_________________________________________________________________ Title: The Catholic Encyclopedia, Volume 13: Revelation-Stock Creator(s): Herbermann, Charles George (1840-1916) Print Basis: 1907-1913 Rights: From online edition Copyright 2003 by K. Knight, used by permission CCEL Subjects: All; Reference LC Call no: BX841.C286 LC Subjects: Christian Denominations Roman Catholic Church Dictionaries. Encyclopedias _________________________________________________________________ THE CATHOLIC ENCYCLOPEDIA AN INTERNATIONAL WORK OF REFERENCE ON THE CONSTITUTION, DOCTRINE, DISCIPLINE, AND HISTORY OF THE CATHOLIC CHURCH EDITED BY CHARLES G. HERBERMANN, Ph.D., LL.D. EDWARD A. PACE, Ph.D., D.D. CONDE B PALLEN, Ph.D., LL.D. THOMAS J. SHAHAN, D.D. JOHN J. WYNNE, S.J. ASSISTED BY NUMEROUS COLLABORATORS IN FIFTEEN VOLUMES VOLUME 13 Revelation to Stock New York: ROBERT APPLETON COMPANY Imprimatur JOHN M. FARLEY ARCHBISHOP OF NEW YORK _________________________________________________________________ Revelation Revelation I. MEANING OF REVELATION Revelation may be defined as the communication of some truth by God to a rational creature through means which are beyond the ordinary course of nature. The truths revealed may be such as are otherwise inaccessible to the human mind -- mysteries, which even when revealed, the intellect of man is incapable of fully penetrating. But Revelation is not restricted to these. God may see fit to employ supernatural means to affirm truths, the discovery of which is not per se beyond the powers of reason. The essence of Revelation lies in the fact that it is the direct speech of God to man. The mode of communication, however, may be mediate. Revelation does not cease to be such if God's message is delivered to us by a prophet, who alone is the recipient of the immediate communication. Such in brief is the account of Revelation given in the Constitution "De Fide Catholica" of the Vatican Council. The Decree "Lamentabili" (3 July, 1907), by its condemnation of a contrary proposition, declares that the dogmas which the Church proposes as revealed are "truths which have come down to us from heaven" (veritates e coelo delapsoe) and not "an interpretation of religious facts which the human mind has acquired by its own strenuous efforts" (prop., 22). It will be seen that Revelation as thus explained differs clearly from: + inspiration such as is bestowed by God on the author of a sacred book; for this, while involving a special illumination of the mind in virtue of which the recipient conceives such thoughts as God desires him to commit to writing, does not necessarily suppose a supernatural communication of these truths; + from the illustrations which God may bestow from time to time upon any of the faithful to bring home to the mind the import of some truth of religion hitherto obscurely grasped; and, + from the Divine assistance by which the pope when acting as the supreme teacher of the Church, is preserved from all error as to faith or morals. The function of this assistance is purely negative: it need not carry with it any positive gift of light to the mind. Much of the confusion in which the discussion of Revelation in non-Catholic works is involved arises from the neglect to distinguish it from one or other of these. During the past century the Church has been called on to reject as erroneous several views of Revelation irreconcilable with Catholic belief. Three of these may here be noted. + The view of Anton Guenther (1783-1863). This writer denied that Revelation could include mysteries strictly so-called, inasmuch as the human intellect is capable of penetrating to the full all revealed truth. He taught, further, that the meaning to be attached to revealed doctrines is undergoing constant change as human knowledge grows and man's mind develops; so that the dogmatic formul which are now true will gradually cease to be so. His writings were put on the Index in 1857, and his erroneous propositions definitively condemned in the decrees of the Vatican Council. + the Modernist view (Loisy, Tyrrell). According to this school, there is no such thing as Revelation in the sense of a direct communication from God to man. The human soul reaching up towards the unknowable God is ever endeavouring to interpret its sentiments in intellectual formul . The formul it thus frames are our ecclesiastical dogmas. These can but symbolize the Unknowable; they can give us no real knowledge regarding it. Such an error is manifestly subversive of all belief, and was explicitly condemned by the Decree "Lamentabili" and the Encyclical "Pascendi" (8 Sept., 1907). + With the view just mentioned is closely connected the Pragmatist view of M. Leroy ("Dogme et Critique", Paris, 2nd ed. 1907). Like the Modernists, he sees in revealed dogmas simply the results of spiritual experience, but holds their value to lie not in the fact that they symbolize the Unknowable, but that they have practical value in pointing the way by which we may best enjoy experience of the Divine. This view was condemned in the same documents as the last mentioned. II. POSSIBILITY OF REVELATION The possibility of Revelation as above explained has been strenuously denied from various points of view during the last century. For this reason the Church held it necessary to issue special decrees on the subject in the Vatican Council. Its antagonists may be divided into two classes according to the different standpoints from which they direct their attack, viz: + Rationalists (under this class we include both Deist and Agnostic writers). Those who adopt this standpoint rely in the main on two fundamental objections: they either urge that the miraculous is impossible, and that Revelation involves miraculous interposition on the part of the Deity; or they appeal to the autonomy of reason, which it is maintained can only accept as truths the results of its own activities. + Immanentists. To this class may be assigned all those whose objections are based on Kantian and Hegelian doctrines as to the subjective character of all our knowledge. The views of these writers frequently involve a purely pantheistic doctrine. But even those who repudiate pantheism, in place of the personal God, Ruler, and Judge of the world, whom Christianity teaches, substitute the vague notion of the "Spirit" immanent in all men, and regard all religious creeds as the attempts of the human soul to find expression for its inward experience. Hence no religion, whether pagan or Christian, is wholly false; but none can claim to be a message from God free from any admixture of error. (Cf. Sabatier, "Esquisse", etc., Bk. I, cap. ii.) Here too the autonomy of reason is invoked as fatal to the doctrine of Revelation properly so called. In the face of these objections, it is evident that the question of the possibility of Revelation is at present one of the most vital portions of Christian apologetic. If the existence of a personal God be once established, the physical possibility at least of Revelation is undeniable. God, who has endowed man with means to communicate his thoughts to his fellows, cannot be destitute of the power to communicate His own thoughts to us. [Martineau, it is true, denies that we possess faculties either to receive or to authenticate a divine revelation concerning the past or the future (Seat of Authority in Religion, p. 311); but such an assertion is arbitrary and extravagant in the extreme.] However, numerous difficulties have been urged on grounds other than that of physical possibility. In estimating their value it seems desirable to distinguish three aspects of Revelation, viz: as it makes known to us; (1) truths of the natural law, (2) mysteries of the faith, (3) positive precepts, e.g. regarding Divine worship. (1) The revelation of truths of the natural law is certainly not inconsistent with God's wisdom. God so created man as to bestow on him endowments amply sufficient for him to attain his last end. Had it been otherwise, the creation would have been imperfect. If over and above this He decreed to make the attainment of beatitude yet easier for man by placing within his reach a far simpler and far more certain way of knowing the law on the observance of which his fate depended, this is an argument for the Divine generosity; it does not disprove the Divine wisdom. To assume, with certain Rationalists, that exceptional intervention can only be explained on the ground that God was unable to embrace His ultimate design in His original scheme is a mere petitio principii. Further, the doctrine of original sin supplies an additional reason for such a revelation of the natural law. That doctrine teaches us that man by the abuse of his free will has rendered his attainment of salvation difficult. Though his intellectual faculties are not radically vitiated, yet his grasp of truth is weakened; his recognition of the moral law is constantly clouded by doubts and questionings. Revelation gives to his mind the certainty he had lost, and so far repairs the evils consequent on the catastrophe which had befallen him. (2) Still more difficulty has been felt regarding mysteries. It is freely asserted that a mystery is something repugnant to reason, and therefore something intrinsically impossible. This objection rests on a mere misunderstanding of what is signified by a mystery. In theological terminology a conception involves a mystery when it is such that the natural faculties of the mind are unable to see how its elements can coalesce. This does not imply anything contrary to reason. A conception is only contrary to reason when the mind can recognize that its elements are mutually exclusive, and therefore involve a contradiction in terms. A more subtle objection is that urged by Dr. J. Caird, to the effect that every truth that can be partially communicated to the mind by analogies is ultimately capable of being fully grasped by the understanding. "Of all such representations, unless they are purely illusory, it must hold good that implicitly and in undeveloped form they contain rational thought and therefore thought which human intelligence may ultimately free from its sensuous veil. . . . Nothing that is absolutely inscrutable to reason can be made known to faith" (Philosophy of Religion, p. 71). The objection rests on a wholly exaggerated view regarding the powers of the human intellect. The cognitive faculty of any nature is proportionate to its grade in the scale of being. The intelligence of a finite intellect can only penetrate a finite object; it is incapable of comprehending the Infinite. The finite types through which the Infinite is made known to it can never under any circumstances lead to more than analogous knowledge. It is further frequently urged that the revelation of what the mind cannot understand would be an act of violence to the intellect; and that this faculty can only accept those truths whose intrinsic reasonableness it recognizes. This assertion, based on the alleged autonomy of reason, can only be met with denial. The function of the intellect is to recognize and admit any truth which is adequately presented to it, whether that truth be guaranteed by internal or by external criteria. The reason is not deprived of its legitimate activity because the criteria are external. It finds ample scope in weighing the arguments for the credibility of the fact asserted. The existence of mysteries in the Christian religion was expressly taught by the Vatican Council (De Fide Cath., cap. ii, can. ii). "If anyone shall say that no mysteries properly so called are contained in the Divine revelation, but that all the dogmas of the faith can be understood and proved from natural principles by human reason duly cultivated -- let him be anathema." (3) The older (Deist) School of Rationalists denied the possibility of a Divine revelation imposing any laws other than those which natural religion enjoins on man. These writers regarded natural religion as, so to speak, a political constitution determining the Divine government of the universe, and held that God could only act as its terms prescribed. This error likewise was proscribed at the same time (De Fide Cath., cap. ii, can. ii). "If any one shall say that it is impossible or that it is inexpedient that man should be instructed regarding God and the worship to be paid to Him by Divine revelation -- let him be anathema." It can hardly be questioned that the "autonomy of reasons" furnishes the main source of the difficulties at present felt against Revelation in the Christian sense. It seems desirable to indicate very briefly the various ways in which that principle is understood. It is explained by M. Blondel, an eminent member of the Immanentist School, as signifying that "nothing can enter into a man which does not proceed from him, and which does not correspond in some manner to an interior need of expansion; and that neither in the sphere of historic facts nor of traditional doctrine, nor of commands imposed by authority, can any truth rank as valid for a man or any precept as obligatory, unless it be in some way autonomous and autochthonous" (Lettre sur les exigences, etc., p. 601). Although M. Blondel has in his own case reconciled this principle with the acceptance of Catholic belief, yet it may readily be seen that it affords an easy ground for the denial not merely of the possibility of external Revelation, but of the whole historic basis of Christianity. The origin of this erroneous doctrine is to be found in the fact that within the sphere of the natural speculative reason, truths which are received purely on external authority, and which are in no way connected with principles already admitted, can scarcely be said to form part of our knowledge. Science asks for the inner reason of things and can make no use of truths save in so far as it can reach the principles from which they flow. The extension of this to religious truths is an error directly traceable to the assumption of the eighteenth-century philosophers that there are no religious truths save those which the human intellect can attain unaided. The principle is, however, sometimes applied with a less extensive signification. It may be understood to involve no more than that reason cannot be compelled to admit any religious doctrine or any moral obligation merely because they possess extrinsic guarantees of truth; they must in every case be able to justify their validity on intrinsic grounds. Thus Prof. J. Caird writes: "Neither moral nor religious ideas can be simply transferred to the human spirit in the form of fact, nor can they be verified by any evidence outside of or lower than themselves" (Fundamental Ideas of Christianity, p. 31). A somewhat different meaning again is implied in the canon of the Vatican Council in which the right of the intellect to claim absolute independence (autonomy) is denied. "If anyone shall say that human reason is independent in such wise that faith cannot be commanded it by God -- let him be anathema" (De Fide Cath., cap. iii, can. i). This canon is directed against the position maintained as already noted by the older Rationalists and the Deists, that human reason is amply sufficient without exterior assistance to attain to absolute truth in all matters of religion (cf. Vacant, "Etudes Théologiques", I, 572; II, 387). III. NECESSITY OF REVELATION Can it be said that Revelation is necessary to man? There can be no question as to its necessity, if it be admitted that God destines man to attain a supernatural beatitude which surpasses the exigencies of his natural endowments. In that case God must needs reveal alike the existence of that supernatural end and the means by which we are to attain it. But is Revelation necessary even in order that man should observe the precepts of the natural law? If our race be viewed in its present condition as history displays it, the answer can only be that it is, morally speaking, impossible for men unassisted by Revelation, to attain by their natural powers such a knowledge of that law as is sufficient to the right ordering of life. In other words, Revelation is morally necessary. Absolute necessity we do not assert. Man, Catholic theology teaches, possesses the requisite faculties to discover the natural law. Luther indeed asserted that man's intellect had become hopelessly obscured by original sin, so that even natural truth was beyond his reach. And the Traditionalists of the nineteenth century (Bautain, Bonnetty, etc.) also fell into error, teaching that man was incapable of arriving at moral and religious truth apart from Revelation. The Church, on the contrary, recognizes the capacity of human reason and grants that here and there pagans may have existed, who had freed themselves from prevalent errors, and who had attained to such a knowledge of the natural law as would suffice to guide them to the attainment of beatitude. But she teaches nevertheless that this can only be the case as regards a few, and that for the bulk of mankind Revelation is necessary. That this is so may be shown both from the facts of history and from the nature of the case. As regards the testimony of history, it is notorious that even the most civilized of pagan races have fallen into the grossest errors regarding the natural law; and from these it may safely be asserted they would never have emerged. Certainly the schools of philosophy would not have enabled them to do so; for many of these denied even such fundamental principles of the natural law as the personality of God and the freedom of the will. Again, by the very nature of the case, the difficulties involved in the attainment of the requisite knowledge are insuperable. For men to be able to attain such a knowledge of the natural law as will enable them to order their lives rightly, the truths of that law must be so plain that the mass of men can discover them without long delay, and possess a knowledge of them which will be alike free from uncertainty and secure from serious error. No reasonable man will maintain that in the case of the greater part of mankind this is possible. Even the most vital truths are called in question and are met by serious objections. The separation of truth from error is a work involving time and labour. For this the majority of men have neither inclination nor opportunity. Apart from the security which Revelation gives they would reject an obligation both irksome and uncertain. It results that a revelation even of the natural law is for man in his present state a moral necessity. IV. CRITERIA OF REVELATION The fact that Revelation is not merely possible but morally necessary is in itself a strong argument for the existence of a revelation, and imposes on all men the strict obligation of examining the credentials of a religion which presents itself with prima facie marks of truth. On the other hand if God has conferred a revelation on men, it stands to reason that He must have attached to it plain and evident criteria enabling even the unlettered to recognize His message for what it is, and to distinguish it from all false claimants. The criteria of Revelation are either external or internal: (1) External criteria consist in certain signs attached to the revelation as a divine testimony to its truth, e.g., miracles. (2) Internal criteria are those which are found in the nature of the doctrine itself in the manner in which it was presented to the world, and in the effects which it produces on the soul. These are distinguished into negative and positive criteria. (a) The immunity of the alleged revelation from any teaching, speculative or moral, which is manifestly erroneous or self-contradictory, the absence of all fraud on the part of those who deliver it to the world, provide negative internal criteria. (b) Positive internal criteria are of various kinds. One such is found in the beneficent effects of the doctrine and in its power to meet even the highest aspirations which man can frame. Another consists in the internal conviction felt by the soul as to the truth of the doctrine (Suarez, "De Fide", IV, sect. 5, n. 9.) In the last century there was in certain schools of thought a manifest tendency to deny the value of all external criteria. This was largely due to the Rationalist polemic against miracles. Not a few non-Catholic divines anxious to make terms with the enemy adopted this attitude. They allowed that miracles are useless as a foundation for faith, and that they form on the contrary one of the chief difficulties which lie in faith's path. Faith, they admitted, must be presupposed before the miracle can be accepted. Hence these writers held the sole criterion of faith to lie in inward experience -- in the testimony of the Spirit. Thus Schleiermacher says: "We renounce altogether any attempt to demonstrate the truth and the necessity of the Christian religion. On the contrary we assume that every Christian before he commences inquiries of this kind is already convinced that no other form of religion but the Christian can harmonize with his piety" (Glaubenslehre, n. 11). The Traditionalists by denying the power of human reason to test the grounds of faith were driven to fall back on the same criterion (cf. Lamennais, "Pensées Diverses", p. 488). This position is altogether untenable. The testimony afforded by inward experience is undoubtedly not to be neglected. Catholic doctors have always recognized its value. But its force is limited to the individual who is the subject of it. It cannot be employed as a criterion valid for all; for its absence is no proof that the doctrine is not true. Moreover, of all the criteria it is the one with regard to which there is most possibility of deception. When truth mingled with error is presented to the mind, it often happens that the whole teaching, false and true alike, is believed to have a Divine guarantee, because the soul has recognized and welcomed the truth of some one doctrine, e.g., the Atonement. Taken alone and apart from objective proof it conveys but a probability that the revelation is true. Hence the Vatican Council expressly condemns the error of those who teach it to be the only criterion (De Fide Cath., cap. iii, can. iii). The perfect agreement of a religious doctrine with the teachings of reason and natural law, its power to satisfy, and more than satisfy, the highest aspirations of man, its beneficent influence both as regards public and private life, provide us with a more trustworthy test. This is a criterion which has often been applied with great force on behalf of the claims of the Catholic Church to be the sole guardian of God's Revelation. These qualities indeed appertain in so transcendent a degree to the teaching of the Church, that the argument must needs carry conviction to an earnest and truth-seeking mind. Another criterion which at first sight bears some resemblance to this claims a mention here. It is based upon the theory of Immanence and has of recent years been strenuously advocated by certain of the less extreme members of the Modernist School. These writers urge that the vital needs of the soul imperatively demand, as their necessary complement, Divine co-operation, supernatural grace, and even the supreme magisterium of the Church. To these needs the Catholic religion alone corresponds. And this correspondence with our vital needs is, they hold, the one sure criterion of truth. The theory is altogether inconsistent with Catholic dogma. It supposes that the Christian Revelation and the gift of grace are not free gifts from God, but something of which the nature of man is absolutely exigent; and without which it would be incomplete. It is a return to the errors of Baius. (Denz. 1021, etc.) While the Church, as we have said, is far from undervaluing internal criteria, she has always regarded external criteria as the most easily recognizable and the most decisive. Hence the Vatican Council teaches: "In order that the obedience of our faith might be agreeable to reason, God has willed that to the internal aids of the Holy Spirit, there should be joined external proofs of His Revelation, viz: Divine works (facta divina), especially miracles and prophecy, which inasmuch as they manifestly display the omnipotence and the omniscience of God are most certain signs of a Divine revelation and are suited to the understanding of all" (De Fide Cath., cap. iii). As an instance of a work evidently Divine and yet other than miracle or prophecy, the council instances the Catholic Church, which, "by reason of the marvellous manner of its propagation, its surprising sanctity, its inexhaustible fruitfulness in all good works, its catholic unity and its invincible stability, is a mighty and perpetual motive of credibility and an irrefragable testimony to its own divine legation" (l. c.). The truth of the teaching of the council regarding external criteria is plain to any unprejudiced mind. Granted the presence of the negative criteria, external guarantees establish the Divine origin of a revelation as nothing else can do. They are, so to say, a seal affixed by the hand of God Himself, and authenticating the work as His. (For a fuller treatment of their apologetic value, and for a discussion of objections, see MIRACLES; APOLOGETICS.) V. THE CHRISTIAN REVELATION It remains here to distinguish the Christian Revelation or "deposit of faith" from what are termed private revelations. This distinction is of importance: for while the Church recognizes that God has spoken to His servants in every age, and still continues thus to favour chosen souls, she is careful to distinguish these revelations from the Revelation which has been committed to her charge, and which she proposes to all her members for their acceptance. That Revelation was given in its entirety to Our Lord and His Apostles. After the death of the last of the twelve it could receive no increment. It was, as the Church calls it, a deposit -- "the faith once delivered to the saints" (Jude, 2) -- for which the Church was to "contend" but to which she could add nothing. Thus, whenever there has been question of defining a doctrine, whether at Nicæa, at Trent, or at the Vatican, the sole point of debate has been as to whether the doctrine is found in Scripture or in Apostolic tradition. The gift of Divine assistance (see I), sometimes confounded with Revelation by the less instructed of anti-Catholic writers, merely preserves the supreme pontiff from error in defining the faith; it does not enable him to add jot or tittle to it. All subsequent revelations conferred by God are known as private revelations, for the reason that they are not directed to the whole Church but are for the good of individual members alone, They may indeed be a legitimate object for our faith; but that will depend on the evidence in each particular case. The Church does not propose them to us as part of her message. It is true that in certain cases she has given her approbation to certain private revelations. This, however, only signifies: + that there is nothing in them contrary to the Catholic Faith or to the moral law, and, + that there are sufficient indications of their truth to justify the faithful in attaching credence to them without being guilty of superstition or of imprudence. It may however be further asked, whether the Christian Revelation does not receive increment through the development of doctrine. During the last half of the nineteenth century the question of doctrinal development was widely debated. Owing to Guenther's erroneous teaching that the doctrines of the faith assume a new sense as human science progresses, the Vatican Council declared once for all that the meaning of the Church's dogmas is immutable (De Fide Cath., cap. iv, can. iii). On the other hand it explicitly recognizes that there is a legitimate mode of development, and cites to that effect (op. cit., cap. iv) the words of Vincent of Lirins: "Let understanding science and wisdom [regarding the Church's doctrine] progress and make large increase in each and in all, in the individual and in the whole Church, as ages and centuries advance: but let it be solely in its own order, retaining, that is, the same dogma, the same sense, the same import" (Commonit. 28). Two of the most eminent theological writers of the period, Cardinal Franzelin and Cardinal Newman, have on very different lines dealt with the progress and nature of this development. Cardinal Franzelin in his "De Divina Traditione et Scriptura" (pt. XXII VI) has principally in view the Hegelian theories of Guenther. He consequently lays the chief stress on the identity at all points of the intellectual datum, and explains development almost exclusively as a process of logical deduction. Cardinal Newman wrote his "Essay on the Development of Christian Doctrine" in the course of the two years (1843 45) immediately preceding his reception into the Catholic Church. He was called on to deal with different adversaries, viz., the Protestants who justified their separation from the main body of Christians on the ground that Rome had corrupted primitive teaching by a series of additions. In that work he examines in detail the difference between a corruption and a development. He shows how a true and fertile idea is endowed with a vital and assimilative energy of its own, in virtue of which, without undergoing the least substantive change, it attains to an ever completer expression, as the course of time brings it into contact with new aspects of truth or forces it into collision with new errors: the life of the idea is shown to be analogous to an organic development. He provides a series of tests distinguishing a true development from a corruption, chief among them being the preservation of type, and the continuity of principles; and then, applying the tests to the case of the additions of Roman teaching, shows that these have the marks not of corruptions but of true and legitimate developments. The theory, though less scholastic in its form than that of Franzelin, is in perfect conformity with orthodox belief. Newman no less than his Jesuit contemporary teaches that the whole doctrine, alike in its later as in its earlier forms, was contained in the original revelation given to the Church by Our Lord and His Apostles, and that its identity is guaranteed to us by the infallible magisterium of the Church. The claim of certain Modernist writers that their views on the evolution of dogma were connected with Newman's theory of development is the merest figment. OTTIGER, Theologia fundamentalis (Freiburg, 1897); VACANT, Etudes Th ologiques sur la Concile du Vatican (Paris, 1895); LEBACHELET, De l apolog tique traditionelle et l apolog tique moderne. (Paris, 1897); DE BROGLIE, Religion et Critique (Paris, 1906); BLONDEL, Lettre sur les Exigences de la Pens e moderne en mati re apolog tique in Annales de la Philos: Chr tienne (Paris. 1896). On private revelations: SUAREZ, De Fide, disp. III, sect. 10; FRANZELIN, De Scriptura et Traditione, Th. xxii (Rome, 1870); POULAIN, Graces of Interior Prayer, pt. IV, tr. (London, 1910). On development of doctrine: BAINVEL, De magisterio vivo et traditione (Paris, 1905); VACANT, op. cit., II, p. 281 seq.; PINARD, art. Dogme in Dict. Apolog tique de la Foi Catholique, ed. D AL S (Paris, 1910); O DWYER, Cardinal Newman and the Encyclical Pascendi (London, 1908). Among those who from one point of view or another have controverted the Christian doctrine of Revelation the following may be mentioned: PAINE, Age of Reason (ed. 1910), 1 30; F. W. NEWMAN, Phases of Faith (4th ed., London, 1854); SABATIER, Esquisse d une philosophie de la religion, I, ii (Paris, 1902); PFLEIDERER, Religionsphilosophie auf geschichtlicher Grundlage (Berlin, 1896), 493 seq.; LOISY, Autour d un petit livre (Paris, 1903), 192 sqq.; WILSON, art. Revelation and Modern Thought in Cambridge Theol. Essays (London, 1905); TYRRELL, Through Scylla and Charybdis (London, 1907), ii; MARTINEAU, Seat of Authority in Religion, III, ii (London, 1890). G.H. JOYCE Private Revelations Private Revelations There are two kinds of revelations: (1) universal revelations, which are contained in the Bible or in the depositum of Apostolic tradition transmitted by the Church. These ended with the preaching of the Apostles and must be believed by all; (2) particular or private revelations which are constantly occurring among Christians (see CONTEMPLATION). When the Church approves private revelations, she declares only that there is nothing in them contrary faith or good morals, and that they may be read without danger or even with profit; no obligation is thereby imposed on the faithful to believe them. Speaking of such revelations as (e.g.) those of St. Hildegard (approved in part by Eugenius III), St. Bridget (by Boniface IX), and St. Catherine of Siena (by Gregory XI) Benedict XIV says: "It is not obligatory nor even possible to give them the assent of Catholic faith, but only of human faith, in conformity with the dictates of prudence, which presents them to us as probable and worthy of pius belief)" (De canon., III, liii, xxii, II). Illusions connected with private revelations have been explained in the article CONTEMPLATION. Some of them are at first thought surprising. Thus a vision of an historical scene (e.g., of the life or death of Christ) is often only approximately accurate, although the visionary may be unaware of this fact, and he may be misled, if he believes in its absolute historical fidelity. This error is quite natural, being based on the assumption that, if the vision comes from God, all its details (the landscape, dress, words, actions, etc.) should be a faithful reproduction of the historical past. This assumption is not justified, for accuracy in secondary details is not necessary; the main point is that the fact, event, or communication revealed be strictly true. It may be objected that the Bible contains historical books, and that thus God may sometimes wish to reveal certain facts in religious history to us exactly. That doubtless is true, when there is question of facts which are necessary or useful as a basis for religion, in which case the revelation is accompanied by proofs that guarantee its accuracy. A vision need not guarantee its accuracy in every detail. One should thus beware of concluding without examination that revelations are to be rejected; the prudent course is neither to believe nor to deny them unless there is sufficient reason for so doing. Much less should one suspect that the saints have been always, or very often deceived in their vision. On the contrary, such deception is rare, and as a rule in unimportant matters only. There are cases in which we can be certain that a revelation is Divine. (1) God can give this certainty to the person who receives the revelation (at least during it), by granting an insight and an evidence so compelling as to exclude all possibility of doubt. We can find an analogy in the natural order: our senses are subject to many illusions, and yet we frequently perceive clearly that we have not been deceived. (2) At times others can be equally certain of the revelation thus vouchsafed. For instance, the Prophets of the Old Testament gave indubitable signs of their mission; otherwise they would not have been believed. There were always false prophets, who deceived some of the people but, inasmuch as the faithful were counselled by Holy Writ to distinguish the false from the true, it was possible so to distinguish. One incontrovertible proof is the working of a miracle, if it be wrought for this purpose and circumstances show this to be so. A prophecy realized is equally convincing, when it is precise and cannot be the result of chance or of a conjecture of the evil spirit. Besides these rather rare means of forming an opinion, there is another, but longer and more intricate method: to discuss the reasons for and against. Practically, this examination will often give only a probability more or less great. It may be also that the revelation can be regarded as Divine in its broad outlines, but doubtful in minor details. Concerning the revelations of Marie de Agreda and Anne Catherine Emmerich, for example, contradictory opinions have been expressed: some believe unhesitatingly everything they contain, and are annoyed when anyone does not share their confidence; others give the revelations no credence whatsoever (generally on a priori grounds); finally there are many who are sympathetic, but do not know what to reply when asked what degree of credibility is to be attributed to the writings of these two ecstatics. The truth seems to be between the two extreme opinions indicated first. If there is question of a particular fact related in these books and not mentioned elsewhere, we cannot be certain that it is true, especially in minor details. In particular instances, these visionaries have been mistaken: thus Marie de Agreda teaches, like her contemporaries, the existence of crystal heavens, and declares that one must believe everything she says, although such an obligation exists only in the case of the Holy Scriptures. In 1771 Clement XIV forbade the continuation of her process of beatification "on account of the book". Catherine Emmerich has likewise given expression to false or unlikely opinions: she regards the writings of the pseudo-Dionysius as due to the Areopagite, and says strange things about the terrestrial Paradise, which, according to her, exists on an inaccessible Mountain towards Tibet. If there be question of the general statement of facts given in these works, we can admit with probability that many of them are true. For these two visionaries led lives that were regarded as very holy. Competent authorities have judged their ecstasies as divine. It is therefore prudent to admit that they received a special assistance from God, preserving them not absolutely, but in the main, from error. In judging of revelations or visions we may proceed in this manner: (1) get detailed information about the person who believes himself thus favored; (2) also about the fact of the revelation and the circumstances attending it. To prove that a revelation is Divine (at least in its general outlines), the method of exclusion is sometimes employed. It consists in proving that neither the demon nor the ecstatic's own ideas have interfered (at least on important points) with God's action, and that no one has retouched the revelation after its occurrence. This method differs from the preceding one only in the manner of arranging the information obtained, but it is not so convenient. To judge revelations or visions, we must be acquainted with the character of the person favoured with them from a triple point of view: natural, ascetical, and mystical. (For those who have been beatified or canonized, this inquiry has been already made by the Church.) Our inquiry into the visionary's character might be pursued as follows: 1. What are his natural qualities or defects, from a physical, intellectual, and especially moral standpoint? If the information is favourable (if the person is of sound judgment, calm imagination; if his acts are dictated by reason and not by enthusiasm, etc.), many causes of illusion are thereby excluded. However, a momentary aberration is still possible. 2. How has the person been educated? Can the knowledge of the visionary have been derived from books or from conversations with theologians? 3. What are the virtues exhibited before and after the revelation? Has he made progress in holiness and especially in humility? The tree can be judged by its fruits. 4. What extraordinary graces of union with God have been received? The greater they are the greater the probability in favour of the revelation, at least in the main. 5. Has the person had other revelations that have been judged Divine? Has he made any predictions that have been clearly realized? 6. Has he been subjected to heavy trials? It is almost impossible for extraordinary favours to be conferred without heavy crosses; for both are marks of God's friendship, and each is a preparation for the other. 7. Does he practice the following rules: fear deception; be open with your director; do not desire to have revelations? Our information concerning a revelation considered in itself or concerning the circumstances that accompanied it might be secured as follows: 1. Is there an authentic account, in which nothing has been added, suppressed, or corrected? 2. Does the revelation agree with the teaching of the Church or with the recognized facts of history or natural science? 3. Does it teach nothing contrary to good morals, and is it unaccompanied by any indecent action? The commandments of God are addressed to everyone without exception. More than once the demon has persuaded false visionaries that they were chosen souls, and that God loved them so much as to dispense them from the burdensome restrictions imposed on ordinary mortals. On the contrary, the effect of Divine visitations is to remove us more and more from the life of sense, and make us more rigorous towards ourselves. 4. Is the reaching helpful towards the obtaining of eternal salvation? In spiritism we find the spirits evoked treat only of trifles. They reply to idle questions, or descend to providing amusement for an assembly (e.g., by moving furniture about); deceased relatives or the great philosophers are interrogated and their replies are woefully commonplace. A revelation is also suspect if its aim is to decide a disputed question in theology, history, astronomy, etc. Eternal salvation is the only thing of importance in the eyes of God. "In all other matters", says St. John of the Cross, "He wishes men to have recourse to human means" (Montée, II, xxii). Finally, a revelation is suspect if it is commonplace, telling only what is to be found in every book. It is then probable that the visionary is unconsciously repeating what he has learnt by reading. 5. After examining all the circumstances accompanying the vision (the attitudes, acts, words, etc.), do we find that the dignity and seriousness which become the Divine Majesty? The spirits evoked by Spiritists often speak in a trivial manner. Spiritists try to explain this by pretending that the spirits are not demons, but the souls of the departed who have retained all their vices; absurd or unbecoming replies are given by deceased persons who are still liars, or libertines, frivolous or mystifiers, etc. But if that be so, communications with these degraded beings is evidently dangerous. In Protestant "revivals" assembled crowds bewail their sins, but in a strange, exaggerated way, as if frenzied or intoxicated. It must be admitted that they are inspired by a good principle: a very ardent sentiment of the love of God and of repentance. But to this is added another element that cannot be regarded as Divine: a neuropathic enthusiasm, which is contagious and sometimes develops so far as to produce convulsions or repugnant contortions. Sometimes a kind of unknown language is spoken, but it consists in reality of a succession of meaningless sounds. 6. What sentiments of peace, or, on the other hand, of disturbance, are experienced during or after the revelations? Here is the rule as formulated by St. Catherine of Siena and St. Ignatius: "With persons of good will [it is only of such that we are here treating] the action of the good spirit [God or His Angels] is characterized by the production of peace, joy, security, courage; except perhaps at the first moment." Note the restriction. The Bible often mentions this disturbance at the first moment of the revelation; the Blessed Virgin experienced it when the Angel Gabriel appeared to her. The action of the demon produces quite the contrary effect: "With persons of good will he produces, except perhaps at the first moment, disturbance, sorrow, discouragement, perturbation, gloom." In a word the action of Satan encounters a mysterious resistance of the soul. 7. It often happens that the revelation inspires an exterior work - for instance, the establishment of a new devotion, the foundation of a new religious congregation or association, the revision of the constitutions of a congregation, etc., the building of a church or the creation of a pilgrimage, the reformation of the lax spirit in a certain body, the preaching of a new spirituality, etc. In these cases the value of the proposed work must be carefully examined; is it good in itself, useful, filling a need, not injurious to other works, etc.? 8. Have the revelations been subjected to the tests of time and discussion? 9. If any work has been begun as a result of the revelation, has it produced great spiritual fruit? Have the sovereign pontiffs and the bishops believed this to be so, and have they assisted the progress of the work? This is very well illustrated in the cases of the Scapular of Mount Carmel, the devotion to the Sacred Heart, the miraculous medal. These are the signs that enable us to judge with probability if a revelation is Divine. In the case of certain persons very closely united to God, the slow study of these signs has been sometimes aided or replaced by a supernatural intuition; this is what is known as the infused gift of the discernment of spirits. As regards the rules of conduct, the two principal have been explained in the article on CONTEMPLATION, namely 1. if the revelation leads solely to the love of God and the saints, the director may provisionally regard it as Divine; 2. at the beginning the visionary should do his best to repulse the revelation quietly. He should not desire to receive it, otherwise he will be exposing himself to the risk of being deceived. Here are some further rules: + the director must be content to proceed slowly, not to express astonishment, to treat the person gently. If he were to be harsh or distrustful, he would intimidate the soul he is directing, and incline it to conceal important details from him; + he must be very careful to urge the soul to make progress in the way of sanctity. He will point out that the only value of the visions is in the spiritual fruit that they produce; + he will pray fervently, and have the subject he is directing pray, that the necessary light may be granted. God cannot fail to make known the true path to those who ask Him humbly. If on the contrary a person confided solely in his natural prudence, he would expose himself to punishment for his self-sufficiency; + the visionary should be perfectly calm and patient if his superiors do not allow him to carry out the enterprises that he deems inspired by Heaven or revealed. One who, when confronted with this opposition, becomes impatient or discouraged, shows that he has very little confidence in the power of God and is but little conformed to His will. If God wishes the project to succeed, He can make the obstacles suddenly disappear at the time appointed by Him. A very striking example of this divine delay is to be found in the life of St. Juliana, the Cistercian prioress of Mont-Cornillon, near Liège (1192-1258). It is to her that the institution of the feast of the Blessed Sacrament is due. All of her life was passed in awaiting the hour of God, which she was never to see, for it came only more than a century after the beginning of the revelations. As regards inspirations ordinarily, those who have not passed the period of tranquility or a complete union, must beware of the idea that they hear supernatural words; unless the evidence is irresistible, they should attribute them to the activity of their own imaginations. But they may at least experience inspirations or impulses more or less strong, which seem to point out to them how to act in difficult circumstances. This is a minor form of revelation. The same line of conduct should be followed as in the latter case. We must not accept them blindly and against the dictates of reason, but weigh the reasons for and against, consult a prudent director, and decide only after applying the rules for the discernment of spirits. The attitude of reserve that has just been laid down does not apply to the simple, sudden and illuminating views of faith, which enables one to understand in a higher manner not novelties, but the truths admitted by the Church. Such enlightenment cannot have any evil result. It is on the contrary a very precious grace, which should be very carefully welcomed and utilized. Consult the writings of ST. TERESA AND ST. JOHN OF THE CROSS, passim; PHILIP OF THE BLESSED TRINITY, Summa theologica mysticae (Lyons, 1656), pt. II, tr. iii; DE VALLGORNERA, Mystica Theologia (Barcelona, 1662), Q. ii, disp. 5; LOPEZ DE EZQUERRA, Lucerna Mystica (Venice, 1692), tr. v; AMORT, De revelationibus (Augsburg, 1744); BENEDICT XIV, De servorum Dei canonizatione (Rome, 1767), l.III, c. liii; SCARAMELLI, Direttorio mistico (Venice, 1754), tr.iv; SCHRAM, Institutiones theologicae mysticae (Augsburg, 1777), pt. II, c. iv; ST. LIGUORI, Homo apostolicus (Venice, 1782), append.i, n. 19; RIBET, La mystique divine, II (Paris, 1879); POULAIN, Des graces d'oraison (5th ed., Paris, 1909), tr. The Graces of Interior Prayer (London, 1910). AUG. POULAIN Revocation Revocation The act of recalling or annulling, the reversal of an act, the recalling of a grant, or the making void of some deed previously existing. This term is of wide application in canon law. Grants, laws, contracts, sentences, jurisdiction, appointments are at times revoked by the grantor, his successor or superior according to the prescriptions of law. Revocation without just cause is illicit, though often valid. Laws and customs are revoked when, owing to change of circumstances, they cease to be just and reasonable. Concordats (q.v.) are revocable when they redound to the serious injury of the Church. Minors and ecclesiastical institutions may have sentences in certain civil trials set aside (Restitutio in integrum). Contracts by which ecclesiastical property is alienated are sometimes rescindable. A judge may revoke his own interlocutory sentence but not a definitive judicial sentence. Many appointments are revocable at will; others require a judicial trial or other formalities. (See BENEFICE; FACULTIES, CANONICAL; INDULTS, PONTIFICAL; JURISDICTION, ECCLESIASTICAL.) ANDREW B. MEEHAN English Revolution of 1688 English Revolution of 1688 James II, having reached the climax of his power after the successful suppression of Monmouth's rebellion in 1685, then had the Tory reaction in his favour, complete control over Parliament and the town corporations, a regular army in England, a thoroughly Catholic army in process of formation in Ireland, and a large revenue granted by Parliament for life. His policy was to govern England as absolute monarch and to restore Catholics to their full civil and religious rights. Unfortunately, both prudence and statesmanship were lacking, with the result that in three years the king lost his throne. The history of the Revolution resolves itself into a catalogue of various ill-judged measures which alienated the support of the Established Church, the Tory party, and the nation as a whole. The execution of Monmouth (July, 1685) made the Revolution possible, for it led to the Whig party accepting William of Orange as the natural champion of Protestantism against the attempts of James. Thus the opposition gained a centre round which it consolidated with ever-increasing force. What the Catholics as a body desired was freedom of worship and the repeal of the penal laws; but a small section of them, desirous of political power, aimed chiefly at the repeal of the Test Act of 1673 and the Act of 1678 which excluded Catholics from both houses of Parliament. Unfortunately James fell under the influence of this section, which was directed by the unprincipled Earl of Sunderland, and he decided on a policy of repeal of the Test Act. Circumstances had caused this question to be closely bound up with that of the army. For James, who placed his chief reliance on his soldiers, had increased the standing army to 30,000, 13,000 of whom, partly officered by Catholics, were encamped on Hounslow Heath to the great indignation of London which regarded the camp as a menace to its liberties and a centre of disorder. Parliament demanded that the army should be reduced to normal dimensions and the Catholic officers dismissed; but James, realizing that the test would not be repealed, prorogued Parliament and proceeded to exercise the "dispensing and suspending power". By this he claimed that it was the prerogative of the crown to dispense with the execution of the penal laws in individual cases and to suspend the operation of any law altogether. To obtain the sanction of the Law Courts for this doctrine a test case, known as Hales's case, was brought to decide whether the king could allow a Catholic to hold office in the army without complying with the Test Act. After James had replaced some of the judges by more complaisant lawyers, he obtained a decision that "it was of the king's prerogative to dispense. with penal laws in particular instances". He acted on the decision by appointing Catholics to various positions, Lord Tyrconnel becoming Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, Lord Arundel Lord Privy Seal, and Lord Bellasyse Lord Treasurer in place of the Tory minister Lord Rochester, who was regarded as the chief mainstay of the Established Church. The Church of England, which was rendered uneasy by the dismissal of Rochester, was further alienated by the king's action in appointing a Court of High Commission, which suspended the Bishop of London for refusing to inhibit one of his clergy from preaching anti-Catholic sermons. The feeling was intensified by the liberty which Catholics enjoyed in London during 1686. Public chapels were opened, including one in the Royal Palace, the Jesuits founded a large school in the Savoy, and Catholic ecclesiastics appeared openly at Court. At this juncture James, desiring to counterbalance the loss of Anglican support, offered toleration to the dissenters, who at the beginning of his reign had been severely persecuted. The influence of William Penn induced the king to issue on 4 April, 1687, the Declaration of Indulgence, by which liberty of worship was granted to all, Catholic and Protestant alike. He also replaced Tory churchmen by Whig dissenters on the municipal corporations and the commission of the peace, and, having dissolved Parliament, hoped to secure a new House of Commons which would repeal both the penal laws and the Test. But he underestimated two difficulties, the hatred of the dissenters for "popery" and their distrust of royal absolutism. His action in promoting Catholics to the Privy Council, the judicial bench, and the offices of Lord lieutenant, sheriff, and magistrate, wounded these susceptibilities, while he further offended the Anglicans by attempting to restore to Catholics some of their ancient foundations in the universities. Catholics obtained some footing both at Christ Church and University College, Oxford, and in March 1688, James gave the presidency of Magdalen College to Bonaventure Giffard, the Catholic Vicar Apostolic of the Midland District. This restoration of Magdalen as a Catholic college created the greatest alarm, not only among the holders of benefices throughout the country, but also among the owners of ancient abbey lands. The presence of the papal nuncio, Mgr d'Adda, at Court and the public position granted to the four Catholic bishops, who had recently been appointed as vicars Apostolic, served to increase both the dislike of the dissenters to support a king whose acts, while of doubtful legality, were also subversive of Protestant interests, and likewise the difficulty of the Anglicans in practicing passive obedience in face of such provocation. Surrounded by these complications, James issued his second Declaration of Indulgence in April, 1688, and ordered that it should be read in all the churches. This strained Anglican obedience to the breaking point. The Archbishop of Canterbury and six of his suffragans presented a petition questioning the dispensing power. The seven bishops were sent to the Tower prosecuted, tried, and acquitted. This trial proved to be the immediate occasion of the Revolution, for, as Halifax said, "it hath brought all Protestants together and bound them up into a knot that cannot easily be untied". While the bishops were in the Tower, another epoch-marking event occurred -- the birth of an heir to the crown (10 June, 1688). Hitherto the hopes of the king's opponents had been fixed on the succession of his Protestant daughter Mary, wife of William of Orange, the Protestant leader. The birth of Prince James now opened up the prospect of a Catholic dynasty just at a moment when the ancient anti-Catholic bigotry had been aroused by events both in England and France. For besides the ill-advised acts of James, the persecution of the Huguenots by Louis XIV, consequent on the Revocation of the Edict of Nantes in 1685, revived old religious animosities. England was flooded with French Protestant refugees bearing everywhere the tale of a Catholic king's cruelty. Unfortunately for James his whole foreign policy had been one of subservience to France, and at this moment of crisis the power of France was a menace to all Europe. Even Catholic Austria and Spain supported the threatened Protestant states, and the pope himself, outraged by Louis XIV in a succession of wrongs, joined the universal resistance to France and was allied with William of Orange and other Protestant sovereigns against Louis and his single supporter, James. William had long watched the situation in England, and during 1687 had received communications from the opposition in which it was agreed that, whenever revolutionary action should become advisable, it should be carried out under William's guidance. As early as the autumn of 1687 the papal secretary of state was aware of the plot to dethrone James and make Mary queen, and a French agent dispatched the news to England through France. The Duke of Norfolk then in Rome also learned it, and sent intelligence to the king before 18 Dec., 1687 (letter of d'Estrées to Louvois, cited by Ranke, II, 424). But James, though early informed, was reluctant to believe that his son-in-law would head an insurrection against him. On the day the seven bishops were acquitted seven English statesmen sent a letter to William inviting him to rescue the religion and liberties of England. But William was threatened by a French army on the Belgian frontier, and could not take action. Louis XIV made a last effort to save James, and warned the Dutch States General that he would regard any attack on England as a declaration of war against France. This was keenly resented by James who regarded it as a slight upon English independence, and he repudiated the charge that he had made a secret treaty with France. Thereupon Louis left him to his fate, removed the French troops from Flanders to begin a campaign against the empire, and thus William was free to move. When it was too late James realized his danger. By hasty concessions granted one after another he tried to undo his work and win back the Tory churchmen to his cause. But he did not remove the Catholic officers or suggest the restriction of the dispensing power. In October Sunderland was dismissed from office, but William was already on the seas, and, though driven back by a storm, he re-embarked and landed at Torbay on 5 Nov., 1688. James at first prepared to resist. The army was sent to intercept William, but by the characteristic treachery of Churchill, disaffection was spread, and the king, not knowing in whom he could place confidence, attempted to escape. At Sheerness he was stopped and sent back to London, where he might have proved an embarrassing prisoner had not his escape been connived at. On 23 Dec., 1688, he left England to take refuge with Louis XIV; the latter received him generously and granted him both palace and pension. On his first departure the mob had risen in London against the Catholics, and attacked chapels and houses, plundering and carrying off the contents. Even the ambassadors' houses were not spared, and the Spanish and Sardinian embassy chapels were destroyed. Bishops Giffard and Leyburn were arrested and committed to the Tower. Father Petre had escaped, and the Nuncio disguised himself as a servant at the house of the envoy from Savoy, till he was enabled to obtain from William a passport. So far as the English Catholics were concerned, the result of the Revolution was that their restoration to freedom of worship and liberation from the penal laws was delayed for a century and more. So completely had James lost the confidence of the nation that William experienced no opposition and the Revolution ran its course in an almost regular way. A Convention Parliament met on 22 January, 1689, declared that James "having withdrawn himself out of the kingdom, had abdicated the government, and that the throne was thereby vacant", and "that experience had shown it to be inconsistent with the safety and welfare of this Protestant kingdom to be governed by a Popish Prince". The crown was offered to William and Mary, who accepted the Declaration of Right, which laid down the principles of the constitution with regard to the dispensing power, the liberties of Parliament, and other matters. After their proclamation as king and queen, the Declaration was ratified by the Bill of Rights, and the work of the Revolution was complete. English Catholics have indeed had good cause to lament the failure of the king's well-meant, if unwise, attempts to restore their liberty, and to regret that he did not act on the wise advice of Pope Innocent XI and Cardinal Howard to proceed by slow degrees and obtain first the repeal of the penal laws before going on to restore their full civil rights. But on the other hand we can now realize that the Revolution had the advantage of finally closing the long struggle between king and Parliament that had lasted for nearly a century, and of establishing general principles of religious toleration in which Catholics were bound sooner or later to be included. LINGARD, Hist. of England, X (London, 1849), the standard Catholic account; LODGE in HUNT and POOLE, Political Hist. of England, Vlll (London, 1910); TEMPERLEY in Cambridge Modern Hist., V (London, 1908); TREVELYAN, England under the Stuarts (London, 1904); WYATT-DAVIES, Hist. of England for Catholic Schools (London, 1903); GREEN, Hist. of the English People (London, 1877-80); MACAULAY, Hist. of England (London, 1849); TASWELL-LANGMEAD, English Constitutional Hist. (London, 1875); BRIGHT, Hist. of England, 2nd period (London, 1880); GUIZOT Pourquoi la Révolution a-t-elle réussi? (1640~1688) (Paris, 1850); MAZURE, Hist. de la révol. de 1688 (3 vols., Paris, 1825). For earlier accounts consult DEFOE, Revol. of 1688 reprinted in ARBER, English Garner, XII (London, 1903); EACHARD, Hist. of the Revol. in 1688 (London, 1725); BURNET, Hist. of my Own Times (last edition, Oxford 1897-1900); DODD, Church Hist. (Wolverhampton vere Brussels, 1737 -42); SPEKE, Secret Hist. of the happy Revol., 1688 (London, 1715). EDWIN BURTON French Revolution French Revolution The last thirty years have given us a new version of the history of the French Revolution, the most diverse and hostile schools having contributed to it. The philosopher, Taine, drew attention to the affinity between the revolutionary and what he calls the classic spirit, that is, the spirit of abstraction which gave rise to Cartesianism and produced certain masterpieces of French literature. Moreover he admirably demonstrated the mechanism of the local revolutionary committees and showed how a daring Jacobin minority was able to enforce its will as that of "the people". Following up this line of research M. Augustin Cochin has quite recently studied the mechanism of the sociétés de pensée in which the revolutionary doctrine was developed and in which were formed men quite prepared to put this doctrine into execution. The influence of freemasonry in the French Revolution proclaimed by Louis Blanc and by freemasonry itself is proved by the researches of M. Cochin. Sorel has brought out the connection between the diplomacy of the Revolution and that of the old regime. His works prove that the Revolution did not mark a break in the continuity of the foreign policy of France. The radically inclined historical school, founded and led by M. Aulard, has published numerous useful documents as well as the review, "La Révolution Française". Two years since, a schism occured in this school, M. Mathiez undertaking opposition to M. Aulard the defence of Robespierre, in consequence of which he founded a new review "Les Annales Révolutionaires". The "Société d'histoire contemporaine", founded under Catholic auspices, has published a series of texts bearing on revolutionary history. Lastly the works of Abbé Sicard have revealed in the clergy who remained faithful to Rome various tendencies, some legitimist, others more favourable to the new political forms, a new side of the history of the French clergy being thus developed. Such are the most recent additions to the history of the French Revolution. This article, however, will emphasize more especially the relations between the Revolution and the Church (see France). MEETING OF THE ESTATES The starting point of the French Revolution was the convocation of the States General by Louis XVI. They comprised three orders, nobility, clergy, and the third estate, the last named being permitted to have as many members as the two other orders together. The electoral regulation of 24 January, 1789, assured the parochial clergy a large majority in the meetings of the bailliages which were to elect clerical representatives to the States General. While chapters were to send to these meetings only a single delegate for ten canons, and each convent only one of its members, all the curés were permitted to vote. The number of the "order" of clergy at the States General exceeded 300, among whom were 44 prelates, 208 curés, 50 canons and commendatory abbots, and some monks. The clergy advocated almost as forcibly as did the Third Estate the establishment of a constitutional government based on the separation of the powers, the periodical convocation of the States General, their supremacy in financial matters, the responsibility of ministers, and the regular guarantee of individual liberty. Thus the true and great reforms tending to the establishment of liberty were advocated by the clergy on the eve of the Revolution. When the Estates assembled 5 May, 1789, the Third Estate demanded that the verification of powers should be made in common by the three orders, the object being that the Estates should form but one assembly in which the distinction between the "orders" should disappear and where every member was to have a vote. Scarcely a fourth of the clergy advocated this reform, but from the opening of the Estates it was evident that the desired individual voting which would give the members of the Third Estate, the advocates of reform, an effectual preponderance. As early as 23 May, 1789, the curés at the house of the Archbishop of Bordeaux were of the opinion that the power of the deputies should be verified in the general assembly of the Estates, and when on 17 June the members of the Third Estate proclaimed themselves the "National Assembly", the majority of the clergy decided (19 June) to join them. As the higher clergy and the nobility still held out, the king caused the hall where the meetings of the Third Estate were held to be closed (20 June), whereupon the deputies, with their president, Bailly, repaired to the Jeu de Paume and an oath was taken not to disband till they had provided France with a constitution. After Mirabeau's thundering speech (23 June) addressed to the Marquis de Dreux-Brézé, master-of-ceremonies to Louis XVI, the king himself (27 June) invited the nobility to join the Third Estate. Louis XVI's dismissal of the reforming minister, Necker, and the concentration of the royal army about Paris, brought about the insurrection of 14 July, and the capture of the Bastille. M. Funck-Brentano has destroyed the legends which rapidly arose in connection with the celebrated fortress. There was no rising en masse of the people of Paris, and the number of the besiegers was but a thousand at most; only seven prisoners were found at the Bastille, four of whom were forgers, one a young man guilty of monstrous crimes and who for the sake of his family was kept at the Bastille that he might escape the death penalty, and two insane prisoners. But in the public opinion the Bastille symbolized royal absolutism and the capture of this fortress was regarded as the overthrow of the whole regime, and foreign nations attached great importance to the event. Louis XVI yielded before this agitation; Necker was recalled; Bailly became Mayor of Paris; Lafayette, commander of the national militia; the tri-colour was adopted, and Louis XVI consented to recognize the title of "National Constituent Assembly". Te Deums and processions celebrated the taking of the Bastille; in the pulpits the Abbé Fauchet preached the harinony of religion and liberty. As a result of the establishment of the "vote by order" the political privileges of the clergy may be considered to have ceased to exist. During the night of 4 August, 1789, at the instance of the Vicomte de Noailles, the Assembly voted with extraordinary enthusiasm the abolition of all privileges and feudal rights and the equality of all Frenchmen. A blow was thereby struck at the wealth of the clergy, but the churchmen were the first to give an example of sacrifice. Plurality of benefices and annates was abolished and the redemption of tithes was agreed upon, but two days later, the higher clergy becoming uneasy, demanded another discussion of the vote which had carried the redemption. The result was the abolition, pure and simple, of tithes without redemption. In the course of the discussion Buzot declared that the property of the clergy belonged to the nation. Louis XVI's conscience began to be alarmed. He temporized for five weeks, then merely published the decrees as general principles, reserving the right to approve or reject the measures which the Assembly would take to enforce them. DECLARATION OF THE RIGHTS OF MAN. CATHOLICISM CEASES TO BE THE RELIGION OF THE STATE Before giving France a constitution the Assembly judged it necessary to draw up a "Declaration of the Rights of Man and of the Citizen", which should form a preamble to the Constitution. Camus's suggestion that to the declaration of the rights of man should be added a declaration of his duties, was rejected. The Declaration of Rights mentions in its preamble that it is made in the presence and under the auspices of the Supreme Being, but out of three of the articles proposed by the clergy, guaranteeing the respect due to religion and public worship, two were rejected after speeches by the Protestant, Rabaut Saint-Etienne, and Mirabeau, and the only article relating to religion was worded as follows: "No one shall be disturbed for his opinions, even religious, provided their manifestation does not disturb the public order established by law." In fact it was the wish of the Assembly that Catholicism should cease to be the religion of the State and that liberty of worship should be established. It subsequently declared Protestants eligible to all offices (24 Dec., 1789), restored to their possessions and status as Frenchmen the heirs of Protestant refugees (10 July and 9 Dec., 1790), and took measures in favour of the Jews (28 January, 26 July, 16 Aug., 1790). But it soon became evident in the discussions relating to the Civil Constitution of the clergy that the Assembly desired that the Catholic Church, to which the majority of the French people belonged, should be subject to the State and really organized by the State. The rumours that Louis XVI sought to fly to Metz and place himself under the protection of the army of Bouillé in order to organize a counter-revolutionary movement and his refusal to promulgate the Declaration of the Rights of Man, brought about an uprising in Paris. The mob set out to Versailles, and amid insults brought back the king and queen to Paris (6 Oct., 1789). Thenceforth the Assembly sat at Paris, first at the archiepiscopal residence, then at the Tuileries. At this moment the idea of taking possession of the goods of the clergy in order to meet financial exigencies began to appear in a number of journals and pamphlets. The plan of confiscating this property, which had been suggested as early as 8 August by the Marquis de Lacoste, was resumed (24 Sept.) by the economist, Dupont de Nemours, and on 10 October was supported in the name of the Committee of Finances in a report which caused scandal by Talleyrand, Bishop of Autun, who under the old regime had been one of the two "general agents" charged with defending the financial interests of the French clergy. On 12 October Mirabeau requested the Assembly to decree (1) that the ownership of the church property belonged to the nation that it might provide for the support of the priests; (2) that the salary of each curé should not be less than 1200 livres. The plan was discussed from 13 October to 2 November. It was opposed the Abbé de Montesquieu, and the Abbé Maury, who contended that the clergy being a moral person could be an owner, disputed the estimates placed upon placed upon the wealth of the clergy, and suggested that their possessions should simply serve as a guarantee for a loan of 400,000,000 livres to the nation. The advocates of confiscation maintained that the clergy no longer existed as an order, that the property was like an escheated succession, and that the State had a right to claim it, that moreover the Royal Government had never expressly recognized the clergy as a proprietor, that in 1749 Louis XV had forbidden the clergy to receive anything without the authority of the State, and that he had confiscated the property of the Society of Jesus. Malouet took an intermediate stand and demanded that the State should confiscate only superfluous ecclesiastical possessions, but that the parochial clergy should be endowed with land. Finally, on 2 November, 1789, the Assembly decided that the possessions of the clergy be "placed at the disposal" of the nation. The results of this vote were not long in following. The first was Treilhard's motion (17 December), demanding in the name of the ecclesiastical committee of the Assembly, the closing of useless convents, and decreeing that the State should permit the religious to release themselves from their monastic vows. The discussion of this project began in February, 1790, after the Assembly by the creation of assemblies of departments, districts, and commons, had proceeded to the administrative reorganization of France. The discussion was again very violent. On 13 February, 1790, the Assembly, swayed by the more radical suggestions of Barnave and Thouret, decreed as a "constitutional article" that not only should the law no longer recognize monastic vows, but that religious orders and congregations were and should remain suppressed in France, and that no others should be established in the future. After having planned a partial suppression of monastic orders the Assembly voted for their total suppression. The proposal of Cazalès (17 February) calling for the dissolution of the Constituent Assembly, and the rightful efforts, made by the higher clergy to prevent Catholics from purchasing the confiscated goods of the Church provoked reprisals. On 17 March, 1790, the Assembly decided that the 400,000,000 livres worth of alienated ecclesiastical properties should be sold to municipalities which in turn should sell them to private buyers. On 14 April it decided that the maintenance of Catholic worship should be provided for without recourse to the revenues of former ecclesiastical property and that a sufficient sum, fixed at more than 133,000,000 livres for the first year, should be entered in the budget for the allowances to be made to the clergy; on 17 April the decree was passed dealing with the assignats, the papers issued by the Government paying interest at 5 per cent, and which were to be accepted as money in payment for the ecclesial property, thenceforth called national property; finally, on 9 July, it was decreed that all this property should be put up for sale. CIVIL CONSTITUTION OF THE CLERGY On 6 February, 1790, the Assembly charged its ecclesiastical committee, appointed 20 Aug., 1789, and composed of fifteen members to prepare the reorganization of the clergy. Fifteen new members were added to the committee on 7 February. The "constituents" were disciples of the eighteenth century philosophes who subordinated religion to the State; moreover, to understand their standpoint it is well to bear in mind that many of them were jurists imbued with Gallican and Josephist ideas. Finally Taine has proved that in many respects their religious policy merely followed in the footsteps of the old regime, but while the old regime protected the Catholic Church and made it the church exclusive, recognized, the constituents planned to enslave it after having stripped it of its privileges. Furthermore they did not take into account that there are mixed matters that can only be regulated after an agreement with ecclesiastical authority. They were especially incensed against the clergy after the consistorial address in which Pius VI (22 March, 1790) reproved some of the measures already taken by the Constituent Assembly, and by the news received from the West and South where the just dissatisfaction of Catholic consciences had provoked disturbances; in particular the election of the Protestant Rabaut Saint-Etienne to the presidency of the National Assembly brought about commotions at Toulouse and Nimes. Under the influence of these disturbances the Civil Constitution of the Clergy was developed. On 29 May, 1790, it was laid before the Assembly. Bonal, Bishop of Clermont, and some members of the Right requested that the project should be submitted to a national council or to the pope. But the Assembly proceeded; it discussed the Civil Constitution of the Clergy from 1 June to 12 July, 1790, on which date it was passed. This Constitution comprised four titles. Title I, Ecclesiastical Offices: Diocesan boundaries were to agree with those of departments, 57 episcopal sees being thus suppressed. The title of archbishop was abolished; out of 83 remaining bishoprics 10 were called metropolitan bishoprics and given jurisdiction over the neighbouring dioceses. No section of French territory should recognize the authority of a bishop living abroad, or of his delegates, and this, adds the Constitution, "without prejudice to the unity of faith and the communion which shall be maintained with the head of the Universal Church". Canonries, prebends, and priories were abolished. There should no longer be any sacerdotal posts especially devoted to fulfilling the conditions of Mass foundations. All appeals to Rome were forbidden. Title II, Appointment to Benefice: Bishops should be appointed by the Electoral Assembly of the department; they should be invested and consecrated by the metropolitan and take an oath of fidelity to the nation, the King, the Law, and the Constitution; they should not seek any confirmation from the pope. Parish priests should be elected by the electoral assemblies of the districts. Thus all citizens, even Protestants, Jews, and nominal Catholics, might name titulars to ecclesiastical offices, and the first obligation of priests and bishops was to take an oath of fidelity to the Constitution which denied to the Holy See any effective power over the Church. Title III, Salary of ministers of Religion: The Constitution fixed the salary of the Bishop of Paris at 51,000 livres (about $10,200), that of bishops of towns whose population exceeded 50,000 souls at 20,000 livres (about $4000), that of other bishops at 12,000 livres (about $2400), that of curés at a sum ranging from 6000 (about $1200) to 1200 livres (about $240). For the lower clergy this was a betterment of their material condition, especially as the real value of these sums was two and one-half times the present amount. Title IV, dealing with residence, made very severe conditions regarding the absences of bishops and priests. At the festival of the Federation (14 July, 1790) Talleyrand and three hundred priests officiating at the altar of the nation erected on the Champs-de-Mars wore the tri-colored girdle above their priestly vestments and besought the blessing of God on the Revolution. Deputations were present from the towns of France, and there was inaugurated a sort of cult, of the Fatherland, the remote origin of all the "Revolutionary cults". On 10 July, 1790, in a confidential Brief to Louis XVI, Pius VI expressed the alarm with which the project under discussion filled him. He commissioned two ecclesiastics who were ministers of Louis XVI, Champion de Cicé and Lefranc de Pompignan, to urge the king not to sign the Civil Constitution of the Clergy. On 28 July, in a letter to the pope, Louis XVI replied that he would be compelled, "with death in his soul", to promulgate the Constitution, that he would reserve the right to broach as soon as possible the matter of some concession, but that if he refused, his life and the lives of his family would be endangered. The pope replied (17 August) that he still held the same opinion of the Constitution, but that he would make no public declaration on the subject until he consulted with the Sacred College. On 24 August the king promulgated the Constitution, for which he was blamed by the pope in a confidential Brief on 22 September. M. Mathiez claims to have proved that the hesitancy of Pius VI was due to temporal rather than to spiritual considerations, to his serious fears about the affairs of Avignon and the Comtat Venaissin, where certain popular parties were clamoring for French troops, but the truth is that Pius VI, who had made known his opinion of the Constitution to two French prelates, was awaiting some manifestation on the part of the French episcopate. Indeed the bishops spoke before the pope had spoken publicly. At the end of October, 1790, they published an "Exposition des principes sur la constitution civile du clergé", compiled by Boisgelin, Archbishop of Aix in which they rejected the Constitution and called upon the faithful to do the same. This publication marks the beginning of a violent conflict between the episcopate an the Constitution. On 27 November, 1790, after a speech by Mirabeau, a decree stipulated that all bishops and priests should within a week, under penalty of losing their offices, take the oath to the Constitution, that all who refused and who nevertheless continued to discharge their priestly functions should be prosecuted as disturbers of the public peace. The king, who was much disturbed by this decree, eventually sanctioned it (26 December, 1790) in order to avoid a rising. Hitherto a large section of the lesser clergy had shown a certain amount of sympathy for the Revolution, but when it was seen that the episcopal members of the Assembly refused to take the oath, thus sacrificing their sees, a number of the priests followed this disinterested example. It may be said that from the end of 1790 the higher clergy and the truly orthodox elements of the lower clergy were united against the revolutionary measures. Thenceforth there were two classes, the non-juring or refractory priests, who were faithful to Rome and refused the oath, and the jurors, sworn, or Constitutional priests, who had consented to take the oath. M. de la Gorce has recently sought to estimate the exact proportion of the priests who took the oath. Out of 125 bishops there were only four, Talleyrand of Autun, Brienne of Sens, Jarente of Orleans, and Lafond de Savine, of Viviers; three coadjutors or bishops in partibus, Gobel, Coadjutor Bishop of Bâle; Martial de Brienne, Coadjutor of Sens; and Dubourg-Miraudet, Bishop of Babylon. In the important towns most of the priests refused to take the oath. Statistics for the small boroughs and the country are more difficult to obtain. The national archives preserve the complete dockets of 42 departments which were sent to the Constituent Assembly by the civil authorities. This shows that in these 42 departments, of 23,093 priests called upon to swear, 13,118 took the oath. There would be therefore out of 100 priests, 56 to 57 jurors against 43 to 44 non-jurors. M. de la Gorce gives serious reasons for contesting these statistics, which were compiled by zealous bureaucrats anxious to please the central administrators. He asserts on the other hand that the schism had little hold in fifteen departments and concludes that in 1791 the number of priests faithful to Rome was 52 to 55 out of 100; this is a small enough majority, but one which M. de la Gorce considers authentic. On 5 February, 1791, the Constituent Assembly forbade every non-juring priest to preach in public. In March the elections to provide for the vacant episcopal sees and parishes took place. Disorder grew in the Church of France; young and ambitious priests, better known for their political than for their religious zeal, were candidates, and in many places owing to the opposition of good Catholics those elected had much difficulty in taking possession of their churches. At this juncture, seeing the Constitutional Church thus setup in France against the legitimate Church, Pius VI wrote two letters, one to the bishops and one to Louis XVI, to inquire if there remained any means to prevent schism; and finally, on 13 April, 1791, he issued a solemn condemnation of the Civil Constitution in a solemn Brief to the clergy and the people. On 2 May, 1791, the annexation of the Comtat Venaissin and the city of Avignon by the French troops marked the rupture of diplomatic relations between France and the Holy See. From May, 1791, there was no longer an ambassador from France at Rome or a nuncio at Paris. The Brief of Pius VI encouraged the resistance of the Catholics. The Masses celebrated by non-juring priests attracted crowds of the faithful. Then mobs gathered and beat and outraged nuns and other pious women. On 7 May, 1791, the Assembly decided that the non-juring priests as prêtres habitués might continue to say Mass in parochial churches or conduct their services in other churches on condition that they would respect the laws and not stir up revolt against the Civil Constitution. The Constitutional priests became more and more unpopular with good Catholics; Sciout's works go to show that the "departmental directories" had to spend their time in organizing regular police expeditions to protect the Constitutional priests against the opposition of good Catholics, or to prosecute the non-juring priests who heroically persisted in remaining at their posts. Finally on 9 June, 1791, the Assembly forbade the publication of all Bulls or Decrees of the Court of Rome, at least until they had been submitted to the legislative body and their publication authorized. Thus Revolutionary France not only broke with Rome, but wished to place a barrier between Rome and the Catholics of France The king's tormenting conscience was the chief reason for his attempted flight (20-21 June, 1791). Before fleeing he had addressed to the Assembly a declaration of his dissatisfaction with the Civil Constitution of the Clergy, and once more protested against the moral violence which had compelled him to accept such a document. Halted at Varennes, Louis XVI was brought back on 25 June, and was suspended from his functions till the completion of the Constitution, to which he took the oath 13 Sept., 1791. On 30 Sept., 1791, the Constituent Assembly dissolved, to make way for the Legislative Assembly, in which none of the members of the Constituent Assembly could sit. The Constituent Assembly had passed 2500 laws and reorganized the whole French administration. Its chief error from a social standpoint, which Anatole Leroy-Beaulieu calls a capital one, was to pass the Chapelier Decree (15 June, 1791), which forbade working people to band together and form associations "for their so-called common interest". Led astray by their spirit of individualism and their hatred for certain abuses of the old corporations, the Constituents did not understand that the world of labour should be organized. They were responsible for the economic anarchy which reigned during the nineteenth century, and the present syndicate movement as well as the efforts of the social Catholics in conformity with the Encyclical "Rerum novarum" marks a deep and decisive reaction against the work of the Constituent Assembly. THE LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY When the Constituent Assembly disbanded (30 Sept., 1791), France all was aflame concerning the religious question. More than half the French people did not want the new Church, the factitious creation of the law; the old the Church was ruined, demolished, hunted down, and the general amnesty decreed by the Constituent Assembly before disbanding could do nothing towards restoring peace in the country where that Assembly's bungling work had unsettled the consciences of individuals. The parties in the Legislative Assembly were soon irreconcilable. The Feuillants, on the Right, saw no salvation save in the Constitution; the Girondins on the Left, and the Montagnards on the Extreme Left, made ready for the Republic. There were men who, like the poet André Chénier, dreamed of a complete Separation of Church and State. "The priests", he wrote in a letter to the "Moniteur" (22 October, 1791), "will not trouble the Estates when no one is concerned about them, and they will always trouble them while anyone is concerned about them as at present." But the majority of the members of the Legislative Assembly had sat in the departmental or district assemblies; they had fought against the non-juring priests and brought violent passions and a hostile spirit to the Legislative Assembly. A report from Gensonné and Gallois to the Legislative Assembly (9 October, 1791) on the condition of the provinces of the West denounced the non-juring priests as exciting the populace to rebellion and called for measures against them. It accused them of complicity with the émigrés bishops. At Avignon the Revolutionary Lécuyer, having been slain in a church, some citizens reputed to be partisans of the pope were thrown into the ancient papal castle and strangled (16-17 Oct., 1791). Calvados was also the scene of serious disturbances. The Legislative Assembly, instead of repairing the tremendous errors of the Constituent Assembly, took up the question of the non-juring priests. On 29 November, on the proposal of François de Neufchâteau, it decided that if within eight days they did not take the civil oath they should be deprived of all salary, that they should be place under the surveillance of the authorities, that if troubles arose where they resided they should be sent away, that they should be imprisoned for a year if they persisted in remaining and for two years if they were convicted of having provoked disobedience to the king. Finally it forbade non-juring priests the legal exercise of worship. It also requested from the departmental directories lists of the jurors and non-jurors, that it might, as it said, "stamp out the rebellion which disguises itself under the pretended dissidence in the exercise of the Catholic religion". Thus its decree ended in a threat. But this decree was the object of a sharp conflict between Louis XVI and the Assembly. On 9 Dec., 1791, the king made his veto known officially. Parties began to form. On one side were the king and the Catholics faithful to Rome, on the other the Assembly and the priests who had taken the oath. The legislative power was on one side, the executive on the other. In March, 1792, the Assembly accused the ministers of Louis XVI; the king replaced them by a Girondin ministry headed by Dumouriez, with Roland, Servan, and Clavière among its members. They had a double policy: abroad, war with Austria, and at home, measures against the non-juring priests. Louis XVI, surrounded by dangers, was also accused of duplicity; his secret negotiations with foreign courts made it possible for his enemies to say that he had already conspired against France. A papal Brief of 19 March, 1792, renewed the condemnation of the Civil Constitution and visited with major excommunication all juring priests who after sixty days should not have retracted, and all Catholics who remained faithful to these priests. The Assembly replied by the Decree of 27 May, 1792, declaring that all non-juring priests might be deported by the directory of their department at the request of twenty citizens, and if they should return after expulsion they would be liable to ten years of imprisonment. Louis vetoed this decree. Thus arose a struggle not only between Louis XVI and the Assembly, but between the king and his ministry. On 3 June 1792, the Assembly decreed the formation of a camp near Paris of 20,600 volunteers to guard the king. At the ministerial council Roland read an insulting letter to Louis, in which he called upon him to sanction the decrees of November and May against the non-juring priests. He was dismissed, whereupon the populace of Paris arose and invaded the Tuileries (20 June, 1792). and for several hours the king and his family were the objects of all manner of outrages. After the public manifesto of the Duke of Brunswick in the name of the powers in coalition against France (25 July, 1792) and the Assembly's declaration of "Fatherland in danger" there came petitions for the deposition of the king, who was accused of being in communication with foreign rulers. On 10 August, Santerre, Westermann, and Fournier l'Américain at the head of the national guard attacked the Tuileries defended by 800 Swiss. Louis refused to defend himself, and with his family sought refuge in the Legislative Assembly. The Assembly passed a decree which suspended the king's powers, drew up a plan of education for the dauphin, and convoked a national convention. Louis XVI was imprisoned in the Temple by order of the insurrectionary Commune of Paris. Madness spread through France caused by the threatened danger from without; arrests of non-juring priests multiplied. In an effort to make them give way. The Assembly decided (15 August) that the oath should consist only of the promise to uphold with all one's might liberty, equality, and the execution of the law, or to die at one's post". But the non-juring priests remained firm and refused even this second oath. On 26 August the Assembly decreed that within fifteen days they should be expelled from the kingdom, that those who remained or returned to France should be deported to Guiana, or should be liable to ten years imprisonment. It then extended this threat to the priests, who, having no publicly recognized priestly duties, had hitherto been dispensed from the oath, declaring that they also might be expelled if they were convicted of having provoked disturbances. This was the signal for a real civil war. The peasants armed in La Vendée, Deux Sèvres, Loire Inférieure, Maine and Loire, Ile and Vilaine. This news and that of the invasion of Champagne by the Prussian army caused hidden influences to arouse the Parisian populaces hence the September massacres. In the prisons of La Force, the Conciergerie, and the Abbaye Saint Germain, at least 1500 Women, priests and soldiers fell under the axe or the club. The celebrated tribune, Danton, cannot be entirely acquitted of complicity in these massacres. The Legislative Assembly terminated its career by two measures against the Church: it deprived priests of the right to register births etc., and authorize divorce. Laicizing the civil state was not in the minds of the Constituents, but was the result of the blocking of the Civil Constitution of the Clergy. The Legislative Assembly was induced to enact it because the Catholics faithful to Rome would not have recourse to Constitutional priests for registering of births, baptisms, and deaths. THE CONVENTION; THE REPUBLIC; THE REIGN OF TERROR The opening of the National Convention (21 Sept., 1792) took place the day following Dumouriez's victory at Valmy over the Prussian troops. The constitutional bishop, Grégoire, proclaimed the republic at the first session; he was surrounded in the assembly by fifteen constitutional bishops and twenty-eight constitutional priests. But the time was at hand when the constitutional clergy in turn was to be under suspicion, the majority of the Convention being hostile to Christianity itself. As early as 16 November, 1792, Cambon demanded that the salaries of the priests be suppressed and that thenceforth no religion be subsidized by the State, but the motion was rejected for the time being. Henceforth the Convention enacted all manner of arbitrary political measures: it undertook the trial of Louis XVI, and on 2 January, 1799, "hurled a kings head at Europe". But from a religious standpoint it was more timid; it feared to disturb the people of Savoy and Belgium, which its armies were annexing to France. From 10 to 15 March, 1793, formidable insurrections broke out in La Vendée, Anjou, and a part of Brittany. At the same time Dumouriez, having been defeated at Neerwinden, sought to turn his army against the Convention, and he himself went over to the Austrians. The Convention took fright; it instituted a Revolutionary Tribunal on 9 March and on 6 April the Committee of Public Safety, formidable powers, was established. Increasingly severe measures were taken chiefly against the non-juring clergy. On 18 Feb., 1793, the Convention voted a prize one hundred livres to whomsoever should denounce a priest liable to deportation and who remained in France despite the law. On 1 March the émigrés were sentenced to perpetual banishment and their property confiscated. On 18 March it was decreed that any émigré or deported priest arrested on French soil should be executed within twenty-four hours. On 23 April it was enacted that all ecclesiastics, priests or monks, who had not taken the oath prescribed by the Decree of 15 August, 1792, should be transported to Guiana; even the priests who had taken the oath should be treated likewise if six citizens should denounce them for lack of citizenship. But despite all these measures the non-juring priests remained faithful to Rome. The pope had maintained in France an official internuncio, the Abbé de Salamon, who kept himself in hiding and performed his duties at the risk of his life, gave information concerning current events, and transmitted orders. The proconsuls of the Convention, Fréron and Barras at Marseilles and Toulon, Tallien at Bordeaux, Carrier at Nantes, perpetuated abominable massacres. In Paris the Revolutionary Tribunal, carrying out the proposals of the public accuser, Foquier-Tinville, inaugurated the Reign of Terror. The proscription of the Girondins by the Montagnards (2 June, 1793), marked a progress in demagogy. The assassination of the bloodthirsty in demagogue Marat, by Charlotte Corday 913 July 1793) gave rise to extravagant manifestations in honour of Marat. But the provinces did not follow this policy. News came of insurrections in Caen, Marseilles, Lyons, and Toulon; and at the same time the Spaniards were in Roussillon, the Piedmontese in Savoy, the Austrians in Valenciennes, and the Vendeans defeated Kleber at Torfou (Sept., 1793). The crazed Convention decreed a rising en masse; the heroic resistance of Valenciennes and Mainz gave Carnot time to organize new armies. At the same time the Convention passed the Law of Suspects. (17 Sept., 1793), which authorized the imprisonment of almost anyone and as a consequence of which 30,000 were imprisoned. Informing became a trade in France. Queen Marie Antoinette was beheaded 16 October, 1793. Fourteen Carmelites who were executed 17 July, 1794, were declared Venerable by Leo XIII in 1902. From a religious point of view a new feature arose at this period — the constitutional clergy, accused of sympathy with the Girondins, came to be suspected almost as much as the non-juring priests. Numerous conflicts arose between the constitutional priests and the civil authorities with regard to the decree of the Convention which did not permit the priests to ask those intending to marry if they were baptized, had been to confession, or were divorced. The constitutional bishops would not submit to the Convention when it required them to give apostate priests the nuptial blessing. Despite the example of the constitutional bishop, Thomas Lindet, a member of the Convention, who won the applause of the Assembly by ann his marriage, despite the scandal given by Gobel, Bishop of Paris, in appointing a married priest to a post in Paris the majority of constitutional bishops remained hostile to the marriage of priests. The conflict between them and the Convention became notorious when, on 19 July, 1793, a decree of the Convention decided that the bishops who directly or indirectly offered any obstacle to the marriage of priests should be deported and replaced. In October the Convention declared that the constitutional priests themselves should be deported if they were found wanting in citizenship. The measures taken by the Convention to substitute the Revolutionary calendar for the old Christian calendar, and the decrees ordering the municipalities to seize and melt down the bells and treasures of the churches, proved that certain currents prevailed tending to the dechristianization of France. On the one hand the rest of décadi, every tenth day, replaced the Sunday rest; on the other the Convention commissioned Leonard Bourdon (19 Sept., 1793) to compile a collection of the heroic actions of Republicans to replace the lives of the saints in the schools. The "missionary representatives", sent to the provinces, closed churches, hunted down citizens suspected of religious practices, endeavoured to constrain priests to marry, and threatened with deportation for lack of citizenship priests who refused to abandon their posts. Persecution of all religious ideas began. At the request of the Paris Commune, Gobel, Bishop of Paris, and thirteen of his vicars resigned at the bar of the Convention (7 November) and their example was followed by several constitutional bishops. The Montagnards who considered worship necessary replaced the Catholic Sunday Mass by the civil mass of décadi. Having failed to reform and nationalize Catholicism they endeavoured to form a sort of civil cult, a development of the worship of the fatherland which had been inaugurated at the feast of the Federation. The Church of Notre-Dame-de-Paris became a temple of Reason, and the feast of Reason was celebrated on 10 November. The Goddesses of Reason and Liberty were not always the daughters of low people; they frequently came of the middle classes. Recent research has thrown new light on the history of these cults. M. Aulard was the first to recognize that the idea of honouring the fatherland, which had its origin in the festival of the Federation in 1790 gave rise to successive cults. Going deeper M. Mathiez developed the theory that confronted by the blocking of the Civil Constitution, the Conventionals, who had witnessed in the successive feasts of the Federation the power of formulas on the minds of the masses, wanted to create a real culte de la patrie, a sanction of faith in the fatherland. On 23 November, 1793, Chaumette passed a law alienating all churches in the capital. This example was followed in the provinces, where all city churches and a number of those in the country were closed to Catholic worship. The Convention offered a prize for the abjuration of priests by passing a decree which assured a pension to Priests who abjured, and the most painful day of that sad period was 20 November, 1793, when men, women, and children dressed in Priestly garments taken from the Church of St. Germain des Prés marched through the hall of the Convention. Laloi, who presided, congratulated them, saying they had "wiped out eighteen centuries of error". Despite the part played by Chaumette and the Commune of Paris in the work of violent dechristianization, M. Mathiez has proved that it is not correct to lay on the Commune and the Exagérés, they were called, the entire responsibility, and that a Moderate, an Indulgent, namely Thuriot, the friend of Danton, was one of the most violent instigators. It is thus clear why Robespierre who desired a reaction against these excesses, should attack both Exagérés and Indulgents. Indeed a reactionary movement was soon evident. As early as 21 November, 1793, Robespierre complained of the "madmen who could only revive fanaticism". On 5 December he caused the Convention to adopt the text of a manifesto to the nations of Europe in which the members declared that they sought to protect the liberty of all creeds; on 7 December, he supported the motion of the committee of public safety which reported the bad effect in the provinces of the intolerant violence of the missionary representatives, and which forbade in the future all threats or violence contrary to liberty of worship. These decrees were the cause of warfare between Robespierre an enthusiasts such as Hébert and Clootz. At first Robespierre sent his enemies to the scaffold; Hébert and Clootz were beheaded in March, 1704, Chaumette and Bishop Gobel in April. But in this same month of April Robespierre sent to the scaffold the Moderates, Desmoulins and Danton, who wanted to stop the Terror, and became the master of France with his lieutenants Couthon and Saint-Just. M. Aulard regards Robespierre as having been hostile to the dechristianization for religious and political motives; he explains that Robespierre shared the admiration for Christ felt by Rousseau's Vicar Savoyard and that he feared the evil effect on the powers of Europe of the Convention's anti-religious policy. M. Mathiez on the other hand considers that Robespierre did not condemn the dechristianization in principle; that he knew the common hostility to the Committee of Public Safety of Moderates such as Thuriot and enthusiasts like Hébert; and that on the information of Basire and Chabot he suspected both parties of having furthered the fanatical measures of dechristianization only to discredit the Convention abroad and thus more easily to plot with the powers hostile to France. Robespierre's true intentions are still an historical problem. On 6 April, 1794, he commissioned Couthon to propose in the name of the Committee of Public Safety that a feast be instituted in honour of the Supreme Being, and on 7 May Robespierre himself outlined in a long speech the plan of the new religion. He explained that from the religious and Republican standpoint the idea of a Supreme Being was advantageous to the State, that religion should dispense with a priesthood, and that priests were to religion what charlatans were to medicine, and that the true priest of the Supreme Being was Nature. The Convention desired to have this speech translated into all languages and adopted a decree of which the first article was: "The French people recognize the existence of a Supreme Being and the immortality of the soul". The same decree states that freedom of worship is maintained but adds that in the case of disturbances caused by the exercise of a religion those who "excite them by fanatical preaching or by counter Revolutionary innovations", shall be punished according to the rigour of the law. Thus the condition of the Catholic Church remained equally precarious and the first festival of the Supreme Being was celebrated throughout France on 8 June, 1794, with aggressive splendour. Whereas the Exagérés wished simply to destroy Catholicism, and in the temples of Reason political rather than moral doctrines were taught. Robespierre desired that the civic religion should have a moral code which he based on the two dogmas of God and the immortality of the soul. He was of the opinion that the idea of God had a social value, that public morality depended on it and that Catholics would more readily support the republic under the auspices of a Supreme Being. The victories of the Republican armies, especially that of Fleurus (July, 1794), reassured the patriots of the Convention; those of Cholet, Mans, and Savenay, marked the checking of the Vendean insurrection. Lyons and Toulon were recaptured, Alsace was delivered, and the victory of Fleurus (26 June, 1794) gave Belgium to France. While danger from abroad was decreasing, Robespierre made the mistake of putting to vote in June the terrible law of 22 Prairial, which still further shortened the summary procedure of the Revolutionary tribunal and allowed sentence to be passed almost without trial even on the members of the Convention. The Convention took fright and the next day struck out this last clause. Montagnards like Tallien, Billaud-Varenne, and Collot d'Herbois, threatened by Robespierre, joined with such Moderates as Boissy d'Anglas and Durand Maillane to bring about the coup d'état of 9 Thermidor (27 July, 1794). Robespierre and his partisans were executed, and the Thermidorian reaction began. The Commune of paris was suppressed, the Jacobin Club closed, the Revolutionary tribunal disappeared after having sent to the scaffold the public accuser Fouquier-tinville and the Terrorist, Carrier, the author of the noyades (drownings) of Nantes. The death of Robespierre was the signal for a change of policy which proved of advantage to the Church; many imprisoned priests were released and many émigré priests returned. Not a single law hostile to Catholicism was repealed, but the application of them was greatly relaxed. The religious policy of the Convention became indecisive and changeable. On 21 December 1794, a speech of the constitutional bishop, Grégoire, claiming effective liberty of worship, aroused violent murmurings in the Convention, but was applauded by the people; and when in Feb., 1795, the generals and commissaries of the Convention in their negotiations with the Vendeans promised them the restoration of their religious liberties, the Convention returned to the idea supported by Grégoire, and at the suggestion of the Protestant, Boissy d'Anglas, it passed the Law of 3 Ventôse (21 Feb., 1795), which marked the enfranchisement of the Catholic Church. This law enacted that the republic should pay salaries to the ministers of no religion, and that no churches should be reopened, but it declared that the exercise of religion should not be disturbed, and prescribed penalties for disturbers. Immediately the constitutional bishops issued an Encyclical for the Establishment of Catholic worship, but their credit was shaken. The confidence of the faithful was given instead to the non-juring priests who were returning by degrees. These priests were soon so numerous that in April, 1795, the Convention ordered them to depart within the month under pain of death. This was a fresh outbreak of anti-Catholicism. With the fluctuation which thenceforth characterized it the Convention soon made a counter-movement. On 20 May, 1795, the assembly hall was invaded by the mob and the deputy Féraud assassinated. These violences of the Extremists gave some influence to the Moderates, and 30 May, at the suggestion of the Catholic, Lanjuinais, the Convention decreed that (Law of 11 Prairial) the churches not confiscated should be place at the disposal of citizens for the exercise of their religion, but that every priest who wished to officiate in these churches should previously take an oath of submission to the laws; those who refused might legally hold services in private houses. This oath of submission to the laws was much less serious than the oaths formerly prescribed by the Revolutionary authorities, and the Abbé Sicard has shown how Emery, Superior General of St. Sulpice, Bausset, Bishop of Alais and other ecclesiastics were inclined to a policy of pacification and to think that such an oath might be taken. While it seemed to be favouring a more tolerant policy the Convention met with diplomatic successes, the reward of the military victories: the treaties of Paris with Tuscany, of the Hague with the Batavian Republic, of Basle with Spain, gave to France as boundaries the Alps, the Rhine, and the Meuse. But the policy of religious pacification was not lasting. Certain periods of the history of the Convention justify M. Champion's theory that certain religious measures taken by the Revolutionists were forced upon them by circumstances. The descent of the émigrés on the Breton coasts, to be checked by Hoche at Quiberon, aroused fresh attacks on the priests. On 6 Sept., 1795 (Law of 20 Fructidor), the Convention exacted the oath of submission to the laws even of priests who officiated in private houses. The Royalist insurrection of 13 Vendémiaire, put down by Bonaparte, provoked a very severe decree against deported priests who should be found on French territory; they were to be sentenced to perpetual banishment. Thus at the time when the Convention was disbanding, churches were separated from the State. In theory worship was free; the Law of 29 Sept., 1795 (7 Vendémiaire), on the religious policy, though still far from satisfactory to the clergy, was nevertheless an improvement on the laws of the Terror, but anarchy and the spirit of persecution still disturbed the whole country. Nevertheless France owes to the Convention a number of lasting creations: the Ledger of the Public Debt, the Ecole Polytechnique, the Conservatory of Arts and Crafts, the Bureau of Longitudes, the Institute of France, and the adoption of the decimal system of weights and measures. The vast projects drawn up with regard to primary, secondary and higher education had almost no results. THE DIRECTORY In virtue of the so-called "Constitution of the year III", promulgated by the Convention 23 Sept., 1795, a Directory of five members (27 Oct., 1795) became the executive, and the Councils of Five Hundred and of the Ancients, the legislative power. At this time the public treasuries were empty, which was one reason why the people came by degrees to feel the necessity of a strong restorative power. The Directors Carnot, Barras, Letourneur, Rewbell, La Reveillière-Lépeaux were averse to Christianity, and in the separation of Church and State saw only a means of annihilating the Church. They wished that even the Constitutional episcopate, though they could not deny its attachment to the new regime, should become extinct by degrees, and when the constitutional bishops died they sought to prevent the election of successors, and multiplied measures against the non-juring priests. The Decree of 16 April, 1796, which made death the penalty for, provoking any attempt to overthrow the Republican government was a threat held perpetually over the heads of the non-juring priests. That the Directors really wished to throw difficulties in the way of all kinds of religion, despite theoretical declarations affirming liberty of worship is proved by the Law of 11 April, 1796, which forbade the use of bells and all sorts of public convocation for the exercise of religion, under penalty of a year in prison, and, in case of a second offense of deportation. The Directory having ascertained that despite police interference some non-juring bishops were officiating publicly in Paris, and that before the end of 1796 more than thirty churches or oratories had been opened to non-juring priests in Paris, laid before the Five Hundred a plan which, after twenty days, allowed the expulsion from French soil, without admission to the oath prescribed by the Law of Vendémiaire, all priests who had not taken the Constitutional Oath prescribed in 1790, or the Oath of Liberty and Equality prescribed in 1792; those who after such time should be found in France would be put to death. But amid the discussions to which this project gave rise, the revolutionary Socialist conspiracy of Babeuf was discovered, which showed that danger lay on the Left; and on @5 Aug., 1796, the dreadful project which had only been passed with much difficulty by the Five Hundred was rejected by the Ancients. The Directory began to feel that its policy of religious persecution was no longer followed by the Councils. It learned also that Bonaparte, who in Italy led the armies of the Directory from victory to victory, displayed consideration for the pope. Furthermore, the electors themselves showed that they desired a change of policy. The elections of 20 may, 1797, caused the majority of Councils to pass from the Left to the Right. Pichegru became president of the Five Hundred, a Royalist, Barthélemy, became one of the Five Directors. Violent discussions which took place from 26 June to 18 July, in which Royer-Collard distinguished himself, brought to the vote the proposal of the deputy Dubruel for the abolition of all laws against non-juring priests passed since 1791. The Directors, alarmed by what they considered a reactionary movement, commissioned General Augereau to effect the coup d'état of 18 Fructidor (4 Sept., 1797); the elections of 49 departments were quashed, two Directors, Carnot and Barthélemy, proscribed, 53 deputies deported, and laws against the émigré and non-juring priests restored to their vigour. Organized hunting for these priests took place throughout France; the Directory cast hundreds of them on the unhealthy shore of Sinnamary, Guiana, where they died. At the same time the Directory commissioned Berthier to make the attack on the Papal States and the pope, from which Bonaparte had refrained. The Roman Republic was proclaimed in 1798 and Pius VI was taken prisoner to Valence. An especially odious persecution was renewed in France against the ancient Christian customs; it was known as the décadaire persecution. Officials and municipalities were called upon to overwhelm with vexations the partisans of Sunday and to restore the observance of décadi. The rest of that day became compulsory not only for administrations and schools, but also for business and industry. Marriages could only be celebrated on décadi at the chief town of each canton. Another religious venture of this period was that of Theophilanthropists, who wished to create a spiritualist church without dogmas, miracles, priesthood or sacraments, a sort of vague religiosity, similar to the "ethical societies of the United States." Contrary to what has been asserted for one hundred years, M. Mathiez has proved that Theophilanthropism was not founded by the director La Réveillière-Lépeaux. It was the private initiative of a former Girondin, the librarian Chemin Dupontés, which gave rise to this cult; Valentine Hauy, instructor of the blind and former Terrorist, and the physiocrat, Dupont de Nemours, collaborated with him. During its early existence, the new Church was persecuted by agents of Cochon, Minister of Police, who was the tool of Camot, and it was only for a short time, after the coup d'état of 18 Fructidor, that the the Theophanthropists benefited by the protection of La Réveillière. In proportion to the efforts of the Directory for the culte décadaire, the Theophilanthropists suffered and were persecuted; in Paris, they were sometimes treated even worse than the Catholics, Catholic priests being at times permitted to occupy the buildings connected with certain churches while the Theophilanthropists were driven out. On a curious memoir written after 18 Fructidor entitled "Des circonstances actuelles qui peuvent terminer la Revolution et des principes qui doivent fonder la Républic en France", the famous Madame de Stael, who was a Protestant, declared herself against Theophilanthropy; like many Protestants, she hoped that Protestantism would become the State religion of the Republic. Through its clumsy and odious religious policy the Directory exposed itself to serious difficulties. Disturbed by the anti-religious innovations, the Belgian provinces revolted; 6000 Belgian priests were proscribed. Brttany, Anjou. and Maine again revolted, winning over Normandy. Abroad the prestige of the French armies was upheld by were upheld by Bonaparte in Egypt, but they were hated on the Continent, and in 1799 were compelled to evacuate most of Italy. Bonaparte's return and the coup d'état of 18 Brumaire (10 November 1799) were necessary to strengthen the glory of the French armies and to restore peace to the country and to consciences. TOURNEUX, Bibl. de l'hist. de Paris pendant la Révolution (Paris, 1896-1906); TUETEY, Répertoire des sources manuscrites de l'hist de Paris sous la Révolution, 7 vols. already published (Paris, 1896-1906); FORTESCUE, List of the three collections of books, pamphlets, and journals in the British Museum relating to the French Revolution (London, 1899). Reprint of the Moniteur Universel (1789-99); the two collections in course of publication of Documents inédits sur l'hist. économique de la Révolution française; and Documents sur l'hist. de Paris pendant la Révolution française; the works of BARRUEL (q.v.); BOURGIN, La france et Rome de 1788 à 1797, regeste des dépêches du cardinal secrétaire d'état, tirée du fond des "Vescovi" des archives secrètes du Vatican (Paris, 1909), fasc. 102 of the Library of French Schools of Athens and Rome; among numerous memoirs on france on the eve of the Revolution may be mentioned: YOUNG, Travels in France, ed. BETHAM-EDWARDS (London, 1889); and on the Revolution itself: Mémoires de l'internounce Salamon, ed. BRIDIER (Paris, 1890); GOUVERNEUR MORRIS, Diary and Letters (New York, 1882); Un séjour en France 1792 à 1795, lettres d'un témoin de la Révolution française, tr. TAINE (Paris, 1883); the work of the famous BURKE, Reflections on the Revolution in France, ed, SELBY (London, 1890), remains an important criticism of Revolutionary ideas. General Works — THIERS, Hist. de la Révolution française (tr. Paris, 1823-27); MIGNET, Hist. de la Révolution française (Paris, 1824); MICHELET, Hist. de la Révolution française (Paris, 1847-1853); LOUIS BLANK, Hist. de la Révolution française (Paris, 1847-1863; TOCQUEVILLE, L'ancien régime et la Révolution (Paris, 1856); TAINE, Les Origines de la France contemporaine: la Révolution (tr. Paris, 1878-84); SOREL, L'Europe et la Révolution française (Paris, 1885-1904); SYBEL, Gesch. der Revolutionszeit (Dusseldorf, 1853-57); CHUQUET, Les guerres de la Révolution (Paris, 1889-1902); AULARD, Hist. Politique de la Révolution française (Paris, 1901); IDEM, Etudes et leçons sur la Révolution française (Paris, 1893-1910); GAUTHEROT, Cours professés à l'Institut Catholique de Paris sur la Révolution française, a periodical begun at the end of 1910 and promising to be very important; MADELIN, La Révolution (Paris, 1911), a summary commendable for the exactness of its information and its effort at justice in the most delicate questions; The Cambridge Modern History, planned by the late LORD ACTON, II the French Revolution (Cambridge, 1904); MacCARTHY, The French Revolution (London, 1890-97); Ross, The Revolutionary and Napoleonic Era (Cambridge, 1907); LEGG, Select Documents Illustrative of the History of the French Revolution (Oxford, 1905); GIBBS, Men and Women of the French Revolution (London, 1905). Monographs and Special Works — AULARD, Taine, historien de la Révolution française (Paris, 1907); COCHIN, La crise de l'hist révolutionaire: Taine et M. Aulard (Paris, 1909); BORD, La francmaçonnerie en France des origiines à 1815, bk. I, Les ouvriers de l'idée révolutionaire (Paris, 1909); IDEM, La conspiration révolutionnaire de 1789, les complices, les victimes (Paris, 1909); FUNCK-BRENTANO, Légendes et archives de la Bastille (Paris, 1898); MALLET, Mallet du Pan and the French Revolution (London, 1902); FLING, Mirabeau and the French Revolution (London, 1906); LENOTRE, Mémoires et souvenirs sur la Révolution et l'Empire (Paris, 1907-9); IDEM, Paris révolutionaire, vieilles maisons, vieux papiers (Paris, 1900-10); WARWICK, Robespierre and the French Revolution (Philadelphia, 1909); FUNCK-BRENTANO, Légendes et archives de la Bastille (Paris, 1898); BLIARD, Fraternité révolutionnaire, études et récits d'après des documents inédits (Paris, 1909); MORTIMER TERNAUX, Hist. de la Terreur (Paris, 1862-1881); WALLON, Hist. du tribunal révolutionnaire (Paris, 1880-2); IDEM, La journéedu 31 Mai et le fédéralisme en 1793 (Paris, 1886); IDEM, Les représentants en mission (Paris, 1888-90); DAUDET, Hist. de l'émigration pendant la Révolution (Paris, 1904-7); LALLEMAND, La Révolution et les pauvres (Paris, 1898); ALGER, Englishment in the French Revolution (London, 1889); DOWDEN, The French Revolution and English Literture (London, 1897); CESTRE, La Révolution française et les poètes anglais (Paris, 1906). Religious History. — SICARD, L'ancien clergé de France II,III (Paris, 1902-3) IDEM, L'éducation morale et civique avant et pendant la Révolution (Paris, 1884); PIERRE DE LA GORCE, Hist. religieuse de la Révolution française I (Paris, 1909); MATHIEZ, rome et le clergé française sous la Constituante (Paris, 1911); IDEM, La théophilanthropie et le culte décadaire (Paris, 1904); IDEM, Contribution à l'histoire religieuse de la Révolution Française (Paris, 1907); IDEM, La Révolution et l'Eglise (Paris, 1910); AULARD, La Révolution française et les congrégations (Paris, 1911); IDEM, Le culte de la raison et le culte de l'Etre suprème (Paris, 1907); IDEM, Le culte de la séparation de 'Eglise et de l'Etat en 1794 (Paris, 1903); PIERRE, La Déportation ecclésiastique sous le Directoire (Paris, 1906). GEORGES GOYAU Rex Gloriose Martyrum Rex Gloriose Martyrum Rex Gloriose Martyrum, the hymn at Lauds in the Common of Martyrs (Commune plurimorum Martyrum) in the Roman Breviary. lit comprises three strophes of four verses in Classical iambic dimeter, the verses rhyming in couplets, together with a fourth concluding strophe (or doxology) in unrhymed verses varying for the season. The first stanza will serve to illustrate the metric and rhymic scheme: Rex gloriose martyrum, Corona confitentium, Qui respuentes terrea Perducis ad coelestia. The hymn is of uncertain date and unknown authorship, Mone (Lateinische Hymnen des Mittelalters, III, 143, no. 732) ascribing it to the sixth century and Daniel (Thesaurus Hymnologicus, IV, 139) to the ninth or tenth century. The Roman Breviary text is a revision, in the interest of Classical prosody, of an older form (given by Daniel, I, 248). The corrections are: terrea instead of terrena in the line "Qui respuentes terrena"; parcisque for parcendo in the line "Parcendo confessoribus"; inter Martyres for in Martyribus in the line "Tu vincis in Martyribus"; "Largitor indulgentiæ" for the line "Donando indulgentiam". A non-prosodic correction is intende for appone in the line "Appone nostris vocibus". Daniel (IV, 139) gives the Roman Breviary text, but mistakenly includes the uncorrected line "Parcendo confessoribus". lie places after the hymn an elaboration of it in thirty-two lines, found written on leaves added to a Nuremberg book and intended to accommodate the hymn to Protestant doctrine. This elaborated form uses only lines 1, 2, 4, 5, 6, 8, 9 of the original. Two of the added strophes may be quoted here to illustrate the possible reason (but also a curious misconception of Catholic doctrine in the apparent assumption of the lines) for the modification of the original hymn: Velut infirma vascula Ictus inter lapideos Videntur sancti martyres, Sed fide durant fortiter. Non fidunt suis meritis, Sed sola tua gratia Agnoscunt se persistere In tantis cruciatibus. Of the thirteen translations of the original hymn into English. nine are by Catholics. To the list given in JULIAN, Dictionary of Hymnology, 958, should be added the versions of BAGSHAWE, Breviary Hymns and Missal Sequences (London, 1900), 166, and DONAHOE, Early Christian Hymns (New York, 1908), 50. For many Manuscript references and readings, see BLUME, Analecta Hymnica, LI (Leipzig, 1909), 128-29; IDEM, Der Cursus s. Benedicti Nursini (Leipzig, 1909), 67. H.T. HENRY Rex Sempiterne Caelitum Rex Sempiterne Cælitum The Roman Breviary hymn for Matins of Sundays and weekdays during the Paschal Time (from Low Sunday to Ascension Thursday). Cardinal Thomasius ("Opera omnia", II, Rome, 1747, 370) gives its primitive form in eight strophes, and Vezzosi conjectures, with perfect justice, that this is the hymn mentioned both by Cæsarius (died 542) and Aurelianus (died circa 550) of Arles, in their "Rules for Virgins", under the title "Rex æterne domine". Pimont (op. cit. infra, III, 95) agrees with the conjecture, and present-day hymnologists confirm it without hesitation. The hymn is especially interesting for several reasons. In his "De arte metrica" (xxiv) the Ven. Bede selects it from amongst "Alii Ambrosiani non pauci" to illustrate the difference between the metre of Classical iambics and the accentual rhythms imitating them. Ordinarily brief in his comment, he nevertheless refers to it (P. L., XC, 174) as "that admirable hymn . . . fashioned exquisitely after the model of iambic metre" and quotes the first strophe: Rex æterne Domine, Rerum Creator omnium, Qui eras ante sæcula Semper cum patre filius. Pimont (op. cit., III, 97) points out that, in its original text, it is amongst all the hymns, the one assuredly which best evidences the substitution of accent for prosodical quantity, and that the (unknown) author gives no greater heed to the laws of elision than to quantity "qui eras", "mundi in primordio", "plasmasti hominem", "tuæ imagini", etc. The second strophe illustrates this well: Qui mundi in primordio Adam plasmasti hominem, Qui tuæ imagini Vultum dedisti similem. Following the law of binary movement (the alternation of arsis and thesis), the accent is made to shorten long syllables and to lengthen short ones, in such wise that the verses, while using the external form of iambic dimeters, are purely rhythmic. Under Urban VIII, the correctors of the hymns omitted the fourth stanza and, in their zeal to turn the rhythm into Classical iambic dimeter, altered every line except one. Hymnologists, Catholic and non-Catholic alike, are usually severe in their judgment of the work of the correctors; but in this instance, Pimont, who thinks the hymn needed no alteration at their hands, nevertheless hastens to add that "never, perhaps, were they better inspired". And it is only just to say that, as found now in the Roman Breviary, the hymn is no less vigorous than elegant. PIMONT, Les hymnes du bréviaire romain, III (Paris, 1884), 93-100, gives the old and the revised text, supplementary stanzas, and much comment. Complete old text with various Manuscript readings in Hymnarium Sarisburiense (London, 1851), 95, and in DANIEL, Thesaurus hymnol., I (Halle, 1841), 85 (together with Rom. Brev. text and notes). Text (8 strophes) With English version, notes, plainsong and other settings in Hymns, Ancient and Modern, Historical Edition (London, 1909), 205-7. Old text, with many Manuscript references and readings, and notes, in BLUME, Der Cursus s. Benedicti Nursini (Leipzig, 1909), 111-13 (cf, also the alphabetical index). For first lines of translations etc., JULIAN, Dict. of Hymnology (London, 1907), s. vv. Rex aeterne Domine and Rex sempiterne coelitum. To his list should be added BAGSHAWE, Breviary Hymns and Missal Sequences (London, 1900), 78, and DONAHOE, Early Christian Hymns (New York, 1908), 22. The translation in BUTE, The Roman Breviary (Edinburgh, 1879), is by Moultrie, an Anglican clergyman. H. T. HENRY. Anthony Rey Anthony Rey An educator and Mexican War chaplain, born at Lyons, 19 March, 1807; died near Ceralvo, Mexico, 19 Jan., 1847. He studied at the Jesuit college of Fribourg, entered the novitiate of that Society, 12 Nov., 1827, and subsequently taught at Fribourg and Sion in Valais, In 1840 he was sent to the United States, appointed professor of philosophy in Georgetown College, and in 1843 transferred to St. Joseph's Church in Philadelphia. He became assistant to the Jesuit provincial of Maryland, pastor of Trinity Church, Georgetown, and vice-president of the college (1845). Appointed chaplain in the U. S. Army in 1846, he ministered to the wounded and dying at the siege of Monterey amid the greatest dangers; after the capture of the city, he remained with the army at Monterey and preached to the rancheros of the neighbourhood. Against the advice of the U. S. officers, he set out for Matamoras, preaching to a congregation of Americans and Mexicans at Ceralvo. It is conjectured that he was killed by a band under the leader Canales, as his body was discovered, pierced with lances, a few days later. He left letters dating from November, 1846, which were printed in the "Woodstock Letters" (XVII, 149-50, 152-55, 157-59). DE BACKER-SOMMERVOGEL, Bibliothèque, VI, 1689; APPLETONS' Cyclopedia of American Biography (New York, 1888), s. v. N. A. WEBER William Reynolds William Reynolds (RAINOLDS, RAYNOLDS, REGINALDUS) Reynolds, William, born. at Pinhorn near Exeter, about 1544; died at Antwerp, 24 August, 1594, the second son of Richard Rainolds, and elder brother of John Rainolds, one of the chief Anglican scholars engaged on the "Authorized Version" of the Bible. Educated at Winchester School, he became fellow of New College, Oxford (1560-1572). He was converted partly by the controversy between Jewel and Harding, and partly by the personal influence of Dr. Allen. In 1575 he made a public recantation in Rome, and two years later went to Douai to study for the priesthood. He removed with the other collegians from Douai to Reims in 1578 and was ordained priest at Chalons in April, 1580. He then remained at the college, lecturing on Scripture and Hebrew, and helping Gregory Martin in translating the Reims Testament. Some years before his death he had left the college to become chaplain to the Beguines at Antwerp. He translated several of the writings of Allen and Harding into Latin and wrote a "Refutation" of Whitaker's attack on the Reims version (Paris, 1583); "De justa reipublicæ christianæ in reges impios et hæreticos authoritate" (Paris, 1590), under the name of Rossæus; a treatise on the Blessed Sacrament (Antwerp, 1593); "Calvino-Turcismus" (Antwerp, 1597). KIRBY, Annals of Winchester College (London, 1892); FOSTER, Alumni Ozonienses (Oxford. 1891); Douay Diaries (London, 1878); WOOD, Athenae Ozonienses (London, 1813); PITTS, De illustribus Angliae scriptoribus (Paris, 1619); DODD. Church History, II (Brussels vere Wolverhampton, 1737-42); GILLOW in Biog. Dict. Eng. Cath., s. v.; RIGG in Dict. Nat. Biog., s. v. Rainolds. EDWIN BURTON. Rhaetia Rhætia (RHÆTORUM). Prefecture Apostolic in Switzerland; includes in general the district occupied by the Catholics belonging to the Rhæto-Romanic race in the canton of the Grisons (Graubünden). The prefecture is bounded on the north by the Prättigau, on the south by Lombardy, on the east by the Tyrol, on the west by the cantons of Tessin (Ticino), Uri, and Glarus. During the sixteenth century the greater part of the inhabitants of the Grisons became Calvinists. In 1621 Paul V, at the entreaty of Bishop John Flugi of Coire (Chur) and Archduke Leopold of Austria, sent thither Capuchin missionaries from Brixen in the Tyrol; the first superior was P. Ignatius of Cosnigo, who resided in the mission (1621-45) and conducted it under the title of prefect Apostolic. The best known of the missionaries is St. Fidelis of Sigmaringen, who was martyred. After the death of P. Ignatius the mission was cared for by the Capuchin province of Brixen, represented in the mission by a sub-prefect. For a long time after the suppression of the religious orders by Napoleon, the mission was without an administrator; upon the restoration of the order, Capuchins from various provinces were sent into the mission. At present it is under the care of Capuchins of the Roman province. It has 22 parishes, in three of which the majority of inhabitants speak Italian; 52 churches and chapels; 40 schools for boys and girls; 7200 Catholics; 25 Capuchins. The prefect Apostolic lives at Sagens. BÜCHI, Die kath. Kirche in der Schweiz (Munich, 1902), 89; Missiones Catholicae (Rome, 1907), 103; MAYER, Gesch. des Bistums Chur (Stans, 1907), not yet completed. JOSEPH LINS. Rhaphanaea Rhaphanæa A titular see in Syria Secunda, suffragan of Apamea. Rhaphanæa is mentioned in ancient times only by Josephus (Bel. Jud., VII, 5, 1), who says that in that vicinity there was a river which flowed six days and ceased on the seventh, probably an intermittent spring now called Fououar ed-Deir, near Rafanieh, a village of the vilayet of Alep in the valley of the Oronte. The ancient name was preserved. At the time of Ptolemy (V, 14, 12), the Third Legion (Gallica) was stationed there. Hierocles (Synecdemus, 712, 8) and Georgius Cyprius, 870 (Gelzer, "Georgii Cyprii descriptio orbis romani", 44) mention it among the towns of Syria Secunda. The crusaders passed through it at the end of 1099; it was taken by Baldwin and was given to the Count of Tripoli ("Historiens des croisades", passim; Rey in "Bulletin de la Société des antiquaires de France", Paris, 1885, 266). The only bishops of Rhaphanæa known are (Le Quien, "Oriens christianus", II, 921): Bassianus, present at the Council of Nicæa, 325; Gerontius at Philippopolis, 344; Basil at Constantinople, 381; Lampadius at Chalcedon, 451; Zoilus about 518; Nonnus, 536. The see is mentioned as late as the tenth century in the "Notitia episcopatuum" of Antioch (Vailhé "Echos d'Orient", X, 94). SMITH, Dict. of Gr. and Rom. geogr., s. v.; MÜLLER, notes on Ptolemy, ed. DIDOT, I, 973. S. PÉTRIDÈS. Joseph Gabriel Rheinberger Joseph Gabriel Rheinberger A composer and organist, born at Vaduz, in the Principality of Lichtenstein, Bavaria, 17 March, 1839; died at Munich, 25 Nov., 1901. When seven years old, he already served as organist in his parish church, and at the age of eight composed a mass for three voices. After enjoying for a short time the instruction of Choir-master Schmutzer in Feldkirch, he attended the conservatory at Munich from 1851 to 1854, and finished his musical education with a course under Franz Lachner. In 1859 he was appointed professor of the theory of music and organ at the conservatory, a position which he held until a few months before his death. Besides his duties as teacher he acted successively as organist at the court Church of St. Michael, conductor of the Munich Oratorio Society, and instructor of the solo artists at the royal opera. In 1867 he received the title of royal professor, and became inspector of the newly established royal school for music, now called the Royal Academy of Music. In 1877 he was promoted to the rank of royal court conductor, which position carried with it the direction of the music in the royal chapel. Honoured by his prince with the title of nobility and accorded the honorary degree of Doctor of Philosophy by the Munich University, Rheinberger for more than forty years wielded as teacher of many of the most gifted young musicians of Europe and America, perhaps more influence than any of his contemporaries. As a composer he was remarkable for his power of invention, masterful technique, and a noble, solid style. Among his two hundred compositions are oratorios (notably "Christoforus" and "Monfort"); two operas; cantatas for soli, chorus, and orchestra ("The Star of Bethlehem", "Toggenburg", "Klãrchen auf Eberstein" etc.); smaller works for chorus and orchestra; symphonies ("Wallenstein"), overtures, and chamber music for various combinations of instruments, Most important of all his instrumental works are his twenty sonatas for organ, the most notable productions in this form since Mendelssohn. Rheinberger wrote many works to liturgical texts, namely, twelve masses (one for double chorus, three for four voices a cappella, three for women's voices and organ, two for men's voices and one with orchestra), a requiem, Stabat Mater, and a large number of motets, and smaller pieces. Rheinbergen's masses rank high as works of art, but some of them are defective in the treatment of the text. Joseph Renner, Jr., has recently remedied most of these defects, and made the masses available for liturgical purposes. KRAYER, Joseph Rheinberger (Ratisbon, 1911); RENNER, Rheinberger's Messen in Kirchen-musikalisches Jahrbuch (Ratisbon, 1909). JOSEPH OTTEN Rhesaena Rhesæna A titular see in Osrhoene, suffragan of Edessa. Rhesæna (numerous variations of the name appear in ancient authors) was an important town at the northern extremity of Mesopotamia near the sources of the Chaboras (now Khabour), on the way from Carrhæ to Nicephorium about eighty miles from Nisibis and forty from Dara; Near by Gordian III fought the Persians in 243. Its coins show that it was a Roman colony from the time of Septimus Severus. The "Notitia dignitatum" (ed. Boecking, I, 400) represents it as under the jurisdiction of the governor or Dux of Osrhoene. Hierocles (Synecdemus, 714, 3) also locates it in this province but under the name of Theodosiopolis; it had in fact obtained the favour of Theodosius the Great and taken his name. It was fortified by Justinian. In 1393 it was nearly destroyed by Tamerlane's troops. To-day under the name of Râs-el-'Ain, it is the capital of a caza in the vilayet of Diarbekir and has only 1500 inhabitants. Le Quien (Oriens christianus, II, 979) mentions nine bishops of Rhesæna: Antiochus, present at the Council of Nicæa (325); Eunomius, who (about 420) forced the Persians to raise the siege of the town; John, at the Council of Antioch (444); Olympius at Chalcedon (451); Andrew (about 490); Peter, exiled with Sevenian (518); Ascholius, his successor, a Monophysite; Daniel (550); Sebastianus (about 600), a correspondent of St. Gregory the Great. The see is again mentioned in the tenth century in a Greek "Notitiæ episcopatuum" of the Patriarchate of Antioch (Vailhé, in "Echos d'Orient", X, 94). Le Quien (ibid., 1329 and 1513) mentions two Jacobite bishops: Scalita, author of a hymn and of homilies, and Theodosius (1035). About a dozen others are known. Revue de l'Orient chrét. VI (1901), 203; D'HERBELOT, Bibl. orientale, I, 140; III, 112; RITTER. Erdkunde, XI, 375; SMITH, Dict. Greek and Roman Geogr., s. v., with bibliography of ancient authors; MÜLLER, notes on Ptolemy, ed. DIDOT, I, 1008; CHAPOT, La frontière de l'Euphrate de Pompée à la conquête arabe (Paris, 1907). 302. S. PÉTRIDÈS Rhinocolura Rhinocolura A titular see in Augustamnica Prima, suffragan of Pelusium. Rhinocolura or Rhinocorura was a maritime town so situated on the boundary of Egypt and Palestine that ancient geographers attributed it sometimes to one country and sometimes to the other. Its history is unknown. Diodorus Siculus (I, 60, 5) relates that it must have been founded by Actisanes, King of Ethiopia, who established there convicts whose noses had been cut off; this novel legend was invented to give a Greek meaning to the name of the town. Strabo (XVI, 781) says that it was formerly the great emporium of the merchandise of India and Arabia, which was unloaded at Leuce Come, on the eastern shore of the Red Sea, whence it was transported via Petra to Rhinocolura, It is identified usually with the present fortified village El Anish, which has 400 inhabitants, excluding the garrison, situated half a mile from the sea, and has some ruins of the Roman period. It was taken by the French in 1799, who signed there in 1800 the treaty by which they evacuated Egypt. To-day it and its vicinity are occupied by Egypt, after having been for a long period claimed by Turkey. The village is near a stream which bears its name (Wadi el-Arish), and receives its waters from central Sinai; it does not flow in winter, but is torrential after heavy rain. It is the "nahal Misraim", or stream of Egypt, frequently mentioned in the Bible (Gen., xv, 18, etc.), as marking on the south-west the frontier of the Promised Land. Instead of the ordinary translation of the Hebrew name, the Septuagint in Is., xxvii, 12, render it by Hrinokoroura; see St. Jerome (In Isaiam, XXVII, 12 in P. L., XXIV, 313). Le Quien (Oriens Christianus, II, 541) gives a list of thirteen bishops of Rhinocolura: the first does not belong to it. A Coptic manuscript also wrongly names a bishop said to have assisted in 325 at the Council of Nice. The first authentic titular known is St. Melas, who suffered exile under Valens and is mentioned on 16 January in the Roman Martyrology. He was succeeded by his brother Solon. Polybius was the disciple of St. Epiphanius of Cyprus, whose life he wrote. Hermogenes assisted at the Council of Ephesus (431), was sent to Rome by St. Cyril, and received many letters from his suffragan St. Isidore. His successor Zeno defended Eutyches at the Second Council of Ephesus (451). Other bishops were: Alphius, the Massalian heretic; Ptolemy, about 460, Gregory, 610. Of the other bishops on the list one did not belong to Rhinocolura; the other three are Coptic heretics. RELAND, Palæstina, 285, 969 sq.; SMITH, Dict. Greek and Roman Geogr., s. v.; MÜLLER, notes on Ptolemy, ed. DIDOT, 1, 683; VIGOUROUX, Dict. de la Bible, s. v. Egypte (torrent ou ruisseau d'); AMÉLINEAU, Géoqraphie de l'Egypte à l'époque copte, 404; RITTER, Erdkunde, XVI, 143; XVI, 39, 41. S. PÉTRIDÈS Rhithymna Rhithymna (RHETHYMNA) A titular see of Crete, suffragan of Gortyna, mentioned by Ptolemy, III, 15, Pliny, IV, 59, and Stephen of Byzantium. Nothing is known of its ancient history but some of its coins are extant. It still exists under the Greek name of Rhethymnon (Turkish, Resmo, It. and Fr. Retimo). It is a small port on the north side of the island thirty-seven miles south-west of Candia; it has about 10,000 inhabitants (half Greeks, half Mussulmans), and some Catholics who have a church and school. Rhithymna exports oil and soap. During the occupation of Crete by the Venetians it became a Latin see. According to Corner (Creta sacra, II, 138 sq.), this see is identical with Calamona. For a list of twenty-four bishops (1287 to 1592) see Eubel (Hier. cath. med. ævi, I, 161; II, 128; III, 161). Three other names are mentioned by Corner from 1611 to 1641. The Turks who had already ravaged the city in 1572, captured it again in 1646. At present the Greeks have a bishop there who bears the combined titles of Rhethymnon and Aulopotamos. The date of the foundation of the see is unknown. It is not mentioned in the Middle Ages in any of the Greek "Notitiæ episcopatuum". SMITH, Dict. of Greek and Roman Geogr., s. v. S. PÉTRIDÈS. Rhizus Rhizus ( Rizous.) A titular see of Pontus Polemoniacus suffragan of Neocaesarea, mentioned by Ptolemy (V, 6) as a port on the Black Sea (Euxine); it is referred to also in other ancient geographical documents, but its history is unknown, Procopius ("De bello gothico", IV, 2), tells us that the town was of some importance and that it was fortified by Justinian. He calls it Rhizaion, and it is so styled in the "Notitiæ Episcopatuum". It was originally a suffragan of Neocaesarea, then an "autocephalous" archdiocese, finally a metropolitan see; the dates of these changes are uncertain. With the decrease of the Christian element the suffragan has become a simple exarchate. To-day there are no more than 400 Greeks among the 2000 inhabitants of Rizeh, as the Turks call the town. It is the capital of the Sanjak of Lazistan in the Vilayet of Trebizond, and exports oranges and lemons. Le Quien (Oriens christianus, I, 517), mentions three bishops; Nectarius, present at the Council of Nice, 787; John, at the Council of Constantinople, 879, and Joachim (metropolitan) in 1565. SMITH, Dict. Greek and Roman Geogr., s. v.; MÜLLER, Notes on Ptolemy, ed. DIDOT, I, 868. S. PÉTRIDÈS. Giacomo Rho Giacomo Rho Missionary, born at Milan, 1593; died at Peking 27 April, 1638. He was the son of a noble and learned jurist, and at the age of twenty entered the Society of Jesus. While poor success attended his early studies, he was later very proficient in mathematics. After his ordination at Rome by Cardinal Bellarmine, he sailed in 1617 for the Far East with forty-four companions. After a brief stay at Goa he proceeded to Macao where, during the siege of that city by the Dutch, he taught the inhabitants the use of artillery and thus brought about its deliverance. This service opened China to him. He rapidly acquired the knowledge of the native language and was summoned in 1631 by the emperor to Peking for the reform of the Chinese calendar. With Father Schall he worked to the end of his life at this difficult task. When he died, amidst circumstances exceptionally favourable to the Catholic mission, numerous Chinese officials attended his funeral. He left works relative to the correction of the Chinese calendar, to astronomical and theological questions. DE BACKER-SOMMERVOGEL, Biblioth. de la Comp. de Jésus, VI (9 vols., Brussels and Paris, 1890-1900), 1709-11; HUC, Christianity in China, Tartary and Thibet, II (tr. New York, 1884), 265-66. N. A. WEBER. Rhode Island Rhode Island The State of Rhode Island and Providence Plantations, one of the thirteen original colonies, is in extent of territory (land area, 1054 square miles), the smallest state in the American union. It includes the Island of Rhode Island, Block Island, and the lands adjacent to Narragansett Bay, bounded on the north and east by Massachusetts, on the south by the Atlantic Ocean, and on the west by Connecticut. The population, according to the United States Census of 1910, numbers 542,674. Providence, the capital, situated at head of Narragansett Bay, and having a population of 224,326, is the industrial centre of an extremely wealthy and densely populated district. Rhode Island has long since ranked as chiefly a manufacturing state, although the agricultural interest in certain sections are still considerable. The agriculture in Rhode Island has not kept pace with manufacturers is illustrated by instances of rural population. Two country towns have fewer inhabitants than in 1748; two others, but a few more than at that date; one town, less than in 1782; two, less than in 1790, and another, less than in 1830. Coal exists and has been mined, but it is of graphitic nature. Granite of high grade is extensively quarried. The value of stone quarried in 1902 was $734,623; the value of all other minerals produced, $39,998. The power supplied by the rivers gave early impetus to manufacturing are general, including cotton, woolen, and rubber goods, jewelry, silverware, machinery and tools. In 1905 there were 1617 manufacturing establishments with a total capitalization of $215,901,375; employing 97,318 workers with a payroll of $43,112,637, and an output of the value of $202,109,583. The total assets of banks and trust companies in June, 1909, were $252,612,122. The bonded State debt,1 Jan., 1910, was $4,800,000 with a sinking fund of $654,999. The direct foreign commerce is small, imports in 1908 being $1,499,116 and exports $21,281. The population of Rhode Island in 1708 was 7181. In 1774 it had increased to 59,707, subsequently decreasing until in 1782 it was 52,391. Thereafter until 1840 the average annual increase was 973; and from 1840 to 1860, 3289. During the latter period and for several years afterward came a heavy immigration from Ireland, followed by a large influx from Canada. For the last twenty-five years, the increase from European countries, especially Italy, has been great. According to the State census of 1095, the number of foreign-born in Rhode Island is as follows; born in Canada, 38,500; in Ireland, 32,629; In England, 24,431; In Italy, 18,014; In Sweden, 7201; In Scotland, 5649; in Portugal, 5293; In Russia, 4505; in Germany, 4463; in Poland, 4104. This classification does not distinguish the Jews, who are rapidly increasing, and who in 1905 numbered 14,570. HISTORY A. Political It is probable that Verrazano, sailing under the French flag, visited rhode Island waters in 1524. A dutch navigator, Adrian Block, in 1614 explored Narragansett Bay and gave to Block Island the name it bears. The sentence of banishment of Roger Williams from Plymouth Colony was passed in 1635, and in the following year he settled on the site of Providence, acquiring land by purchase from the Indians. One cause of Williams's banishment was his protest against the interference of civil authorities in religious matters. In November, 1637, William Coddington was notified to eave Massachusetts. With the help f of Williams, he settled on the site of Portsmouth, in the northerly part of the island of Rhode Island, which was then call Aquidneck. Disagreements arising at Portsmouth, Coddington, with a minority of his townsmen, in 1639 moved southward on the island and began the settlement of New port. Samuel Gorton, another refugee from Massachusetts, in 1638 came first to Portsmouth, and later to Providence, creating discord at both places by denying all power in the magistrates. Gorton finally, in 1643, purchased from the Indians a tract of land in what is now the town of Warwick, and settled there. The four towns, Providence, Warwick, Portsmouth, and Newport, lying in a broken line about thirty miles in length, for many years constituted the municipal divisions of the colony. In 1644 Roger Williams secured from the English Parliament the first charter, which was accepted by an assembly of delegates from the four towns; and a bill of rights, and a brief code of laws, declaring the government to be "held by the common consent of all the free inhabitants", were enacted thereunder. In 1663 was granted the charter of Charles II, the most liberal of all the colonial charters. It ordained that no person should be in any way molested on account of religion; and created the General Assembly, with power to enact all laws necessary for the government of the colony, such laws being not repugnant to but agreeable as near as might be to the laws of England, "considering the nature and constitution of the place and people there" The separate existence of the little colony was long precarious. Coddington in 1651 secured for himself a commission as governor of the islands of Rhode Island and Conanicut, but his authority was vigorously assailed, and his commission finally revoked. The Puritans in Massachusetts were no friends of the people of Rhode Island, and portions of the meagre territory were claimed by Massachusetts and Connecticut. Rhode Island, like the other colonies was threatened both in England and in America by those who favoured direct control by the English Government. Under the regime of Andros, Colonial Governor at Boston, the charter government was suspended for two years; and had the recommendations of the English commissioner, Lord Bellemont, been adopted, the charter government would have been abolished. In 1710 the colony first issued "bills of credit", paper money, which continued increasing in volume and with great depreciation in value, until after the close of the Revolution, causing and inciting bitter partisan and sectional strife, and at times leading to the verge of civil war. The advocates of this currency defended it on the ground of necessity, lack of specie, and the demand for some medium to pay the expenses os successive wars. In 1787 the State owed £150,047, English money, on interest-bearing notes, which in 1789 the Assembly voted to retire by paying them in paper money then passing at the ratio of twelve to one. By the early part of the eighteenth century the people were extensively engaged in ship-building, and it is said that in the wars in America between Great Britain and France, Rhode Island fitted out more ships for service than any other colony. The extraordinary measure of self-government granted to the colonists by the charter fostered in them a spirit of loyalty toward the mother country, substantially and energetically manifested on every occasion; but which, nevertheless, when the danger from the foreign foe was no longer imminent, was supplanted by a feeling of jealous apprehension of the encroachments on that the colonist s had now learned to regard as their natural rights. Rhode Island heartily joined the other colonies in making the Revolution her cause. In 1768 the Assembly ratified the Massachusetts remonstrance against the British principle of taxation, in spite of Lord Hillsborough's advice to treat it with "the contempt it deserves". The first overt act of the Revolution, the scuttling of the revenue sloop "Liberty", took place in Newport harbour, 19 July, 1769; followed three years later by the burning of the British ship of war "Gaspee" at Providence. A strong loyalist party in the colony for social and commercial reasons was anxious to avoid an open breach with the mother country, but the enthusiasm with which the news of Lexington was received showed that the majority of the people welcomed the impending struggle. on 4 May, 1776, the Rhode Island Assembly by formal act renounced its allegiance to Great Britain, and in the following July voted its approval of the Declaration of Independence. The colony bore its burden, too, of the actual conflict. From 1776 until 1779, the British occupied Newport as their headquarters, ruining the commerce of the town and wasting the neighbouring country. The evident strategic importance of the possession of Newport by the British, and the possibility of the place's becoming the centre of a protracted and disastrous war, created great alarm not only in the colony but throughout New England. Two attempts were made to dislodge the enemy, the second with the co-operation of the French fleet, but both failed. The levies of men and money were promptly met by the people of the colony in spite of the widespread privation and actual suffering. At last the British headquarters were shifted to the south, and the French allies Newport until the end of the war. The same consideration, the instinct for local self-government, which prompted Rhode Island to resist the mother country, made her slow to join with the other colonies in establishing a strong centralized government. "We have not seen our way clear to do it consistent with our idea of the principles upon which we are all embarked together", wrote the Assemble to the President of Congress. The proposed federal organization seemed scarcely less objectionable than the former British rule. Rhode Island took no part in the Convention of 1787, and long refused even to submit the question of the adoption of the Constitution to a state convention. Eight times the motion to submit was lost in the Assemble, and it was only when it became evident that the other states did not regard Rhode Island's condition single independence as an "eligible" one, and where quite ready to act in support of their opinion even to the extent of parcelling her territory among themselves, that the Constitution was submitted to a convention and adopted by a majority of two votes, 29 May, 1790. Admitted to the Union, Rhode Island did not follow the example of most of the other states in framing a constitution adapted to the new national life, but continued under the old charter. This fact underlies here political history for the next fifty years. The charter of Charles II, though suitable to its time, was bound to become oppressive. First, it fixed the representation of the several towns without providing for a readjustment to accord with the relative changes therein. Hence, the natural and social forces, necessarily operating in the course of two hundred years to enlarge some communities and to reduce others, failed to find a corresponding political expression. Again, the charter had conferred the franchise upon the "freemen" of the towns, leaving to the Assemble the task of defining the term. From early colonial days the qualification had fluctuated until in 1798 it was fixed at the ownership of real estate to the value of $134, or of $7 annual rental (the eldest sons of freeholders being also eligible). Agitation for a constitution began as soon as Rhode Island had entered the Union, and continued for many years with little result. It came to a head ultimately in 1841 in the Dorr Rebellion, the name given to that movement whereby a large part in the state, under the leadership of Thomas W. Dorr of Providence, proceeded to frame a constitution, independently of the existing government and to elect officers thereunder. The movement was readily put down by the authorities after some display of force, and Dorr was obliged to flee the state. Returning later, he was indicted for treason, convicted and sentenced to imprisonment for life. He was pardoned and set at liberty within a year. His work was not a failure, however, for in 1842 a constitution was adopted incorporating his proposed reforms. A personal property qualification was instituted, practically equivalent to the real estate qualification; and neither was required, except in voting upon an proposition to impose a tax or to expend money, or for the election of the City Council of Providence. The personal property qualification was not available, to foreign-born citizens, and this discrimination persisted until 1888, when it was abolished by constitutional amendment. Each town and city was entitled to one member in the Senate; and the membership of the Lower House, limited to seventy-two, was apportioned among the towns and cities on the basis of population, with the proviso that now town or city should have more than one-sixth of the total membership. In 1909, an amendment was adopted increasing the membership of the Lower House to one hundred, apportioned as before among the towns and cities on the basis of population, with the proviso that no town or city should have more than one-fourth of the total membership. It is significant that under this amendment the City of Providence has twenty-five representatives whereas its population warrants forty-one. In the same year, the veto power was for the first time bestowed upon the governor. Notwithstanding these approaches toward a republican form of government, there is a strong demand for a thorough revision of the Constitution. According to an opinion of the Supreme Court a constitutional convention is out of the question, inasmuch as the Constitution itself contains no provision therefor (In re The Constitutional Convention, IIV R. I., 469), and the only hope of reform seems to be in the slow and difficult process of amendment. B. Religious The earliest settlers in this state were criticized by their enemies for lack of religion. Cotton Mather described them as a "colluvies" of everything but Roman Catholics and real Christians. In Providence Roger Williams was made pastor of the first church, the beginning of the present First Baptist Church. In 1739 there were thirty-three churches in the colony; twelve Baptist, ten Quaker, six Congregational or Presbyterian, and five Episcopalian. It is said that in 1680 there was not one Catholic in the colony, and for a long period their number must have been small. In 1828 there were probably less than 1000 Catholics in the state. In that year Bishop Fenwick of Boston assigned Rev. Robert Woodley to a "parish" which included all of Rhode Island and territory to the east in Massachusetts. A church was built in Pawtucket in 1829. Father Woodley in 1828 acquired in Newport a lot and building which was used for a church and school. In 1830 Rev. John Corry was assigned to Taunton and Providence, and built a church in Taunton in that year. The first Catholic church in Providence was built in 1837 on the site of the present cathedral. At that time Father Corry was placed in charge of Providence alone. From 1844 to 1846 the mission of Rev. James Fitton included Woonsocket, Pawtucket, Crompton and Newport, a series of districts extending the length of the state. In 1846, Newport was made a parish by itself. Woonsocket received a pastor at about the same time; Pawtucket in 1847; Warren in 1851; Pascoag in 1851; East Greenwich in 1853; Georgiaville in 1855. These parishes were not confined to the limits of the towns or villages named, but included the surrounding territory. In 1844 the Diocese of Hartford was created, including Rhode Island and Connecticut, with the episcopal residence at Providence. At this time there were only six priests in the two states. In 1872 the diocese of Hartford was divided and the Diocese of Providence created, including all Rhode Island, and in Massachusetts, the counties of Bristol, Barnstable, Dukes and Nantucket, also the towns of Mattapoisset, Marion, and Wareham in the County of Plymouth. In 1904 the Diocese of Fall River was created, leaving the Diocese of Providence coextensive with the state. After 1840, and especially following the famine in Ireland, the Irish increased with great rapidity and long formed the bulk of the Catholic population. The growth of cotton manufactures after the Civil War drew great numbers of Canadian Catholics. In more recent years Italians have settled in Rhode Island in great numbers, and many Polish Catholics. Included in the Catholic population are approximately 65,000 Canadians and French, 40,000 Italians, 10,000 Portuguese,8000 Poles, and 1000 Armenians and Syrians. According to a special government report on the census of religious bodies of the United States, 76.5 per cent, of the population of the City of Providence are Catholics. There are 199 priests in the diocese, including about 47 Canadian and French priests, 8 Italian, and 5 Polish priests. Thirty parishes support parochial schools. Under Catholic auspices are two orphan asylums, one infant asylum, two hospitals, one home for the aged poor, one industrial school, one house for working boys, and two houses for working girls. The first Catholic governor of the State was James H. Higgins, a Democrat, who was elected for two terms, 1907, 1908. He was succeeded by Aram J. Pothier, A Catholic, and a Republican. The State census of 1905 gives the following statistics of religious denominations: + Catholic: 200,00 members (76 churches) + Protestant Episcopal: 15,441 members (68 churches) + Baptist: 14,761 members (75 churches) + Methodist Episcopal: 5,725 members (45 churches) + Congregationalist: 9,738 members (42 churches) + Lutheran: 2,217 members (12 churches) + Free Baptist: 3,306 members (30 churches) + Presbyterian: 993 members (4 churches) + Universalist: 1,166 members (9 churches) + Unitarian: 1,000 members (4 churches) + Seventh Day Baptist: 1,040 members (5 churches) + Friends: 915 members (7 churches) Value of property owned by certain denominations is stated as follows: Protestant Episcopal, $1,957,518; Congregational, $1,417,089; Baptist, $1,124,348; Methodist Episcopal, $624,900; Unitarian $280,000; Universalist, $259,000; Free Baptist, $242,000. Education Provision was made for a public school in New port in 1640. State supervision of public schools was not inaugurated until 1828. The number of pupils enrolled in public schools in 1907 was 74,065, and the number of teachers employed, 2198. The State maintains an agricultural college, a normal school, a school for the deaf, a home and school for dependent children not criminal or vicious, and makes provision for teaching the blind. Schools are supported mainly by the towns wherein they are located. The state appropriates annually $120,000 to be used only for teachers salaries, and to be divided among the towns and cities in proportion to school population, but no town may receive its allotment without appropriating at least an equal amount for the same purpose. Another appropriation is paid to towns maintaining graded high schools. This appropriation in 1910 was $26,500. The total amount expended on public schools in 1907, exclusive of permanent improvements, was $1,800,325, the number of school buildings was 528; and the valuation of school property, $6,550,172. The number of parochial school pupils in 1907 was 16,254; the total attendance of Catholic parochial schools and academies in 1910 was 17,440. These schools cost about $1,500,000, and their annual maintenance about $150,000. The average monthly expense per pupil in the public schools in 1907 was stated as $3.14. Allowing ten months for the school year, on the basis of that cost, the 16,254 parochial school pupils, if attending the public school, would have cost the State and towns $510,375. Providence is the seat of Brown University, a Baptist institution founded in 1764. The corporation consists of a Board of Trustees and a Board of Fellow. A majority of the trustees must be Baptists and the rest of the trustees must be chosen from three other prescribed Protestant denominations. A majority of the fellows including the president, must be Baptists; "the rest indifferently of any or all denominations". It is provided that the places of professors, tutors and all officers, the president alone excepted, shall be free and open to all denominations of Protestants. The total enrollment of the university for the academic year 1909-10 was 967, including the graduate department and the Women's College. Legislation Affecting Religion In 1657 the Assembly denied the demand of the commissioners of the United Colonies that Quakers should be banished from Rhode Island, and later passed a law that military service should not be exacted from those whose religious belief forbade the bearing of arms. The Charter of 1663 guaranteed freedom of conscience, and the colonial laws prohibited compulsory support of any form of worship. In 1663, Charles II wrote to the Assembly declaring that all men of civil conversation, obedient to magistrates though of differing judgments, might be admitted as freemen, with liberty to choose and be chosen to office, civil and military. In this communication it was voted that all those who should take an oath of allegiance to Charles II and were of competent estate, should be admitted as freemen; but none should vote or hold office until admitted by vote of the assembly. In the volume of laws printed in 1719, appeared a provision that all men professing Christianity, obedient to magistrates, and of civil conversation, though of differing judgments in religious matters, Roman Catholics alone excepted should have liberty to choose and be chosen to offices both civil and military. The date of the original enactment of this exception is not known. It was repealed in 1783. The State Constitution of 1842 guarantees freedom of conscience, and provides that no man's civil capacity shall be increased or diminished on account of his religious belief. The Sunday law of Rhode Island, following the original English statute (Charles II, e. VII, sect. 1) differs from the law of most other states in that it forbids simply the exercise of one's ordinary calling upon the Lord's day; excepting of course works of charity and necessity. Hence a release given on Sunday has been held good (Allen v. Gardiner, VII, R.I. 22); and probably any contracts not in pursuance of one's ordinary calling would be sustained though made on Sunday. A characteristic exception exists in favour of Jews and Sabbatarians, who are permitted with certain restrictions, to pursue their ordinary calling on the first day of the week. Fishing and fowling, except on one's own property, and all games, sports, plays, and recreations on Sunday are forbidden. The penalty for the first violation of the statute is $5, and $10 for subsequent violations. Service of civil process on Sunday is void. Witnesses are sworn with the simple formality of raising the right hand; or they make affirmation upon peril of the penalty for perjury. Judges assemblymen, and all State officers, civil and military, must take an oath of office. The substance of the oath is to support the Constitution of the United States, and the Constitution and laws of this State, and faithfully and impartially to discharge the duties of the office. The judges of the Supreme and Superior Courts also swear to administer justice without respect of persons, and to do equal right to the poor and to the rich. Lawyers, auditors and almost every city and town official take an oath office. Blasphemy is punished by imprisonment not exceeding two months or fine not exceeding $200; profane cursing swearing by fine not exceeding $5. New State and municipal governments are generally inaugurated with prayer. Legal holidays include New Year's Day, Columbus Day, and Christmas. Good Friday is a Court holiday by rule of Court and a school holiday in Providence by vote of the school committee. There is no statute or reported decision regarding evidence of statements made under the seal of confession. Should a question arise concerning this, it would have to be decided on precedent and on grounds of public policy. The sole statutory privilege is that accorded to communications between husband and wife; although the common law privilege of offers of compromise and settlement and of communications between attorney and client are recognized. Physicians may be compelled to disclose statements made to them by patients regarding physical condition. Incorporation and Taxation In 1869 an act was passed enabling the bishop of the Diocese of Hartford, with the vicar-general, the pastor and two lay members of any Catholic congregation in this State, to incorporate, and to hold the Church property of such congregation, by filing with the secretary of State an agreement to incorporate. This act was amended upon the creation of the Diocese of Providence. The property of all the organized and self-sustaining Catholic parishes is held by corporations so formed. The system furnishes a convenient means of continuing the ownership of the property of the respective parishes. In 1900 the bishop of the Diocese of Providence and his successors were created a corporation sole with power to hold property for the religious and charitable purposes of the Roman Catholic Church. Since 1883 there has existed an act enabling Episcopalian parishes to incorporate. Special chatters are freely granted when desired. There is a general law allowing libraries, lyceums and societies for religious charitable, literary, scientific, artistic, musical or social purposes to incorporate by filing an agreement stating the names of the promoters and the object of the corporation, and by paying a nominal charge. Such corporations may hold property up to $100,000 in value. By general law, buildings for religious worship, and the land on which they stand, not exceeding one acre, so far as such land and buildings are occupied and used exclusively for religious or educational purposes, are exempt from taxation. The exemption does not apply to pastors' houses. The buildings and personal property of any corporation used for schools, academies, or seminaries of learning, and of any incorporated public charity, and the land, not exceeding one acre, on which such buildings stand, are exempt. School property is exempt only so far as it is used exclusively for educational purposes. Property used exclusively for burial purposes, hospitals, public libraries, and property used for the aid of the poor, are exempt. Any church property other than that specified is taxed, unless it is in a form exempted by national law. Clergymen are exempt from jury and military duty. Marriage and Divorce Marriage between grandparent and grandchild, or uncle and niece, and between persons more closely related by blood, is void; as is marriage with a step-parent, with the child or grandchild or one's husband or wife, with the husband or wife of one's child or grandchild, and with the parent or grandparent of one's wife or husband. The statute contains no express requirement regarding the age of the parties contracting marriage, but it is a defence to an indictment for bigamy that the prior marriage was contracted when the man was under fourteen years of age, and the woman under twelve. Marriages among Jews are valid in law if they are valid under the Jewish religion. Marriages may be performed by licensed clergymen and by the judges of the Supreme and Superior Courts. Before marriage, parties must obtain a licence by personal application from the town clerk, or city clerk, or registrar; and a non-resident woman must obtain such licence at least five days previous to the marriage. The licence must be presented to the clergyman or judge officiating, who must make return of the marriage. Two witnesses are required to the marriage ceremony. Failure to observe the licence regulations will not invalidate the marriage provided either of the contracting parties supposes they have been complied with; but the noncompliance is punished by fine or imprisonment. Causes for divorce include adultery, extreme cruelty, wilful desertion for five years, or for a shorter time in the discretion of the Court, continued drunkenness, excessive use of opium, morphine, or chloral, neglect of husband to provide necessaries for this wife, and an other gross misbehaviour and wickedness repugnant to the marriage covenant. If the parties have been separated for ten years, the Court may in its discretion decree a divorce. Under the law of Rhode Island marriage is regarded as a status, pertaining to the citizen, which the State may regulate or alter. Hence a Court having jurisdiction over one of the parties to a marriage as a bona fide domiciled citizen of the State, may dissolve the marriage although the other party is beyond the jurisdiction; and such dissolution will be recognized by other states b virtue of the comity provision of the Federal Constitution (Ditson vs. Ditson, IV R.I. 87). Liquor Laws, Corrections, etc. A Constitutional amendment prohibiting the manufacture and sale of intoxicating liquor was adopted in 1886, and repealed in 1889. At present Rhode Island is a local option state, the question of licence or no-licence being submitted annually to the voters of the several cities and towns. The licensing boards may in their discretion refuse any application. The number of licences in any town may not exceed the proportion of one licence to each 500 inhabitants. The owners of the greater part of the land within two hundred feet of any location may bar its licence. No licence can be granted for a location within two hundred feet, measured on the street, of any public or parochial school. Maximum and minimum licence fees are fixed by statute, and the exact sum is determined by the licensing boards. For retail licences the minimum fee is $300, and the maximum, $1000. In the City of Cranston are located the "State institutions", so-called, including the State prison, the county jail, the State workhouse, a reform school for girls, and another for boys. The probation system is extensively employed, and in the case of juvenile offenders especially, the State makes every effort to prevent their becoming hardened criminals. Probation officers have the power of bail over persons committed to them. In proper cases, probation officers may provide for the maintenance of girls and women apart from their families. Capital punishment does not exist in the State except in cases where a life convict commits murder. Wills disposing of personal property may be made by persons eighteen years of age or over; wills disposing of real estate, by persons twenty-one years of age or over. Probate clerks are required to notify corporations and voluntary associations of all gifts made to them by will. If a gift for charity is made by will to a corporation and the acceptance thereof would be ultra vires, the corporation may at once receive the gift, and may retain it on condition of securing the consent of the legislature within one year. It has been held that a legacy for Masses should be paid in full even if the estate were insufficient to pay general pecuniary legacies in full, on the ground that the gift for Masses is for services to be rendered and is not gratuitous, furthermore that a gift for Masses is legal and is not void as being a superstitious use (Sherman v. Baker, XX R.I., 446, 613). Cemeteries are regulated to the extent that town councils may prevent their location in thickly populated districts, and for the protection of health may pass ordinances regarding burials and the use of the grounds. Desecration of graves is punished. Towns may receive land for burial purposes, and town councils may hold funds for the perpetual care of burial lots. Cemeteries are generally owned by corporations specially chartered, by churches and families. Field, State of R.I. and Providence Plantations (Boston, 1902); Arnold, Hist. of R.I. (New York, 1860); Staples, Annals of Providence (Providence, 1843); Dowling, Hist. of the Catholic Church in New England (Boston, 1899); R.I. Colonial Records. ALBERT B. WEST Alexandre de Rhodes Alexandre De Rhodes A missionary and author, born at Avignon, 15 March, 1591; died at Ispahan, Persia, 5 Nov., 1660. He entered the novitiate of the Society of Jesus at Rome, 24 April, 1612, with the intention of devoting his life to the conversion of the infidels. He was assigned to the missions of the East Indies, and inaugurated his missionary labours in 1624 with great success in Cochin China. In 1627 he proceeded to Tongking where, within the space of three years, he converted 6000 persons, including several bonzes. When in 1630 persecution forced him to leave the country, the newly-made converts continued the work of evangelization. Rhodes was later recalled to Rome where he obtained permission from his superiors to undertake missionary work in Persia. Amidst the numerous activities of a missionary career, he found time for literary productions: "Tunchinensis historiæ libri duo" (Lyons, 1652); "La glorieuse mort d'André, Catéchiste . . ." (Paris, 1653); "Catechismus", published in Latin and in Tongkingese at Rome in 1658. DE BACKER-SOMMERVOGEL, Biblioth. de la Comp. de Jésus, VI (9 vols., Brussels and Paris, 1890-1900), 1718-21; CARAYON, Voyages et Missions du P. Rhodes (Paris and Le Mans, 1854). N. A. WEBER. Rhodes Rhodes (RHODUS) A titular metropolitan of the Cyclades (q. v.). It is an island opposite to Lycia and Caria, from which it is separated by a narrow arm of the sea. It has an area of about 564 sq. miles, is well watered by many streams and the river Candura, and is very rich in fruits of all kinds. The climate is so genial that the sun shines ever there, as recorded in a proverb already known to Pliny (Hist. natur., II, 62). The island, inhabited first by the Carians and then by the Phoenicians (about 1300 b.c.) who settled several colonies there, was occupied about 800 b.c. by the Dorian Greeks. In 408 b.c. the inhabitants of the three chief towns, Lindus, Ialysus, and Camirus founded the city of Rhodes, from which the island took its name. This town, built on the side of a hill, had a very fine port. On the breakwater, which separated the interior from the exterior port, was the famous bronze statue, the Colossus of Rhodes, 105 feet high, which cost 300 talents. Constructed (280) from the machines of war which Demetrius Poliorcetes had to abandon after his defeat before the town, it was thrown down by an earthquake in 203 B.C.; its ruins were sold in the seventh century by Caliph Moaviah to a Jew from Emesus, who loaded them on 900 camels. After the death of Alexander the Great and the expulsion of the Macedonian garrison (323 b.c.) the island, owing to its navy manned by the best mariners in the world, became the rival of Carthage and Alexandria. Allied with the Romans, and more or less under their protectorate, Rhodes became a centre of art and science; its school of rhetoric was frequented by many Romans, including Cato, Cicero, Cæsar, and Pompey. Ravaged by Cassius in 43 b.c. it remained nominally independent till a.d. 44, when it was incorporated with the Roman Empire by Claudius, becoming under Diocletian the capital of the Isles or of the Cyclades, which it long remained. The First Book of Machabees (xv, 23) records that Rome sent the Rhodians a decree in favour of the Jews. St. Paul stopped there on his way from Miletus to Jerusalem (Acts, xxi, 1); he may even have made converts there. In three other passages of Holy Writ (Gen., x, 4; I Par., i, 7; Ezech., xxvii, 15) the Septuagint renders by Rhodians what the Hebrew and the Vulgate rightly call Dodanim and Dedan. If we except some ancient inscriptions supposed to be Christian, there is no trace of Christianity until the third century, when Bishop Euphranon is said to have opposed the Encratites. Euphrosynus assisted at the Council of Nicæa (325). As the religious metropolitan of the Cyclades, Rhodes had eleven suffragan sees towards the middle of the seventh century (Gelzer, "Ungedruckte. . . . Texte der Notitiæ episcopatuum", 542); at the beginning of the tenth century, it had only ten (op. cit., 558); at the close of the fifteenth, only one, Lerne (op. cit., 635), which has since disappeared. Rhodes is still a Greek metropolitan depending on the Patriarchate of Constantinople. On 15 August, 1310, under the leadership of Grand Master Foulques de Villaret, the Knights of St. John captured the island in spite of the Greek emperor, Andronicus II, and for more than two centuries, thanks to their fleet, were a solid bulwark between Christendom and Islam. In 1480 Rhodes, under the orders of Pierre d'Aubusson, underwent a memorable siege by the lieutenants of Mahomet II; on 24 October, 1522, Villiers de l'Isle Adam had to make an honorable capitulation to Solyman II and deliver the island definitively to the Turks. From 1328 to 1546 Rhodes was a Latin metropolitan, having for suffragans the sees of Melos, Nicaria, Carpathos, Chios, Tinos, and Mycone; the list of its bishops is to be found in Le Quien (Oriens christ., III, 1049) and Eubel (Hierarchia catholica medii ævi, I, 205; II, 148; III, 188). The most distinguished bishop is Andreas Colossensis (the archdiocese was called Rhodes or Colossi) who, in 1416 at Constance and 1439 at Florence, defended the rights of the Roman Church against the Greeks, and especially against Marcus Eugenicus. After the death of Marco Cattaneo, the last residential archbishop, Rhodes became a mere titular bishopric, while Naxos inherited its metropolitan rights. On 3 March, 1797 it became again a titular archbishopric but the title was thenceforth attached to the See of Malta. Its suffragans are Carpathos, Leros, Melos, Samos, and Tenedos. By a decree of the Congregation of the Propaganda, 14 August, 1897, a prefecture Apostolic, entrusted to the Franciscans, was established in the Island of Rhodes; it has in addition jurisdiction over a score of neighbouring islands, of which the principal are Carpathos, Leros, and Calymnos. There are in all 320 Catholics, while the island, the capital of the vilayet of the archipelago, contains 30,000 inhabitants. The Franciscans have three priests; the Brothers of the Christian Schools have established there a scholasticate for the Orient as well as a school; the Franciscan Sisters of Gemona have a girls' school. The most striking feature of the city, in addition to a series of medieval towers and fortifications, is the Street of the Knights, which still preserves their blason (Order of St. John) and the date of the erection of each house or palace; several of the mosques are former churches. MEURSIUS, Creta, Cyprus, Rhodus (Amsterdam, 1675): CORONELLI, Isola di Rodi geographica, storica (Venice, 1702); LE QUIEN, Oriens christ., I, 923 30; PAULSEN, Commentatio exhibens Rhodi descriptionem macedonica oetate (Göttingsn, 1818); MENGE, Ueber die Vorgesch. der Insel Rhodus (Cologne, 1827): ROTTIERS, Description des monuments de Rhodes (Brussels, 1828); ROSS, Reisen auf den griech. Inseln, III, 70-113; IDEM, Reisen nach Kos, Halikarnassos, Rhodos (Stuttgart, 1840); BERG, Die Insel Rhodos (Brunswick, 1860); SCHNEIDERWIRTH, Gesch. der Insel Rhodos (Heiligenstadt. 1868); GUÉRIN, L'île de Rhodes (Paris, 1880); BILLIOTI AND COTTERET, L'île de Rhodes (Paris, 1891); BECKER, De Rhodiorum primordiis (Leipzig, 1882); TORR, Rhodes in Ancient Times (Cambridge, 1885); IDEM, Rhodes in Modern Times (Cambridge, 1887); SCHUMACHER, De Republica Rhodiorum commentatio (Heidelberg, 1886); VON GELDER, Gesch. der alten Rhodier (La Haye, 1900); SMITH, Dict. of Greek and Roman Geogr., s. v.; FILLION in VIGOUROUX, Dict. de la Bible, s. v.; Missiones catholicae (Rome, 1907). S. VAILHÉ Rhodesia Rhodesia A British possession in South Africa, bounded on the north and north-west by the Congo Free State and German East Africa; on the east by German East Africa, Nyassaland, and Portuguese East Africa; on the south by the Transvaal and Bechuanaland; on the west by Bechuanaland and Portuguese West Africa. Cecil John Rhodes, to whom the colony owes its name, desired to promote the expansion of the British Empire in South Africa. The Dutch South African Republic and Germany were contemplating annexations in the neighbourhood of the Zambesi River. To thwart these enemies of unity without delay and without the aid of the British Parliament was the task to which Mr. Rhodes and his colleagues set themselves. Early in 1888 Lobengula, King of Matabeleland, entered into a treaty with Great Britain and on 30 October of the same year he granted to Rhodes's agents "the complete and exclusive charge over all metals and minerals" in his dominions. On 28 October, 1889, the British South Africa Company was formed under a royal charter. The company, on Lobengula's advice, first decided to open up Mashonaland, which lies north and west of Matabeleland and south of the Zambesi. In September, 1890, an expeditionary column occupied that country and, in the next four years, much was done to develop its resources. In 1893 the company, who questioned the right of the Matabele to make annual raids among their neighbours the Mashonas, came to blows with King Lobengula. Five weeks of active operations and the death of the king, probably by self-administered poison, brought the whole of Southern Rhodesia under the absolute control of the company. After the war, the settlement and opening up of the country was carried on under the direction of Mr. Rhodes who, on the ruins of Lobengula's royal kraal at Bulawayo, built Government House, and in the vicinity, laid out the streets and avenues of what was intended soon to become a great city. At one time Bulawayo had a population of some 7000 white inhabitants and seemed to be fulfilling the dreams of its founder when its progress and that of the whole country was cut short by the cattle pest, the native rebellion of 1896, and by years of stagnation and inactivity consequent upon the Boer War. Its white population (1911) is 5200. Besides Southern Rhodesia the chartered company own the extensive teritories of North-western and North-eastern Rhodesia which lie north of the Zambesi and which, with the more populous southern province, cover an area of some 450,000 square miles and form a country larger than France, Germany, and the Low Countries combined. The black population is less than 1,500,000, while the whites hardly exceed 16,000. All the native tribes of Rhodesia belong to the great Bantu family of the negro race. Before the arrival of the pioneer columns the dominant race south of the Zambesi were the Matabele, an off-shoot of the Zulus, who conquered the country north of the Limpopo River in the middle of the last century. They formed a military caste which lived by war and periodical raids upon their weaker neighbours. The destruction of this military despotism was a necessary step to the evangelizing of the country. Before the arrival of the Matabele warriors the principal inhabitants of Southern Rhodesia were the Makaranga whose ancestors had formed the once powerful empire of Monomotapa. North-western Rhodesia or Barotseland is ruled partly by an administrator residing at Livingstone, near the Victoria Falls of the Zambesi and partly by its native King Lewanika, the chief of the Barotse, who has been heavily subsidised by the company. The predominant people in North-eastern Rhodesia are the Awemba and the Angoni whose raiding propensities and coöperation with the Arab slave drivers caused much trouble and expense until their definitive annexation by the company in 1894. The earliest attempt to evangelize Matabeleland was made in 1879 when three Jesuit Fathers, travelling by ox-wagon, accomplished the journey of some twelve hundred miles between Grahamstown and Bulawayo. They were hospitably received by King Lobengula who had been assured by some resident traders that the missionaries had come for his people's good. He granted them a free passage through his dominions and allowed them to train his subjects in habits of industry but not to preach the Gospel of Christ which, as he well knew, would lead to drastic changes, not only in the domestic life of his people, but in his whole system of government. For some fourteen years the missionaries held their ground awaiting events and it was only through the conquest of the country by the company that free missionary work was rendered possible. It was during this period that Baron von Hubner, who was not without personal experience of South Africa, declared that he would never contribute a penny to the Zambesi Mission, since he thought it contrary to his duty to foster an enterprise doomed to failure and disaster. Events seemed to justify his prognostications, for the mission, owing to fever and the hardships of travel, seemed to be losing more workers than it made converts. In 1893, however, the power of Lobengula was broken and mission stations began to grow up in the neighbourhood of Salisbury, the capital, and of Bulawayo. In Matabeleland there are two mission stations, one at Bulawayo and the second at Empandeni, some sixty miles away. This last station owns a property of about one hundred square miles most of which formed the original grant of Lobengula and the title to which was confirmed by the company. The principal station among the Mashonas or Makaranga is Chishawasha, fourteen miles from Salisbury (founded in 1892). There are other stations of more recent date at Salisbury, Driefontein, Hama's Kraal, and Mzondo, near Victoria, all under the charge of the Jesuit Fathers. The Missionaries of Marianhill, recently separated from the Trappists, have two missions in Mashonaland at Macheke and St. Trias Hill. The Makaranga who are thus being evangelized from seven mission stations are the descendants of the predominant tribe who received the faith from the Ven. Father Gonçalo de Silveira in 1561. Among the Batongas, who owe a somewhat doubtful allegiance to King Lewanika in North-western Rhodesia, there are two Jesuit mission stations on the Chikuni and Nguerere Rivers. These missions are under the jurisdiction of the Jesuit Prefect Apostolic of the Zambesi, resident in Bulawayo. There are 35 priests, 30 lay brothers, and 83 nuns in charge of the missions. The Catholic native population is about 3000. For the missions of North-eastern Rhodesia see NYASSA, VICARIATE, APOSTOLIC OF. The land of the mission stations in Rhodesia is usually a grant from the Government made on condition of doing missionary work and is therefore inalienable without a special order in Council. Native schools, in some cases, are in receipt of a small grant from the Government. The Jesuit Fathers have one school for white boys (120) at Bulawayo, while the Sisters of the Third Order of St. Dominic have three: at Bulawayo (210), Salisbury (130) and Gwelo (40). These schools are undenominational and receive grants from the Government. Hence Catholics who were first in the field, have a very considerable share in the education of the country. New Government schools have been built recently in Salisbury, Bulawayo, and Gwelo and other places in order to meet the growing demand for education and they have, so far, succeeded in filling their school-rooms without taking many pupils from the schools managed by Catholics. The chief source of information about the Zambesi Mission is the Zambesi Mission Record, issued quarterly (Roehampton, England); HENSMAN, A History of Rhodesia (London, 1900); HONE, Southern Rhodesia (London, 1909); HALL, Prehistoric Rhodesia (London, 1909); MICHELL, Life of C. J. Rhodes (2 vols., London, 1910). JAMES KENDAL. Rhodiopolis Rhodiopolis A titular see of Lycia, suffragan of Myra, called Rhodia by Ptolemy (V, 3) and Stephanus Byzantius; Rhodiapolis on its coins and inscriptions; Rhodiopolis by Pliny (V, 28), who locates it in the mountains to the north of Corydalla. Its history is unknown. Its ruins may be seen on a hill in the heart of a forest at Eski Hissar, vilayet of Koniah. They consist of the remains of an aqueduct, a small theatre, a temple of Escalapius, sarcophagi, and churches. Only one bishop is known, Nicholas, present in 518 at a Council of Constantinople. The "Notitiæ episcopatuum" continue to mention the see as late as the twelfth or thirteenth century. LE QUIEN, Oriens christianus, I, 991; SPRATT AND FORBES, Travels in Lycia, I, 166, 181; SMITH, Dict. of Greek and Roman geogr., s. v. S. PÉTRIDÈS Rhodo Rhodo A Christian writer who flourished in the time of Commodus (180-92); he was a native of Asia who came to Rome where he was a pupil of Tatian's. He wrote several books, two of which are mentioned by Eusebius (Hist. eccl., V, xiii), viz., a treatise on "The Six Days of Creation" and a work against the Marcionites in which he dwelled upon the various opinions which divided them. Eusebius, upon whom we depend exclusively for our knowledge of Rhodo, quotes some passages from the latter work, in one of which an account is given of the Marcionite Apelles. St. Jerome (De vir. ill.) amplifies Eusebius's account somewhat by making Rhodo the author of a work against the Cataphrygians -- probably he had in mind an anonymous work quoted by Eusebius a little later (op. cit., V, xvi). HARNACK, Altchrist Lit., p . 599; BARDENHEWER, Patrology (tr. SHAHAN, St. Louis, 1908), 117. F.J. BACCHUS Rhosus Rhosus A titular see in Cilicia Secunda, suffragan to Anazarba. Rhosus or Rhossus was a seaport situated on the Gulf of Issus, now Alexandretta, southwest of Alexandria (Iskenderoun or Alexandretta). It is mentioned by Strabo (XIV, 5; XVI, 2), Ptolemy (V, 14), Pliny (V, xviii, 2), who place it in Syria, and by Stephanus Byzantius; later by Hierocles (Synecd. 705, 7), and George of Cyprus (Descriptio orbis romani, 827), who locate it in Cilicia Secunda. Towards 200, Serapion of Antioch composed a treatise on the Gospel of Peter for the faithful of Rhosus who had become heterodox on account of that book (Eusebius, "Hist. eccl.", VI, xii, 2). Theodoret (Philoth. Hist., X, XI), who places it in Cilicia, relates the history of the hermit Theodosius of Antioch, founder of a monastery in the mountain near Rhosus, who was forced by the inroads of barbarians to retire to Antioch, where he died and was succeeded by his disciple Romanus, a native of Rhosus; these two religious are honoured by the Greek Church on 5 and 9 February. Six bishops of Rhosus are known (Le Quien, "Or. Christ.", II, 905): Antipatros, at the Council of Antioch, 363; Porphyrius, a correspondent of St. John Chrysostom; Julian, at the Council of Chalcedon, 451; a little later a bishop (name unknown), who separated from his metropolitan to approve of the reconciliation effected between John of Antioch and St. Cyril; Antoninus, at the Council of Mopsuestra, 550; Theodore, about 600. The see is mentioned among the suffragans of Anazarba in "Notitiæ episcopatuum" of the Patriarchate of Antioch, of the sixth century (Vailhé in "Echos d'Orient", X, 145) and one dating from about 840 (Parthey, "Hieroclis synecd. et notit. gr. episcopat.", not. Ia, 827). In another of the tenth century Rhosus is included among the exempt sees (Vailhé, ibid 93 seq.). In the twelfth century the town and neighbouring fortress fell into the hands of the Armenians; in 1268 this castle was captured from the Templars by Sultan Bibars (Alishan, "Sissouan", Venice, 1899, 515). Rhosus is near the village of Arsous in the vilayet of Adana. S. PÉTRIDÈS. Rhymed Bibles Rhymed Bibles The rhymed versions of the Bible are almost entirely collections of the psalms. The oldest English rhymed psalter is a pre-Reformation translation of the Vulgate psalms, generally assigned to the reign of Henry II and still preserved in Corpus Christi College, Cambridge. The Bodleian Library, Oxford, has another Catholic rhyming psalter of much the same style, assigned epigraphically to the time of Edward II. Thomas Brampton did the Seven Penitential Psalms, from the Vulgate into rhyming verse in 1414; the Manuscript is in the Cottonian collection, British Museum. These and other pre-Reformation rhyming psalters tell a story of popular use of the vernacular Scripture in England which they ignore who say that the singing of psalms in English began with the Reformation. Sir Thomas Wyat (died 1521) is said to have done the whole psalter. We have only "Certayne Psalmes chosen out of the Psalter of David, commonly called the VII Penitential Psalmes, Drawen into English metre". Henry Howard, Earl of Surrey (died 1547), translated Pss. lv, lxxiii, lxxxviii into English verse. Miles Coverdale (died 1567) translated several psalms in "Goastly psalmes and spirituall songs drawen out of the Holy Scripture". The old Version of the Anglican Church, printed at the end of the Prayer Book (1562) contains thirty-seven rhyming psalms translated by Thomas Sternhold, fifty-eight by John Hopkins, twenty-eight by Thomas Norton, and the remainder by Robert Wisdom (Ps. cxxv), William Whittingham (Ps. cxix of 700 lines) and others. Sternhold's psalms had been previously published (1549). Robert Crowley (1549) did the entire psalter into verse. The Seven Penitential Psalms were translated by very many; William Hunnis (1583) entitles his translation, with quaint Elizabethan conceit, "Seven Sobs of a Sorrowful Soul for Sinne". During the reign of Edward VI, Sir Thomas Smith translated ninety-two of the psalms into English verse, while imprisoned in the Tower. A chaplain to Queen Mary, calling himself the "symple and unlearned Syr William Forrest, preeiste", did a poetical version of fifty psalms (1551). Matthew Parker (1557), later Archbishop of Canterbury, completed a metrical psalter. The Scotch had their Psalmes buickes from 1564. One of the most renowned of Scotch versifiers of the Psalms was Robert Pont (1575). Zachary Boyd, another Scotchman, published the Psalms in verse early in the seventeenth century. Of English rhyming versifications of the Psalms, the most charming are those of Sir Philip Sidney (d. 1586) together with his sister, Countess of Pembroke. This complete psalter was not published till 1823. The rich variety of the versification is worthy of note; almost all the usual varieties of lyric metres of that lyric age are called into requisition and handled with elegance. The stately and elegant style of Lord Bacon is distinctive of his poetical paraphrases of several psalms. Richard Verstegan, a Catholic, published a rhyming version of the Seven Penitential Psalms (1601). George Sandys (1636) published a volume containing a metrical version of other parts of the Bible together with "a Paraphrase upon the Psalmes of David, set to new Tunes for Private Devotion, and a Thorow Base for Voice and Instruments"; his work is touching in its simplicity and unction. The Psalm Books of the various Protestant churches are mostly rhyming versions and are numerous: New England Psalm Book (Boston, 1773); Psalm Book of the Reformed Dutch Church in North America (New York, 1792); The Bay Psalm Book (Cambridge, 1640). Noteworthy also, among the popular and more recent rhymed psalters are: Brady and Tate (poet laureate), "A new Version of the Psalms of David" (Boston, 1762); James Merrick, "The Psalms in English Verse" (Reading, England, 1765); I. Watts, "The Psalms of David" (27th ed., Boston, 1771); J. T. Barrett, "A Course of Psalms" (Lambeth, 1825); Abraham Coles, "A New Rendering of the Hebrew Psalms into English Verse" (New York, 1885); David S. Wrangham, "Lyra Regis" (Leeds, 1885); Arthur Trevor Jebb "A Book of Psalms" (London, 1898). Such are the chief rhyming English psalters. Other parts of Holy Writ done into rhyming English verse are: Christopher Tye's "The Acts of the Apostles translated into English Metre" (1553); Zachary Boyd's "St. Matthew" (early seventeenth cent.); Thomas Prince's "Canticles, parts of Isaias and Revelations" in New England Psalm Book (1758); Henry Ainswort, "Solomon's Song of Songs" (1642); John Mason Good's "Song of Songs" (London, 1803); C. C. Price's "Acts of the Apostles" (New York, 1845). The French have had rhyming psalters since the "Sainctes Chansonettes en Rime Française" of Clement Marot (1540). Some Italian rhymed versions of the Bible are: Abbate Francesco Rezzano, "II Libro di Giobbe" (Nice, 1781); Stefano Egidio Petroni, "Proverbi di Salomone" (London, 1815); Abbate Pietro Rossi, "Lamentazioni di Geremia, i Sette Salmi Penitenziali e il Cantico di Mose" (Nizza, 1781); Evasio Leone, "II Cantico de' Cantici" (Venice, 1793); Francesco Campana, "Libro di Giuditta" (Nizza, 1782). Bibliotheca Sussexiana, II (London. 1839); WARTON, History of English Poetry (1774-81); HOLLAND, The Psalmists of Britain (London, 1843). WALTER DRUM. Rhythmical Office Rhythmical Office I. DESCRIPTION, DEVELOPMENT, AND DIVISION By rhythmical office is meant a liturgical horary prayer, the canonical hours of the priest, or an office of the Breviary, in which not only the hymns are regulated by a certain rhythm, but where, with the exception of the psalms and lessons, practically all the other parts show metre, rhythm, or rhyme; such parts for instance as the antiphons to each psalm, to the Magnificat, Invitatorium, and Benedictus, likewise the responses and versicles to the prayers, and after each of the nine lessons; quite often also the benedictions before the lessons, and the antiphons to the minor Horœ (Prime, Terce, Sext, and None). The old technical term for such an office was Historia, with or without an additional " rhytmata" or rimata, an expression that frequently caused misunderstanding on the part of later writers. The reason for the name lay in the fact that originally the antiphons or the responses, and sometimes the two together, served to amplify or comment upon the history of a saint, of which there was a brief sketch in the readings of the second nocturn. Gradually this name was transferred to offices in which no word was said about a "history", and thus we find the expression "Historia ss. Trinitatis". The structure of the ordinary office of the Breviary in which antiphons, psalms, hymns, lessons, and responses followed one another in fixed order, was the natural form for the rhythmical office. It was not a question of inventing something new, as with the hymns, sequences, or other kinds of poetry, but of creating a text in poetic form in the place of a text in prose form, where the scheme existed, definitely arranged in all its parts. A development therefore which could eventually serve as a basis for the division of the rhythmical offices into distinct classes is of itself limited to a narrow field, namely the external form of the parts of the office as they appear in poetic garb. Here we find in historical order the following characters: + (1) a metrical, of hexameters intermixed with prose or rhymed prose; + (2) a rhythmical, in the broadest sense, which will be explained below; + (3) a form embellished by strict rhythm and rhyme. Consequently one may distinguish three classes of rhythmical offices: + (1) metrical offices, in hexameters or distichs; + (2) offices in rhymed prose, i. e., offices with very free and irregular rhythm, or with dissimilar assonant long lines; + (3) rhymed offices with regular rhythm and harmonious artistic structure. The second class represents a state of transition, wherefore the groups may be called those of the first epoch, the groups of the transition period, and those of the third epoch, in the same way as with the sequences, although with the latter the characteristic difference is much more pronounced. If one desires a general name for all three groups, the expression "Rhymed Office", as suggested by " Historia rimata"" would be quite appropriate for the pars major et potior, which includes the best and most artistic offices; this designation: " gereimtes Officium" (Reimofficium) has been adopted in Germany through the "Analecta Hymnica". The term does not give absolute satisfaction, because the first and oldest offices are without rhyme, and cannot very well be called rhymed offices. In the Middle Ages the word "rhythmical" was used as the general term for any kind of poetry to be distinguished from prose, no matter whether there was regular rhythm in those poems or not. And for that reason it is practical to comprise in the name "rhythmical offices" all those which are other than pure prose, a designation corresponding to the "Historia rhytmata". Apart from the predilection of the Middle Ages for the poetic form, the Vitœ metricœ of the saints were the point of departure and motive for the rhythmical offices. Those Vitœ were frequently composed in hexameters or distichs. From them various couples of hexameters or a distich were taken to be used as antiphon or response respectively. In case the hexameters of the Vitœ metricœ did not prove suitable enough, the lacking parts of the office were supplemented by simple prose or by means of verses in rhymed prose, i. e., by text lines of different length in which there was very little of rhythm, but simply assonance. Such offices are often a motley mixture of hexameters, rhythmical stanzas, stanzas in pure prose, and again in rhymed prose. An example of an old metrical office, intermixed with Prose Responses, is that of St. Lambert (Anal. Hymn., XXVII, no. 79), where all the antiphons are borrowed from that saint's Vitœ metricœ, presumably the work of Hucbald of St. Amand; the office itself was composed by Bishop Stephen of Liège about the end of the ninth century: Antiphona I: Orbita solaris præsentia gaudia confert Præsulis eximii Lantberti gesta revolvens. Antiphona II: Hic fuit ad tempus Hildrici regis in aula, Dilectus cunctis et vocis famine dulcis. A mixing of hexameters, of rhythmical stanzas, and of stanzas formed by unequal lines in rhymed prose is shown in the old Office of Rictrudis, composed by Hucbald about 907 (Anal. Hymn., XIII, no. 87). By the side of regular hexameters, as in the Invitatorium: Rictrudis sponso sit laus et gloria, Christo, Pro cuius merito iubilemus ei vigilando. we find rhythmical stanzas, like the first antiphon to Lauds: Beata Dei famula Rictrudis, adhuc posita In terris, mente devota Christo hærebat in æhra; or stanzas in very free rhythm, as e. g., the second response to the first nocturn: Hæc femina laudabilis Meritisque honorabilis Rictrudis egregia Divina providentia Pervenit in Galliam, Præclaris orta natalibus, Honestis alta et instituta moribus. From the metrical offices, from the pure as well as from those mixed with rhymed prose, the transition was soon made to such as consisted of rhymed prose merely. An example of this kind is in the Offices of Ulrich, composed by Abbot Berno of Reichenau (d. 1048); the antiphon to the Magnificat of the first Vespers begins thus: Venerandi patris Wodalrici sollemnia Magnæ jucunditatis repræsentant gaudia, Quæ merito cleri suscipiuntur voto Ac populi celebrantur tripudio. Lætetur tellus tali compta præsule, Exsultet polus tanto ditatus compare; Solus dæmon ingemat, qui ad eius sepulcrum Suum assidue perdit dominium . . . etc. Much more perfectly developed on the other hand, is the rhythm in the Office which Leo IX composed in honour of Gregory the Great (Anal. Hymn., V, no. 64). This office, the work of a pope, appeared in the eleventh century in the Roman breviaries, and soon enjoyed widespread circulation; all its verses are iambic dimeters, but the rhythm does not as yet coincide with the natural accent of the word, and many a verse has a syllable in excess or a syllable wanting. For example, the first antiphon of the first nocturn: Gregorius ortus Romæ E senatorum sanguine Fulsit mundo velut gemma Auro superaddita, Dum præclarior præclaris Hic accessit atavis. This author does not yet make use of pure rhyme, but only of assonance, the precursor of rhyme. Hence we have before us an example of transition from offices of the first epoch to those of the second. With these latter the highest development of the rhythmical office is reached. It is marvellous how in many offices of this artistic period, in spite of all symmetry in rhythm and rhyme, the greatest variety exists in the structure of the stanzas, how a smooth and refined language matches the rich contents full of deep ideas, and how the individual parts are joined together in a complete and most striking picture of the saint or of the mystery to be celebrated. A prominent example is the Office of the Trinity by Archbishop Pecham of Canterbury. The first Vespers begins with the antiphons: 1. Sedenti super solium Congratulans trishagium Seraphici clamoris Cum patre laudat filium Indifferens principium Reciproci amoris. 2. Sequamur per suspirium, Quod geritur et gaudium In sanctis cæli choris; Levemus cordis studium In trinum lucis radium Splendoris et amoris. It is interesting to compare with the preceding the antiphons to the first nocturn, which have quite a different structure; the third of them exhibits the profound thought: Leventur cordis ostia: Memoria Giguenti Nato intelligentia, Voluntas Procedenti. again the first response to the third nocturn: Candor lucis, perpurum speculum Patris splendor, perlustrans sæculum, Nubis levis intrans umbraculum In Ægypti venit ergastulum. Virgo circumdedit virum Mel mandentem et butyrum. upon which follows as second response the beautiful picture of the Trinity in the following form: A Veterani facie manavit ardens fiuvius: Antiquus est ingenitus, et facies est Filius, Ardoris fluxus Spiritus, duorum amor medius. Sic olim multifarie Prophetis luxit Trinitas, Quam post pandit ecclesiæ In carne fulgens veritas. II. HISTORY AND SIGNIFICANCE It cannot be definitely stated which of the three old abbeys: Prüm, Landévennec, or Saint-Amand can claim priority in composing a rhythmical office. There is no doubt however that Saint-Amand and the monasteries in Hainault, Flanders, and Brabant, was the real starting-point of this style of poetry, as long ago as the ninth century. The pioneer in music, the Monk Hucbald of Saint-Amand, composed at least two, probably four, rhythmical offices; and the larger number of the older offices were used liturgically in those monasteries and cities which had some connexion with Saint-Amand. From there this new branch of hymnody very soon found its way to France, and in the tenth and eleventh, and particularly in the twelfth and thirteenth centuries, showed fine, if not the finest results, both in quality and quantity. Worthy of especial mention as poets of this order are: the Abbots Odo (927-42) and Odilo (994-1049) of Cluny, Bishop Fulbert of Chartres (1017-28), the Benedictine Monk Odorannus of Sens (died 1045), Pope Leo IX (died 1054); Bishop Stephen of Tournay (1192-1203); Archdeacon Rainald of St. Maurice in Angers (died about 1074); Bishop Richard de Gerberoy of Amiens (1204-10); Prior Arnaud du Prè of Toulouse (died 1306), and the General of the Dominican Order, Martialis Auribelli, who in 1456 wrote a rhymed office for the purpose of glorifying St. Vincent Ferrer. The most eminent poet and composer of offices belongs to Germany by birth, but more so to France by reason of his activity; he is Julian von Speyer, director of the orchestra at the Frankish royal court, afterwards Franciscan friar and choir master in the Paris convent, where about 1240 he composed words and music for the two well-known offices in honour of St. Francis of Assisi and of St. Anthony of Padua (Anal. Hymn., V, nos. 61 and 42). These two productions, the musical value of which has in many ways been overestimated, served as a prototype for a goodly number of successive offices in honour of saints of the Franciscan Order as well as of others. In Germany the rhymed offices were just as popular as in France. As early as in the ninth century an office, in honour of St. Chrysantus and Daria, had its origin probably in Prüm, perhaps through Friar Wandalbert (Anal. Hymn,, XXV, no. 73); perhaps not much later through Abbot Gurdestin of Landévennec a similar poem in honour of St. Winwalœus (Anal. Hymn., XVIII, no. 100). As hailing from Germany two other composers of rhythmical offices in the earlier period have become known: Abbot Berno of Reichenau (died 1048) and Abbot Udalschalc of Maischach at Augsburg (died 1150). The other German poets whose names can be given belong to a period as late as the fifteenth century, as e. g. Provost Lippold of Steinberg and Bishop Johann Hofmann of Meissen. England took an early part in this style of poetry, but unfortunately most of the offices which originated there have been lost. Brilliant among the English poets is Archbishop Pecham whose office of the Trinity has been discussed above. Next to him are worthy of especial mention Cardinal Adam Easton (died 1397) and the Carmelite John Horneby of Lincoln, who about 1370 composed a rhymed office in honour of the Holy Name of Jesus, and of the Visitation of Our Lady. Italy seems to have a relatively small representation; Rome itself, i. e. the Roman Breviary, as we know, did not favour innovations, and consequently was reluctant to adopt rhythmical offices. The famous Archbishop Alfons of Salerno (1058-85) is presumably the oldest Italian poet of this kind. Besides him we can name only Abbot Reinaldus de Colle di Mezzo (twelfth century), and the General of the Dominicans, Raymundus de Vineis from Capua (fourteenth century). In Sicily and in Spain the rhymed offices were popular and quite numerous, but with the exception of the Franciscan Fra Gil de Zamora, who about the middle of the fifteenth century composed an office in honour of the Blessed Virgin (Anal. Hymn., XVII, no. 8) it has been impossible to cite by name from those two countries any other poet who took part in composing rhythmical offices. Towards the close of the thirteenth century, Scandinavia also comes to the fore with rhymed offices, in a most dignified manner. Special attention should be called to Bishop Brynolphus of Skara (1278-1317), Archbishop Birgerus Gregorii of Upsala (died 1383), Bishop Nicolaus of Linköping (1374-91), and Johannes Benechini of Oeland (about 1440). The number of offices where the composer's name is known is insignificantly small. No less than seven hundred anonymous rhythmical offices have been brought to light during the last twenty years through the "Analecta Hymnica". It is true not all of them are works of art; particularly during the fifteenth century many offices with tasteless rhyming and shallow contents reflect the general decadence of hymnody. Many, however, belong to the best products of religious lyric poetry. For six centuries in all countries of the West, men of different ranks and stations in life, among them the highest dignitaries of the Church, took part in this style of poetry, which enjoyed absolute popularity in all dioceses. Hence one may surmise the significance of the rhythmical offices with reference to the history of civilization, their importance in history and development of liturgy, and above all their influence on other poetry and literature. BLUME AND DREVES, Analecta Hymnica medii œvi, V, XIII, XVII, XVIII-XXVI, XXVIII, XL Va, LII, appendix (Leipzig, 1889-1909); BÄUMER, Reimofficien, 356-64, in Gesch. des Breviers (Freiburg, 1895); BLUME, Zur Poesie des kirchlichen Stundengebetes, 132-45, in Stimmen aus Maria-Laach (1898); FELDER, Liturgische Reimofficien auf die hll. Franziskus und Antonius (Fribourg, 1901). CLEMENS BLUME. Pedro de Ribadeneira Pedro de Ribadeneira (or RIBADENEYRA and among Spaniards often RIVADENEIRA) Pedro De Ribadeneira was born at Toledo, of a noble Castilian family, 1 Nov., 1526 (Astrain, I, 206); died 22 Sept., 1611. His father Alvaro Ortiz de Cisneros, was the son of Pedro Gonzales Cedillo and grandson of Hernando Ortiz de Cisneros whom Ferdinand IV had honoured with the governorship of Toledo and important missions. His mother, of the illustrious house of Villalobos, was still more distinguished for her virtue than for her birth. Already the mother of three daughters, she promised to consecrate her fourth child to the Blessed Virgin if it should be a son. Thus vowed to Mary before his birth, Ribadeneira received in baptism the name of Pedro which had been borne by his paternal grandfather and that of Ribadeneira in memory of his maternal grandmother, of one of the first families of Galicia. In the capacity of page he followed Cardinal Alexander Farnese to Italy, and at Rome entered the Society of Jesus at the age of fourteen, on 18 Sept., 1540, eight days before the approval of the order by Paul III. After having attended the Universities of Paris, Louvain, and Padua, where, besides the moral crises which assailed him, he often had to encounter great hardships and habitually confined himself to very meagre fare [he wrote to St. Ignatius (Epp. mixtæ, V, 649): "Quanto al nostro magnare ordinariamente é, a disnare un poco de menestra et un poco de carne, et con questo è finito"]. He was ordered in November, 1549, to go to Palermo, to profess rhetoric at the new college which the Society had just opened in that city. He filled this chair for two years and a half, devoting his leisure time to visiting and consoling the sick in the hospitals. Meanwhile St. Ignatius was negotiating the creation of the German College which was to give Germany a chosen clergy as remarkable for virtue and orthodoxy as for learning: his efforts were soon successful, and during the autumn of 1552 he called on the talent and eloquence of the young professor of rhetoric at Palermo. Ribadeneira amply fulfilled the expectations of his master and delivered the inaugural address amid the applause of an august assembly of prelates and Roman nobles. He was ordained priest 8 December, 1553 (Epp. mixtæ, III, 179); during the twenty-one years which followed he constantly filled the most important posts in the government of his order. From 1556 to 1560 he devoted his activity to securing the official recognition of the Society of Jesus in the Low Countries. At the same time he was charged by his general with the duty of promulgating and causing to be accepted in the Belgian houses the Constitutions, which St. Ignatius had just completed at the cost of much labour. But these diplomatic and administrative missions did not exhaust Ribadeneira's zeal. He still applied himself ardently to preaching. In December, 1555 he preached at Louvain with wonderful success, and likewise in January, 1556, at Brussels. On 25 November of the same year he left Belgium and reached Rome 3 February, 1557, setting out again, 17 October for Flanders. His sojourn in the Low Countries was interrupted for five months (November, 1558 to March, 1559); this period he spent in London, having been summoned thither on account of the sickness of Mary Tudor, Queen of England, which ended in her death. In the summer of 1559 he was once more with his general, Lainez, whose right hand he truly was. On 3 November, 1560, he made his solemn profession, and from then until the death of St. Francis Borgia (1572) he continued to reside in Italy, filling in turn the posts of provincial of Tuscany, of commissary-general of the Society in Sicily, visitor of Lombardy, and assistant for Spain and Portugal. The accession of Father Everard Mercurian as general of the order brought a great change to Ribadeneira. His health being much impaired, he was ordered to Spain, preferably to Toledo, his native town, to recuperate. This was a dreadful blow to the poor invalid, a remedy worse than the disease. He obeyed, but had been scarcely a year in his native land when he began to importune his general by letter to permit him to return to Italy. These solicitations continued for several years. At the same time his superiors saw that he was as sick in mind as in body, and that his religious spirit was somewhat shaken. Not only was he lax in his religious observances, but he did not hesitate to criticize the persons and affairs of the Society, so much so that he was strongly suspected of being the author of the memoirs then circulated through Spain against the Jesuits (Astrain, III, 106-10). This, however, was a mistake, and his innocence was recognized in 1578. He it was who took upon himself the task of refuting the calumnies which mischief-makers, apparently Jesuits, went about disseminating against the Constitutions of the Society, nor did he show less ardour and filial piety in making known the life of St. Ignatius Loyola and promoting his canonization. Outside of the Society of Jesus, Ribadeneira is chiefly known for his literary works. From the day of his arrival in Spain to repair his failing health until the day of his death his career was that of a brilliant writer. His compatriots regard him as a master of Castilian and rank him among the classic authors of their tongue. All lines were familiar to him, but he preferred history and ascetical literature. His chief claim to glory is his Life of St. Ignatius Loyola, in which he speaks as an eye-witness, admirably supported by documents. Perhaps the work abounds too much in anecdotal details which tend to obscure the grand aspect of the saint's character and genius (Analecta Bolland., XXIII, 513). It appeared for the first time in Latin at Naples in 1572 (ibid., XXI, 230). The first Spanish edition, revised and considerably augmented by the author, dates from 1583. Other editions followed, all of them revised by the author; that of 1594 seems to contain the final text. It was soon translated into most of the European languages. Among his other works must be mentioned his "Historia eclesiástica del Cisma del reino de Inglaterra" and the "Flos sanctorum", which has been very popular in many countries. Some unpublished works of his deserve publication, notably his History of the persecution of the Society of Jesus and his History of the Spanish Assistancy. ASTRAIN, Historia de la Compañía de Jesús en le Asistencia de España (Madrid, 1902-09); PEAT, Histoire du Père Ribadeneyra, disciple de S. Ignace (Paris, 1862); SOMMERVOGEL, Bibliothèque de la C. de J., VI, 1724-58; DE LA FUENTE, Obras escojidas del Padre Pedro de Rivadeneira, con una noticia de su vida y juicio crítico de sus escritos in Biblioteca de autores Españoles, LX (1868); Monumenta historica S.J.; Ignatiana, ser. I, Epistolœ, II; ser. IV, I; POLANCO, Chronicon Soc. Jesu, VI; Epistolœ mixtœ, V. FRANCIS VAN ORTROY. Andres Perez de Ribas Andrés Pérez De Ribas A pioneer missionary, historian of north-western Mexico; born at Cordova, Spain, 1576; died in Mexico, 26 March, 1655. He joined the Society of Jesus in 1602, coming at once to America, and finishing his novitiate in Mexico in 1604. In the same year he was sent to undertake the Christianization of the Ahome and Suaqui of northern Sinaloa, of whom the former were friendly and anxious for teachers, while the latter had just been brought to submission after a hard campaign. He succeeded so well that within a year he had both tribes gathered into regular towns, each with a well-built church, while all of the Ahome and a large part of the Suaqui had been baptized. The two tribes together numbered about 10,000 souls. In 1613, being then superior of the Sinaloa district, he was instrumental in procuring the submission of a hostile mountain tribe. In 1617, in company with other Jesuit missionaries whom he had brought from Mexico City, he began the conversion of the powerful and largely hostile Yaqui tribe (q.v.) of Sonora, estimated at 30,000 souls, with such success that within a few years most of them had been gathered into orderly town communities. In 1620 he was recalled to Mexico to assist in the college, being ultimately appointed provincial, which post he held for several years. After a visit to Rome in 1643 to take part in the election of a general of the order, he devoted himself chiefly to study and writing until his death. He left numerous works, religious and historical, most of which are still in manuscript, but his reputation as an historian rests secure upon his history of the Jesuit missions of Mexico published at Madrid in 1645, one year after its completion, under the title: "Historia de los Triunfos de Nuestra Santa Fe entre gentes las más bárbaras . . . conseguidos por los soldados de la milicia de Ia Compañía de Jesús en las misiones de la Provincia de Nueva-España". Of this work Bancroft says: "It is a complete history of Jesuit work in Nueva Vizcaya, practically the only history the country had from 1590 to 1644, written not only by a contemporary author but by a prominent actor in the events narrated, who had access to all the voluminous correspondence of his order, comparatively few of which documents have been preserved. In short, Ribas wrote under the most favourable circumstances and made good use of his opportunities." ALEGRE, Historia de la Compañía de Jesús (Mexico, 1841); BANCROFT, Hist. North Mexican States and Texas, I (San Francisco, 1886); BERÍSTAIN Y SOUZA, Biblioteca Hispano-Americana Setentrional, III (Amecemeca, 1883). JAMES MOONEY Diocese of Preto Ribeirao Ribeirao Preto (DE RIBERAO PRETO) A suffragan see of the Archdiocese of São Paulo, Brazil, established 7 June, 1908, with a Catholic population of 500,000 souls. The first and present bishop, Rt. Rev. Alberto José Gonçalves, was born 20 July, 1859, elevated 5 December, 1908, and consecrated 29 April, 1909. The district of Ribeirão Preto is at present the most important one of the State of São Paulo, both on account of the richness of its soil and the great number of agricultural, industrial, and commercial establishments therein. Its principal product is coffee, the shipments of which are so considerable as to necessitate the constant running of an extraordinary number of trains. The seat of the diocese is the city of Ribeirão Preto, situated on the shores of Ribeirão Preto and Ribeirão Retiro, 264 miles from the capital of the state. The municipality, created by law of 1 April, 1889, is divided into four wards, viz.: Villa Tibeiro, Barracão, Morro do Cipó, and Republica. It is, like most of the interior towns of São Paulo, of modern construction. The city is lighted by electric light and has excellent sewer and water-supply systems. The streets are well laid, straight, and intersecting at right angles, with many parks and squares. The cathedral now nearing completion will be one of the finest buildings of its kind in Brazil. It is well provided with schools and colleges, prominent among which are those maintained by the Church. JULIAN MORENO-LACALLE. Jusepe de Ribera Jusepe de Ribera Jusepe De Ribera, called also SPAGNOLETTO, L'ESPAGNOLET (the little Spaniard), painter born at Jativa, 12 Jan., 1588; died at Naples, 1656. Fantastic accounts have been given of his early history; his father was said to be a noble, captain of the fortress of Naples, etc. All this is pure romance. A pupil of Ribalta, the author of many beautiful pictures in the churches of Valencia, the young man desired to know Italy. He was a very determined character. At eighteen, alone and without resources, he begged in the streets of Rome in order to live, and performed the services of a lackey. A picture by Caravaggio aroused his admiration, and he set out for Naples in search of the artist, but the latter had just died (1609). Ribera was then only twenty. For fifteen years the artist is entirely lost sight of; it is thought that he travelled in upper Italy. He is again found at Naples in 1626, at which time he was married, living like a nobleman, keeping his carriage and a train of followers, received by viceroys, the accomplished host of all travelling artists, and very proud of his title of Roman Academician. Velasquez paid him a visit on each of his journeys (1630, 1649). A sorrow clouded the end of his life; his daughter was seduced by Don Juan of Austria. Her father seems to have died of grief, but the story of his suicide is a fiction. Ribera's name is synonymous with a terrifying art of wild-beast fighters and executioners. Not that he did not paint charming figures. No artist of his time, not excepting Rubens or Guido Reni, was more sensitive to a certain ideal of Correggio-like grace. But Ribera did not love either ugliness or beauty for themselves, seeking them in turn only to arouse emotion. His fixed idea, which recurs in every form in his art, is the pursuit and cultivation of sensation. In fact the whole of Ribera's work must be understood as that of a man who made the pathetic the condition of art and the reason of the beautiful. It is the negation of the art of the Renaissance, the reaction of asceticism and the Catholic Reformation on the voluptuous paganism of the sixteenth century. Hence the preference for the popular types, the weather-beaten and wrinkled beggar, and especially the old man. This "aging" of art about 1600 is a sign of the century. Heroic youth and pure beauty were dead for a long time. The anchorites and wasted cenobites, the parchment-like St. Jeromes, these singular methods of depicting the mystical life seem Ribera's personal creation; to show the ruins of the human body, the drama of a long existence written in furrows and wrinkles, all engraved by a pencil which digs and scrutinizes, using the sunlight as a kind of acid which bites and makes dark shadows, was one of the artist's most cherished formulas. No one demonstrates so well the profound change which took place in men's minds after the Reformation and the Council of Trent. Thenceforth concern for character and accent forestalled every other consideration. Leanness, weariness, and abasement became the pictorial signs of the spiritual life. A sombre energy breathes in these figures of Apostles, prophets, saints, and philosophers. Search for character became that of ugliness and monstrosity. Nothing is so personal to Ribera as this love of deformity. Paintings like the portrait of "Cambazo", the blind sculptor, the "Bearded Woman" (Prado, 1630), and the "Club Foot" of the Louvre (1651) inaugurate curiosities which had happily been foreign to the spirit of the Renaissance. They show a gloomy pleasure in humiliating human nature. Art, which formerly used to glorify life, now violently emphasized its vices and defects. The artist seized upon the most ghastly aspects even of antiquity. Cato of Utica howling and distending his wound, Ixion on his wheel, Sisyphus beneath his rock. This artistic terrorism won for Ribera his sinister reputation, and it must be admitted that it had depraved and perverted qualities. The sight of blood and torture as the source of pleasure is more pagan than the joy of life and the laughing sensuality of the Renaissance. At times Ribera's art seems a dangerous return to the delights of the amphitheatre. His "Apollo and Marsyas" (Naples) his "Duel" or "Match of Women" (Prado) recall the programme of some spectacle manager of the decadence. In nothing is Ribera more "Latin" than in this sanguinary tradition of the games of the circus. However, it would be unjust wholly to condemn this singular taste in accordance with our modern ideas. At least we cannot deny extraordinary merit to the scenes of martyrdom painted by Ribera. This great master has never been surpassed as a practical artist. For plastic realism, clearness of drawing and evidence of composition the "Martyrdom of St. Bartholomew" (there are in Europe a dozen copies, of which the most beautiful is at the Prado) is one of the masterpieces of Spanish genius. It is impossible to imagine a more novel and striking idea. No one has spoken a language more simple and direct. In this class of subjects Rubens usually avoids atrocity by an oratorical turn, by the splendour of his discourse, the lyric brilliancy of the colouring. Ribera's point of view is scarcely less powerful with much less artifice. It is less transformed and developed. The action is collected in fewer persons. The gestures are less redundant, with a more spontaneous quality. The tone is more sober and at the same time stronger. Everything seems more severe and of a more concentrated violence. The art also, while perhaps not the most elevated of all, is at least one of the most original and convincing. Few artiste have given us, if not serene enjoyment, more serious thoughts. The "St. Lawrence" of the Vatican is scarcely less beautiful than the "St. Bartholomew". Moreover it must not be thought that these ideas of violence exhaust Ribera's art. They are supplemented by sweet ideas, and in his work horrible pictures alternate with tender ones. There is a type of young woman or rather young girl, still almost a child, of delicate beauty with candid oval features and rather thin arms, with streaming hair and an air of ignorance, a type of paradoxical grace which is found in his "Rapture of St. Magdalen" (Madrid, Academy of S. Fernando), or the "St. Agnes" of the Dresden Museum. This virginal figure is truly the "eternal feminine" of a country which more than any other dreamed of love and sought to deify its object summarizing in it the most irreconcilable desires and virtues. No painter has endowed the subject of the Immaculate Conception with such grandeur as Ribera in his picture for the Ursulines of Salamanca (1636). Even a certain familiar turn of imagination, a certain intimate and domestic piety, a sweetness, an amicable and popular cordiality which would seem unknown to this savage spirit were not foreign to him. In more than one instance he reminds us of Murillo. He painted several "Holy Families", "Housekeeping in the Carpenter Shop" (Gallery of the Duke of Norfolk). All that is inspired by tender reverie about cradles and chaste alcoves, all the distracting delights in which modern religion rejoices and which sometimes result in affectation, are found in more than germ in the art of this painter, who is regarded by many as cruel and uniformly inhuman. Thus throughout his work scenes of carnage are succeeded by scenes of love, atrocious visions by visions of beauty. They complete each other or rather the impression they convey is heightened by contrast. And under both forms the artist incessantly sought one object, namely to obtain the maximum of emotion; his art expresses the most intense nervous life. This is the genius of antithesis. It forms the very basis of Ribera's art, the condition of his ideas, and even dictates the customary processes of his chiaroscuro. For Ribera's chiaroscuro, scarcely less personal than that of Rembrandt, is, no less than the latter's, inseparable from a certain manner of feeling. Less supple than the latter less enveloping, less penetrating, less permeable by the light, twilight, and penumbra, it proceeds more roughly by clearer oppositions and sharp intersections of light and darkness. Contrary to Rembrandt, Ribera does not decompose or discolour, his palette does not dissolve under the influence of shadows, and nothing is so peculiar to him as certain superexcited notes of furious red. Nevertheless, compared to Caravaggio, his chiaroscuro is much more than a mere means of relief. The canvas assumes a vulcanized, carbonized appearance. Large wan shapes stand out from the asphalt of the background, and the shadows about them deepen and accumulate a kind of obscure tragic capacity. There is always the same twofold rhythm, the same pathetic formula of a dramatized universe regarded as a duel between sorrow and joy, day and night. This striking formula, infinitely less subtile than that of Rembrandt, nevertheless had an immense success. For all the schools of the south Caravaggio's chiaroscuro perfected by Ribera had the force of law, such as it is found throughout the Neapolitan school, in Stanzioni, Salvator Rosa, Luca Giordano. In modern times Bonnat and Ribot painted as though they knew no master but Ribera. Rest came to this violent nature towards the end of his life; from the idea of contrast he rose to that of harmony. His last works, the "Club Foot" and the "Adoration of the Shepherds" (1650), both in the Louvre, are painted in a silvery tone which seems to foreshadow the light of Velasquez. His hand had not lost its vigour, its care for truth; he always displayed the same implacable and, as it were, inflexible realism. The objects of still life in the "Adoration of the Shepherds" have not been equalled by any specialist, but these works are marked by a new serenity. This impassioned genius leaves us under a tranquil impression; we catch a ray— should it rather be called a reflection?— the Olympian genius of the author of "The Maids of Honour". Ribera was long the only Spanish painter who enjoyed a European fame; this he owed to the fact that he had lived at Naples and has often been classed with the European school. Because of this he is now denied the glory which was formerly his. He is regarded more or less as a deserter, at any rate as the least national of Spanish painters. But in the seventeenth century Naples was still Spanish, and by living there a man did not cease to be a Spanish subject. By removing the centre of the school to Naples, Ribera did Spain a great service. Spanish art, hitherto little known, almost lost at Valencia and Seville, thanks to Ribera was put into wider circulation. Through the authority of a master recognized even at Rome the school felt emboldened and encouraged. It is true that his art, although more Spanish than any other, is also somewhat less specialized; it is cosmopolitan. Like Seneca and Lucian, who came from Cordova, and St. Augustine, who came from Carthage, Ribera has expressed in a universal language the ideal of the country where life has most savour. DOMINICI, Vite de' pittori . . . napoletani (Naples, 1742-1743; 2nd ed., Naples, 1844); PALOMINO, El Museo Pictórico, I (Madrid, 1715); II (Madrid, 1724); Noticias, Elogios y Vidas de Los Pintores, at the end of vol. II, Separate edition (London, 1742), in German (Dresden, 1781); BERMÚDEZ, Diccionario historíco de los más ilustres profesores de las bellas artes en España (Madrid, 1800); STIRLING. Annals of the artists of Spain (London, 1848); VIARDOT, Notices sur les principaux peintres de l'Espagne (Paris, 1839); BLANC, Ecole Espagnole (1869); MEYER, Ribera (Strasburg, 1908); LAFOND, Ribera et Zurbaran (Paris, 1910). LOUIS GILLET. Ricardus Anglicus Ricardus Anglicus Ricardus Anglicus, Archdeacon of Bologna, was an English priest who was rector of the law school at the University of Bologna in 1226, and who, by new methods of explaining legal proceedings, became recognized as the pioneer of scientific judicial procedure in the twelfth century. His long-lost work "Ordo Judiciarius" was discovered in Manuscript by Wunderlich in Douai and published by Witt in 1851. A more correct Manuscript was subsequently discovered at Brussels by Sir Travers Twiss, who, on evidence which seems insufficient, followed Panciroli in identifying him with the celebrated Bishop Richard Poor (died 1237). Probably he graduated in Paris, as a Papal Bull of 1218 refers to "Ricardus Anglicus doctor Parisiensis", but there is no evidence to connect him with Oxford. He also wrote glosses on the papal decretals, and distinctions on the Decree of Gratian. He must be distinguished from his contemporary, Ricardus Anglicanus, a physician. RASHDALL, Mediæval Universities, II, 750 (London, 1895); TWISS, Law Magazine and Review, May, 1894; SARTI AND FATTORINI, De claris Archigymnasii Bononiensis Professoribus; BLAKISTON in Dict. Nat. Biog., s. v. Poor, Richard. EDWIN BURTON. Nicholas Riccardi Nicholas Riccardi A theologian, writer and preacher; born at Genoa, 1585; died at Rome, 30 May, 1639. Physically he was unprepossessing, even slightly deformed. His physical deficiencies, however, were abundantly compensated for by mentality of the highest order. His natural taste for study was encouraged by his parents who sent him to Spain to pursue his studies in the Pincian Academy. While a student at this institution he entered the Dominican order and was invested with its habit in the Convent of St. Paul, where he studied philosophy and theology. So brilliant was his record that after completing his studies he was made a professor of Thomistic theology at Pincia. While discharging his academic duties, he acquired a reputation as a preacher second only to his fame as a theologian. As a preacher Philip III of Spain named him "The Marvel", a sobriquet by which he was known in Spain and at Rome till the end of his life. On his removal to Rome in 1621, he acquired the confidence of Urban VIII. He was made regent of studies and professor of theology at the College of the Minerva. In 1629 Urban VIII appointed him Master of the Sacred Palace to succeed Niccolò Ridolphi, recently elected Master General of the Dominicans. Shortly after this the same pontiff appointed him pontifical preacher. These two offices he discharged with distinction. His extant works number twenty. Besides several volumes of sermons for Advent, Lent, and special occasions, his writings treat of Scripture, theology, and history. One of his best known works is the "History of the Council of Trent" (Rome, 1627). His commentaries treat of all the books of Scripture, and are notable for their originality, clearness, and profound learning. Two other commentaries treat of the Lord's Prayer and the Canticle of Canticles. QUÉTIF-ECHARD, SS. Ord. Praed., II, 503, 504. JOHN B. O'CONNOR. Lorenzo Ricci Lorenzo Ricci General of the Society of Jesus b. at Florence, 2 Aug., 1703; d. at the Castle of Sant' Angelo, Rome, 24 Nov., 1775. He belonged to one of the most ancient, and illustrious families of Tuscany. He had two brothers, one of whom subsequently became canon of the. cathedral and the other was raised by Francis I, Grand Duke of Tuscany, to the dignity of first syndic of the Grand duchy. Sent when very young to Prato to pursue, his studies under the direction of the Society of Jesus in the celebrated Cicognini college, he entered the society when he was scarcely fifteen, 16 Dec., 1718, at the novitiate of S. Andrea at Rome. Having made the usual course of philosophical and theological studies and twice defended with rare success public theses in these subjects, he was successively charged with teaching belles lettres and philosophy it Siena, and philosophy and theology at the Roman College, from which he was promoted to the foremost office of his order. Meanwhile he was admitted to the profession of the four vows, 15 Aug., 1736. About 1751 his edifying and regular life, his discretion, gentleness, and simplicity caused him to be appointed to the important office of spiritual father, the duties of which he discharged to the satisfaction of all. In 1755 Father Luigi Centurione, who appreciated his eminent qualities, chose him as secretary of the society. Finally in the Nineteenth Congregation he was elected general by unanimous vote, (21 May, 1758). It was at the most stormy and distressed period of its existence that the senate of the society placed its government and its destinies in the, hand of a man deeply virtuous and endowed with rare merit, but, who was inexperienced in the art of governing and who had always lived apart from the world and diplomatic intrigues. The historiographer Julius Cordara, who lived near Ricci and seems to have known him intimately, deplored this choice: "Eundem tot, inter iactationes ac fluctus cum aliquid praeter morem audendum et malis inusitatis inusitata remedia adhibenda videbantur, propter ipsam nature placiditatem et nulla unquam causa incalescentem animum, minus aptum arbitrabar" (On account of his placid nature and too even temper, I regarded him as little suited for a time when disturbance and storm seem to require extraordinary application of unusual remedies to unusual evils). (Denkwurdigkeiten der Jesuiten, p.19.) On the other hand it must be admitted that the new general did not have much leeway. In his first interview with Clement XIII, who had assumed the tiara 6 July, 1758, and always showed himself deeply attached to the Jesuits, the pope counselled him: "Silentium, patientiam et preces; cetera sibi curae fore" (Cordara, op. cit., 22), The saintly superior followed this line of conduct to the letter and incessantly inculcated it in his subordinates. The seven encyclical letters which he addressed to them in the fifteen years of his generalship all breathe the sweetest and tenderest piety and zeal for their religious perfection. "Preces vestras", he says in the last, that of 21 Feb., 1773, "animate omni pietatis exercitio accurate fervideque obeundo, mutua inter vosmetipsos caritate, obedientia et observantia erga eos qui vobis Dei loco sunt, tolerantia laborurn, aerumnarum, paupertatis, contumeliarum, secessu et solitudine, prudentia et evangelica in agendo simplicitate, boni exempli operibus, piisque colloquiis" (Let your prayers be inspired by every practice of piety, with mutual charity among yourselves, obedience and respect for those who hold the place of God in your regard, en durance of labour, of hardships, of poverty, of insult in retreat and solitude, with prudence and evangelical simplicity of conduct, the example of good works, and pious conversation). (Epistolae praepositorum generalium S.J., 11, Ghent 1847, 306). This pious and profoundly upright man was nevertheless not wanting on occasion in courage and firmness. When it was suggested to save the French provinces of his order by giving them a superior entirely independent of the general of Rome he refused thus to transgress the. constitutions committed to his care and uttered to the pope the ever famous saying: "Sint ut sunt aut non sint" (Leave them as they are or not at all). (Cordara, op. cit., 35) Unfortunately he placed all his confidence in hi,, assistant for Italy, Father Timoni, of Greek origin, "vir quippe praefidens sibi, iudiciique sui plus nimio tenax" (Idem, op. cit., 20), who, like many other expected the society to be saved by a miracle of Providence. When, to the mass of pamphlets aimed against the Jesuits, the Portuguese episcopate brought the reinforcement of pastoral letters, a number of bishops wrote to the pope letters which were very eulogistic of the Society of Jesus and its Institute, and Clement XIII hastened to send a copy to Father Ricci. It was a brilliant apologia for the order Cordara and many of his brethren considered it, expedient to publish this correspondence in full with the sole title: "ludicium Ecclesiae, universae, de statu praesenti Societatis Iesu" (op. cit., 26). Timoni, who fancied that no one would dare any thing against the Jesuits of Portugal, was of a contrary opinion, and the general was won over to his way of thinking. Disaster followed disaster, and Ricci experienced the most serious material difficulties in assisting the members who were expelled from every country. At his instance, and perhaps even with his collaboration, Clement XIII, solicitous for the fate of the Society, published 7 January, 1765, the Bull "Apostolicam pascendi", which was a cogent defence of the Institute and its members (Masson, "Le cardinal de, Bernis depuis son ministere" 80). But even the pontiff's intervention could not stay the devastating torrent. After the suppression of the Jesuits in Naples and the Duchy of Parma, the ambassadors of France, Spain, and Portugal went (Jan., 1769) to request officially of the pope the total suppression of the society. This was the death-blow of Clement XIII, who died some days later (2 Feb., 1769) of an apoplectic attack. His successor, the conventual Ganganelli, little resembled him. Whatever may have been his sympathies for the order prior to his elevation to the sovereign pontificate, and his indebtedness to Ricci, who had used his powerful influence to secure for him the cardinal's hat, it is indisputable that once he became pope he assumed at least in appearance a hostile attitude. "Se palam Jesuitis infensum praebere atque ita quidem, ut ne generalem quidem praepositum in conspectum admitteret" (Cordara, 43). There is no necessity of repeating even briefly the history of the pontificate of Clement XIV (18 May, 1769-22 Sept., 1774), which was absorbed by his measures to bring about the suppression of the Society of Jesus. Despite the exactions and outrageous injustices which the Jesuit houses had to undergo even at Rome, the general did not give up hope of a speedy deliverance, as is testified by the letter he wrote to Cordara the day after the feast of St. Ignatius, 1773 (Cordara, loc. cit., 53). Although the Brief of abolition had been signed by the pope ten days previously, Father Ricci was suddenly notified on the evening of 16 August. The next day he was assigned the English College as residence, until 23 Sept., 1773, when he was removed to the Castle of Sant' Angelo, where he was held in strict captivity for the remaining two years of his life. The surveillance was so severe that he did not learn of the death of his secretary Cornolli, imprisoned with him and in his vicinity, until six months after the event=2E To satisfy the hatred of his enemies his trial and that of his companions was hastened, but the judge ended by recognizing "nunquam objectos sibi reos his innocentiores; Riccium etiam ut hominem vere sanctum dilaudabat" (Cordara, op. cit., 62); and Cardinal de Bernis dared to write (5 July): "There are not, perhaps, sufficient proofs for judges, but there are enough for upright and reasonable men" (Masson, op. cit., 324). Justice required that the ex-general be at once set at liberty, but nothing was done, apparently through fear lest the scattered Jesuits should gather about their old head, to reconstruct their society at the centre of Catholicism. At the end of August, 1775, Ricci sent an appeal to the new pope, Pius VI, to obtain his release. But while his claims were being considered by the circle of the Sovereign Pontiff, death came to summon the venerable old man to the tribunal of the supreme Judge. Five days previously, when about to receive Holy Viaticum, he made this double protest: (1) "I declare and protest that the suppressed Society of Jesus has not given any cause for its suppression; this I declare and protest with all that moral certainty that a superior well informed of his order can have. (2) I declare and protest that I have not given any cause, even the slightest, for my imprisonment; this I declare and protest with that supreme certainty and evidence that each one has of his own actions. I make this second protest only because it is necessary for the reputation of the suppressed Society of Jesus, of which I was the general." (Murr, "Journal zur Kunstgeschichte", IX, 281.) To do honour to his memory the pope caused the celebration of elaborate funeral services in the church of St. John of the Florentines near the Castle of Sant' Angelo. As is customary with prelates, the body was placed on a bed of state. It was carried in the evening to the Church of the Gesu where it was buried in the vault reserved for the burial of his predecessors in the government of the order. CORDARA, Denkwürdigkeiten in DÖLLINGER, Beiträge zur politischen, kirchlichen und Culturgesch., III (1882), 1-74. These memoirs carry much weight, inasmuch as Cordara speaks with severity of his former brothers in arms, and of the Society of Jesus. CARAYON, Documents inedits concernant la Compagnie de Jesus, XVII, Le Pere Ricci et la suppression de la Compagnie de Jesus en 1773, CLXXIV (Poitiers, 1869); Epistoloe proepositorum generalium Societatis Jesu, If (Ghent, 1847); SMITH, The Suppression of the Society of Jesus in The Month (1902-03); MURR, Journal zur Kunstgesch. u. zur allgemeinen Litteratur, IX (Nuremberg, 1780), 254-309; MASSON, Le Cardinal de Bernis depuis son ministere 1758-1794 (Paris, 1903), a good collection of documents, but the author does not know the history of the Jesuits; RAVIGNAN, Clement XIII et Clement XI V, supplementary volume, historical and critical documents (Paris, 1854); BOERO, Osservazioni sopra l'istoria del pontificato di Clemente XIV scritta dal P. A. Theiner (2nd ed., Monza, 1854), useful for documents. FRANCIS VAN ORTROY Matteo Ricci Matteo Ricci Founder of the Catholic missions of China, b. at Macerata in the Papal States, 6 Oct. 1552; d. at Peking, 11 May, 1610. Ricci made his classical studies in his native town, studied law at Rome for two years, and on 15 Aug., 1571, entered the Society of Jesus at the Roman College, where he made his novitiate, and philosophical and theological studies. While there he also devoted his attention to mathematics, cosmology, and astronomy under the direction of the celebrated Father Christopher Clavius. In 1577 he asked to be sent on the missions in Farthest Asia, and his request being granted he embarked at Lisbon, 24 March, 1578. Arriving at Goa, the capital of the Portuguese Indies, on 13 Sept. of this year, he was employed there and at Cochin in teaching and the ministry until the end of Lent, 1582, when Father Alessandro Valignani (who had been his novice-master at Rome but who since August, 1573, was in charge of all the Jesuit missions in the East Indies) summoned him to Macao to prepare to enter China. Father Ricci arrived at Macao on 7 August, 1582. Beginning of the Mission In the sixteenth century nothing remained of the Christian communities founded in China by the Nestorian missionaries in the seventh century and by the Catholic monks in the thirteenth and fourteenth (see CHINA). Moreover it is doubtful whether the native Chinese population was ever seriously affected by this ancient evangelisation. For those desiring to resume the work everything therefore remained to be done, and the obstacles were greater than formerly. After the death of St. Francis Xavier (27 November, 1552) many fruitless attempts had been made. The first missionary to whom Chinese barriers were temporarily lowered was the Jesuit, Melchior Nuñez Barreto, who twice went as far as Canton, where he spent a month each time (1555). A Dominican, Father Gaspar da Cruz, was also admitted to Canton for a month, but he also had to refrain from "forming a Christian Christianity". Still others, Jesuits, Augustinians, and Fransciscans in 1568, 1575, 1579, and 1582 touched on Chinese soil, only to be forced, sometimes with ill treatment, to withdraw. To Father Valignani is due the credit of having seen what prevented all these undertakings from having lasting results. The attempts had hitherto been made haphazard, with men insufficiently prepared and incapable of profiting by favourable circumstances had they encountered them. Father Valignani substituted the methodical attack with previous careful selection of missionaries who, the field once open, would implant Christianity there. To this end he first summoned to Macao Father Michele de Ruggieri, who had also come to India from Italy in 1578. Only twenty years had elapsed since the Portuguese had succeeded in establishing their colony at the portals of China, and the Chinese, attracted by opportunities for gain, were flocking thither. Ruggieri reached Macao in July, 1579, and, following the given orders applied himself wholly to the study of the Mandarin language, that is, Chinese, as it is spoken throughout the empire by the officials and the educated. His progress, though very slow, permitted him to labour with more fruit than his predecessors in two sojourns at Canton (1580-81) allowed him by an unwonted complacency of the mandarins. Finally, after many untoward events, he was authorized (10 Sept., 1583) to take up his residence with Father Ricci at Chao-k'ing, the administrative capital of Canton. Method of the Missionaries The exercise of great prudence alone enabled the missionaries to remain in the region which they had had such difficulty in entering. Omitting all mention at first of their intention to preach the Gospel, they declared to the mandarins who questioned them concerning their object "that they were religious who had left their country in the distant West because of the renown of the good government of China, where they desired to remain till their death, serving god, the Lord of Heaven". Had they immediately declared their intention to preach a new religion, they would never have been received; this would have clashed with Chinese pride, which would not admit that China had anything to learn from foreigners, and it would have especially alarmed their politics, which beheld a national danger in every innovation. However, the missionaries never hid their Faith nor the fact that they were Christian priests. As soon as they were established at Chao-k'ing they placed in a conspicuous part of their house a picture of the Blessed Virgin with the Infant Jesus in her arms. Visitors seldom failed to inquire the meaning of this, to them, novel representation, and the missionaries profited thereby to give them a first idea of Christianity. The missionaries assumed the initiative in speaking of their religion as soon as they had sufficiently overcome Chinese antipathy and distrust to see their instructions desired, or at least to be certain of making them understood without shocking their listeners. They achieved this result by appealing to the curiosity of the Chinese, by making them feel, without saying so, that the foreigners had something new and interesting to teach; to this end they made use of the European things they had brought with them. Such were large and small clocks, mathematical and astronomical instruments, prisms revealing the various colours, musical instruments, oil paintings and prints, cosmographical, geographical, and architectural works with diagrams, maps, and views of towns and buildings, large volumes, magnificently printed and splendidly bound, etc. The Chinese, who had hitherto fancied that outside of their country only barbarism existed, were astounded. Rumours of the wonders displayed by the religious from the West soon spread on all sides, and thenceforth their house was always filled, especially with mandarins and the educated. It followed, says Father Ricci, that "all came by degrees to have with regard to our countries, our people, and especially of our educated men, an idea vastly different from that which they had hitherto entertained". This impression was intensified by the explanations of the missionaries concerning their little museum in reply to the numerous questions of their visitors. One of the articles which most aroused their curiosity was a map of the world. The Chinese had already had maps, called by their geographers "descriptions of the world", but almost the entire space was filled by the fifteen provinces of China, around which were painted a bit of sea and a few islands on which were inscribed the names of countries of which they had heard -- all together was not as large as a small Chinese province. Naturally the learned men of Chao-k'ing immediately protested when Father Ricci pointed out the various parts of the world on the European map and when they saw how small a part China played. But after the missionaries had explained its construction and the care taken by the geographers of the West to assign to each country its actual position and boundaries, the wisest of them surrendered to the evidence, and beginning with the Governor of Chao-k'ing, all urged the missionary to make a copy of his map with the names and inscriptions in Chinese. Ricci drew a larger map of the world on which he wrote more detailed inscriptions, suited to the needs of the Chinese; when the work was completed the governor had it printed, giving all the copies as presents to his friends in the province and at a distance. Father Ricci does not hesitate to say: "This was the most useful work that could be done at that time to dispose China to give credence to the things of our holy Faith. . . . Their conception of the greatness of their country and of the insignificance of all other lands made them so proud that the w hole world seemed to them savage and barbarous compared with themselves; it was scarcely to be expected that they, while entertaining this idea, would heed foreign masters." But now numbers were eager to learn of European affairs from the missionaries, who profited by these dispositions to introduce religion more frequently with their explanations. For example, their beautiful Bibles and the paintings and prints depicting religious subjects, monuments, churches, etc., gave them an opportunity of speaking of "the good customs in the countries of the Christians, of the falseness of idolatry, of the conformity of the law of God with natural reason and similar teachings found in the writings of the ancient sages of China". This last instance shows that Father Ricci already knew how to draw from his Chinese studies testimony favourable to the religion which he was to preach. It was soon evident to the missionaries that their remarks regarding religion were no less interesting to many of their visitors than their Western curiosities and learning, and, to satisfy those who wished to learn more, they distributed leaflets containing a Chinese translation of the Ten Commandments, an abbreviation of the moral code much appreciated by the Chinese, composed a small catechism in which the chief points of Christian doctrine were explained in a dialogue between a pagan and a European priest. This work, printed about 1584, was also well received, the highest mandarins of the province considering themselves honoured to receive it as a present. The missionaries distributed hundreds and thousands of copies and thus "the good odour of our Faith began to be spread throughout China". Having begun their direct apostolate in this manner, they furthered it not a little by their edifying regular life, their disinterestedness, their charity, and their patience under persecutions which often destroyed the fruits of their labours. Development of the Missions Father Ricci played the chief part in these early attempts to make Christianity known to the Chinese. In 1607 Father Ruggieri died in Europe, where he had been sent in 1588 by Father Valignani to interest the Holy See more particularly in the missions. Left alone with a young priest, a pupil rather than an assistant, Ricci was expelled from Chao-k'ing in 1589 by a viceroy of Canton who had found the house of the missionaries suited to his own needs; but the mission had taken root too deeply to be exterminated by the ruin of its first home. Thenceforth in whatever town Ricci sought a new field of apostolate he was preceded by his reputation and he found powerful friends to protect him. He first went to Shao-chow, also in the province of Canton, where he dispensed with the services of interpreters and adopted the costume of the educated Chinese. In 1595 he made an attempt on Nan-king, the famous capital in the south of China, and, though unsuccessful, it furnished him with an opportunity of forming a Christian Church at Nan-ch'ang, capital of Kiang-si, which was so famous for the number and learning of its educated men. In 1598 he made a bold but equally fruitless attempt to establish himself at Peking. Forced to return to Nan-king on 6 Feb., 1599, he found Providential compensation there; the situation had changed completely since the preceding year, and the highest mandarins were desirous of seeing the holy doctor from the West take up his abode in their city. Although his zeal was rewarded with much success in this wider field, he constantly longed to repair his repulse at Peking. He felt that the mission was not secure in the provinces until it was established and authorized in the capital. On 18 May, 1600, Ricci again set out for Peking and, when all human hope of success was lost, he entered on 24 January, 1601, summoned by Emperor Wan-li. Last Labours Ricci's last nine years were spent at Peking, strengthening his work with the same wisdom and tenacity of purpose which had conducted it so far. The imperial goodwill was gained by gifts of European curiosities, especially the map of the world, from which the Asiatic ruler learned for the first time the true situation of his empire and the existence of so many other different kingdoms and peoples; he required Father Ricci to make a copy of it for him in his palace. At Peking, as at Nan-king and elsewhere, the interest of the most intelligent Chinese was aroused chiefly by the revelations which the European teacher made to them in the domain of the sciences, even those in which they considered themselves most proficient. Mathematics and astronomy, for example, had from time immemorial formed a part of the institutions of the Chinese Government, but, when they listened to Father Ricci, even the men who knew most had to acknowledge how small and how mingled with errors was their knowledge. But this recognition of their ignorance and their esteem for European learning, of which they had just got a glimpse, impelled very few Chinese to make serious efforts to acquire this knowledge, their attachment to tradition or the routine of national teaching being too deep-rooted. However, the Chinese governors, who even at the present day have made no attempt at reform in this matter, did not wish to deprive the country of all the advantages of European discoveries. To procure them recourse had to be had to the missionaries, and thus the Chinese mission from Ricci's time until the end of the eighteenth century found its chief protection in the services performed with the assistance of European learning. Father Ricci made use of profane science only to prepare the ground and open the way to the apostolate properly so called. With this object in view he employed other means, which made a deep impression on the majority of the educated class, and especially on those who held public offices. He composed under various forms adapted to the Chinese taste little moral treatises, e.g., that called by the Chinese "The Twenty-five Words", because in twenty-five short chapters it treated "of the mortification of the passions and the nobility of virtue". Still greater admiration was aroused by the "Paradoxes", a collection of practical sentences, useful to a moral life, familiar to Christians but new to the Chinese, which Ricci developed with accounts of examples, comparisons, and extracts from the Scriptures and from Christian philosophers and doctors. Not unreasonably proud of their rich moral literature, the Chinese were greatly surprised to see a stranger succeed so well; they could not refrain from praising his exalted doctrine, and the respect which they soon acquired for the Christian writings did much to dissipate their distrust of strangers and to render them kindly disposed towards the Christian religion. But the book through which Ricci exercised the widest and most fortunate influence was his "T'ien-chu-she-i" (The True Doctrine of God). This was the little catechism of Chao-k'ing which had been delivered from day to day, corrected and improved as occasion offered, until it finally contained all the matter suggested by long years of experience in the apostolate. The truths which must be admitted as the necessary preliminary to faith -- the existence and unity of God, the creation, the immortality of the soul, reward or punishment in a future life -- are here demonstrated by the best arguments from reason, while the errors most widespread in China, especially the worship of idols and the belief in the transmigration of souls, are successfully refuted. To the testimony furnished by Christian philosophy and theology Ricci added numerous proofs from the ancient Chinese books which did much to win credit for his work. A masterpiece of apologetics and controversy, the "T'ien-chu-she-i", rightfully became the manual of the missionaries and did most effacacious missionary work. Before its author's death it had been reprinted at least four times, and twice by the pagans. It led countless numbers to Christianity, and aroused esteem for our religion in those readers whom it did not convert. The perusal of it induced Emperor K'ang-hi to issue his edict of 1692 granting liberty to preach the Gospel. The Emperor Kien-long, although he persecuted the Christians, ordered the "T'ien-chu-she-i" to be placed in his library with his collection of the most notable productions of the Chinese language. Even to the present time missionaries have experienced its beneficent influence, which was not confined to China, being felt also in Japan, Tong-king, and other countries tributary to Chinese literature. Besides the works intended especially for the infidels and the catechumens whose initiation was in progress, Father Ricci wrote others for the new Christians. As founder of the mission he had to invent formulae capable of expressing clearly and unequivocally our dogmas and rites in a language which had hitherto never been put to such use (except for the Nestorian use, with which Ricci was not acquainted). It was a delicate and difficult task, but it formed only a part of the heavy burden which the direction of the mission was for Father Ricci, particularly during his last years. While advancing gradually on the capital Ricci did not abandon the territory already conquered; he trained in his methods the fellow-workers who joined him and commissioned them to continue his work in the cities he left. Thus in 1601, the mission included, besides Peking, the three residences of Nan-king, Nan-ch'ang, Shao-chow, to which was added in 1608 that of Shang-hai. In each of these there were two or three missionaries with "brothers", Chinese Christians from Macao who had been received into the Society of Jesus, and who served the mission as catechists. Although as yet the number of Christians was not very great (2000 baptized in 1608), Father Ricci in his "Memoirs" has said well that considering the obstacles to the entrance of Christianity into China the result was "a very great miracle of Divine Omnipotence". To preserve and increase the success already obtained, it was necessary that the means which had already proved efficacious should continue to be employed; everywhere and always the missionaries, without neglecting the essential duties of the Christian apostolate, had to adapt their methods to the special conditions of the country, and avoid unnecessary attacks on traditional customs and habits. The application of this undeniably sound policy was often difficult. In answer to the doubts of his fellow-workers Father Ricci outlined rules, which received the approval of Father Valignano; these insured the unity and fruitful efficacy of the apostolic work throughout the mission. Question of the Divine Names and the Chinese Rites The most difficult problem in the evangelization of China had to do with the rites or ceremonies, in use from time immemorial, to do honour to ancestors or deceased relatives and the particular tokens of respect which the educated felt bound to pay to their master, Confucius. Ricci's solution of this problem caused a long and heated controversy in which the Holy See finally decided against him. The discussion also dealt with the use of the Chinese terms T'ien (heaven) and Shang-ti (Sovereign Lord) to designate God; here also the custom established by Father Ricci had to be corrected. The following is a short history of this famous controversy which was singularly complicated and embittered by passion. With regard to the designations for God, Ricci always preferred, and employed from the first, the term T'ien chu (Lord of Heaven) for the God of Christians; as had been seen, he used it in the title of his catechism. But in studying the most ancient Chinese books he considered it established that they said of T'ien (Heaven) and Shang-ti (Sovereign Lord) what we say of the true God, that is, they described under these two names a sovereign lord of spirits and men who knows all that takes place in the world, the source of all power and all lawful authority, the supreme regulator and defender of the moral law, rewarding those who observe and punishing those who violate it. Hence he concluded that, in the most revered monuments of China, T'ien and Shang'ti designate nothing else than the true God whom he himself preached. Ricci maintained this opinion in several passages of his T'ien-chu-she-i; it will be readily understood of what assistance it was to destroy Chinese prejudices against the Christian religion. It is true that, in drawing this conclusion, Ricci had to contradict the common interpretation of modern scholars who follow Chu-Hi in referring T'ien and Shang-ti to apply to the material heaven; but he showed that this material interpretation does not do justice to the texts and it is at least reasonable to see in them something better. In fact he informs us that the educated Confucianists, who did not adore idols, were grateful to him for interpreting the words of their master with such goodwill. Indeed, Ricci's opinion has been adopted and confirmed by illustrious modern Sinologists, amongst whom it suffices to mention James Legge ("The Notions of the Chinese concerning God and Spirits", 1852; "A Letter to Prof. Max Muller chiefly on the Translation of the Chinese terms Ti and Chang-ti", 1880). Therefore it was not without serious grounds that the founder of the Chinese mission and his successors believed themselves justified in employing the terms T'ien and Shang-ti as well as T'ien-chu to designate the true God. However, there were objections to this practice even among the Jesuits, the earliest rising shortly after the death of Father Ricci and being formulated by the Japanese Jesuits. In the ensuing discussion carried on in various writings for and against, which did not circulate beyond the circle of the missionaries only one of those working in China declared himself against the use of the name Shang-ti. This was Father Nicholas Longobardi, Ricci's successor as superior general of the mission, who, however, did not depart in anything from the lines laid down by its founder. After allowing the question to be discussed for some years, the superior ordered the missionaries to abide simply by the custom of Father Ricci; later this custom together with the rites was submitted to the judgment of the Holy See. In 1704 and 1715 Clement XI, without pronouncing as to the meaning of T'ien and Shang-ti in the ancient Chinese books, forbade, as being open to misconstruction, the use of these names to indicate the true God, and permitted only the T'ien-chu. Regarding the rites and ceremonies in honour of ancestors and Confucius, Father Ricci was also of the opinion that a broad toleration was permissible without injury to the purity of the Christian religion. Moreover, the question was of the utmost importance for the progress of the apostolate. To honour their ancestors and deceased parents by traditional prostrations and sacrifices was in the eyes of the Chinese the gravest duty of filial piety, and one who neglected it was treated by all his relatives as an unworthy member of his family and nation. Similar ceremonies in honour of Confucius were an indispensable obligation for scholars, so that they could not receive any literary degree nor claim any public office without having fulfilled it. This law still remains inviolable; Kiang-hi, the emperor who showed most goodwill towards the Christians, always refused to set it aside in their favour. In modern times the Chinese Government showed no more favour to the ministers of France, who, in the name of the treaties guaranteeing the liberty of Catholicism in China, claimed for the Christians who had passed the examinations, the titles and advantages of the corresponding degrees without the necessity of going through the ceremonies; the Court of Peking invariably replied that this was a question of national tradition on which it was impossible to compromise. After having carefully studied what the Chinese classical books said regarding these rites, and after having observed for a long time the practice of them and questioned numerous scholars of every rank with whom he was associated during this eighteen years of apostolate, Ricci was convinced that these rites had no religious significance, either in their institution or in their practice by the enlightened classes. The Chinese, he said, recognized no divinity in Confucius any more than in their deceased ancestors; they prayed to neither; the made no requests nor expected any extraordinary intervention from them. In fact they only did for them what they did for the living to whom they wished to show great respect. "The honour they pay to their parents consists in serving them dead as they did living. They do not for this reason think that the dead come to eat their offerings [the flesh, fruit, etc.] or need them. They declare that they act in this manner because they know no other way of showing their love and gratitude to their ancestors. . . . Likewise what they do [especially the educated], they do to thank Confucius for the excellent doctrine which he left them in his books, and through which they obtained their degrees and mandarinships. Thus in all this there is nothing suggestive of idolatry, and perhaps it may even be said that there is no superstition." The "perhaps" added to the last part of this conclusion shows the conscientiousness with which the founder acted in this matter. That the vulgar and indeed even most of the Chinese pagans mingled superstition with their national rites Ricci never denied; neither did he overlook the fact that the Chinese, like infidels in general, mixed superstition with their most legitimate actions. In such cases superstition is only an accident which does not corrupt the substance of the just action itself, and Ricci thought this applied also to the rites. Consequently he allowed the new Christians to continue the practice of them avoiding everything suggestive of superstition, and he gave them rules to assist them to discriminate. He believed, however, that this tolerance, though licit, should be limited by the necessity of the case; whenever the Chinese Christian community should enjoy sufficient liberty, its customs, notably its manner of honouring the dead, must be brought into conformity with the customs of the rest of the Christian world. These principles of Father Ricci, controlled by his fellow-workers during his lifetime, and after his death, served for fifty years as the guide of all the missionaries. In 1631 the first mission of the Dominicans was founded at Fu-kien by two Spanish religious; in 1633 two Franciscans, also Spanish, came to establish a mission of their order. The new missionaries were soon alarmed by the attacks on the purity of religion which they thought they discerned in the communities founded by their predecessors. Without taking sufficient time perhaps to become acquainted with Chinese matters and to learn exactly what was done in the Jesuit missions they sent a denunciation to the bishops of the Philippines. The bishops referred it to Pope Urban VIII (1635), and soon the public was informed. As early as 1638 a controversy began in the Philippines between the Jesuits in defence of their brethren on the one side and the Dominicans and Franciscans on the other. In 1643 one of the chief accusers, the Dominican, Jean-Baptiste Moralez, went to Rome to submit to the Holy See a series of "questions" or "doubts" which he said were controverted between the Jesuit missionaries and their rivals. Ten of these questions concerned the participation of Christians in the rites in honour of Confucius and the dead. Moralez's petition tended to show that the cases on which he requested the decision of the Holy See represented the practice authorized by the Society of Jesus; as soon as the Jesuits learned of this they declared that these cases were imaginary and that they had never allowed the Christians to take part in the rites as set forth by Moralez. In declaring the ceremonies illicit in its Decree of 12 Sept., 1645 (approved by Innocent X), the congregation of the Propaganda gave the only possible reply to the questions referred to it. In 1651 Father Martin Martini (author of the "Novus Atlas Sienensis") was sent from China to Rome by his brethren to give a true account of the Jesuits practices and permissions with regard to the Chinese rites. This delegate reached the Eternal City in 1654, and in 1655 submitted four questions to the Sacred Congregation of the Holy Office. This supreme tribunal, in its Decree of 23 March, 1656, approved by Pope Alexander VII, sanctioned the practice of Ricci and his associates as set forth by Father Martini, declaring that the ceremonies in honour of Confucius and ancestors appeared to constitute "a purely civil and political cult". Did this decree annul that of 1645? Concerning this question, laid before the Holy Office by the Dominican, Father John de Polanco, the reply was (20 Nov., 1669) that both decrees should remain "in their full force" and should be observed "according to the questions, circumstances, and everything contained in the proposed doubts". Meanwhile an understanding was reached by the hitherto divided missionaries. This reconciliation was hastened by the persecution of 1665 which assembled for nearly five years in the same house at Canton nineteen Jesuits, three Dominicans, and one Franciscan (then the sole member of his order in China). Profiting by their enforced leisure to agree on a uniform Apostolic method, the missionaries discussed all the points on which the discipline of the Church should be adapted to the exigencies of the Chinese situation. After forty days of conferences, which terminated on 26 Jan., 1668, all (with the possible exception of the Franciscan Antonio de Santa Maria, who was very zealous but extremely uncompromising) subscribed to forty-two articles, the result of the deliberations, of which the forty-first was as follows: "As to the ceremonies by which the Chinese honour their master Confucius and the dead, the replies of the Sacred Congregation of the Inquisition approved by our Holy Father Alexander VII, in 1656, must be followed absolutely because they are based on a very probable opinion, to which it is impossible to offset any evidence to the contrary, and, this probability assumed, the door of salvation must not be closed to the innumerable Chinese who would stray from the Christian religion if they were forbidden to what they may do licitly and in good faith and which they cannot forego without serious injury." After the subscription, however, a new courteous discussion of this article in writing took place between Father Domingo Fernandez Navarrete, superior of the Dominicans, and the most learned of the Jesuits at Canton. Navarrette finally appeared satisfied and on 29 Sept., 1669, submitted his written acceptance of the article to the superior of the Jesuits. However, on 19 Dec. of this year he secretly left Canton for Macao whence he went to Europe. There, and especially at Rome where he was in 1673, he sought from now on only to overthrow what had been attempted in the conferences of Canton. He published the "Tratados historicos, politicos, ethicos, y religiosos de la monarchia de China" (I, Madrid, 1673; of vol. II, printed in 1679 and incomplete, only two copies are known). This work is filled with impassioned accusations against the Jesuit missionaries regarding their methods of apostolate and especially their toleration of the rites. Nevertheless, Naverrette did not succeed in inducing the Holy See to resume the question, this being reserved for Charles Maigrot, a member of the new Société des Missions Étrangères. Maigrot went to China in 1683. He was Vicar Apostolic of Fu-kien, before being as yet a bishop, when, on 26 March, 1693, he addressed to the missionaries of his vicariate a mandate proscribing the names T'ien and Shang-ti; forbidding that Christians be allowed to participate in or assist at "sacrifices or solemn oblations" in honour of Confucius or the dead; prescribing modifications of the inscriptions on the ancestral tablets; censuring and forbidding certain, according to him, too favourable references to the ancient Chinese philosophers; and, last but not least, declaring that the exposition made by Father Martini was not true and that consequently the approval which the latter had received from Rome was not to be relied on. By order of Innocent XII, the Holy Office resumed in 1697 the study of the question on the documents furnished by the procurators of Mgr Maigrot and on those showing the opposite side brought by the representatives of the Jesuit missionaries. It is worthy of note that at this period a number of the missionaries outside the Society of Jesus, especially all the Augustinians, nearly all the Franciscans, and some Dominicans, were converted to the practice of Ricci and the Jesuit missionaries. The difficulty of grasping the truth amid such different representations of facts and contradictory interpretations of texts prevented the Congregation from reaching a decision until towards the end of 1704 under the pontificate of Clement XI. Long before then the pope had chosen and sent to the Far East a legate to secure the execution of the Apostolic decrees and to regulate all other questions on the welfare of the missions. The prelate chosen was Charles-Thomas-Maillard de Tournon (b. at Turin) whom Clement XI had consecrated with his own hands on 27 Dec., 1701, and on whom he conferred the title of Patriarch of Antioch. Leaving Europe on 9 Feb., 1703, Mgr de Tournon stayed for a time in India (see MALABAR RITES) reaching Macao on 2 April, 1705, and Peking on 4 December of the same year. Emperor K'ang-hi accorded him a warm welcome and treated him with much honour until he learned, perhaps through the imprudence of the legate himself, that one of the objects of his embassy, if not the chief, was to abolish the rites amongst the Christians. Mgr de Tournon was already aware that the decision against the rites had been given since 20 Nov., 1704, but not yet published in Europe, as the pope wished that it should be published first in China. Forced to leave Peking, the legate had returned to Nan-king when he learned that the emperor had ordered all missionaries, under penalty of expulsion, to come to him for a piao or diploma granting permission to preach the Gospel. This diploma was to be granted only to those who promised not to oppose the national rites. On the receipt of this news the legate felt that he could no longer postpone the announcement of the Roman decisions. By a mandate of 15 January, 1707, he required all missionaries under pain of excommunication to reply to Chinese authority, if it questioned them, that "several things" in Chinese doctrine and customs did not agree with Divine law and that these were chiefly "the sacrifices to Confucius and ancestors" and "the use of ancestral tablets", moreover that Shang-ti and "T'ien" were not "the true God of the Christians". When the emperor learned of this Decree he ordered Mgr de Tournon to be brought to Macao and forbade him to leave there before the return of the envoys whom he himself sent to the pope to explain his objections to the interdiction of the rites. While still subject to this restraint, the legate died in 1710. Meanwhile Mgr Maigrot and several other missionaries having refused to ask for the piao had been expelled from China. But the majority (i.e. all the Jesuits, most of the Franciscans, and other missionary religious, having at their head the Bishop of Peking, a Franciscan, and the Bishop of Ascalon, Vicar Apostolic of Kiang-si, an Augustinian) considered that, to prevent the total ruin of the mission, they might postpone obedience to the legate until the pope should have signified his will. Clement XI replied by publishing (March, 1709) the answers of the Holy Office, which he had already approved on 20 November, 1704, and then by causing the same Congregation to issue (25 Sept., 1710) a new Decree which approved the acts of the legate and ordered the observance of the mandate of Nan-king, but interpreted in the sense of the Roman replies of 1704, omitting all the questions and most of the preambles, and concluded with a form of oath which the pope enjoined on all the missionaries and which obliged them under the severest penalties to observe and have observed fully and without reserve the decisions inserted in the pontifical act. This Constitution, which reached China in 1716, found no rebels among the missionaries, but even those who sought most zealously failed to induce the majority of their flock to observe its provisions. At the same time the hate of the pagans was reawakened, enkindled by the old charge that Christianity was the enemy of the national rites, and the neophytes began to be the objects of persecutions to which K'ang-hi, hitherto so well-disposed, now gave almost entire liberty. Clement XI sought to remedy this critical situation by sending to China a second legate, John-Ambrose Mezzabarba, whom he named Patriarch of Alexandria. This prelate sailed from Lisbon on 25 March, 1720, reaching Macao on 26 September, and Canton on 12 October. Admitted, not without difficulty, to Peking and to an audience with the emperor, the legate could only prevent his immediate dismissal and the expulsion of all the missionaries by making known some alleviations of the Constitution "Ex illâ die", which he was authorized to offer, and allowing K'ang-hi to hope that the pope would grant still others. Then he hastened to return to Macao, whence he addressed (4 November, 1721) a pastoral letter to the missionaries of China, communicating to them the authentic text of his eight "permissions" relating to the rites. He declared that he would permit nothing forbidden by the Constitution; in practice, however, his concessions relaxed the rigour of the pontifical interdictions, although they did not produce harmony or unity of action among the apostolic workers. To bring about this highly desirable result the pope ordered a new investigation, the chief object of which was the legitimacy and opportuneness of Mezzabarba's "permissions"; begun by the Holy Office under Clement XII a conclusion was reached only under Benedict XIV. On 11 July, 1742, this pope, by the Bull "Ex quo singulari", confirmed and reimposed in a most emphatic manner the Constitution "Ex illâ die", and condemned and annulled the "permissions" of Mezzabarba as authorizing the superstitions which that Constitution sought to destroy. This action terminated the controversy among Catholics. The Holy See did not touch on the purely theoretical questions, as for instance what the Chinese rites were and signified according to their institution and in ancient times. In this Father Ricci may have been right; but he was mistaken in thinking that as practised in modern times they are not superstitious or can be made free from all superstition. The popes declared, after scrupulous investigations, that the ceremonies in honour of Confucius or ancestors and deceased relatives are tainted with superstition to such a degree that they cannot be purified. But the error of Ricci, as of his fellow-workers and successors, was but an error in judgment. The Holy See expressly forbade it to be said that they approved of idolatry; it would indeed be an odious calumny to accuse such a man as Ricci, and so many other holy and zealous missionaries, of having approved and permitted their neophytes practices which they knew to be superstitions and contrary to the purity of religion. Despite this error, Matto Ricci remains a splendid type of missionary and founder, unsurpassed for his zealous intrepidity, the intelligence of the methods applied to each situation, and the unwearying tenacity with which he pursued the projects he undertook. To him belongs the glory not only of opening up a vast empire to the Gospel, but of simultaneously making the first breach in that distrust of strangers which excluded China from the general progress of the world. The establishment of the Catholic mission in the heart of this country also had its economic consequences: it laid the foundation of a better understanding between the Far East and the West, which grew with the progress of the mission. It is superfluous to detail the results from the standpoint of the material interests of the whole world. Lastly, science owes to Father Ricci the first exact scientific knowledge received in Europe concerning China, its true geographical situation, its ancient civilization, its vast and curious literature, its social organization so different from what existed elsewhere. The method instituted by Ricci necessitated a fundamental study of this new world, and if the missionaries who have since followed him have rendered scarcely less service to science than to religion, a great part of the credit is due to Ricci. [MATTEO RICCI], "Dell' entrata della Campagnia di Giesu e christianita nella Cina" (MS. Of Father Ricci, extant in the archives of the Society of Jesus; cited in the foregoing article as the "Memmoirs of Father Ricci", a somewhat free tr. Of his work is given in TRIGAULT, "De christiana expeditione apud Sinas suscepta ab Societate Jesu". "Ex P. Matthaei Ricci commentariis libri", V (Augsbrg, 1615); DE URSIS, "P. Matheus Ricci, S.J. Relacao escripta pelo seu companhiero" (Rome, 1910); BARTOLI, "Dell' Historia della Compagnia di Gesu. La Cina", I-II (Rome, 1663). Bartoli is the most accurate biographer of Ricci; d'ORLEANS, "La vie du Pere Matthieu Ricci" (Paris, 1693); NATALI, "Il secondo Confucio" (Rome, 1900); VENTURI, "L'apostolato del P. M. Ricci d. C. d. G. in Cina secondo I suoi scritti inediti" (Rome, 1910); BRUCKER, "Le Pere Matthieu Ricci" in "Etudes", CXXIV (Paris, 1910), 5-27; 185-208; 751-79; DE BACKER-SOMMERVOGEL, "Bibl. Des ecrivains de la C. de J", VI, 1792-95). Chinese Rites.-BRUCKER in VACANT, "Dict. De Theol. cath., s.v. "Chinois (Rites"" and works indicated; CORDIER, "Bibl. Sinica", II, 2nd. Ed., 869-925; IDEM, "Hist. Des relations de la Chine avec les puissances occidentales", III (Paris, 1902) xxv. JOSEPH BRUCKER Giovanni Battista Riccioli Giovanni Battista Riccioli Italian astronomer, b. at Ferrara 17 April, 1598; d. at Bologna 25 June, 1671. He entered the Society of Jesus 6 Oct., 1614. After teaching philosophy and theology for a number of years, chiefly at Parma and Bologna, he devoted himself, at the request of his superiors, entirely to the study of astronomy, which at that time, owing to the discoveries of Kepler and the new theories of Copernicus, was a subject of much discussion. Realizing the many defects of the traditional astronomy inherited from the ancients, he conceived the bold idea of undertaking a reconstruction of the science with a view to bringing it into harmony with contemporary progress. This led to his "Almagestum novum, astronomiam veterem novamque complectens" (2 vols., Bologna, 1651), considered by many the most important literary work of the Jesuits during the seventeenth century. The author in common with many scholars of the time, notably in Italy, rejected the Copernican theory, and in this work, admittedly of great erudition, gives an elaborate refutation in justification of the Roman Decrees of 1616 and 1633. He praises, however, the genius of Copernicus and readily admits the value of his system as a simple hypothesis. His sincerity in this connexion has been called into question by some, e.g. Wolf, but a study of the work shows beyond doubt that he wrote from conviction and with the desire of making known the truth. Riccioli's project also included a comparison of the unit of length of various nations and a more exact determination of the dimensions of the earth. His topographical measurements occupied him at intervals between 1644 and 1656, but defects of method have rendered his results of but little value. His most important contribution to astronomy was perhaps his detailed telescopic study of the moon, made in collaboration with P. Grimaldi. The latter's excellent lunar map was inserted in the "Almagestum novum", and the lunar nomenclature they adopted is still in use. He also made observations on Saturn's rings, though it was reserved for Huyghens to determine the true ring-structure. He was an ardent defender of the new Gregorian calendar. Though of delicate health, Riccioli was an indefatigable worker and, in spite of his opposition to the Copernican theory, rendered valuable services to astronomy and also to geography and chronology. His chief works are: "Geographiæ et hydrographiæ reformatæ libri XII" (Bologna, 1661); "Astronomia reformata" (2 vols., Bologna, 1665); "Chronologia reformata" (1669); "Tabula latitudinum et longitudinum" (Vienna, 1689). SOMMERVOGEL, Bibl. de la C. de J., VI (Paris, 1895), 1795; DELAMBRE, Hist. de l'Astronomie Moderne, II (Paris, 1821), 274; WOLF, Gesch. d. Astronomie (Munich, 1877), 434; WALSH, Catholic Churchmen in Science (2nd series, Philadelphia, 1909); LINSMEIER, Natur. u. Offenbarung, XLVII, 65 sqq. H. M. BROCK Edmund Ignatius Rice Edmund Ignatius Rice Founder of the Institute of the Brothers of the Christian Schools (better known as "Irish Christian Brothers"), b. at Callan, Co. Kilkenny, 1762; d. at Waterford, 1844. He was educated in a Catholic school which, despite the provision of the iniquitous penal laws, the authorities suffered to exist in the City of Kilkenny. In 1779 he entered the business house of his uncle, a large export and import trader in the City of Waterford, and, after the latter's death, became sole proprietor. As a citizen he was distinguished for his probity, charity, and piety; he was an active member of a society established in the city for the relief of the poor. About 1794 he meditated entering a continental convent, but his brother, an Augustinian who had but just returned from Rome, discountenanced the idea. Rice, thereupon, devoted himself to the extension of his business. Some years later, however, he again desired to become a religious. As he was discussing the matter with a friend of his, a sister of Bishop Power of Waterford, a band of ragged boys passed by. Pointing to them Miss Power exclaimed: "What! would you bury yourself in a cell on the continent rather than devote your wealth and your life to the spiritual and material interest of these poor youths?" The words were an inspiration. Rice related the incident to Dr. Lanigan, bishop of his native Diocese of Ossory, and to others, all of whom advised him to undertake the mission to which God was evidently calling him. Rice settled his worldly affairs, his last year's business (1800) being the most lucrative one he had known, and commenced the work of the Christian schools. Assisted by two young men, whom he paid for their services, he opened his fist school in Waterford in 1802. In June of this year Bishop Hussey of Waterford laid the foundation stone of a schoolhouse on a site which he named Mount Sion. The building was soon ready for occupation, but Rice's assistants had fled and could not be induced to return even when offered higher salaries. In this extremity two young men from Callan offered themselves as fellow-labourers. Other workers soon gathered round him, and by 1806 Christian schools were established in Waterford, Carrick-on-Suir, and Dungarvan. The communities adopted a modified form of the Rule of the Presentation order of nuns, and, in 1808, pronounced their vows before Bishop Power. Houses were established in Cork, Dublin, Limerick, and elsewhere. Though the brothers, as a rule, made their novitiate in Mount Sion and regarded Rice as their father and model, he was not their superior; they were subject to the bishops of their respective dioceses. In 1817, on the advice of Bishop Murray, coadjutor to the Archbishop of Dublin, and of Father Kenny, S.J., a special friend, Rice applied to the Holy See for approbation and a constitution for his society. In 1820 Pius VII formally confirmed the new congregation of "Fratres Monachi" by the Brief "Ad pastoralis dignitatis fastigium". This was the first confirmation by the Church of a congregation of religious men in Ireland. Brother Rice was unanimously elected superior general by the members. All the houses were united except the house in Cork, where Bishop Murphy refused his consent. Later, however, in 1826, the Brothers in Cork attained the object of their desire, but one of their number, preferring the old condition of things, offered his services to the bishop, who placed him in charge of a school on the south side of the city. This secession of Br. Austin Reardon was the origin of the teaching congregation of the Presentation Brothers. The confirmation of the new Institute attracted considerable attention, even outside of Ireland, and many presented themselves for the novitiate. The founder removed the seat of government to Dublin. At this time the agitation for Catholic Emancipation was at its height and the people were roused to indignation by the reports of the proselytizing practices carried on in the Government schools. Brother Rice conceived the idea of establishing a "Catholic Model School". The "Liberator" entered warmly into his scheme, and procured a grant of £1500 from the Catholic Association in aid of the proposed building. On St. Columba's day, 1828, Daniel O'Connell laid the foundation stone, in North Richmond Street, Dublin, of the famous school, since known as the "O'Connell Schools". In his speech on the occasion he referred to Brother Rice as "My old friend, Mr. Rice, the Patriarch of the Monks of the west". The founder resigned his office in 1838 and spent his remaining years in Mount Sion. Before his death he saw eleven communities of his institute in Ireland, eleven in England, and one in Sydney, Australia, while applications for foundations had been received from the Archbishop of Baltimore and from bishops in Canada, Newfoundland, and other places. PATRICK J. HENNESSY Richard (Franciscan Preacher) Richard A Friar minor and preacher, appearing in history between 1428 and 1431, whose origin and nationality are unknown. He is sometimes called the disciple of St. Bernardine of Sienna and of St. Vincent Ferrer, but probably only because, like the former, he promoted the veneration of the Holy Name of Jesus and, like the latter, announced the end of the world as near. In 1428 Richard came from the Holy Land to France, preached at Troyes, next year in Paris during ten days (16-26 April) every morning from about five o'clock to ten or eleven. He had such a sway over his numerous auditors that after his sermons the men burned their dice, and the women their vanities. Having been threatened by the Faculty of Theology on account of his doctrine — perhaps, also, because he was believed to favour Charles VII, King of France, whilst Paris was then in the hands of the English — he left Paris suddenly and betook himself to Orléans and Troyes. In the latter town he first met Bl. Joan of Arc. Having contributed much to the submission of Troyes to Charles VII, Richard now followed the French army and became confessor and chaplain to Bl. Joan. Some differences, however, arose between the two on account of Catherine de la Rochelle, who was protected by the friar, but scorned by Joan. Richard's name figures also in the proceedings against Bl. Joan of Arc in 1431; in the same year he preached the Lent in Orléans and shortly after was interdicted from preaching by the inquisitor of Poitiers. No trace of him is found after this. DE KERVAL, Jeanne d'Arc et les Franciscains (Vanves, 1893); DEBOUT, Jeanne d'Arc (Paris, 1905-07), I, 694-97 and passim; WALLON, Jeanne d'Arc (Paris, 1883), 125, 200, 261. LIVARIUS OLIGER Richard I, King of England Richard I, King Of England Richard I, born at Oxford, 6 Sept, 1157; died at Chaluz, France, 6 April, 1199; was known to the minstrels of a later age, rather than to his contemporaries, as "Coeur-de-Lion". He was only the second son of Henry II, but it was part of his father's policy, holding, as he did, continental dominions of great extent and little mutual cohesion, to assign them to his children during his own lifetime and even to have his sons brought up among the people they were destined to govern. To Richard were allotted the territories in the South of France belonging to his mother Eleanor of Aquitaine, and before he was sixteen he was inducted as Duke of that province. It was a weak point in the old King's management of his sons, that, while dazzling them with brilliant prospects, he invested them with very little of the substance of power. In 1173 the young Henry, who, following a German usage, had already been crowned king in the lifetime of his father, broke out into open revolt, being instigated thereto by his father-in-law, Louis VII, King of France. Under the influence of their mother Eleanor, who bitterly resented her husband's infidelities, Geoffrey and Richard in 1173 also threw in their lot with the rebel and took up arms against their father. Allies gathered round them and the situation grew so threatening, that Henry II thought it well to propitiate heaven by doing penance at the tomb of the martyred Archbishop St. Thomas (11 July, 1174). By a remarkable coincidence, on the very next day, a victory in Northumberland over William, King of Scotland, disposed of Henry's most formidable opponent. Returning with a large force to France, the King swept all before him, and though Richard for a while held out alone he was compelled by 21 Sept. to sue for forgiveness at his father's feet. The King dealt leniently with his rebellious children, but this first outbreak was only the harbinger of an almost uninterrupted series of disloyal intrigues, fomented by Louis VII and by his son and successor, Philip Augustus, in which Richard, who lived almost entirely in Guienne and Poitou, was engaged down to the time of his father's death. He acquired for himself a great and deserved reputation for knightly prowess, and he was often concerned in chivalrous exploits, showing much energy in particular in protecting the pilgrims who passed through his own and adjacent territories on their way to the shrine of St. James of Compostella. His elder brother Henry grew jealous of him and insisted that Richard should do him homage. On the latter's resistance war broke out between the brothers. Bertrand de Born, Count of Hautefort, who was Richard's rival in minstrelsy as well as in feats of arms, lent such powerful support to the younger Henry, that the old King had to intervene on Richard's side. The death of the younger Henry, 11 June, 1183, once more restored peace and made Richard heir to the throne. But other quarrels followed between Richard and his father, and it was in the heat of the most desperate of these, in which the astuteness of Philip Augustus had contrived to implicate Henry's favourite son John, that the old King died broken-hearted, 6 July, 1189. Despite the constant hostilities of the last few years, Richard secured the succession without difficulty. He came quickly to England and was crowned at Westminster on 3 Sept. But his object in visiting his native land was less to provide for the government of the kingdom than to collect resources for the projected Crusade which now appealed to the strongest, if not the best, instincts of his adventurous nature, and by the success of which he hoped to startle the world. Already, towards the end of 1187, when the news had reached him of Saladin's conquest of Jerusalem, Richard had taken the cross. Philip Augustus and Henry II had subsequently followed his example, but the quarrels which had supervened had so far prevented the realization of this pious design. Now that he was more free the young King seems to have been conscientiously in earnest in putting the recovery of the Holy Land before everything else. Though the expedients by which he set to work to gather every penny of ready money upon which he could lay hands were alike unscrupulous and impolitic, there is something which commands respect in the energy which he threw into the task. He sold sheriffdoms, justiceships, church lands, and appointments of all kinds, both lay and secular, practically to the highest bidder. He was not ungenerous in providing for his brothers John and Geoffrey, and he showed a certain prudence in exacting a promise from them to remain out of England for three years, in order to leave a free hand to the new Chancellor William of Longehamp, who was to govern England in his absence. Unfortunately he took with him many of the men, e. g. Archbishop Baldwin, Hubert Walter, and Ranulf Glanvill, whose statesmanship and experience would have been most useful in governing England and left behind many restless spirits like John himself and Longehamp, whose energy might have been serviceable against the infidel. Already on 11 Dec., 1189, Richard was ready to cross to Calais. He met Philip Augustus, who was also to start on the Crusade, and the two Kings swore to defend each other's dominions as they would their own. The story of the Third Crusade has already been told in some detail (see CRUSADES). It was September, 1190, before Richard reached Marseilles; he pushed on to Messina and waited for the spring. There miserable quarrels occurred with Philip, whose sister he now refused to marry, and this trouble was complicated by an interference in the affairs of Sicily, which the Emperor Henry VI watched with a jealous eye, and which later on was to cost Richard dear. Setting sail in March, he was driven to Cyprus, where he quarrelled with Isaac Comnenus, seized the island, and married Berengaria of Navarre. He at last reached Acre in June and after prodigies of valour captured it. Philip then returned to France but Richard made two desperate efforts to reach Jerusalem, the first of which might have succeeded had he known the panic and weakness of the foe. Saladin was a worthy opponent, but terrible acts of cruelty as well as of chivalry took place, notably when Richard slew his Saracen prisoners in a fit of passion. In July, 1192, further effort seemed hopeless, and the King of England's presence was badly needed at home to secure his own dominions from the treacherous intrigues of John. Hastening back Richard was wrecked in the Adriatic, and falling eventually into the hands of Leopold of Austria, he was sold to the Emperor Henry VI, who kept him prisoner for over a year and extorted a portentous ransom which England was racked to pay. Recent investigation has shown that the motives of Henry's conduct were less vindictive than political. Richard was induced to surrender England to the Emperor (as John a few years later was to make over England to the Holy See), and then Henry conferred the kingdom upon his captive as a fief at the Diet of Mainz, in Feb., 1194 (see Bloch, "Forschungen", Appendix IV). Despite the intrigues of King Philip and John, Richard had loyal friends in England. Hubert Walter had now reached home and worked energetically with the Justices to raise the ransom, while Eleanor the Queen Mother obtained from the Holy See an excommunication against his captors. England responded nobly to the appeal for money and Richard reached home in March, 1194. He showed little gratitude to his native land, and after spending less than two months there quitted it for his foreign dominions never to return. Still, in Hubert Walter, who was now both Archbishop of Canterbury and Justiciar, he left it a capable governor. Hubert tried to wring unconstitutional supplies and service from the impoverished barons and clergy, but failed in at least one such demand before the resolute opposition of St. Hugh of Lincoln. Richard's diplomatic struggles and his campaigns against the wily King of France were very costly but fairly successful. He would probably have triumphed in the end, but a bolt from a cross-bow while he was besieging the castle of Chaluz inflicted a mortal injury. He died, after receiving the last sacraments with signs of sincere repentance. In spite of his greed, his lack of principle, and, on occasions, his ferocious savagery, Richard had many good instincts. He thoroughly respected a man of fearless integrity like St. Hugh of Lincoln, and Bishop Stubbs says of him with justice that he was perhaps the most sincerely religious prince of his family. "He heard Mass daily, and on three occasions did penance in a very remarkable way, simply on the impulse of his own distressed conscience. He never showed the brutal profanity of John." Lingard and all other standard Histories of England deal fully with the reign and personal character of Richard. DAVIS, A History of England in Six Volumes, II (2nd ed., London, 1909), and ADAMS, The Political History of England. II (London, 1905), may be specially recommended. The Prefaces contributed by Bishop Stubbs to his editions of various Chronicles in the R. S. are also very valuable, notably those to Roger of Hoveden (London, 1868-71); Ralph de Diceto (1875); and Benedict of Peterborough (1867). Besides these should be mentioned in the same series the two extremely important volumes of Chronicles and Memorials of the Reign of Richard I (London, 1864-65), also edited by Stubbs; the Magna Vita S. Hugonis, edited by Dimock, 1864; and Randulphi de Coggeshall Chronicon Anglicanum, ed. Stevenson, 1875. See also NORGATE, England under the Angevin Kings (London, 1889); LUCRAIRE AND LAVISSE, Histoire de France (Paris, 1902); KNELLER, Des Richard Löwenherz deutsche Gefangenshaft (Freiburg, 1893); BLOCH, Forschungen zur Politik Kaisers Heinrich VI in den Jahren 1191-1194 (Berlin, 1892); KINDT, Gründe der Gefangenschaft Richard I von England (Halle, 1892); and especially RÖHRICHT, Gesch. d. Konigreich Jerusalem (Innsbruck, 1890). HERBERT THURSTON. Charles-Louis Richard Charles-Louis Richard Theologian and publicist; b. at Blainville-sur-l'Eau, in Lorraine, April, 1711; d. at Mons, Belgium, 16 Aug., 1794. His family, though of noble descent, was poor, and he received his education in the schools of his native town. At the age of sixteen he entered the Order of St. Dominic and, after his religious profession, was sent to study theology in Paris, where he received the Doctorate at the Sorbonne. He next applied himself to preaching and the defense of religion against d'Alembert, Voltaire, and their confederates. The outbreak of the Revolution forced him to seek refuge at Mons, in Belgium. During the second invasion of that country by the French, in 1794, old age prevented him from fleeing, and, though he eluded his pursuers for some time, he was at last detected, tried by court martial, and shot, as the author of "Parallèle des Juifs qui ont crucifié Jésus-Christ, avec les Français qui ont exécuté leur roi" (Mons, 1794). Among his works may be mentioned "Bibliothèque sacrée, ou dictionnaire universelle des sciences ecclésiastiques" (5 vols., Paris, 1760) and "Supplément" (Paris, 1765), the last and enlarged edition being that of Paris, 1821-27, 29 vols., and "Analyses des conciles généraux et particuliers" (5 vols., Paris, 1772-77). MOULAERT, Ch. L. Richard aus dem Predigerorden (Ratisbon, 1870); Nomenclator, III (3rd ed.), 433-35. H.J. SCHROEDER Richard de Bury Richard de Bury Bishop and bibliophile, b. near Bury St. Edmund's, Suffolk, England, 24 Jan., 1286; d. at Auckland, Durham, England, 24 April, 1345. He was the son of Sir Richard Aungerville, but was named after his birthplace. He studied at Oxford and became a Benedictine. Having been appointed tutor to Prince Edward, son of Edward II and Isabella of France, he was exposed to some danger during the stormy scenes that led to the deposition of the king. On the accession of his pupil to the throne (1327), de Bury eventually rose to be Bishop of Durham (1333), High Chancellor (1334), and Treasurer of England (1336). He was sent on two embassies to John XXII of Avignon, and on one of his visits, probably in 1330, he made the acquaintance of the poet Petrarch. He continued to enjoy the favor of the king, and in his later years took a prominent part in the diplomatic negotiations with Scotland and France. He died at his manor of Auckland, and was buried in the cathedral of Durham. He founded Durham College at Oxford, and according to tradition bequeathed to its library most of the books which he had spent his life in collecting. There they remained until the dissolution of the College by Henry VIII. They were then scattered, some going to Balliol College, others to the university (Duke Humphrey's) library, and still others passing into the possession of Dr. George Owen, the purchaser of the site whereon the dissolved college had stood. These books were of course all in manuscript, for the art of printing had not yet been discovered. Bale mentions three of de Bury's works, namely: "Philobiblon"; "Epistolae Familiarium"; and "Orationes ad Principes". It is by the "Philobiblon" that he is principally remembered. It was first printed at Cologne in 1473, then at Spires in 1483, in Paris in 1500, and at Oxford in 1598-99. Subsequent editions were made in Germany in 1610, 1614, 1674, and 1703, and in Paris in 1856. It was translated into English in 1832 by J. B. Inglis, and of this translation a reprint was made at Albany, New York, in 1861. The standard Latin text—the result of a collation of 28 manuscripts and of the printed editions—was established by Ernest C. Thomas and edited by him, with English translation, in 1888. A reprint of Thomas's translation appeared in the "Past and Present" Library in 1905. Bishop Richard had a threefold object in writing the "Philobiblon": he wished to inculcate on the clergy the pursuit of learning and the cherishing of books as its receptacles; to vindicate to his contemporaries and to posterity his own action in devoting so much time, attention, and money to the acquisition of books; and to give directions for the management of the library which he proposed to establish at Durham College, Oxford. The work is important for its side-lights on the state of learning and manners and on the habits of the clergy in fourteenth-century England. He is the true type of the book-lover. He had a library in each of his residences. Conspicuous in his legacy are Greek and Hebrew grammars. He did not despise the novelties of the moderns, but he preferred the well-tested labors of the ancients, and, while he did not neglect the poets, he had but little use for law-books. He kept copyists, scribes, binders, correctors, and illuminators, and he was particularly careful to restore defaced or battered texts. His directions for the lending and care of the books intended for his college at Oxford are minute, and evince considerable practical forethought. His humility and simple faith are shown in the concluding chapter, in which he acknowledges his sins and asks the future students of his college to pray for the repose of his soul. BALE, Scriptorum Illustrium majoris Britanniae, quam nunc Angliam et Scotiam vocant, Catalogus (Basle, 1557); WARTON, History of English Poetry, I, 146; HALLAM, Introduction to the Literature of Europe in the Fifteenth, Sixteenth, and Serenteenth Centuries; THOMAS, The Philobiblon newly translated, published under the title of The Love of Books in the Past and Present Library (1905); SURTEES SOCIETY, edition of Scriptores Tres; WHARTON, Anglia Sacra; Cambridge Modern History, I, xvii; The Cambridge History of English Literature, II, 410; BLADES, The Enemies of Books; CLARK, The Care of Books. P.J. LENNOX Francois-Marie-Benjamin Richard de la Vergne François-Marie-Benjamin Richard de la Vergne Archbishop of Paris, born at Nantes, 1 March, 1819; died in Paris, 28 January, 1908. Educated at the Seminary of Saint-Sulpice he became in 1849 secretary to Bishop Jacquemet at Nantes, then, from 1850 to 1869, vicar-general. In 1871 he became Bishop of Belley where he began the process for the beatification of the Curé d'Ars. On 7 May, 1875, he became coadjutor of Cardinal Guibert, Archbishop of Paris, whom he succeeded 8 July, 1886, becoming cardinal with the title of Santa Maria in Via, 24 May, 1889. He devoted much energy to the completion of the Basilica of the Sacred Heart at Montmartre, which he consecrated. Politically, Cardinal Richard was attached by ties of esteem and sympathy to the Monarchist Catholics. In 1892, when Leo XIII recommended the rallying of Catholics to the Republic (see FRANCE, The Third Republic and the Church in France), the cardinal created the "Union of Christian France" (Union de la France Chrétienne), to unite all Catholics on the sole basis of the defence of religion. The Monarchists opposed this "rallying" (Ralliement) with the policy which this union represented, and at last, at the pope's desire, the union was dissolved. On many occasions Cardinal Richard spoke in defence of the religious congregations, and Leo XIII addressed to him a letter (27 December, 1900) on the religious who were menaced by the then projected Law of Associations. In the domain of hagiography he earned distinction by his "Vie de la bienheureuse Françoise d'Amboise" (1865) and "Saints de l'église de Bretagne" (1872). L'episcopat français, 1802-1905, s. v. Belley, Paris; LECANUET, L'Eglise de France sous la troisieme republique, II (Paris, 1910). GEORGES GOYAU St. Richard de Wyche St. Richard de Wyche Bishop and confessor, b. about 1197 at Droitwich, Worcestershire, from which his surname is derived; d. 3 April, 1253, at Dover. He was the second son of Richard and Alice de Wyche. His father died while he was still young and the family property fell into a state of great delapidation. His elder brother offered to resign the inheritance to him, but Richard refused the offer, although he undertook the management of the estate and soon restored it to a good condition. He went to Oxford, where he and two companions lived in such poverty that they had only one tunic and hooded gown between them, in which they attended lectures by turns. He then went to Paris and on his return proceeded Master of Arts. At Bologna he studied canon law, in which he acquired a great reputation and was elected Chancellor of the University of Oxford. His learning and sanctity were so famed that Edmund Rich, Archbishop of Canterbury, and Robert Grosseteste, Bishop of Lincoln, both offered him the post of chancellor of their respective dioceses. Richard accepted the archbishop's offer and thenceforward became St. Edmund's intimate friend and follower. He approved the archbishop's action in opposing the king on the question of the vacant sees, accompanied him in his exile to Pontigny, was present at Soissy when he died, and made him a model in life. Richard supplied Matthew Paris with material for his biography, and, after attending the translation of his relics to Pontigny in 1249, wrote an account of the incident in a letter published by Matthew Paris (Historia major, V, VI). Retiring to the house of the Dominicans at Orleans, Richard studied theology, was ordained priest, and, after founding a chapel in honour of St. Edmund, returned to England where he became Vicar of Deal and Rector of Charring. Soon afterwards he was induced by Boniface of Savoy, the new Archbishop of Canterbury, to resume his former office of chancellor. In 1244 Ralph Neville, Bishop of Chichester, died; the election of Robert Passelewe, Archdeacon of Chichester, to the vacant see, was quashed by Boniface at a synod of his suffragans, held 3 June, 1244, and on his recommendation the chapter elected Richard, their choice being immediately confirmed by the archbishop. Henry III was indignant, as Robert Passelewe was a favourite, and he refused to surrender to Richard the temporalities of his see. The Saint took his case to Innocent IV, who consecrated him in person at Lyons, 5 March, 1245, and sent him back to England. But Henry was immovable. Thus homeless in his own diocese, Richard was dependent on the charity of his clergy, one of whom, Simon of Tarring, shared with him the little he possessed. At length, in 1246, Henry was induced by the threats of the pope to deliver up the temporalities. As bishop, Richard lived in great austerity, giving away most of his revenues as alms. He compiled a number of statutes which regulate in great detail the lives of the clergy, the celebration of Divine service, the administration of the sacraments, church privileges, and other matters. Every priest in the diocese was bound to obtain a copy of these statutes and bring it to the diocesan synod (Wilkins, "Concilia", I, 688-93); in this way the standard of life among the clergy was raised considerably. For the better maintenance of his cathedral Richard instituted a yearly collection to be made in every parish of the diocese on Easter or Whit Sunday. The mendicant orders, particularly the Dominicans, received special encouragement from him. In 1250 Richard was named as one of the collectors of the subsidy for the crusades (Bliss, "Calendar of Papal Letters", I, 263) and two years later the king appointed him to preach the crusade in London. He made strenuous efforts to rouse enthusiasm for the cause in the Dioceses of Chichester and Canterbury, and while journeying to Dover, where he was to consecrate a new church dedicated to St. Edmund, he was taken ill. Upon reaching Dover, he went to a hospital called "Maison Dieu", performed the consecration ceremony on 2 April, but died the next morning. His body was taken back to Chichester and buried in the cathedral. He was solemnly canonized by Urban IV in the Franciscan church at Viterbo, 1262, and on 20 Feb. a papal licence for the translation of his relics to a new shrine was given; but the unsettled state of the country prevented this until 16 June, 1276, when the translation was performed by Archbishop Kilwardby in the presence of Edward I. This shrine, which stood in the feretory behind the high altar, was rifled and destroyed at the Reformation. The much-restored altar tomb in the south transept now commonly assigned to St. Richard has no evidence to support its claim, and no relics are known to exist. The feast is celebrated on 3 April. The most accurate version of St. Richard's will, which has been frequently printed, is that given by Blaauw in "Sussex Archaeological Collections", I, 164-92, with a translation and valuable notes. His life was written by his confessor Ralph Bocking shortly after his canonization and another short life, compiled in the fifteenth century, was printed by Capgrave. Both these are included in the notice of St. Richard in the Bollandist "Acta Sanctorum". HARDY, Descriptive catalogue of MSS. relating to the history of Great Britain and Ireland, III (London, 1871), 136-9; Acta SS., April, I (Venice, 1768), 277-318; CAPGRAVE, Nova legenda Angliae (London, 1516), 269; PARIS, Historia major, ed. MADDEN in R. S., II, III (London, 1866); Annales monastici, ed. LUARD in R. S. (London, 1864); Flores historiarum, ed. IDEM in R. S., II (London, 1890); Rishanger's Chronicle, ed. RILEY in R. S. (London, 1865); TRIVET, ed. HOG, Annales sex regum Angliae (London, 1845); Calendar of Papal Letters, ed. BLISS, I (London, 1893); Vita di S. Ricardo vescovo di Cicestria (Milan, 1706); STEPHENS, Memorials of the See of Chichester (London, 1876), 83-98, contains the best modern life; WALLACE, St. Edmund of Canterbury (London, 1893), 196-205; GASQUET, Henry III and the Church (London, 1905), 222, 343; CHALLONER, Britannia sancta (London, 1745), 206-13; STANTON, Menology of England and Wales (London, 1887), 141-3. G. ROGER HUDLESTON Bl. Richard Fetherston Bl. Richard Fetherston Priest and martyr; died at Smithfield, 30 July, 1540. He was chaplain to Catharine of Aragon and schoolmaster to her daughter, Princess Mary, afterwards queen. He is called sacrae theologiae Doctor by Pits (De illustribus Angliae scriptoribus, 729). He was one of the theologians appointed to defend Queen Catharine's cause in the divorce proceedings before the legates Wolsey and Campeggio, and is said to have written a treatise "Contra divortium Henrici et Catharinae, Liber unus". No copy of this work is known to exist. He took part in the session of Convocation which began in April, 1529, and was one of the few members who refused to sign the Act declaring Henry's marriage with Catharine to be illegal ab initio, through the pope's inability to grant a dispensation in such a case. In 1534 he was called upon to take the Oath of Supremacy and, on refusing to do so, was committed to the Tower, 13 December, 1534. He seems to have remained in prison till 30 July, 1540, when he was hanged, drawn, and quartered at Smithfield, together with the Catholic theologians, Thomas Abel and Edward Powell, who like himself had been councillors to Queen Catharine in the divorce proceedings, and three heretics, Barnes, Garret, and Jerome, condemned for teaching Zwinglianism. All six were drawn through the streets upon three hurdles, a Catholic and a heretic on each hurdle. The Protestants were burned, and the three Catholics executed in the usual manner, their limbs being fixed over the gates of the city and their heads being placed upon poles on London Bridge. Richard was beatified by Leo XIII, 29 December, 1886. PITS, De illustribus Angliae scriptoribus (Paris, 1619), 729; SANDER, tr. LEWIS, Rise and Growth of the Anglican Schism (London, 1877), 65, 67, 150; BURNET, History of the Reformation, ed. POCOCK (Oxford, 1865), I, 260, 472, 566-67; IV, 555, 563; TANNER, Bibliotheca Britannico-Hibernica (London, 1748), 278; Original Letters Relative to the English Reformation (Parker Society, Cambridge, 1846), I, 209; Calendar of State Papers, Henry VIII, ed. GAIRDNER (London, 1882, 1883, 1885, VI, 311, 1199; VII, 530; VIII, 666, 1001. G. ROGER HUDLESTON Richard of Cirencester Richard of Cirencester Chronicler, d. about 1400. He was the compiler of a chronicle from 447 to 1066, entitled "Speculum Historiale de Gestis Regum Angliae". The work, which is in four books, is of little historical value, but contains several charters granted to Westminster Abbey. Nothing is known of Richard's life except that he was a monk of Westminster, who made a pilgrimage to Jerusalem in 1391, was still at Westminster in 1397, and that he lay sick in the infirmary in 1400. Two other works are attributed to him: "De Officiis", and "Super Symbolum Majus et Minus", but neither is now extant. In the eighteenth century his name was used by Charles Bertram as the pretended author of his forgery "Richardus Copenensis de situ Britanniae", which deceived Stukeley and many subsequent antiquarians and historians, including Lingard, and which was only finally exposed by Woodward in 1866-67. This spurious chronicle, however, still appears under Richard's name in Giles, "Six English Chronicles" (London, 1872). Ricardi Cicestrensis Speculum Historiale, ed. MAYOR, Rolls Series (London, 1863-69); STUKELEY An Account of Richard of Cirencester and his works (London, 1757); HARDY Descriptive Catalogue (London, 1871); HUNT in Dict. Nat. Biog, s. v.; BOLLANDISTS. Catalogus cod. hagiog. Lat. B. N. (Paris, 1893). EDWIN BURTON Richard of Cornwall Richard of Cornwall (RICHARD RUFUS, RUYS, ROSSO, ROWSE). The dates of his birth and death are unknown, but he was still living in 1259. He was an Oxford Franciscan, possibly a Master of Arts of that university, who had studied for a time in Paris (1238), and then returned to Oxford. He was chosen with Haymo of Faversham to go to Rome to oppose the minister-general Elias. In 1250 he was lecturing at Oxford on the "Sentences", till he was driven away by the riots, when he returned to Paris and continued lecturing there, gaining the title Philosophus Admirabilis; but according to Roger Bacon his teaching was very mischievous, and produced evil results for the next forty years. He was again at Oxford in 1255 as regent-master of the friars. Several works, all still in MS., are attributed to him. These are: "Commentaries on the Master of the Sentences", a work formerly at Assisi; "Commentary on Bonaventure's third book of Sentences" (Assisi); and a similar commentary on the fourth book (Assisi); Pits ("De illustribus Angliae scriptoribus") denies his identity with Richard Rufus on the ground that Rufus was born at Cirencester in Gloucestershire, and not in Cornwall. Monumenta Franciscana, ed. BREWER AND HOWLETT in R. S. (London, 1858-82); WADDING, Annales Minorum, IV (Lyons and Rome, 1650); 2nd ed. (Rome, 1731-45); and supplement by SBARALEA (1806); PARKINSON, Collectanea Anglo-Minoritica (London, 1726); LITTLE, The Grey Friars in Oxford (Oxford, 1892); DENIFLE, Chartularium Universitatis Parisiensis (Paris 1889); see also tr. of THOMAS OF ECCLESTON by FR. CUTHBERT, The Friars and how they came to England (London, 1903), and The Chronicle of Thomas of Eccleston (London, 1909). EDWIN BURTON Richard of Middletown Richard of Middletown (A MEDIA VILLA). Flourished at the end of the thirteenth century, but the dates of his birth and death and most incidents of his life are unknown. Middleton Stoney in Oxfordshire and Middleton Cheyney in Northamptonshire have both been suggested as his native place, and he has also been claimed as a Scotsman. He probably studied first at Oxford, but in 1283 he was at the University of Paris and graduated Bachelor of Divinity in that year. He entered the Franciscan order. In 1278 he had been appointed by the general of his order to examine the doctrines of Peter Olivus, and the same work was again engaging his attention in 1283. In 1286 he was sent with two other Franciscans to Naples to undertake the education of two of the sons of Charles II, Ludwig, afterwards a Franciscan, and Robert. After the defeat of Charles by Peter of Arragon the two princes were carried as hostages to Barcelona and Richard accompanied them, sharing their captivity till their release in 1295. The rest of his life lies in obscurity. A new point of interest at the present day lies in the fact that, medieval scholastic though he was, he knew and studied the phenomena of hypnotism, and left the results of his investigations in his "Quodlibeta" (Paris, 1519, fol. 90 8) where he treats of what would now be termed auto-suggestion and adduces some instances of tele pathy. His works include "Super sententias Petri Lombardi", written between 1281 and 1285, and first printed at Venice, 1489; "Quaestiones Quodlibetales" in MS. at Oxford and elsewhere; "Quodlibeta tria" printed with the Sentences at Venice, 1509; "De gradibus formarum" in MS. at Munich; and "Quae stiones disputatae" in MS. at Assisi. Other works which have been attributed. to him are: "Super epistolas Pauli"; "Super evangelia"; "Super distinctiones decreti"; "De ordine judiciorum"; "De clavium sacerdotalium potestate"; "Contra Patrem Joannem Olivum"; a poem, "De conceptione immaculata Virginis Mariae"; three MS. sermons now in the Bibliotheque Nationale (MS. 14947, nos. 47, 69, 98), and a sermon on the Ascension, the MS. of which is at Erlangen. Works erroneously ascribed to him are a treatise on the rule of St. Francis; the "Quadragesimale" which was written by Francis of Asti; the completion of the "Summa" of Alexander of Hales, and an "Expositio super Ave Maria", probably by Richard of Saxony. His death is assigned by some to 1307 or 1308, by Pits to 1300, by Parkinson to some earlier date on the ground that he was one of the "Four Masters", the expositors of the Rule of St. Francis. WADDING, Annales Minorum (2nd ed., Rome, 1731-45), and supplement by SBARALEA (1806); PARKINSON, Collectanea Anglo Minoritica (London, 1726); DE MARTIGNE, La Scolastique et les traditions Franciscaines: Richard de Middletown in Revue. scien., eccles., II (1885); PORTALIE, L'hypnotisme au moyen age: Aricenne Avicenne et Richard Middletown in etudes relig. hist. Litt., LV (1892); CHEVALIER, Repertoire des sources historiques du Moyen Age (Paris, 1905); KINGSFORD in Dict. Nat. Biog., s.v. Middleton. EDWIN BURTON Richard of St. Victor Richard of St. Victor Theologian, native of Scotland, but the date and place of his birth are unknown; d. 1173 and was commemorated on 10 March in the necrology of the abbey. He was professed at the monastery of St. Victor under the first Abbot Gilduin (d. 1155) and was a disciple of the great mystic Hugo whose principles and methods he adopted and elaborated. His career was strictly monastic, and his relations with the outer world were few and slight. He was sub-prior of the monastery in 1159, and subsequently became prior. During his tenure of the latter office, serious trouble arose in the community of St. Victor from the misconduct of the English Abbot Ervisius, whose irregular life brought upon him a personal admonition from Alexander III, and was subsequently referred by the pope to a commission of inquiry under the royal authority; after some delay and resistance on the part of the abbot his resignation was obtained and he retired from the monastery. A letter of exhortation was addressed by the pope to "Richard, the prior" and the community in 1170. Richard does not appear to have taken any active part in these proceedings, but the disturbed condition of his surroundings may well have accentuated his desire for the interior solace of mystical contemplation. Ervisius's resignation took place in 1172. In 1165, St. Victor had been visited by St. Thomas of Canterbury, after his flight from Northampton; and Richard was doubtless one of the auditors of the discourse delivered by the archbishop on that occasion. A letter to Alexander III, dealing with the affairs of the archbishop, and signed by Richard is extant and published by Migne. Like his master, Hugo, Richard may probably have had some acquaintance and intercourse with St. Bernard, who is thought to have been the Bernard to whom the treatise "De tribus appropriatis personis in Trinitate" is addressed. His reputation as a theologian extended far beyond the precincts of his monastery, and copies of his writings were eagerly sought by other religious houses. Exclusively a theologian, unlike Hugo, he appears to have had no interest in philosophy, and took no part in the acute philosophieal controversies of his time; but, like all the School of St. Victor, he was willing to avail himself of the didactic and constructive methods in theology which had been introduced by Abelard. Nevertheless, he regarded merely secular learning with much suspicion, holding it to be worthless as an end in itself, and only an occasion of worldly pride and self-seeking when divorced from the knowledge of Divine things. Such learning he calls, in the antithetical style which characterizes all his writing, "Sapientia insipida et doctrina indocta"; and the professor of such learning is "Captator famae, neglector conscientiae". Such worldly-minded persons should stimulate the student of sacred things to greater efforts in his own higher sphere—"When we consider how much the philosophers of this world have laboured, we should be ashamed to be inferior to them"; "We should seek always to comprehend by reason what we hold by faith." His works fall into the three classes of dogmatic, mystical, and exegetical. In the first, the most important is the treatise in six books on the Trinity, with the supplement on the attributes of the Three Persons, and the treatise on the Incarnate Word. But greater interest now belongs to his mystical theology, which is mainly contained in the two books on mystical contemplation, entitled respectively "Benjamin Minor" and "Benjamin Major", and the allegorical treatise on the Tabernacle. He carries on the mystical doctrine of Hugo, in a somewhat more detailed scheme, in which the successive stages of contemplation are described. These are six im number, divided equally among the three powers of the soul—the imagination, the reason, and the intelligence, and ascending from the contemplation of the visible things of creation to the rapture in which the soul is carried "beyond itself" into the Divine Presence, by the three final stages of "Dilatio, sublevatio, alienatio". This schematic arrangement of contemplative soul-states is substantially adopted by Gerson in his more systematic treatise on mystical theology, who, however, makes the important reservation that the distinction between reason and intelligence is to be understood as functional and not real. Much use is made in the mystical treatises of the allegorical interpretation of Scripture for which the Victorine school had a special affection. Thus the titles "Benjamin Major" and "Minor" refer to Ps. lxvii, "Benjamin in mentis excessu". Rachel represents the reason, Lia represents charity; the tabernacle is the type of the state of perfection, in which the soul is the dwelling-place of God. In like manner, the mystical or devotional point of view predominates in the exegetical treatises; though the critical and doctrinal exposition of the text also receives attention. The four books entitled "Tractatus exceptionum", and attributed to Richard, deal with matters of secular learning. Eight titles of works attributed to him by Trithemius (De Script. Eccl.) refer probably to MS. fragments of his known works. A "Liber Penitentialis" is mentioned by Montfauçon as attributed to a "Ricardus Secundus a Sancto Victore", and may probably be identical with the treatise "De potestate solvendi et ligandi" above mentioned. Nothing is otherwise known of a second Richard of St. Victor. Fifteen other MSS. are said to exist of works attributed to Richard which have appeared in none of the published editions, and are probably spurious. Eight editions of his works have been published: Venice, 1506 (incomplete) and 1592; Paris, 1518 and 1550; Lyons, 1534; Cologne, 1621; Rouen, 1650, by the Canons of St. Victor; and by Migne. HUGONIN, Notice sur R. de St. Victor in P.L., CXCVI; ENGELHARDT, R. von St. Victor u. J. Ruysbroek (Erlangen, 1838); VAUGHAN, Hours uith the Mystics V (London, 1893); INGE, Christian Mysticism (London, 1898); DE WULF, Histoire de la philosophie medievale (Louvain, 1905); BUONAMICI, R. di San Vittore saggi di studio sulla filosofia mistica del secolo XII (Alatri, 1898); VON HUGEL, The Mystical Element in Religion (London, 1909); UNDERHILL, Mysticism (London, 1911). A.B. SHARPE Ven. William Richardson Ven. William Richardson ( Alias Anderson.) Last martyr under Queen Elizabeth; b. according to Challoner at Vales in Yorkshire (i.e. presumably Wales, near Sheffield), but, according to the Valladolid diary, a Lancashire man; executed at Tyburn, 17 Feb., 1603. He arrived at Reims 16 July, 1592 and on 21 Aug. following was sent to Valladolid, where he arrived 23 Dec. Thence, 1 Oct., 1594, he was sent to Seville where he was ordained. According to one account he was arrested at Clement's Inn on 12 Feb., but another says he had been kept a close prisoner in Newgate for a week before he was condemned at the Old Bailey on the 15 Feb., under stat. 27 Eliz., c. 2, for being a priest and coming into the realm. He was betrayed by one of his trusted friends to the Lord Chief Justice, who expedited his trial and execution with unseemly haste, and seems to have acted more as a public prosecutor than as a judge. At his execution he showed great courage and constancy, dying most cheerfully, to the edification of all beholders. One of his last utterances was a prayer for the queen. JOHN B. WAINEWRIGHT Blessed Richard Thirkeld Bl. Richard Thirkeld Martyr; b. at Coniscliffe, Durham, England; d. at York, 29 May, 1583. From Queen's College, Oxford, where he was in 1564-5, he went to Reims, where he was ordained priest, 18 April, 1579, and left 23 May for the mission, where he ministered in or about York, and acted as confessor to Ven. Margaret Clitheroe. On the eve of the Annunciation, 1583, he was arrested while visiting one of the Catholic prisoners in the Ousebridge Kidcote, York, and at once confessed his priesthood, both to the pursuivants, who arrested him, and to the mayor before whom he was brought, and for the night was lodged in the house of the high sheriff. The next day his trial took place, at which he managed to appear in cassock and biretta. The charge was one of having reconciled the queen's subjects to the Church of Rome. He was found guilty on 27 May and condemned 28 May. He spent the night in instructing his fellow-prisoners, and the morning of his condemnation in upholding the faith and constancy of those who were brought to the bar. No details of his execution are extant: six of his letters still remain, and are summarized by Dom Bede Camm. JOHN B. WAINEWRIGHT Blessed Richard Whiting Blessed Richard Whiting Last Abbot of Glastonbury and martyr, parentage and date of birth unknown, executed 15 Nov., 1539; was probably educated in the claustral school at Glastonbury, whence he proceeded to Cambridge, graduating as M.A. in 1483 and D.D. in 1505. If, as is probable, he was already a monk when he went to Cambridge he must have received the habit from John Selwood, Abbot of Glastonbury from 1456 to 1493. He was ordained deacon in 1500 and priest in 1501, and held for some years the office of chamberlain of his monastery. In February, 1525, Richard Bere, Abbot of Glastonbury, died, and the community, after deciding to elect his successor per formam compromissi, which places the selection in the hands of some one person of note, agreed to request Cardinal Wolsey to make the choice of an abbot for them. After obtaining the king's permission to act and giving a fortnight's inquiry to the circumstances of the case Wolsey on 3 March, 1525, nominated Richard Whiting to the vacant post. The first ten years of Whiting's rule were prosperous and peaceful, and he appears in the State papers as a careful overseer of his abbey alike in spirituals and temporals. Then, in August, 1535, came the first "visitation" of Glastonbury by Dr. Layton, who, however, found all in good order. In spite of this, however, the abbot's jurisdiction over the town of Glastonbury was suspended and minute "injunctions" were given to him about the management of the abbey property; but then and more than once during the next few years he was assured that there was no intention of suppressing the abbey. By January, 1539, Glastonbury was the only monastery left in Somerset, and on 19 September in that year the royal commissioners, Lavton, Pollard and Moyle, arrived there without warning. Whiting happened to be at his manor of Sharpham. Thither the commissioners followed and examined him according to certain articles received from Cromwell, which apparently dealt with the question of the succession to the throne. The abbot, was then taken back to Glastonbury and thence sent up to London to the Tower that Cromwell might examine him for himself, but the precise charge on which he was arrested, and subsequently executed, remains uncertain though his case is usually referred to as one of treason. On 2 October, the commissioners wrote to Cromwell that they had now come to the knowledge of "divers and sundry treasons committed by the Abbot of Glastonbury", and enclosed a "book" of evidences thereof with the accusers' names, which however is no longer forthcoming. In Cromwell's MS., "Remembrances", for the same month, are the entries: "Item, Certayn persons to be sent to the Towre for the further examenacyon of the Abbot, of Glaston . . . . Item. The Abbot, of Glaston to (be) tryed at Glaston and also executvd there with his complvcys. . . Item. Councillors to give evidence against the Abbot of Glaston, Rich. Pollard, Lewis Forstew (Forstell), Thos. Moyle." Marillac, the French Ambassador, on 25 October wrote: "The Abbot of Glastonbury. . . has lately, been put in the Tower, because, in taking the Abbey treasures, valued at 200,000 crowns, they found a written book of arguments in behalf of queen Katherine." If the charge was high treason, which appears most probable, then, as a member of the House of Peers, Whiting should have been attainted by an Act of Parliament passed for the purpose, but his execution was an accomplished fact, before Parliament even met. In fact it seems clear that his doom was deliberately wrapped in obscurity by Cromwell and Henry, for Marillac, writing to Francis I on 30 November, after mentioning the execution of the Abbots of Reading and Glastonbury, adds: "could learn no particulars of what they were charged with, except that it was the relics of the late lord marquis"; which makes things more perplexing than ever. Whatever the charge, however, Whiting was sent back to Somerset in the care of Pollard and reached Wells on 14 November. Here some sort of trial apparently took place, and next day, Saturday, 15 November, he was taken to Glastonbury with two of his monks, Dom John Thorne and Dom Roger James, where all three were fastened upon hurdles and dragged by horses to the top of Toe Hill which overlooks the town. Here they were hanged, drawn and quartered, Abbot Whiting's head being fastened over the gate of the now deserted abbey and his limbs exposed at Wells, Bath, Ilchester and Bridgewater. Richard Whiting was beatified by Pope Leo XIII in his decree of 13 May, 1895. His watch and seal are still preserved in the museum at Glastonbury. G. ROGER HUDDLESTON Cardinal Richelieu Armand-Jean du Plessis, Duke de Richelieu Cardinal; French statesman, b. in Paris, 5 September, 1585; d. there 4 December 1642. At first he intended to follow a military career, but when, in 1605, his brother Alfred resigned the Bishopric of Luçon and retired to the Grande Chartreuse, Richelieu obtained the see from Henry IV and withdrew to the country to take up his theological studies under the direction of Bishop Cospéan of Aire. He was consecrated bishop on 17 April, 1607; he was not yet twenty-two years old, although the Brief of Paul V dated 19 December, 1606, announcing his appointment contains the statement: "in vigesimo tertio aetatis anno tantum constitutus". Mgr. Lacroix, the historian of Richelieu's youth, believes that in a journey made to Rome at the end of 1606, Richelieu deceived the pope as to his age, but the incident is still obscure. In his diocese, Richelieu showed great zeal for the conversion of Protestants and appointed the Oratorians and the Capuchins to give missions in all the parishes. Richelieu represented the clergy of Poitou in the States General of 1614, where his political career began. There he was the mouth-piece of the Church, and in a celebrated discourse demanded that bishops and prelates be summoned to the royal councils, that the distribution of ecclesiastical benefices to the laity be forbidden, that the Church be exempt from taxation, that Protestants who usurped churches or had their coreligionists interred in them be punished, and that the Decrees of the Council of Trent be promulgated throughout France. He ended by assuring the young king Louis XIII that the desire of the clergy was to have the royal power so assured that it might be "comme un ferme rocher qui brise tout ce qui le heurte" (as a firm rock which crushes all that opposes it). Richelieu was named secretary of state on 30 November, 1616, but after the assassination of Concini, favourite of Maria de' Medici, he was forced to leave the ministry and follow the queen mother to Blois. To escape the political intrigues which pursued him he retired in June, 1617, to the priory of Coussay and, during this time of leisure caused by his disgrace, published in October, 1617 (date confirmed by Mgr. Lacroix), his "Les principaux points de la foi de l'église catholique, défendus contre l'éecrit adressé au Roi par les quartre ministres de Charenton"; it was upon reading this book half a century later that Jacques de Coras, a Protestant pastor of Tonneins, was converted to Catholicism. Richelieu continued to be represented to the king as an enemy to his power; the Capuchin, Leclerc du Tremblay, never succeeded in completely clearing him in Louis XIII's opinion. To disarm suspicion Richelieu asked the king to name a place of exile, and at his order went in 1618 to Avignon, where he passed nearly a year and where he composed a catechism which became famous under the name of "Instruction du chrétien". This book, destined to be read in every parish each Sunday at the sermon, was a real blessing at a time when ignorance of religion was the principal evil. When Maria de' Medici escaped from Blois in 1619, Richelieu was chosen by the minister Luynes to negotiate for peace between Louis XIII and his mother. By Brief of 3 November, 1622, he was created cardinal by Gregory XV. On 19 April, 1624, he re-entered the Council of Ministers, and on 12 August, 1624, was made its president. Richelieu's policy can be reduced to two principal ideas: the domestic unification of France and opposition to the House of Austria. At home he had to contend with constant conspiracies in which Maria de' Medici, Queen Anne of Austria, Gaston d'Orléans (the king's brother), and the highest nobles of the court were involved. The executions of Marillac (1632), Montmorency (1632), Cinq-Mars and of de Thou (1642) intimidated the enemies of the cardinal. He had also to contend with the Protestants who were forming a state within the state (see HUGUENOTS). The capitulation of La Rochelle and the peace of Alais (28 June, 1629) annihilated Protestantism as a political party. Richelieu's foreign policy (for which see LECLERC DU TREMBLAY) was characterized by his fearlessness in making alliances with the foreign Protestants. At various times the Protestants of the Grisons, Sweden, the Protestant Princes of Germany, and Bernard of Saxe-Weimar were his allies. The favourable treaties signed by Mazarin were the result of Richelieu's policy of Protestant alliances, a policy which was severely censured by a number of Catholics. At the end of 1625, when Richelieu was preparing to give back Valteline to the Protestant Grisons, the partisans of Spain called him "Cardinal of the Huguenots", and two pamphlets, attributed to the Jesuits Eudemon Joannes and Jean Keller, appeared against him; these he had burned. Hostilities, however, increased until finally the king's confessor opposed the foreign policy of the cardinal. This was a very important episode, and on it the recent researches of Father de Rochemonteix in the archives of the Society of Jesus have cast new light. Father Caussin, author of "La Cour Sainte", the Jesuit whom Richelieu, on 25 March, 1636, had made the king's confessor, tried to use against the cardinal the influence of Mlle. de La Fayette, a lady for whom the king had entertained a certain regard and who had become a nun. On 8 December, 1637, in a solemn interview Caussin recalled to the king his duties towards his wife, Anne of Austria, to whom he was too indifferent; asked him to allow his mother, Maria de' Medici, to return to France; and pointed out the dangers to Catholicism which might arise through Richelieu's alliance with the Turks and the Protestant princes of Germany. After this interview Caussin gave Communion to the king and addressed him a very beautiful sermon, entreating him to obey his directions. Richelieu was anxious that the king's confessor should occupy himself solely with "giving absolutions", consequently, on 10 December, 1637, Caussin was dismissed and exiled to Rennes, and his successor, Father Jacques Sirmond, celebrated for his historical knowledge, was forced to promise that, if he saw "anything censurable in the conduct of the State", he would report it to the cardinal and not attempt to influence the king's conscience. However, Father Caussin's fears concerning Richelieu's foreign policy were not shared by all of his confrères. Father Lallemand, for instance, affirmed that it was rash to blame the king's political alliance with the Protestant princes -- an alliance which had been made only after an unsuccessful attempt to form one with Bavaria and the Catholic princes of Germany. That Richelieu was possessed of religious sentiments cannot be contested. It was he who in February, 1638, prompted the declaration by which Louis XIII consecrated the Kingdom of France to the Virgin Mary; in the ministry he surrounded himself with priests and religious; as general he employed Cardinal de la Valette; as admiral, Sourdis, Archbishop of Bordeaux; as diplomat, Bérulle; as chief auxiliary he had Leclerc du Tremblay. He himself designated Mazarin his successor. He had a high idea of the sacerdotal dignity, was continually protesting against he encroachments of the parlements on the jurisdiction of the Church, and advised the king to choose as bishops only those who should "have passed after their studies a considerable time in the seminaries, the places established for the study of the ecclesiastical functions". He wished to compel the bishops to reside in their dioceses, to establish seminaries there, and to visit their parishes. He aided the efforts of St. Vincent de Paul to induce the bishops to institute the "exercises des ordinants", retreats, during which the young clerics were to prepare themselves for the priesthood. Richelieu foresaw the perils to which nascent Jansenism would expose the Church. Saint-Cyran's doctrines on the constitution of the Church, his views on the organization of the "great Christian Republic", his liaison with Jansenius (who in 1635 had composed a violent pamphlet against France under the names of Mars gallicus), and the manner in which he opposed the annulment of the marriage of Gaston d'Orléans, drew upon him the cardinal's suspicion. In having him arrested 14 May, 1638, Richelieu declared that "had Luther and Calvin been confined before they had begun to dogmatize, the states would have been spared many troubles". Two months later Richelieu forced the solitaries of Port Royal-des- Champs to disperse; some were sent to Paris, others to Ferte-Milon. Saint-Cyran remained in the dungeon of Vincennes until the cardinal's death. With the co-operation of the Benedictine Gregoire Tarisse, Richelieu devoted himself seriously to the reform of the Benedictines. Named coadjutor to the Abbot of Cluny in 1627, and Abbot of Cluny in 1629, he called to this monastery the Reformed Benedictines of Saint-Vannes. He proposed forming the congregations of Saint-Vannes and Saint-Maur into one body, of which he was to have been superior. Only half of this project was accomplished, however, when in 1636 he succeeded in uniting the Order of Cluny with the Congregation of Saint-Maur. From 1622 Richelieu was proviseur of the Sorbonne, and was in virtue of this office head of the Association of Doctors of the Sorbonne. He had the Sorbonne entirely rebuilt between 1626 and 1629, and between 1635 and 1642 built the church of the Sorbonne, in which he is now buried. On the question of the relations between the temporal and the spiritual powers, Richelieu really professed the doctrine called Duvalism after the theologian Duval, who admitted at the same time the supreme power of the pope and the supreme power of the king and the divine right of both. In the dissensions between Rome and the Gallicans he most frequently acted as mediator. When in 1626 a book by the Jesuit Sanctarel appeared in Paris, affirming the right of the popes to depose kings for wrong-doing, heresy, or incapacity, it was burned in the Place de Greve; Father Coton and the three superiors of the Jesuits houses summoned before the Parlement were forced to repudiate the work. The enemies ofthe Jesuits wished immediately to create a new disturbance on the occasion of the publication of the "Somme theologique des vérités apostoliques capitales de la religion chrétienne", by Father Garasse, but Richelieu opposed the continued agitation. It was, however, renewed at the end of 1626, owing to a thesis of the Dominican Têtefort, which maintained that the Decretals formed part of the Scripture. Richelieu again strove to allay feeling, and in a discourse (while still affirming that the king held his kingdom from God alone) declared that "the king cannot make an article of faith unless this article has been so declared by the Church in her oecumenical councils". Subsequently, Richelieu gave satisfaction to the pope when on 7 December,1 629, he obtained a retraction from the Gallican Edmond Richer, syndic of the theological faculty, who submitted his book "La puissance ecclesiastique et politique" to the judgment of the pope. Nine years alter, however, Richelieu's struggles against the resistance offered by the French clergy to taxes led him to assume an attitude more deliberately Gallican. Contrary to the theories which he had maintained in his discourse of 1614 he considered, now that he was a minister, that the needs of the State constituted a case of force majeure, which should oblige the clergy to submit to all the fiscal exigencies of the civil power. As early as 1625 the assembly of the clergy, tired of the incessant demands of the Government for money, had decreed that no deputy could vote supplies without having first received full powers on the subject; Richelieu, contesting this principle, declared that the needs of the State were actual, while those of the Church were chimerical and arbitrary. In 1638 the struggle between the State and the clergy on the subject of taxes became critical, and Richelieu, to uphold his claims, enlisted the aid of the brothers Pierre and Jacques Dupuy, who about the middle of 1638 published "Les libertés de l'église gallicane". This book established the independence of the Gallican Church in opposition to Rome only to reduce it into servile submission to the temporal power. The clergy and the nuncio complained; eighteen bishops assembled at the house of Cardinal de la Rouchefoucald, and denounced to their colleagues this "work of the devil". Richelieu then exaggerated his fiscal exigencies in regard to the clergy; an edict of 16 April, 1639, stipulated that ecclesiastics and communities were incapable of possessing landed property in France, that the king could compel them to surrender their possessions and unite them to his domains, but that he would allow them to retain what they had in consideration of certain indemnities which should be calculated in going back to the year 1520. In Oct., 1639, after the murder of an equerry of Marshal d'Estrees, the French Ambassador, Estrees declared the rights of the people violated. Richelieu refused to receive the nuncio (October, 1639); a decree of the royal council, 22 December, restrained the powers of the pontifical Briefs, and even the canonist Marca proposed to break the Concordat and to hold a national council at which Richelieu was to have been made patriarch. Precisely at this date Richelieu had a whole series of grievances against Rome: Urban VIII had refused successively to name him Legate of the Holy See in France, Legate of Avignon, and coadjutor to the Bishop of Trier; he had refused the purple to Father Joseph, and had been opposed the annulment of the marriage of Gaston d'Orléans. But Richelieu, however furious he was, did not wish to carry things to extremes. After a certain number of polemics on the subject of the taxes to be levied on the clergy, the ecclesiastical assembly of Mantes in 1641 accorded to the Government (which was satisfied therewith) five and a half millions, and Richelieu, to restore quiet, accepted the dedication of Marca's book "La concorde du sacerdoce et de l'empire", in which certain exceptions were taken to Dupuy's book. At the same time the sending of Mazarin as envoy to France by Urban VIII, and the presentation to him of the cardinal's hat put an end to the differences between Richelieu and the Holy See. Upon the whole, Richelieu's policy was to preserve a just mean between the parliamentary Gallicans and the Ultramontanes. "In such matters", he wrote in his political testament, "one must believe neither the people of the palace, who ordinarily measure the power of the king by the shape of his crown, which, being round, has no end, nor those who, in the excesses of an indiscreet zeal, proclaim themselves openly as partisans of Rome". One may believe that Pierre de Marca's book was inspired by him and reproduces his ideas. According to this book the liberties of the Gallican Church have two foundations: (1) the recognition of the primacy and the sovereign authority ofthe Church of Rome, a primacy consisting in the right to make general laws, to judge without appeal, and to be judged neither by bishops nor by councils; (2) the sovereign right of the kings which knows no superior in temporal affairs. It is to be noted that Marca does not give the superiority of a council over the pope as a foundation of the Gallican liberties. (For Richelieu's work in Canada see article CANADA.) In 1636 Richelieu founded the Academie Française. He had great literary pretensions, and had several mediocre plays of his own composition produced in a theatre belonging to him. With a stubbornness inexplicable to-day Voltaire foolishly denied that Richelieu's "Testament politique" was authentic; the researches of M. Hanotaux have proved its authenticity, and given the proper value to admirable chapters such as the chapter entitled, "Le conseil du Prince", into which Richelieu, says M. Hanotaux, "has put all his soul and his genius". [For Richelieu's "Mémoires" see HARLAY, FAMILY OF: (2) Achille de Harlay.] Besides the works indicated in the articles LECLERC DU TREMBLAY and MARIA DE' MEDICI the following may be consulted: Maximes d'etat et fragments politiques du cardinal de Richelieu, ed. HANTAUX (Paris, 1880); Lettres, instructions diplomatiques et papiers d'etat du cardinal de Richelieu, ed. AVERNEL (8 vols., Paris, 1853-77); Memoires du cardinal de Richelieu, ed. HORRIC DE BEAUCAIRE, I (Paris, 1908); LAIR, LAVOLLEE, BRUEL, GABRIEL DE MUN, and LECESTRE, Rapports et notices sur l'edition des Memoires du cardinal de Richelieu preparee pour la societe de l'histoire de France (3 fasc., Paris, 1905-07); HANOTAUX, Hist. du cardinal de Richelieu (2 tomes in 3 vols., Paris, 1893-1903), extends to 1624; CAILLET, L'Administration en France sous le ministere du cardinal de Richelieu (2 vols., Paris, 1863); D'AVENEL, Richelieu et la monarchie absolue (4 vols., Paris, 1880-7); IDEM, La noblesse francaise sous Richelieu (Paris, 1901); IDEM, Pretres, soldats et juges sous Richelieu (Paris, 1907); LACROIX, Richelieu a Lucon, sa jeunese, son episcopat (Paris, 1890); GELEY, Fancan et la politique de Richelieu de 1617 a 1627 (Paris, 1884); DE ROCHEMONTEIX, Nicholaus Caussin, confesseur de Louis XIII, et le cardinal de Richelieu (Paris, 1911); PERRAUD, Le cardinal de Richelieu eveque, theologien et protecteur des lettres (Autun, 1882); VALENTIN, Cardinalis Richelieu scriptor ecclesiasticus (Toulouse, 1900); LODGE, Richelieu (London, 1896); PERKINS, Richelieu and the Growth of French Power (New York, 1900). GEORGES GOYAU Diocese of Richmond Diocese of Richmond (RICHMONDENSIS.) Suffragan of Baltimore, established 11 July, 1820, comprises the State of Virginia, except the Counties of Accomac and Northampton (Diocese of Wilmington); and Bland, Buchanan, Carroll, Craig (partly), Dickinson, Floyd, Giles, Grayson, Lee, Montgomery, Pulaski, Russell, Scott, Smyth, Tazewell, Washington, Wise, and Wythe (Diocese of Wheeling); and in the State of West Virginia, the Counties of Berkeley, Grant, Hampshire, Hardy, Jefferson, Mineral, Morgan, and Pendleton. It embraces 31,518 square miles in Virginia and 3290 square miles in West Virginia. Originally it included also the territory of the present Diocese of Wheeling, created 23 July, 1850. Colonial Period In the summer of 1526 a Spanish Catholic settlement was made in Virginia on the very spot (according to Ecija, the pilot-in-chief of Florida) where, in 1607, eighty-one years later, the English founded the settlement of Jamestown. Lucas Vasques de Ayllón, one of the judges of the island of San Domingo, received from the King of Spain, 12 June, 1523,a patent empowering him to explore the coast for 800 leagues, establish a settlement within three years and Christianize the natives. In June, 1526, Ayllón sailed from Puerto de la Plata, San Domingo, with three vessels, 600 persons of both sexes, horses and supplies. The Dominicans Antonio de Montesinos and Antonio de Cervantes, with Brother Peter de Estrada, accompanied the expedition. Entering the Capes at the Chesapeake, and ascending a river (the James), he landed at Guandape, which he named St. Michael. Buildings were constructed and the Holy Sacrifice offered in a chapel, the second place of Catholic worship on American soil. Ayllón died of fever, 18 Oct., 1526. The rebellion of the settlers and hostility of the Indians caused Francisco Gomez, the next in command, to abandon the settlement in the spring of 1527, when he set sail for San Domingo in two vessels, one of which foundered. Of the party only 150 reached their destination. A second expedition sent by Menendez, the Governor of Florida and nominal Governor of Virginia, settled on the Rappahannock River at a point called Axacan, 10 Sept., 1570. It consisted of Fathers Segura, Vice-Provincial of the Jesuits, and Luis de Quiros, six Jesuit brothers, and a few friendly Indians. A log building served as chapel and home. Through the treachery of Don Luis de Velasco, an Indian pilot of Spanish name, Father Quiros and Brothers Solis and Mendez were slain by the Indians, 14 Feb., 1571. Four days later were martyred Father Segura, Brothers Linares, Redondo, Gabriel, Gomez, and Sancho Zevalles. Menendez, several months later, sailed for Axacan, where he had eight of the murderers hanged; they being converted before death by Father John Rogel, a Jesuit missionary. Attempts to found Catholic settlements in Virginia were made by Lord Baltimore in 1629, and Captain George Brent in 1687. In the spring of 1634 Father John Altham, a Jesuit companion of Father Andrew White, the Maryland missionary, laboured amongst some of the Virginia tribes on the south side of the Potomac. Stringent laws were soon enacted in Virginia against Catholics. In 1687 Fathers Edmonds and Raymond were arrested at Norfolk for exercising their priestly functions. During the last quarter of the eighteenth century the few Catholic settlers at Aquia Creek, near the Potomac, were attended by Father John Carroll and other Jesuit missionaries from Maryland. American Period Rev. Jean Dubois, afterwards third Bishop of New York, accompanied by a few French priests and with letters of introduction from Lafayette to several prominent Virginia families, came to Norfolk in August, 1791, where he laboured a few months, and probably left the priests who came with him. Proceeding to Richmond towards the end of the year, he offered in the House of Delegates, by invitation of the General Assembly, the first Mass ever said in the Capital City. His successors at Richmond, with interruptions, were the Revs. T.C. Mongrand, Xavier Michel, John McElroy, John Baxter, John Mahoney, James Walsh, Thomas Hore, and Fathers Horner and Schreiber. Tradition tells us that at an early date, probably at the time of the Declaration of Independence, Alexandria had a log chapel with an unknown resident priest. Rev. John Thayer of Boston was stationed there in 1794. Rev. Francis Neale, who in 1796 constructed at Alexandria a brick church, erected fourteen years later a more suitable church where Fathers Kohlmann, Enoch, and Benedict Joseph Fenwick, afterwards second Bishop of Boston, frequently officiated. About 1796 Rev. James Bushe began the erection of a church at Norfolk. His successors were the Very Rev. Leonard Neale, afterwards Archbishop of Baltimore (see Baltimore, Archdiocese of), Revs. Michael Lacy, Christopher Delaney, Joseph Stokes, Samuel Cooper, J. VanHorsigh, and A.L. Hitzelberger. Bishops of Richmond (1) Right Rev. Patrick Kelly, D.D., consecrated first Bishop of Richmond, 24 Aug., 1820, came to reside at Norfolk, where the Catholics were much more numerous than at Richmond, 19 Jan., 1821. The erection of Virginia into a diocese had been premature and was accordingly opposed by the Archbishop of Baltimore. Because of factions and various other difficulties, Bishop Kelly soon petitioned Rome to be relieved of his charge. He left Virginia in July, 1822, having been transferred to the See of Waterford and Lismore, where he died, 8 Oct., 1829. Archbishop Marechal of Baltimore was appointed administrator of the diocese. Rev. Timothy O'Brien, who came as pastor to Richmond in 1832, did more for Catholicism during his eighteen years' labour than any other missionary, excepting the Bishops of the See. In 1834 he built St. Peter's Church, afterwards the cathedral, and founded St. Joseph's Female Academy and Orphan Asylum, bringing as teachers three Sisters of Charity. (2) The Right Rev. Richard Vincent Whelan, D.D., consecrated 21 March, 1841, established the same year, on the outskirts of Richmond, St. Vincent's Seminary and College, discontinued in 1846. Leaving Rev. Timothy O'Brien at St. Peter's, Richmond, the Bishop took up his residence at the seminary, and acted as president. In 1842 Bishop Whelan dedicated St. Joseph's Church, Petersburg, and St. Patrick's Church, Norfolk, and the following year that of St.Francis at Lynchburg. In 1846 he built a church at Wheeling and,two years later, founded at Norfolk St. Vincent's Female Orphan Asylum. Wheeling was made a separate see, 23 July, 1850, and to it was transferred Bishop Whelan. (3) Right Rev. John McGill, D.D., consecrated 10 Nov., 1850, was present in Rome in 1854 when the Dogma of the Immaculate Conception was proclaimed. By pen and voice he opposed Knownothingism. In 1855 Bishop McGill convened the First Diocesan Synod. During the yellow fever plague of the same year, Rev. Matthew O'Keefe of Norfolk and Rev. Francis Devlin of Portsmouth won renown; the latter dying a martyr to priestly duty. In 1856 St. Vincent's Hospital, Norfolk, was founded. Alexandria, formerly in the Baltimore archdiocese as part of the District of Columbia, but ceded back to Virginia, was annexed to the Richmond diocese, 15 Aug., 1858. In 1860 the bishop transferred St. Mary's German Church, Richmond, to the Benedictines. During the Civil War Bishop McGill wrote two learned works, "The True Church Indicated to the Inquirer", and "Our Faith, the Victory", republished as "The Creed of Catholics". The bishop established at Richmond the Sisters of the Visitation, and at Alexandria the Sisters of the Holy Cross. He also took part in the Vatican Council. Bishop McGill died at Richmond, 14 January, 1872. (4) Right Rev. James Gibbons, D.D. (afterwards archbishop and cardinal), consecrated titular Bishop of Adramyttum to organize North Carolina into a vicariate, 16 Aug., 1868, was appointed Bishop of Richmond, 30 July, 1872. He established at Richmond the Little Sisters of the Poor, and St. Peter's Boys' Academy. Erecting new parishes, churches, and schools, making constant diocesan visitations, frequently preaching to large congregations of both Catholics and non-Catholics, Bishop Gibbons, during his short rule of five years, accomplished in the diocese a vast amount of religious good. Made coadjutor Bishop of Baltimore, 29 May, 1877, he succeeded Archbishop Bayley in that see, 3 Oct., 1877. (5) Right Rev. John Joseph Keane, D.D. (afterwards archbishop), consecrated, 25 Aug., 1878. Gifted with ever-ready and magnetic eloquence, Bishop Keane drew great numbers of people to hear his inspiring discourses. He held the Second Diocesan Synod in 1886, and introduced into the diocese the Josephites and the Xaverian Brothers. Bishop Keane was appointed first Rector of the Catholic University, Washington, 12 Aug., 1888, created titular Archbishop of Damascus, 9 Jan., 1897, and transferred to the See of Dubuque, 24 July, 1900. (6) Right Rev. Augustine Van De Vyver, D.D., consecrated, 29 Oct., 1889, began an able and vigorous rule. On 3 June, 1903, he publicly received the Most Rev. Diomede Falconio, Apostolic Delegate, who the following day laid the cornerstone of the new Sacred Heart Cathedral, one of the most artistic edifices in the country, designed by Joseph McGuire, architect, of New York. A handsome bishop's house and a pastoral residence adjoin the cathedral. The latter was solemnly conscrated by Mgr. Falconio on 29 Nov., 1906. The event was the most imposing Catholic ceremony in the history of the diocese. Besides Cardinal Gibbons, and the Apostolic Delegate, there were present 18 archbishops and bishops. Bishop Van De Vyver convened a quasi-synod, 12 Nov., 1907, which approved the decrees of the Second Synod and enacted new and needed legislation. In 1907 the Knights of Columbus held at the Jamestown Exposition their national convention and jubilee celebration, participated in by the Apostolic Delegate, and several archbishops and bishops; while the following year the St. Vincent de Paul Society held a similar celebration in Richmond. In June, 1909, St. Peter's (Richmond) handsome new residence and the adjoining home of the McGill Union and the Knights of Columbus were completed, at a total cost of about $50,000. In the following autumn St. Peter's Church (the old cathedral) celebrated the diamond jubilee of its existence. With it, either as bishops or as priests, are indelibly linked the names of Cardinal Gibbons, Archbishops Keane and Janssens,and Bishops Van De Vyver, Whelan, McGill, Becker, Kelley and O'Connell of San Francisco. Most Rev. John J. Kain, deceased archbishop of St. Louis, had also been a priest of the diocese. Bishop Van De Vyver introduced into the diocese the Fathers of the Holy Ghost; additional Benedictine and Josephite Fathers and Xaverian Brothers; the Christian Brothers; additional Sisters of Charity; the Benedictine and Franciscan Sisters; Sisters of Charity of Nazareth, of the Blessed Sacrament and of the Perpetual Adoration. Under his regime have been founded 12 new parishes, 32 churches, 3 colleges, 4 industrial schools, 2 orphan asylums, 1 infant asylum (coloured), and many parochial schools. Notable Benefactors Mr. and Mrs. Thomas Fortune Ryan, of New York, the former donating, the latter furnishing, the imposing Sacred Heart Cathedral (nearly $500,000), together with other notable benefactions. Mrs.Ryan has built churches, schools, and religious houses in various parts of the state. Other generous benefactors were Right Rev. Bernard McQuaid, D.D., Joseph Gallego, John P. Matthews, William S. Caldwell, Mark Downey, and John Pope. Statistics (1911) Secular priests, 50; Benedictines, 10; Josephites, 6; Holy Ghost Fathers, 2; Brothers, Xaverian, 35; Christian, 12; Sisters of Charity, 60; of St. Benedict, 50; Visitation Nuns, 23; Sisters of Charity of Nazareth, Kentucky, 20; of the Holy Cross, 20; Little Sisters of the Poor, 18; Sisters of the Blessed Sacrament, 18; of St. Francis, 12; of Perpetual Adoration, 10; parishes with resident priests, 35; msisions with churches, 48; colleges, 3 (1 coloured), academies, 9; parochial schools, 26; industrial schools, 4 (2 coloured); orphan asylums, 4; infant asylums, 1 (coloured); young people attending Catholic institutions, 7500; home for aged, 1 (inmates, 200); Catholic Hospital, 1 (yearly patients, 3000). Catholic Societies Priests' Clerical Fund Association; Eucharistic League; Holy Name; St. Vincent dePaul; League of Good Shepherd; boys' and girls' sodalities; tabernacle, altar, and sanctuary societies; women's benevolent and beneficial; fraternal and social, such as Knights of Columbus, Hibernians, and flourishing local societies. Of parishes there are one each of Germans, Italians, and Bohemians, and 4 for the coloured people. Catholic population, 41,000. The causes of growth are principally natural increase and conversions, there being little Catholic immigration into the diocese. Magri, The Catholic Church in the City and Diocese of Richmond (Richmond, Virginia, 1906); Parks, Catholic Missions in Virginia (Richmond, 1850); Keiley, Memoranda (Norfolk, Virginia, 1874); Proceedings of the Catholic Benevolent Union (Norfolk, 1875); The Metropolitan catholic Almanac (Baltimore, 1841-61); Catholic Almanac and Directory (New York, 1865-95); Catholic Directory (Milwaukee, 1895-9); Official Catholic Directory (Milwaukee, 1900-11); Hughes, The History of the Society of Jesus in North America, Colonial and Federal (London, 1907); Shea, The History of the Catholic Church in the United States (Akron, Ohio, 1890); foreign references cited by Shea (I, bk II, i,106, 107, 149, 150); Navarette, Real Cedula que contiene el asiento capitulado con Lucas Vasquez de Ayllón; Coleccion de Viages y Descubrimientos (Madrid, 1829), ii, 153, 156; Fernandez, Historia Ecclesiastica de Nuestros Tiempos (Toledo, 1611); Quiros, Letter of 12 Sept., 1570; Rogel, Letter of 9 Dec., 1520; Barcia, Ensayo Cronologico, 142-6; Tanner, Societas Militaris, 447-51. F. JOSEPH MAGRI Ricoldo Da Monte di Croce Ricaldo da Monte di Croce (PENNINI.) Born at Florence about 1243; d. there 31 October, 1320. After studying in various great European schools, he became a Dominican, 1267; was a professor in several convents of Tuscany (1272-99), made a pilgrimage to the Holy Land (1288), and then travelled for many years as a missionary in western Asia, having his chief headquarters at Bagdad. He returned to Florence before 1302, and was chosen to high offices in his order. His "Itinerarium" (written about 1288-91; published in the original Latin at Leipzig; 1864; in Italian at Florence, 1793; in French at Paris, 1877) was intended as a guide-book for missionaries, and is an interesting description of the Oriental countries visited by him. The "Epistolæ de Perditione Acconis" are five letters in the form of lamentations over the fall of Ptolemais (written about 1292, published at Paris, 1884). Ricoldo's best known work is the "Contra Legem Sarracenorum", written at Bagdad, which has been very popular as a polemical source against Mohammedanism, and has been often edited (first published at Seville, 1500). The "Christianæ Fidei Confessio facta Sarracenis" (printed at Basle, 1543) is attributed to Ricoldo, and was probably written about the same time as the above mentioned works. Other works are: "Contra errores Judæorum" (MS. at Florence); "Libellus contra nationes orientales" (MSS. at Florence and Paris); "Contra Sarracenos et Alcoranum" (MS. at Paris); "De variis religionibus" (MS. at Turin). Very probably the last three works were written after his return to Europe. Ricoldo is also known to have written two theological works--a defence of the doctrines of St. Thomas (in collaboration with John of Pistoia, about 1285) and a commentary on the "Libri sententiarum" (before 1288). Ricoldo began a translation of the Koran about 1290, but it is not known whether this work was completed. MANDONNET in Revue Biblique (1893), 44-61, 182-202, 584-607; ECHARD-QUÉTIF, Script. Ord. Proed., I, 506; TOURON, Hist. des Hommes illus. de l'ordre de St. Dom., I, 759-63; MURRAY, Discoveries and Travels in Asia, I, 197. J.A. MCHUGH Riemenschneider Tillmann Riemenschneider One of the most important of Frankish sculptors, b. at Osterode am Harz in or after 1460; d. at Würzburg, 1531. In 1483 he was admitted into the Guild of St. Luke at Würzburg, where he worked until his death. In the tombstone of the Ritter von Grumbach he still adheres to the Gothic style, but in his works for the Marienkapelle at Würzburg he adopts the Renaissance style, while retaining reminiscences of earlier art. For the south entrance he carved, besides an annunciation and a representation of Christ as a gardener, the afterwards renowned statues of Adam and Eve, the heads of which are of special importance. There also he showed his gift of depicting character in the more than life-size statues of Christ, the Baptist, and the Twelve Apostles for the buttresses. Elsewhere indeed we seek in vain for the merits of rounded sculpture. He had a special talent for the noble representation of female saints (cf. for example, Sts. Dorothea and Margareta in the same chapel, and the Madonna in the Münsterkirche). A small Madonna (now in the municipal museum at Frankfort) is perfect both in expression and drapery. Besides other works for the above-mentioned churches and a relief with the "Vierzehn Nothelfer" for the hospital (St. Burkhard), he carved for the cathedral of Würzburg a tabernacle reaching to the ceiling, two episcopal tombs, and a colossal cross--all recognized as excellent works by those familiar with the peculiar style of the master. Riemenschneider's masterpiece is the tomb of Emperor Henry II in the Cathedral of Bamberg; the recumbent forms of the emperor and his spouse are ideal, while the sides of the tomb are adorned with fine scenes from their lives. The figures instinct with life, the drapery, and the expression of sentiment, are all of equal beauty. Among his representations of the "Lament over Christ", those of Heidingsfeld and Maidbrunn, in spite of some defects, are notable works; resembling the former, but still more pleasing, is a third in the university collection. The defects in many of his works are probably to be referred for the most part to his numerous apprentices. There are a great number of other works by him in various places, e.g. a beautiful group of the Crucifixion in the Darmstadt Museum, another at Volkach am Main representing Our Lady surrounded by a rosary with scenes from her life in relief and being crowned by angels playing music--the picture is suspended from the roof. There is a second Meister Tillmann Riemenschneider, who carved the Virgin's altar in Creglingen. This bears so close a resemblance to the works of the younger "Master Dill", that recently many believed it should be referred to him; in that case, however, he would have executed one of his best works as a very young man. BODE, Gesch. der deutschen Plastik (Berlin, 1885); WEBER, Leben u. Wirken T. Riemenschneiders (2nd ed., Würzburg, 1888); TONNERS, Leben u. Werke T. Riemenschneiders (Strasburg, 1900); ADELMANN in Walhalla, VI (1910). G. GIETMANN Cola di Rienzi Cola di Rienzi (i.e., NICOLA, son of Lorenzo) A popular tribune and extraordinary historical figure. His father was an innkeeper at Rome in the vicinity of the Trastevere; though it was believed that he was really the son of the Emperor Henry VII. His childhood and youth were passed at Anagni, with some relatives to whom he was sent on the death of his mother. Though he was thus brought up in the country he succeeded in acquiring a knowledge of letters and of Latin, and devoted himself to a study of the history of ancient Rome in the Latin authors, Livy, Valerius Maximus, Cicero, Seneca, Boethius, and the poets. When his father died he returned to Rome and practised as a notary. The sight of the remains of the former greatness of Rome only increased his admiration for the city and the men described in his favourite authors. Contemplating the condition in which Rome then was in the absence of the popes, torn by the factions of the nobles who plundered on all sides and shed innocent blood, he conceived a desire of restoring the justice and splendour of former days. His plans became more definite and settled when his brother was slain in a brawl between the Orsini and the Colonna. Thenceforth he thought only of the means of breaking the power of the barons. To accomplish this he had first to win the favour of the populace by upholding the cause of the oppressed. In consequence of this and on account of the eloquence with which he spoke in Latin, he was sent to Avignon in 1343 to Clement VI, by the captain of the people, to ask him to return to Rome and grant the great jubilee every five years. Cola explained to the pope the miserable condition of Rome. Clement was much impressed, and appointed him to the office of notary (secretary) of the Camera Capitolina, in which position he could gain a better knowledge of the misfortunes of the city. Cola then by his public discourses and private conversations prepared the people; a conspiracy was formed, and on 19 May, 1347, he summoned the populace to assemble the following day in the Campidoglio. There Cola explained his plans and read a new democratic constitution which, among other things, ordained the establishment of a civic militia. The people conferred absolute power on him; but Cola at first contented himself with the title of tribune of the people; later, however, he assumed the bombastic titles of Candidatus Spiritus Sancti, Imperator Orbis, Zelator Italiæ, Amator Orbis et Tribunus Augustus (candidate of the Holy Spirit, emperor of the world, lover of Italy, of the world, august tribune). He was wise enough to select a colleague, the pope's vicar, Raymond, Bishop of Orvieto. The success of the new regime was wonderful. The most powerful barons had to leave the city; the others swore fealty to the popular government. An era of peace and justice seemed to have come. The pope, on learning what had happened, regretted that he had not been consulted, but gave Cola the title and office of Rector, to be exercised in conjunction with the Bishop of Orvieto. His name was heard everywhere, princes had recourse to him in their disputes, the sultan fortified his ports. Cola then thought of reestablishing the liberty and independence of Italy and of Rome, by restoring the Roman Empire with an Italian emperor. In August, 1347, two hundred deputies of the Italian cities assembled at his request. Italy was declared free, and all those who had arrogated a lordship to themselves were declared fallen from power; the right of the people to elect the emperor was asserted. Louis the Bavarian and Charles of Bohemia were called upon to justify their usurpation of the imperial title. Cola flattered himself secretly with the hope of becoming emperor; but his high opinion of himself proved his ruin. He was a dreamer rather than a man of action; he lacked many qualities for the exercise of good government, especially foresight and the elements of political prudence. He had formed a most puerile concept of the empire. He surrounded himself with Asiatic luxury, to pay for which he had to impose new taxes; thereupon the enthusiasm of the people, weary of serving a theatrical emperor, vanished. The barons perceived this, and forgetting for the moment their mutual discord, joined together against their common enemy. In vain the bell summoned the people to arms in the Campidoglio. No one stirred. Cola had driven out the barons, but he had not thought of reducing them to inaction; on the contrary he had rendered them more hostile by his many foolish and humiliating acts. Lacking all military knowledge he could offer no serious resistance to their attacks. The discontent of the people increased; the Bishop of Orvieto, the other Rector of Rome, who had already protested against what had occurred at the convention of the Italian deputies, abandoned the city; the pope repudiated Cola in a Bull. Thus deserted, and not believing himself safe, he took refuge in the Castle of S.Angelo, and three days later (18 Dec., 1347) the barons returned in triumph to restore things to their former condition. Cola fortunately succeeded in escaping. He sought refuge with the Spiritual Franciscans living in the hermitages of Monte Maiella. But the plague of 1348, the presence of bands of adventurers and the jubilee of 1350 had increased the mysticism of the people and still more of the Spirituals. One of the latter, Fra Angelo, told Rienzi that it was now the proper moment to think of the common weal, to co-operate in the restoration of the empire and in the purification of the Church: all of which had been predicted by Joachim of Flora, the celebrated Calabrian abbot, and that he ought to give his assistance. Cola betook himself thence to Charles IV at Prague (1350), who imprisoned him, either as a madman or as a heretic. After two years Cola was sent at the request of the pope to Avignon, where through the intercession of Petrarch, his admirer, though now disillusioned, he was treated better. When Innocent VI sent Cardinal Albornoz into Italy (at the beginning of 1353) he allowed Cola di Rienzi to accompany him. The Romans, who had fallen back into their former state of anarchy, invited him to return, and Albornoz consented to appoint him senator (sindaco) of Rome. On 1 Aug., 1354, Rienzi entered Rome in triumph. But the new government did not last long. His luxury and revelry, followed by the inevitable taxation, above all the unjust killing of several persons (among whom was Fra Moriale, a brigand, in the service of Cola), provoked the people to fury. On 8 Oct., 1354, the cry of "Death to Rienzi the traitor!" rose in the city. Cola attempted to flee, but was recognized and slain, and his corpse dragged through the streets of the city. Cola represented, one might say, the death agony of the Guelph (papal-national-democratic) idea and the rise of the classical (imperial and æsthetic) idea of the Renaissance. Vita Nicolai Laurentii in MURATORI, Antiquitates; Vita Nicolai Laurentii, ed. DEL Rè (Florence, 1854); GABRIELLI, Epistolario de Cola Rienzo (Rome, 1890); PAPENCORDT, Cola de Rienzo und seine Zeit (Hamburg, 1841); RODOCANACHI, Cola di Rienzo (Paris, 1888). U. BENIGNI Rieti Rieti (REATINA). Diocese in Central Italy, immediately subject to the Holy See. The city is situated in the valley of the River Velino, which, on account of the calcareous deposits that accumulate in it, grows shallower and imperils the city, so that even in ancient days it was necessary to construct canals and outlets, like that of Marius Curius Dentatus (272 B.C.) which, repaired and enlarged by Clement VIII, has produced the magnificent waterfall of the Velino, near Terni. The city, which was founded by the Pelasgians, was the chief town of the Sabines, and became later a Roman municipium and prefecture. After the Longobard invasion it was the seat of a "gastaldo", dependent on the Duchy of Spoleto. It was presented to the Holy See by Otto I in 962; in 1143, after a long siege, it was destroyed by King Roger of Naples. It was besieged again in 1210 by Otto of Brunswick when forcing his way into the Kingdom of Naples. In the thirteenth century the popes took refuge there on several occasions, and in 1288 it witnessed the coronation of Charles II of Naples; later an Apostolic delegate resided at Rieti. In 1860, by the disloyalty of a delegate, it was occupied by the Italian troops without resistance. Rieti was the birthplace of Blessed Colomba (1501); in the sixth century it contained an Abbey of St. Stephen; the body of St. Baldovino, Cistercian, founder of the monastery of Sts. Matthew and Pastor (twelfth century) is venerated in the cathedral. Near Rieti is Greccio, where St. Francis set up the first Christmas crib. The cathedral is in Lombard style, with a crypt dating from the fourth or fifth century. It should be remarked that in medieval documents there is frequent confusion between Reatinus (Rieti), Aretinus (Arezzo), and Teatinus (Chieti). The first known Bishop of Rieti is Ursus (499); St. Gregory mentions Probus and Albinus (sixth century). The names of many bishops in the Longobard period are known. Later we meet with Dodonus (1137), who repaired the damage done by King Roger; Benedict, who in 1184 officiated at the marriage of Queen Constance of Naples and Henry VI; Rainaldo, a Franciscan (1249), restorer of discipline, which work was continued by Tommaso (1252); Pietro Guerra (1278), who had Andrea Pisano erect the episcopal palace with materials taken from the ancient amphitheatre of Vespasian; Lodovico Teodonari (1380), murdered while engaged in Divine service, on account of his severity, which deed was cruelly punished by Boniface IX; Angelo Capranica (1450), later a cardinal; Cardinal Pompeo Colonna (1508), who for rebellion against Julius II and Clement VII was twice deprived of his cardinalitial dignity; Scipione Colonna (1520), his nephew, took part in the revolt against Clement VII in 1528, and was killed in an encounter with Amico of Ascoli, Abbot of Farfa; Marianus Victorius (1572, for a few days), a distinguished writer and petrologist; Giorgio Bolognetti (1639), restored the episcopal palace and was distinguished for his charity; Gabrielle Ferretti (1827), later a cardinal, a man of great charity. At present the diocese contains 60 parishes, 142,100 inhabitants, 250 secular priests, 7 religious houses with 63 priests, 15 houses of nuns; 2 educational establishments for boys, and 4 for girls. CAPPELLETTI, Le chiese d'Italia, V; DE SANCTIS, Notizie stor iche di Rieti (Rieti, 1887); MARONI, Commentarii de Ecclesia Reatina (Rome, 1753). U. BENIGNI Abbey of Rievaulx Abbey of Rievaulx (RIEVALL.) Thurston, Archbishop of York, was very anxious to have a monastery of the newly founded and fervent order of Cistercians in his diocese; and so, at his invitation, St. Bernard of Clairvaux sent a colony of his monks, under the leadership of Abbot William, to make the desired foundation. After some delay Walter Espec became their founder and chief benefactor, presenting them with a suitable estate, situated in a wild and lonely spot, in the valley of the rivulet Rie (from whence the abbey derived its name), and surrounded by precipitous hills, in Blakemore, near Helmesley. The community took possession of the ground in 1131, and began the foundation, the first of their order in Yorkshire. The church and abbey, as is the case with all monasteries of the order, were dedicated to the Blessed Virgin Mary. At first their land being crude and uncultivated, they suffered much until, after a number of years, their first benefactor again came to their assistance and, later on, joined their community. Their land, also, through their incessant labours, eventually became productive, so that, with more adequate means of subsistence, they were able to devote their energies to the completion of church and monastic buildings, though these were finished only after a great lapse of time, on account of their isolation and the fact that the monastery was never wealthy. The constructions were carried on section by section, permanent edifices succeeding those that were temporary after long intervals. The final buildings, however, as attested by the magnificent, though melancholy, ruins yet remaining, were completed on a grand scale. Within a very few years after its foundation the community numbered three hundred members, and was by far the most celebrated monastery in England; many others sprang from it, the most important of them being Melrose, the first Cistecian monastery built in Scotland. Rievaulx early became a billiant centre of learning and holiness; chief amongst its lights shone St. Aelred, its third abbot (1147-67), who from his sweetness of character and depth of learning was called Bernardo prope par. He had been, before his entrance into the cloister, a most dear friend and companion of St. David, King of Scotland. History gives us but scant details of the later life at Rievaulx. At the time of its suppression and confiscation by Henry VIII the abbot, Rowland Blyton, with twenty-three religious composed its community. The estates of this ancient abbey are now in the possession of the Duncombe family. MANRIQUE, Annales Cistercienses (Lyons, 1642); MARTENE AND DURAND, Thesaurus novus anecdotorum, IV (Paris, 1717); HENRIQUEZ, Phoenix reviviscens (Brussels, 1626); DUGDALE, Monasticon Anglicanum, V (London, 1817-30); Cartularium abbatiae de Rievalle in Surtees' Soc. Publ. (London, 1889); St. Aelred, Abbot of Rievaulx (London, 1845); OXFORD, Ruins of Fountains Abbey (London, 1910); HODGES, Fountains Abbey (New York, 1904). EDMOND M. OBRECHT Caspar Riffel Caspar Riffel Historian, b. at Budesheim, Bingen, Germany, 19 Jan., 1807, d. at Mainz, 15 Dec., 1856. He studied under Klee at Mainz and Bonn and under Möhler at Tübingen. After his ordination to the priesthood, 18 Dee., 1830, he was named assistant priest at Bingen. In 1835 he was appointed to a parish at Giessen, and to the chair of moral theology in the local theological faculty. His transfer to the professorship in Church history followed in 1837. The publication of the first volume of his Church history in 1841 aroused a storm of indignation among Protestants, to whom his accurate though not flattering account of the Reformation was distasteful. The Hessian Government hastened to pension the fearless teacher (19 Nov., 1842). This measure caused intense indignation among the diocesan Catholic clergy, who denounced the Protestant atmosphere of the university. Riffel retired to Mainz, where Bishop von Ketteler appointed him in 1851 professor of Church history in his newly organized ecclesiastical seminary. Death put a premature end to the teaching of this Catholic educator, who contributed largely to the restoration of a truly ecclesiastical spirit among the German clergy. He wrote: "Geschichtliche Darstellung des Verhältnisses zwischen Kirche und Staat", Mainz, 1836; "Predigten auf alle Sonn- und Festtage des Jahres", Mainz, 1839-40, 3rd ed., 1854; "Christliche Kirchengeschichte der neuesten Zeit", Mainz, 1841-46; "Die Aufhebung des Jesuitenordens", 3rd ed., Mainz, 1855. GOYAU, L'Allemagne religieuse: le Catholicisme, II (Paris, 1905), 313. N.A. WEBER St. John Rigby St. John Rigby English martyr; b. about 1570 at Harrocks Hall, Eccleston, Lancashire; executed at St. Thomas Waterings, 21 June, 1600. He was the fifth or sixth son of Nicholas Rigby, by Mary, daughter of Oliver Breres of Preston. In the service of Sir Edmund Huddleston, at a time when his daughter, Mrs. Fortescue, being then ill, was cited to the Old Bailey for recusancy, Rigby appeared on her behalf; compelled to confess himself a Catholic, he was sent to Newgate. The next day, 14 February, 1599 or 1600, he signed a confession, that, since he had been reconciled by the martyr, John Jones the Franciscan, in the Clink some two or three years previously, he had declined to go to church. He was then chained and remitted to Newgate, till, on 19 February, he was transferred to the White Lion. On the first Wednesday in March (which was the 4th and not, as the martyr himself supposes, the 3rd) he was brought to the bar, and in the afternoon given a private opportunity to conform. The next day he was sentenced for having been reconciled; but was reprieved till the next sessions. On 19 June he was again brought to the bar, and as he again refused to conform, he was told that his sentence must be carried out. On his way to execution, the hurdle was stopped by a Captain Whitlock, who wished him to conform and asked him if he were married, to which the martyr replied, "I am a bachelor; and more than that I am a maid", and the captain thereupon desired his prayers. The priest, who reconciled him, had suffered on the same spot 12 July, 1598. [ Note: Both John Rigby and the Franciscan priest, John Jones, were canonized by Pope Paul VI in 1970 among the Forty Martyrs of England and Wales, whose joint feastday is kept on 25 October.] CHALLONER, Missionary Priests, II (London, 1878), n. 117; GILLOW, Bibl. Dict. Eng. Cath., V, 420; Chatham Society's Publications, LXXXI (1870), 74. JOHN B. WAINEWRIGHT Nicholas Rigby Nicholas Rigby Born 1800 at Walton near Preston, Lancashire; died at Ugthorpe, 7 September, 1886. At twelve years he went to Ushaw College, where he was for a time professor of elocution. Ordained priest in September, 1826, he was sent to St. Mary's, Wycliffe, for six months, and was then given the united missions of Egton Bridge and Ugthorpe. After seven years the two missions were again separated, and he took up his residence at Ugthorpe. There he built a church (opened in 1855), started a new cemetery, and founded a middle-class college. About 1884 he resigned the mission work to his curate, the Rev. E.J. Hickey. His obituary notice, in the "Catholic Times" of 17 September, 1886, gives a sketch of his life. He wrote: "The Real Doctrine of the Church on Scripture", to which is added an account of the conversion of the Duke of Brunswick (Anton Ulrich, 1710), and of "Father Ignatius" Spencer (1830), (York, 1834), dedicated to the Rev. Benedict Rayment. Other works, chiefly treatises on primary truths, or sermons of a controversial character, are described in Gillow, "Bibl. Dict. Eng. Cath." PATRICK RYAN Right Right Right, as a substantive (my right, his right), designates the object of justice. When a person declares he has a right to a thing, he means he has a kind of dominion over such thing, which others are obliged to recognize. Right may therefore be defined as a moral or legal authority to possess, claim, and use a thing as one's own. It is thus essentially distinct from obligation; in virtue of an obligation we should, in virtue of a right, we may do or omit something. Again, right is a moral or legal authority, and, as such, is distinct from merely physical superiority or pre-eminence; the thief who steals something without being detected enjoys the physical control of the object, but no right to it; on the contrary, his act is an mjustice:, a violation of right, and he is bound to return the stolen object to its owner. Right is called a moral or legal authority, because it emanates from a law which assigns to one the dominion over the thing and imposes on others the obligation to respect this dominion. To the right of one person corresponds an obligation on the part of others, so that right and obligation condition each other. If I have the right to demand one hundred dollars from a person, he is under the obligation to give them to me; without this obligation, right would be illusory. One may even say that the right of one person consists in the fact that, on his account, others are bound to perform or omit something. The clause, "to possess, claim, and use, anything as one's own", defines more closely the object of right. Justice assigns to each person his own (suum cuique). When anyone asserts that a thing is his own, is his private property, or belongs to him, he means that this object stands in a special relation to him, that it is in the first place destined for his use, and that he can dispose of it according to his will, regardless of others. By a thing is here meant not merely a material object, but everything that can be useful to man, including actions, omissions, etc. The connexion of a certain thing with a certain person, in virtue of which the person may declare the thing his own, can originate only on the basis of concrete facts. It is an evident demand of human reason in general that one may give or leave one's own to anyone; but what constitutes one's own is determined by facts. Many things are physically connected with the human per-son by conception or birth--his limbs, bodily and mental qualities, health, etc. From the order imposed by the Creator of Nature, we recognize that, from the first moment of his being, his faculties and members are granted a person primarily for his own use, and so that they may enable him to support himself and develop and fulfil the tasks appointed by the Creator for this life. These things (i.e., his qualities, etc.) are his own from the first moment of his existence, and whoever injures them or deprives him of them violates his right. However, many other things are connected with the human person, not physically, but only morally. In other words, in virtue of a certain fact, everyone recognizes that certain things are specially destined for thc use of one person, and must be recognized as such by all. Persons who build a house for themselves, make an implement, catch game in the unreserved forest, or fish in the open sea, become the owners of these things in virtue of occupation of their labour; they can claim these things as their own, and no one can forcibly appropriate or injure these things without a violation of their rights. Whoever has lawfully purchased a thing, or been presented with it by another, may regard such thing as his own, since by the purchase or presentation he succeeds to the place of the other person and possesses his rights. As a right gives rise to a certain connection between person and person with respect to a thing, we may distinguish in right four elements: the holder, the object, the title, and the terminus of the right. The holder of the right is the person who possesses the right, the terminus is the person who has the obligation corresponding to the right, the object is the thing to which the right refers, and the title is the fact on the ground of which a person may regard and claim the thing as his own. Strictly speaking, this fact alone is not the title of thc right, which originates, indeed, in the fact, but taken in connection with thc: principle that one must assign to each his own property; however, since this principle may be presupposed as self-evident, it is customary to regard the simple fact as the title of the right. The right of which we have hitherto been speaking is individual right, to which the obligation of commutative justice corresponds. Commutative justice regulates the relations of the members of human society to one another, and aims at securing that each member renders to his fellow-members what is equally theirs. In addition to this commutative justice, there is also a legal and distributive justice; these virtues regulate the relations between the complete societies (State and Church) and their members. From the propensities and needs of human nature we recognize the State as resting on a Divine ordinance; only in the State can man support himself and develop according to his nature. But, if the Divine Creator of Nature has willed the existence of the State, He must also will the means necessary for its maintenance and the attainment of its objects. This will can be found only in the right of the State to demand from its members what is necessary for the general good. It must be authorized to make laws, to punish violations of such, and in general to arrange everything for the public welfare, while, on their side, the members must be under the obligation corresponding to this right. The virtue which makes all members of society contribute what is necessary for its maintenance is called legal justice, because the law has to determine in individual cases what burdens are to be borne by the members. According to Catholic teaching, the Church is, like the State, a complete and independent society, wherefore it also must be justified in demanding from its members whatever is necessary for its welfare and the attainment of its object. But the members of the State have not only obligations towards the general body; they have likewise rights. The State is bound to distribute public burdens (e.g. taxation) according to the powers and capability of the members, and is also under the obligation of distributing public goods (offices and honours) according to the degree of worthiness and services. To these duties of the general body or its leaders corresponds a right of the members; they can demand that the leaders observe the claims of distributive justice, and failure to do this on the part of the authorities is a violation of the right of the members. On the basis of the above notions of right, its object can be more exactly determined. Three species of right and justice have been distinguished. The object of the right, corresponding to even-handed justice, has as its object the securing for the members of human society in their intercourse with one another freedom and independence in the use of their own possessions. For the object of right can only be the good for the attainment of which we recognize right as necessary, and which it effects of its very nature, and this good is the freedom and independence of every member of society in the use of his own. If man is to fulfil freely the tasks imposed upon him by God, he must possess the means necessary for this purpose, and be at liberty to utilize such independently of others. He must have a sphere of free activity, in which he is secure from the interference of others; this object is attained by the right which protects each in the free use of his own from the encroachments of others. Hence the proverbs: "A willing person suffers no injustice" and "No one is compelled to make use of his rights". For the object of the right which corresponds to commutative justice is the liberty of the possessor of the right in the use of his own, and this right is not attained if each is bound always to make use of and insist upon his rights. The object of the right which corresponds to legal justice is the good of the community; of this right we may not say that "no one is bound to make use of his right", since the community---or, more correctly, its leaders--must make use of public rights, whenever and wherever the good of the community requires it. Finally, the right corresponding to the object of distributive justice is the defence of the members against the community or its leaders; they must not be laden with public burdens beyond their powers, and must receive as much of the public goods as becomes the condition of their meritoriousness arid services. Although, in accordance with the above, each of the three kinds of rights has its own immediate object, all three tend in common towards one remote object, which, according to St. Thomas (Cont. Gent., III, xxxiv), is nothing else than to secure that peace be maintained among men by procuring for each the peaceful possession of his own. Right (or more precisely speaking, the obligation corresponding to right) is enforceable at least in general--that is, whoever has a right with respect to some other person is authorized to employ physical force to secure the fulfilment of this obligation, if the other person will not voluntarily fulfil it. This enforceable character of the obligation arises necessarily from the object of right. As already said, this object is to secure for every member of society a sphere of free activity and for society the means necessary for its development, and the attainment of this object is evidently indispensable for social life; but it would not be sufficiently attained if it were left to each one's discretion whether he should fulfil his obligations or not. In a large community there are always many who would allow themselves to be guided, not by right or justice, but by their own selfish inclinations, and would disregard the rights of their fellowmen, if they were not forcibly confined to their proper sphere of right; consequently, the obligation corresponding to a right must be enforceable in favour of the possessor of the right. But in a regulated community the power of compulsion must be vested in the public authority, since, if each might employ force against his fellowmen whenever his right was infringed, there would soon arise a general conflict of all against all, and order and safety would be entirely subverted. Only in cases of necessity, where an unjust attack on one's life or property has to be warded off and recourse to the authorities is impossible, has the individual the right of meeting violence with violence. While right or the obligation corresponding to it is enforceable, we must beware of referring the essence of right to this enforcibility or even to the authority to enforce it, as is done by many jurists since the time of Kant. For enforcibility is only a secondary characteristic of right and does not pertain to all rights; although, for example, under a real monarchy the subjects possess some rights with respect to the ruler, they can usually exercise no compulsion towards him, since he is irresponsible, and is subject to no higher authority which can employ forcible measures against him. Rights are divided, according to the title on which they rest, into natural and positive rights, and the latter are subdivided into Divine and human rights. By natural rights are meant all those which we acquire by our very birth, e.g. the right to live, to integrity of limbs, to freedom, to acquire property, etc.; all other rights are called acquired rights, although many of them are acquired, independently of any positive law, in virtue of free acts, e.g. the right of the husband and wife in virtue of the marriage contract, the right to ownerless goods through occupation, the right to a house through purchase or hire, etc. On the other hand, other rights may be given by positive law; according as the law is Divine or human, and the latter civil or ecclesiastical, we distinguish between Divine or human, civil or ecclesiastical rights. To civil rights belong citizenship in a state, active or passive franchise, etc. V. CATHREIN St. Rimbert St. Rimbert Archbishop of Bremen-Hamburg, died at Bremen 11 June, 888. It is uncertain whether he was a Fleming or a Norman. He was educated at the monastery of Turholt near Brügge in Flanders. There St. Ansgar, first Archbishop of Hamburg, became acquainted with him, and later made him his constant companion When Ansgar died on 2 February, 865, Rimbert was chosen his successor. Pope Nicholas I sent him the pallium in December, 865. As Ansgar's missionary system was based on a connection with the Benedictine Order, Rimbert became, shortly after his consecration, a monk at Corvey, and subsequently made missionary journeys to West Friesland, Denmark, and Sweden, but concerning these unfortunately we have no detailed information. In 884 he succeeded in putting to flight the Norman marauders on the coast of Friesland; in remembrance of this incident he was later held in special veneration in Friesland. Among his episcopal achievements the foundation of a monastery in Bücken near Bremen and his care for the poor and sick are especially emphasized. Historians are indebted to him for a biography of St. Ansgar, which is distinguished by valuable historical information and a faithful character sketch. On the other hand, the biography of Rimbert himself, written by a monk of Corvey, is, while very edifying, poor in actual information; hence we know so little of his life. KLEMENS LÖFFLER Council of Rimini Council of Rimini The second Formula of Sirmium (357) stated thc doctrine of the Anomoeans, or extreme Arians. Against this the Semi-Arian bishops, assembled at Ancyra, the episcopal city of their leader Basilius, issued a counter formula, asserting that the Son is in all things like the Father, afterwards approved by the Third Synod of Sirmium (358). This formula, though silent on the term "homousios", consecrated by the Council of Nicaea, was signed by a few orthodox bishops, and probably by Pope Liberius, being, in fact, capable of an orthodox interpretation. The Emperor Constantius cherished at that time the hope of restoring peace between the orthodox and the Semi-Arians by convoking a general council. Failing to convene one either at Nicaea or at Nicomedia, he was persuaded by Patrophilus, Bishop of Scythopolis, and Narcissus, Bishop of Neronias, to hold two synods, one for the East at Seleucia, in Isauria, the other for the West at Rimini, a proceeding justified by diversity of language and by expense. Before the convocation of the councils, Ursacius and Valens had Marcus, Bishop of Arethusa, designated to draft a formula (the Fourth of Sirmium) to be submitted to the two synods. It declared that the Son was born of the Father before all ages (agreeing so far with the Third Formula); but it added that when God is spoken of, the word ousia, "essence ', should be avoided, not being found in Scripture and being a cause of scandal to the faithful; by this step they intended to exclude the similarity of essence. The Council of Rimini was opened early in July, 359, with over four hundred bishops. About eighty Semi-Arians, including Ursacius, Germinius, and Auxentius, withdrew from the orthodox bishops, the most eminent of whom was Restitutus of Carthage; Liberius, Eusebius, Dionysius, and others were still in exile. The two parties sent separate deputations to the emperor, the orthodox asserting clearly their firm attachment to the faith of Nicaea, while the Arian minority adhered to the imperial formula. But the inexperienced representatives of the orthodox majority allowed themselves to be deceived, and not only entered into communion with the heretical delegates, but even subscribed, at, Nice in Thrace, a formula to the effect merely that the Son is like the Father according to the Scriptures (the words "in all things" being omitted). On their return to Rimini, they were met with the unanimous protests of their colleagues. But the threats of the consul Taurus, the remonstrances of the Semi-Arians against hindering peace between East and West for a word not contained in Scripture, their privations and their homesickness--all combined to weaken the constancy of the orthodox bishops. And the last twenty were induced to subscribe when Ursacius had an addition made to the formula of Nice, declaring that the Son is not a creature like other creatures. Pope Liberius, having regained his liberty, rejected this formula, which was thereupon repudiated by many who had signed it. In view of the hasty manner of its adoption and the 1ack of approbation by the Holy See, it could have no authority. In any case, the council was a sudden defeat of orthodoxy, and St. Jerome could say: "The whole world groaned in astonishment to find itself Arian". U. BENIGNI Rimini Rimini DIOCESE OF RIMINI (ARIMINUM). Suffragan of Ravenna. Rimini is situated near the coast between the rivers Marecchia (the ancient Ariminus) and Ausa (Aprusa). Coast navigation and fishing are the principal industries. The thirteenth-century cathedral (San Francesco) was originally Gothic, but was transformed by order of Sigismondo Malatesta (1446-55) according to the designs of Leone Baptista Alberti and never completed; the cupola is lacking, also the upper part of the façade; in the cathedral are the tombs of Sigismondo and his wife Isotta. The plastic decorations of the main nave and some of the chapels, a glorification to Sigismondo and Isotta, are by Agostino di Duccio, and breathe the pagan spirit of the Renaissance. On the southern side are the tombs of illustrious humanists, among them that of the philosopher Gemistus Pletho, whose remains were brought back by Sigismondo from his wars in the Balkans. There is a remarkable fresco of Piero della Francesca. In San Giuliano is the great picture of Paul Veronese representing the martyrdom of that saint, also pictures of Bittino da Faenza (1357) dealing with some episodes of the saint's life. Among the profane edifices are the Arch of Augustus (27 B. C.), the remains of an amphitheatre, and the five-arched bridge of Augustus over the Marecchia. The town hall has a small but valuable gallery (Perin del Vaga, Ghirlandajo, Bellini, Benedetto Coda, Tintoretto, Agostino di Duccio); the Gambalunga Library (1677) has valuable manuscripts. There is an archæological museum and a bronze statue of Paul V; the castle of Sigismondo Malatesta is now used as a prison. Ariminum was built by the Umbri. In the sixth century B. C. it was taken by the Gauls; after their last defeat (283) it returned to the Umbri and became in 263 a Latin colony, very helpful to the Romans during the late Gallic wars. Rimini was reached by the Via Flamminia, and here began the Via Æmilia that led to Piacenza. Augustus did much for the city and Galla Placida built the church of San Stefano. When the Goths conquered Rimini in 493, Odoacer, besieged in Ravenna, had to capitulate. During the Gothic wars Rimini was taken and retaken many times. In its vicinity Narses overthrew (553) the Alamanni. Under Byzantine dominion it belonged to the Pentapolis. In 728 it was taken with many other cities by the Lombard King Liutprand but returned to the Byzantines about 735. King Pepin gave it to the Holy See, but during the wars of the popes and the Italian cities against the emperors, Rimini sided with the latter. In the thirteenth century it suffered from the discords of the Gambacari and Ansidei families. In 1295 Malatesta I da Verucchio was named "Signore" of the city, and, despite interruptions, his family held authority until 1528. Among his successors were: Malatesta II (1312-17); Pandolfo I, his brother (d. 1326), named by Louis the Bavarian imperial vicar in Romagna; Ferrantino, son of Malatesta II (1335), opposed by his cousin Ramberto and by Cardinal Bertando del Poggetto (1331), legate of John XXII; Malatesta III, Guastafamiglia (1363), lord also of Pesaro; Malatesta IV l'Ungaro (1373); Galeotto, uncle of the former (1385), lord also of Fano (from 1340), Pesaro, and Cesena (1378); his son Carlo (1429), the noblest scion of the family, laboured for the cessation of the Western Schism, and was the counsellor, protector, and ambassador of Gregory XII, and patron of scholars; Galeotto Roberto (1432); his brother Sigismondo Pandolf (1468) had the military and intellectual qualities of Carlo Malatesta but not his character. He was tyrannous and perfidious, in constant rebellion against the popes, a good soldier, poet, philosopher, and lover of the fine arts, but a monster of domestic and public vices; in 1463 he submitted to Pius II, who left him Rimini; Robert, his son (1482), under Paul II nearly lost his state and under Sixtus IV became the commanding officer of the pontifical army against Alfonso of Naples, by whom he was defeated in the battle of Campo Morto (1482); Pandolfo V, his son (1500), lost Rimini to Cesare Borgia (1500-3), after whose overthrow it fell to Venice (1503-9), but was retaken by Julius II and incorporated with the territory of the Holy See. After the death of Leo X Pandolfo returned for several months, and with his son Sigismondo held tyrannous rule. Adrian VI gave Rimini to the Duke of Urbino, the pope's vicar. In 1527 Sigismondo managed to regain the city, but the following year the Malatesta dominion passed away forever. Rimini was thenceforth a papal city, subject to the legate at Forlì. In 1845 a band of adventurers commanded by Ribbotti entered the city and proclaimed a constitution which was soon abolished. In 1860 Rimini and the Romagna were incorporated with the Kingdom of Italy. Rimini was probably evangelized from Ravenna. Among its traditional martyrs are: St. Innocentia and companions; Sts. Juventinus, Facundinus, and companions; Sts. Theodorus and Marinus. The see was probably established before the peace of Constantine. Among the bishops were: Stennius, at Rome in 313; Cyriacus, one of his successors, sided with the Arians; under St. Gaudentius the famous Council of Rimini was held (359); he was later put to death by the Arians for having excommunicated the priest Marcianus; Stephanus attended at Constantinople (551); the election of Castor (591) caused much trouble to St. Gregory I, who had to send to Rimini a "visitor"; Agnellus (743) was governor of the city subject to the Archbishop of Ravenna; Delto acted frequently as legate for John VIII; Blessed Arduino (d. in 1009); Uberto II is mentioned with praise by St. Peter Damian; Opizo was one of the consecrators of the Antipope Clement III (Guiberto, 1075); Ranieri II degli Uberti (1143) consecrated the ancient cathedral of St. Colomba; Alberigo (1153) made peace between Rimini and Cesena; Bonaventura Trissino founded the hospital of Santo Spirito; under Benno (1230) some pious ladies founded a hospital for the lepers, and themselves cared for the afflicted. At the end of the thirteenth century the Armenians received at Rimini a church and a hospital. From 1407 Gregory XII resided at Rimini. Giovanni Rosa united the eleven hospitals of Rimini into one. Under Giulio Parisani (1549) the seminary was opened (1568). Giambattista Castelli (1569) promoted the Tridentine reforms and was nuncio at Paris. Andrea Minucci was severely tried during the French Revolution; under him the Malatesta church (San Francesco) became the cathedral. The diocese has 124 parishes, 125,400 inhabitants, 336 priests, 10 houses of religious with 56 priests, 24 houses of religious women, who care for the hospitals, orphanages, and other charitable institutions, or communal and private schools. There are also 1 school for boys and 3 for girls. CAPPELLETTI, Le Chiese d'Italia, II; NARDI, Cronotassi dei pastori della Chiesa di Rimini (Rimini, 1813); TONINI, Storia civile e sacra di Rimini (6 vols., Rimini, 1848-88); IDEM, Compendio della storia di Rimini (1896); YRIARTE, Rimini: Etudes sur les lettres et les arts à la cour des Malatesta (Paris, 1882). U. BENIGNI Rimouski Rimouski DIOCESE OF RIMOUSKI (SANCTI GERMANI DE RIMOUSKI) Suffragan of Quebec, comprises the counties of Bonaventure, Gaspé (except Magdalen Islands), Rimouski and the greater part of Temiscouata, and forms the eastern extremity of the province of Quebec. At the extreme point of the Gaspé peninsula (formerly called Honguedo), Jacques Cartier landed on his first voyage of discovery (1534) and planted a cross with the royal arms of France. The Souriquois or Micmacs occupied the shores of Baie des Chaleurs, and their successive missionaries, Recollets, Capuchins, Jesuits, amongst them Father Labrosse, and Spiritians (or priests of the seminary of the Holy Ghost), including the celebrated Pierre Maillard, ministered to that region of the Rimouski diocese. The first Mass was celebrated near the city of Rimouski, at a place since called Pointe-au-Père, by the Jesuit Henri Nouvel, in 1663, on his way to the Papinachois and Montagnais of Tadoussac, on the north shore. The first settler at Rimouski was Germain Lepage (1696), whose patronymic was chosen as titular of the future parish and diocese. The seigniory had been conceded to his son René in 1688. The latest statistics give 120 churches and chapels, with 148 priests. Two wooden churches were built at Rimouski, in 1712 and 1787 respectively; the first stone church, 1824, was replaced by the present cathedral in 1854. Before the creation of the see, Rimouski was successively visited by Bishops Hubert (1791), Denaut (1798), Plessis (1806-14-22), Panet (1810-26), Signay (1833-38-43), Turgeon (1849), and Baillargeon (1855-60-65). The see was created and its first titular nominated on 15 January, 1867, and acquired civil incorporation ipso facto the same day, according to the law of the country. The first bishop, Jean-Pierre-François Laforce-Langevin, was b. at Quebec, 22 Sept., 1821, and ordained on 12 Sept., 1844. as director of the Quebec seminary he was one of the joint founders of Laval University (1852). He successively filled the offices of pastor to the parishes of Ste Claire and Beauport, and of principal of Laval Normal School. He was consecrated 1 may, 1867, resigned 1891, and died 1892. He completed the organization of a classical college previously founded by the Abbés C. Tanguay and G. Potvin and adopted it as the seminary of the diocese. He introduced the Sisters of the Congregation of Notre-Dame (Montreal) and sanctioned the foundation (1879) of the Sisters of the Most Holy Rosary, a flourishing institute largely due to the zeal of Vicar-General Langevin, his brother. Bishop Langevin established the cathedral chapter in 1878. The second bishop, still in office, André-Albert Blais, b. at St-Vallier, P.Q., 1842, studied at the college of Ste Anna de la Pocatière, graduated in Rome Doctor of Canon Law, and taught the same branch at Laval University. He was consecrated bishop 18 May, 1890, and took possession of the see in 1891. Bishop Blais created many new parishes in the diocese, and founded a normal school under the management of the Ursulines. The clergy, exclusively French-Canadian, study classics and philosophy at the diocesan seminary, and theology principally at Laval University, in some cases at the Propaganda, Rome. (For parochial system, incorporation of religious institutions, etc. see CANADA, and QUEBEC, PROVINCE OF.) There are no cities besides Rimouski, but all the larger rural parishes have fine churches and convent-schools; the only domestic mission is that of the Micmacs at Ristigouche, under the care of the Capuchins. Besides a Priests' Aid Society, there are several benevolent and mutual aid societies for the laity. The religious orders of men are the Capuchins, Eudists, and Brothers of the Cross of Jesus; those of women are the Ursulines, Sisters of Charity, of the Good Shepherd (teaching), of the Holy Rosary, of the Holy Family, and the Daughters of Jesus. Retreats for the clergy are given each year; conferences to discuss theological cases take place every three months. Nearly all the secular clergy (110 our of 137) belong to the Eucharistic league. Out of a total Catholic population of 118,740, only 3695 are not French Canadians. The Indians number 610. The Protestant element amounts to 8798. There is no friction between these different elements and no difficult racial problem to solve, the parishes containing an English-speaking element as well as the Micmacs being instructed in their native tongues. GUAY, Chroniques de Rimouski (Quebec, 1873); Le Canada ecclesiastique (Montreal, 1911). LIONEL LINDSAY Rings Rings In General Although the surviving ancient rings, proved by their devices, provenance, etc., to be of Christian origin, are fairly numerous (See Fortnum in "Arch. Journ.", XXVI, 141, and XXVIII, 275), we cannot in most cases identify them with any liturgical use. Christians no doubt, just like other people, wore rings in accordance with their station in life, for rings are mentioned without reprobation in the New Testament (Luke, xv, 22, and James, ii, 2). Moreover, St. Clement of Alexandria (Paed., III, c. xi) says that a man might lawfully wear a ring on his little finger, and that it should bear some religious emblem--a dove, or a fish, or an anchor - though, on the other hand, Tertullian, St. Cyprian, and the Apostolic Constitutions (I, iii) protest against the ostentation of Christians in decking themselves with rings and gems. In any case the Acts of Sts. Perpetua and Felicitas (c. xxi), about the beginning of the third century, inform us of how the martyr Saturus took a ring from the finger of Pudens, a soldier who was looking on, and gave it back to him as a keepsake, covered with his own blood. Knowing, as we do, that in the pagan days of Rome every flamen Dialis (i.e., a priest specially consecrated to the worship of Jupiter) had, like the senators, the privilege of wearing a gold ring, it would not be surprising to find evidence in the fourth century that rings were worn by Christian bishops. But the various passages that have been appealed to, to prove this, are either not authentic or else are inconclusive. St. Augustine indeed speaks of his sealing a letter with a ring (Ep. ccxvii, in P.L., XXXIII, 227), but on the other hand his contemporary Possidius expressly states that Augustine himself wore no ring (P.L., XXXII, 53), whence we are led to conclude that the possession of a signet does not prove the use of a ring as part of the episcopal insignia. However, in a Decree of Pope Boniface IV (A.D. 610) we hear of monks raised to the episcopal dignity as anulo pontificali subarrhatis, while at the Fourth Council of Toledo, in 633, we are told that if a bishop has been deposed from his office, and is afterwards reinstated, he is to receive back stole, ring, and crosier (orarium, anulum et baculum). St. Isidore of Seville at about the same period couples the ring with the crosier and declares that the former is conferred as "an emblem of the pontifical dignity or of the sealing of secrets" (P.L., LXXXIII, 783). From this time forth it may be assumed that the ring was strictly speaking an episcopal ornament conferred in the rite of consecration, and that it was commonly regarded as emblematic of the betrothal of the bishop to his Church. In the eighth and ninth centuries in MSS. of the Gregorian Sacramentary and in a few early Pontificals (e.g., that attributed to Archbishop Egbert of York) we meet with various formulae for the delivery of the ring. The Gregorian form, which survives in substance to the present day, runs in these terms: "Receive the ring, that is to say the seal of faith, whereby thou, being thyself adorned with spotless faith, mayst keep unsullied the troth which thou hast pledged to the spouse of God, His holy Church." These two ideas--namely of the seal, indicative of discretion, and of conjugal fidelity--dominate the symbolism attaching to the ring in nearly all its liturgical uses. The latter idea was pressed so far in the case of bishops that we find ecclesiastical decrees enacting that "a bishop deserting the Church to which he was consecrated and transferring himself to another is to be held guilty of adultery and is to be visited with the same penalties as a man who, forsaking his own wife, goes to live with another woman" (Du Saussay, "Panoplia episcopalis", 250). It was perhaps this idea of espousals which helped to establish the rule, of which we hear already in the ninth century, that the episcopal ring was to be placed on the fourth finger (i.e., that next the little finger) of the right hand. As the pontifical ring had to be worn on occasion over the glove, it is a common thing to find medieval specimens large in size and proportionately heavy m execution. The inconvenience of the looseness thus resulting was often met by placing another smaller ring just above it as a keeper (see Lacy, "Exeter Pontifical", 3). As the pictures of the medieval and Renaissance periods show, it was formerly quite usual for bishops to wear other rings along with the episcopal ring; indeed the existing "Caeremoniale episcoporum" (Bk. II, viii, nn. 10-11) assumes that this is still likely to be the case. Custom prescribes that a layman or a cleric of inferior grade on being presented to a bishop should kiss his hand, that is to say his episcopal ring, but it is a popular misapprehension to suppose that any indulgence is attached to the act. Episcopal rings, both at an earlier and later period, were sometimes used as receptacles for relics. St. Hugh of Lincoln had such a ring which must have been of considerable capacity. (On investiture by ring and staff see Investitures, Conflict of.) Besides bishops, many other ecclesiastics are privileged to wear rings. The pope of course is the first of bishops, but he does not habitually wear the signet ring distinctive of the papacy and known as "the Ring of the Fisherman" (see below in this article), but usually a simple cameo, while his more magnificent pontifical rings are reserved for solemn ecclesiastical functions. Cardinals also wear rings independently of their grade in the ecclesiastical hierarchy. The ring belonging to the cardinalitial dignity is conferred by the pope himself in the consistory in which the new cardinal is named to a particular "title". It is of small value and is set with a sapphire, while it bears on the inner side of the bezel the arms of the pope conferring it. In practice the cardinal is not required to wear habitually the ring thus presented, and he commonly prefers to use one of his own. The privilege of wearing a ring has belonged to cardinal-priests since the time of Innocent III or earlier (see Sägmüller, "Thatigkeit und Stellung der Cardinale", 163). Abbots in the earlier Middle Ages were permitted to wear rings only by special privilege. A letter of Peter of Blois in the twelfth century (P.L., CCVII, 283) shows that at that date the wearing of a ring by an abbot was apt to be looked upon as a piece of ostentation, out in the later Pontificals the blessing and delivery of a ring formed part of the ordinary ritual for the consecration of an abbot, and this is still the case at the present day. On the other hand: there is no such ceremony indicated in the blessing of an abbess, though certain abbesses have received, or assumed, the privilege of wearing a ring of office. The ring is also regularly worn by certain other minor prelates, for example prothonotaries, but the privilege cannot be said to belong to canons as such (B. de Montault, "Le costume, etc.", I, 170) without special indult. In any case such rings cannot ordinarily be worn by these minor prelates during the celebration of Mass. The same restriction, it need hardly be said, applies to the ring which is conferred as part of the insignia of the doctorate either of theology or of canon law. The plain rings worn by certain orders of nuns and conferred upon them in the course of their solemn profession, according to the ritual provided in the Roman Pontifical appear to find some justification in ancient tradition. St. Ambrose (P.L., XVII, 701, 735) speaks as though it were a received custom for virgins consecrated to God to wear a ring in memory of their betrothal to their heavenly Spouse. This delivery of a ring to professed nuns is also mentioned by several medieval Pontificals, from the twelfth century onwards. Wedding rings, or more strictly, rings given in the betrothal ceremony, seem to have been tolerated among Christians under the Roman Empire from a quite early period. The use of such rings was of course of older date than Christianity, and there is not much to suggest that the giving of the ring was at first incorporated in any ritual or invested with any precise religious significance. But it is highly probable that, if the acceptance and the wearing of a betrothal ring was tolerated among Christians, such rings would have been adorned with Christian emblems. Certain extant specimens, more particularly a gold ring found near Arles, belonging apparently to the fourth or fifth century, and bearing the inscription, Tecla vivat Deo cum marito seo [suo], may almost certainly be assumed to be Christian espousal rings. In the coronation ceremony, also, it has long been the custom to deliver both to the sovereign and to the queen consort a ring previously blessed. Perhaps the earliest example of the use of such a ring is in the case of Judith, the step-mother of Alfred the Great. It is however in this instance a little difficult to determine whether the ring was bestowed upon the queen in virtue of her dignity as queen consort or of her nuptials to Ethelwulf. Rings have also occasionally been used for other religious purposes. At an early date the small keys which contained filings from the chains of St. Peter seem to have been welded to a band of metal and worn upon the finger as reliquaries. In more modern times rings have been constructed with ten small knobs or protuberances, and used for saying the rosary. Babington in Dict. Christ. Antiq.; Leclercq in Dict. dæarch. chret., I (Paris, 1907), s. v. Anneaux; Deloche, Etude historique et archeologique sur les anneaux (Paris, 1900); Du Saussay, Panoplia episcopalis (Paris, 1646), 175-294; Dalton, Catalogue of early Christian Antiquities in the British Museum (London, 1901); Barbier de Montault, Le costume et les usages ecclesiastiques selon la tradition romaine (Paris, 1897-1901). HERBERT THURSTON The Ring of Fisherman The Ring of the Fisherman The earliest mention of the Fisherman's ring worn by the popes is in a letter of Clement IV written in 1265 to his nephew, Peter Grossi. The writer states that popes were then accustomed to seal their private letters with "the seal of the Fisherman", whereas public documents, he adds, were distinguished by the leaden "bulls" attached (see BULLS AND BRIEFS). From the fifteenth century, however, the Fisherman's ring has been used to seal the class of papal official documents known as Briefs. The Fisherman's ring is placed, by the cardinal camerlengo on the finger of a newly elected pope. It is made of gold, with a representation of St. Peter in a boat, fishing, and the name of the reigning pope around it. BABINGTON in Dict. Christ. Antiq., s. v., 3. MAURICE M. HASSETT Giovanni Battista Rinuccini Giovanni Battista Rinuccini Born at Rome, 1592; d. at Fermo, 1653, was the son of a Florentine patrician, his mother being a sister of Cardinal Ottavo. Educated at Rome and at the Universities of Bologna, Perugia and Pisa, in due course he was ordained priest, having at the age of twenty-two obtained his doctor's degree from the University of Pisa. Returning to Rome he won distinction as an advocate in the ecclesiastical courts, and in 1625 became Archbishop of Fermo. For the twenty years following, his life was the uneventful one of a hard-working chief pastor, and then, in 1645, he was sent as papal nuncio to Ireland. Maddened by oppression, the Irish Catholics had taken up arms, had set up a legislative assembly with an executive government, and had bound themselves by oath not to cease fighting until they had secured undisturbed possession of their lands and religious liberty. But the difficulties were great. The Anglo-Irish and old Irish disagreed, their generals were incompetent or quarrelled with each other, supplies were hard to get, and the Marquis of Ormond managed to sow dissension among the members of the Supreme Council at Kilkenny. In these circumstances the Catholics sought for foreign aid from Spain and the pope; and the latter sent them Rinuccini with a good supply of arms, ammunition, and money. He arrived in Ireland, in the end of 1645, after having narrowly escaped capture at sea by an English vessel. Acting on his instructions from the pope, he encouraged the Irish Catholics not to strive for national independence, but rather to aid the king against the revolted Puritans, provided there was a repeal of the penal laws in existence. Finding, however, that Ormond, acting for the king, would grant no toleration to the Catholics, Rinuccini wished to fight both the Royalists and the Puritans. The Anglo-Irish, satisfied with even the barest toleration, desired negotiations with Ormond and peace at any price, while the Old Irish were for continuing the war until the Plantation of Ulster was undone, and complete toleration secured. Failing to effect a union between such discordant elements, Rinuccini lost courage; and when Ormond surrendered Dublin to the Puritans, and the Catholics became utterly helpless from dissension, he left Ireland, in 1649, and retired to his diocese, where he died. Rinuccini, The Embassy to Ireland (tr. Hutton, Dublin, 1873); Gilbert, History of Irish Affairs (1641-52, 1880); Meehan, Confederation of Kilkenny (Dublin, 1846); D'Alton, History of Ireland (London, 1910). E.A. D'ALTON Alexis-Francois Rio Alexis-François Rio French writer on art, b. on the Island of Arz, Department of Morbihan, 20 May, 1797; d. 17 June, 1874. He was educated at the college of Vannes, where he received his first appointment as instructor, which occupation however proved to be distasteful. He proceeded to Paris, but was temporarily disappointed in his hope of obtaining there a chair of history. His enthusiastic championship of the liberty of the Greeks attracted the attention of the Government, which appointed him censor of the public press. His refusal of this appointment won him great popularity and the lifelong friendship of Montalembert. In 1828 he published his first work, "Essai sur l'histoire de l'esprit humain dans l'antiquité", which brought him the favour of the minister de La Ferronays and a secretariate in the Ministry of Foreign Affairs. This position allowed him (as Montalembert later wrote to him) to become for Christian, what Winckelmann had been for ancient, art. He spent the greater portion of the period 1830-60 in travels through Italy, Germany, and England. In Munich he became acquainted with the spokesmen of contemporary Catholicism -- Boisserée, Baader, Döllinger, Görres, and Rumohr -- and also with Schelling. Schelling gave him an insight into the aesthetic ideal; Rumohr directed him to Italy, where the realization of this ideal in art could be seen. In 1835 the first volume of his "Art chrétien" appeared under the misleading title, "De la poésie chrétienne--Forme de l'art". This work, which was received with enthusiasm in Germany and Italy, was a complete failure in France. Discouraged, he renounced art study and wrote a history of the persecutions of the English Catholics, a work which was never printed. As the result of his intercourse with the Pre-Raphaelites of England, where he lived for three years and married, and especially of Montalembert's encouragement, he visited again, in company with his wife, all the important galleries of Europe, although he had meanwhile become lame and had to drag himself through the museums on crutches. Prominent men like Gladstone, Manzoni, and Thiers became interested in his studies, which he published in four volumes under the title "L'art chrétien" (1861-7). This work is not a history of all Christian art, but of Italian painting from Cimabue to the death of Raphael. Without any strict method or criticism, he expresses preference for the art of the fifteenth century, not without many an inexact and even unjust judgment on the art of later ages; but, in spite, or rather on account of this partiality, he has contributed greatly towards restoring to honour the forgotten and despised art of the Middle Ages. Rio describes the more notable incidents of his life in the two works, "Histoire d'un collège breton sous l'Empire, la petite chouannerie" (1842) and "Epilogue à l'art chrétien" (2 vols., Paris, 1872). He also published the following works: "Shakespeare" (1864), in which he claims the great dramatist as a Catholic; "Michel-Ange et Raphael" (1867); "L'idéal antique et l'idéal chrétien" (1873). Lefébure, Portraits de croyants (2nd ed., Paris, 1905), 157-284. B. KLEINSCHMIDT Riobamba Riobamba Diocese of (Bolivarensis), suffragan of Quito, Ecuador, erected by Pius IX, 5 January, 1863. The city, which has a population of 18,000, is situated 9039 feet above sea-level, 85 miles E.N.E. of Guayaquil. Its streets are wide and its adobe houses generally but one story high on account of the frequent earthquakes. Formerly the city was situated about 18 miles further west near the village of Cajabamba and contained 40,000 inhabitants. but it was completely destroyed on 4 February, 1797, by an earthquake. Old Riobamba was the capital of the Kingdom of Puruha before the conquest of the Incas; it was destroyed by Ruminiahui during his retreat in 1533 after his defeat by Benalcázar. The cathedral and the Redemptorist church in the new city are very beautiful. Velasco the historian and the poets Larrea and Orozco were natives of Riobamba. It was here too that the first national Ecuadorian convention was held in 1830. The diocese, comprising the civil Provinces of Chimborazo and Bolivar (having an area of 4250 square miles), has 63 priests, 48 churches and chapels, and about 200,000 inhabitants. The present bishop, Mgr Andres Machado, S.J., was born at Cuenca, Ecuador, 16 October, 1850, and appointed, 12 November, 1907, in succession to Mgr Arsenio Andrade (b. at Uyumbicho, in the Archdiocese of Quito, 8 September, 1825, appointed on 13 November, 1884, d. 1907). Mera, Geog. de la republica del Ecuador. A.A. MacERLEAN Rio Negro Rio Negro Prefecture Apostolic in Brazil, bounded on the south by a line running westwards from the confluence of the Rio Negro and Rio Branco along the watershed of the Rio Negro to Colombia, separating the new prefecture from those of Teffé and Upper Solimões, and the See of Amazones (from which it was separated by a Decree of the Sacred Congregation of the Consistory, 19 Oct., 1910), on the west by Colombia, on the north by Colombia and Venezuela, on the east by the territory of Rio Branco. The white population is small, and confined to the few villages along the banks of the Rio Negro. As early as 1658 a Jesuit Father, Francisco Gonsales, established a mission among the natives of the Upper Rio Negro, and traces of the work of the Jesuit missionaries still exist in the scattered villages. Two years later a Carmelite, Father Theodosius, evangelized the Tucumaos. The Franciscans labored among the Indians from 1870 and had seven stations on the Rio Uaupés (Tariana Indians), four on the Rio Tikié (Toccana Indians), and one on the Rio Papuri (Macu Indians), but on the fall of the empire most of the missions were abandoned, though some of them were re-established later. A.A. MACERLEAN Juan Martinez de Ripalda Juan Martínez de Ripalda Theologian, b. at Pamplona, Navarre, 1594; d. at Madrid, 26 April, 1648. He entered the Society of Jesus at Pamplona in 1609. In the triennial reports of 1642 he says of himself that he was not physically strong, that he had studied religion, arts, and theology, that he had taught grammar one year, arts four, theology nineteen, and had been professed. According to Southwell, he taught philosophy at Monforte, theology at Salamanca, and was called from there to the Imperial College of Madrid, where, by royal decree, he taught moral theology. Later he was named censor to the Inquisition and confessor of de Olivares, the favorite of Philip IV, whom he followed when he was exiled from Madrid. Southwell describes his character by saying that he was a good religious, noted for his innocence. Mentally he qualifies him as subtle in argument, sound in opinion, keen-edged and clear in expression, and well-versed in St. Augustine and St. Thomas. According to Drews, no Jesuit ever occupied this chair in the University of Salamanca with more honor than he, and Hurter places him, with Lugo, first among the contemporary theologians of Spain, and perhaps of all Europe. Among the numerous theological opinions which characterize him the following are worth citing: (1) He thinks that the creation of an intrinsically supernatural substance is possible, in other words, that a creature is possible to which supernatural grace, with the accompanying gifts and intuitive vision, is due. (2) He holds that, by a positive decree of God, supernatural grace is conferred, in the existing providence for every good act whatsoever; so that every good act is supernatural, or at least that every natural good act is accompanied by another which is supernatural. (3) He maintains that, prescinding from the extrinsic Divine law, and taking into account only the nature of things, the supernatural faith which is called lata would be sufficient for justification, that faith, namely, which comes by the contemplation of created things, though assent is not produced with- out grace. (4) He affirms that in the promissory revelations the formal object of faith is God's faithfulness to His promises, the constancy of His will, and the efficacy of omnipotence. (5) He asserts that all the propositions of Baius were condemned for doctrine according to the sense in which he (Baius) held them. (6) He maintains that the Divine maternity of the Blessed Virgin Mary is of itself a sanctifying form. The following are his works: "De ente supernaturali disputationes in universam theologiam", .three vols., I (Bordeaux, 1634), II (Lyons, 1645), III, written "Adversus Bajanos" (Cologne, 1648); rare editions like that of Lyons, 1663, have been published of the two first volumes. It is a classic work in which he included questions which are not included in ordinary theological treatises. His third volume was attacked in an anonymous work, "P. Joannis Martínez . . . Vulpes capta per theologos . . . Academiae Lovaniensis", which Reusch says was the work of Sinnich. "Expositio brevis litterae Magistri Sententiarum" (Salamanca, 1635), praised by the Calvinist Voet. "Tractatus theologici et scholastici de virtutibus, fide, spe et charitate" (Lyons, 1652), a posthumous work and very rare. Two new editions of all his works have been issued: Vives (8 vols., Paris, 1871-3), Palmé (4 vols., Paris, Rome, Propaganda Fide, 1870-1). "Discurso sobre la elección de sucessor del pontificado en vida del pontifice" (Seville). Uriarte says this work was published in Aragon, perhaps in Huesca, with the anagram of Martín Jirón de Palazeda, written by order of the Count de Olivares. The following are in manuscript: "De visione Dei" (2 vols.); "De praedestinatione"; "De angelis et auxiliis"; "De voluntate Dei" preserved in the University of Salamanca; "Discurso acerca de la ley de desafío y parecer sobre el desafio de Medina Sidonia a Juan de Braganza", preserved in the Biblioteca Nacional. SOUTHWELL, Biblioteca scriptorum S. J. (Rome, 1670), 478; ANTONIO, Bibliotheca hispana nova, I (Madrid, 1783), 736; HURTER, Nomenclator, I (Innsbruck, 1892), 381; SOMMERVOGEL, Bibliotheque, V., col. 640, Biografia eclesiastica completa, XXII (Madrid, 1864), 179. ANTONIO PEREZ GOYENA Ripatransone Ripatransone (RIPANENSIS). Diocese in Ascoli Piceno, Central Italy. The city is situated on five hills, not far from the site of ancient Cupra Marittima. The modern name comes from Ripa trans Asonem, "the other bank of the Asone". A castle was erected there in the early Middle Ages, and enlarged later by the bishops of Fermo, who had several conflicts with the people. In 1571 St. Pius V made it an episcopal see, naming as its first bishop Cardinal Lucio Sasso and including in its jurisdiction small portions of the surrounding Dioceses of Fermo, Ascoli, and Teramo. Noteworthy bishops were: Cardinal Filippo Sega (1575); Gaspare Sillingardi (1582), afterwards Bishop of Modena, employed by Alfonso II of Ferrara on various missions to Rome and to Spain, effected a revival of religious life in Ripatransone; Gian Carlo Gentili (1845), historian of Sanseverino and Ripatransone; Alessandro Spoglia (1860-67) not recognized by the Government. The cathedral is the work of Gaspare Guerra and has a beautiful marble altar with a triptych by Crivelli; the church of the Madonna del Carmine possesses pictures of the Raphael School. The diocese, at first directly subject to the Holy See, has been suffragan of Fermo since 1680. CAPPELLETTI, Le chiese d'Italia, III (Venice, 1857); Annuaire pontifical catholique (Paris, 1911), s.v. U. BENIGNI Marquess of Ripon Marquess of Ripon George Frederick Samuel Robinson, K.G., P.C., G.C.S.I., F.R.S., Earl de Grey, Earl of Ripon, Viscount Goderich, Baron Grantham, and baronet Born at the prime minister's residence, 10 Downing Street, London, 24 Oct., 1827; died 9 July, 1909. He was the second son of Frederick John Robinson, Viscount Goderich, afterwards first Earl of Ripon, and Lady Sarah Albinia Louisa, daughter of Robert, fourth Earl of Buckinghamshire; and he was born during his father's brief tenure of the office of prime minister. Before entering public life he married (8 April, 1851) his cousin Henrietta Ann Theodosia, elder daughter of Captain Henry Vyner, and by her had two children, Frederick Oliver, who succeeded to his honours, and Mary Sarah, who died in infancy. Inheriting the principles which were common to the great Whig families, Lord Ripon remained through his long public life one of the most generally respected supporters of Liberalism, and even those who most severely criticised his administrative ability -- and in his time he held very many of the great offices of state -- recognized the integrity and disinterestedness of his aims. He entered the House of Commons as member for Hull in 1852, and after representing Huddersfield (1853-57), and the West Riding of Yorkshire (1857-59), he succeeded his father as Earl of Ripon and Viscount Goderich on 28 Jan., 1859, taking his seat in the House of Lords. In the following November he succeeded his uncle as Earl de Grey and Baron Grantham. In the same year he first took office, and was a member of every Liberal administration for the next half-century. The offices he held were: under secretary of State for war (1859-61); under secretary of State for India (1861-1863); secretary of State for war; (1863-66), all under Lord Palmerston; secretary of State for India (1866) under Earl Russell. In Mr. Gladstone's first administration he was lord president of the council (1868-73) and during this period acted as chairman of the joint commission for drawing up the Treaty of Washington which settled the Alabama claims (1876). For this great public service he was created Marquess of Ripon. He also was grand master of the freemasons from 1871 to 1874, when he resigned this office to enter the Catholic Church. He was received at the London Oratory, 4 Sept., 1874. When Gladstone returned to power in 1880 he appointed Lord Ripon Governor-General and Viceroy of India, the office with which his name will ever be connected, he having made himself beloved by the Indian subjects of the Crown as no one of his predecessors had been. He held this office until 1884. In the short administration of 1886 he was first lord of the admiralty, and in that of 1892-1895 he was secretary of State for the Colonies. When the Liberals again returned to power he took office as lord privy seal. This office he resigned in 1908. Ever a fervent Catholic, Lord Ripon took a great share in educational and charitable works. He was president of the Society of St. Vincent de Paul from 1899 until his death; vice-president of the Catholic Union, and a great supporter of St. Joseph's Catholic Missionary Society. The Tablet (17 July, 1909); Annual Register (London, 1909). EDWIN BURTON Richard Risby Richard Risby Born in the parish of St. Lawrence, Reading, 1489; executed at Tyburn, London, 20 April, 1534. He entered Winchester College in 1500, and was subsequently a fellow of New College, Oxford, taking his degree in 1510. He resigned in 1513 to enter the Franciscan Order, and eventually became warden of the Observant friary at Canterbury. He was condemned to death by the Act of Attainder, 25 Henry VIII, c. 12, together with Elizabeth Barton, Edward Bocking, Hugh Rich, warden of the Observant friary at Richmond, John Dering, B.D. (Oxon.), Benedictine of Christ Church, Canterbury, Henry Gold, M.A. (Oxon.), parson of St. Mary; Aldermanbury, London, and vicar of Hayes, Middlesex and Richard Master, rector of Aldington, Kent, who was pardoned; but by some strange oversight Master's name is included and Risby's omitted in the catalogue of praetermissi. Father Thomas Bourchier, who took the Franciscan habit at Greenwich about 1557, says that Fathers Risby and Rich were twice offered their lives, if they would accept the king's supremacy. GAIRDNER, Letters and Papers of the reign of Henry VIII, VI, Vll (London, Oxford, Cambridge, Edinburgh, and Dublin, 1882-3), passim; GASQUET, Henry VIII and the English Monasteries (London, 1906), 44; KIRBY, Winchester Scholars (London and Winchester, 1888), 98; BOASE, Register of the University of Oxford (Oxford, 1885), 71. J.B. WAINEWRIGHT William Rishanger William Rishanger Chronicler, b. at Rishangles, Suffolk, about 1250; d. after 1312. He became a Benedictine at St. Alban's Abbey, Hertfordshire in 1271, and there revived the custom of composing chronicles which had languished since the time of Matthew Paris. His chief work is the history of the Barons' Wars, "Narratio de bellis apud Lewes et Evesham", covering the period from 1258 to 1267 and including a reference which shows that he was still engaged on it on 3 May, 1312. Apart from its historical matter which is derived from Matthew Paris and his continuators, it is interesting for the evidence it affords of the extreme veneration in which Simon de Montfort was held at that time. He also wrote a short chronicle about Edward I, "Quaedam recapitulatio brevis de gestis domini Edwardi". It is possible, though not very probable, that he wrote the earlier part of a chronicle, "Willelmi Rishanger, monachi S. Albani, Chronica". Four other works attributed to him by Bale are not authentic. RILEY, Willelmi Rishanger chronica et annales in R. S. (London 1863-76); RILEY in Mon. Germ. Hist., XXVIII (Berlin, 1865); HALLIWELL, Chronicle of William de Rishanger of the Barons' Wars in Camden Society Publications, XV (London, 1840); BEMONT, Simon de Montfort (Paris, 1884); HARDY, Descriptive Catalogue (London, 1862-71), I, 871; III, 171-2, 191-3; TOUT in Dict. Nat. Bioq., s.v. EDWIN BURTON Edward Rishton Edward Rishton Born in Lancashire, 1550; died at Sainte-Ménehould, Lorraine, 29 June, 1585. He was probably a younger son of John Rishton of Dunkenhalgh and Dorothy Southworth. He studied at Oxford from 1568 to 1572, when he proceeded B.A. probably from Brasenose College. During the next year he was converted and went to Douai to study for the priesthood. He was the first Englishman to matriculate at Douai, and is said to have taken his M.A. degree there. While a student he drew up and published a chart of ecclesiastical history, and was one of the two sent to Reims in November, 1576, to see if the college could be removed there. After his ordination at Cambrai (6 April, 1576) he was sent to Rome. In 1580 he returned to England, visiting Reims on the way, but was soon arrested. He was tried and condemned to death with Blessed Edmund Campion and others on 20 November, 1581, but was not executed, being left in prison, first in King's Bench, then in the Tower. On 21 January he was exiled with several others, being sent under escort as far as Abbeville, whence he made his way to Reims, arriving on 3 March. Shortly afterwards, at the suggestion of Father Persons, he completed Sander's imperfect "Origin and Growth of the Anglican Schism". With the intention of taking his doctorate in divinity he proceeded to the University of Pont-à-Mousson in Lorraine, but the plague broke out, and though he went to Saint-Ménehould to escape the infection, he died of it and was buried there. Dodd in error ascribes his death to 1586, in which mistake he has been followed hy the writer in the "Dictionary of National Biography" and others. After his death the book on the schism was published by Father Persons, and subsequent editions included two tracts attributed to Rishton, the one a diary of an anonymous priest in the Tower (1580-5), which was probably the work of Father John Hart, S.J.; the other a list of martyrs with later additions by Persons. Recent publication of the "Tower Bills" makes it certain that Rishton did not write the diary, and his only other known works are a tract on the difference between Catholicism and Protestantism (Douai, 1575) and "Profession of his faith made manifest and confirmed by twenty-one reasons". PITTS, De illustribus Angliae scriptoribus (Paris, 1619); DODD, Church History (Brussels vere Wolverhampton, 1737-42), II, 74, a very inaccurate account; A WOOD, Athenae Oxonienses, ed. BLISS (London, 1813 - 20); KINSELLA AND DEANE, The Rise and Progress of the English Reformation (Dublin, 1827), a translation of Sander; LEWIS, Rise and Growth of the Anglican Schism (London, 1877, the best translation of Sander, the editor accepts the diary in the Tower as being by Rishton; KNOX, First and Second Douay Diaries (London, 1878); FOLEY, Records Eng. Prov. S.J., VI (London 1880); FOSTER, Alumni Oxonienses (Oxford, 1891); GILLOW, Bibl. Dict. Eng. Cath. SIMPSON, Edmund Campion, revised ed. (London, 1896-1907); COOPER in Dict. Nat. Biog.; PERSONS, Memoirs in Catholic Record Society, II, IV (London, 1906); Tower Bills, ed. POLLEN in Catholic Record Society, III (London, 1906). EDWIN BURTON St. Rita of Cascia St. Rita of Cascia Born at Rocca Porena in the Diocese of Spoleto, 1386; died at the Augustinian convent of Cascia, 1456. Feast, 22 May. Represented as holding roses, or roses and figs, and sometimes with a wound in her forehead. According to the "Life" (Acta SS., May, V, 224) written at the time of her beatification by the Augustinian, Jacob Carelicci, from two older biographies, she was the daughter of parents advanced in years and distinguished for charity which merited them the surname of "Peacemakers of Jesus Christ". Rita's great desire was to become a nun, but, in obedience to the will of her parents, she, at the age of twelve, married a man extremely cruel and ill-tempered. For eighteen years she was a model wife and mother. When her husband was murdered she tried in vain to dissuade her twin sons from attempting to take revenge; she appealed to Heaven to prevent such a crime on their part, and they were taken away by death, reconciled to God. She applied for admission to the Augustinian convent at Cascia, but, being a widow, was refused. By continued entreaties, and, as is related, by Divine intervention, she gained admission, received the habit of the order and in due time her profession. As a religious she was an example for all, excelled in mortifications, and was widely known for the efficacy of her prayers. Urban VIII, in 1637, permitted her Mass and Office. On account of the many miracles reported to have been wrought at her intercession she received in Spain the title of La Santa de los impossibiles. She was solemnly canonized 24 May, 1900. FRANCIS MERSHMAN Rites Rites I. NAME AND DEFINITION Ritus in classical Latin in means primarily, the form and manner of any religious observance, so Livy, 1, 7: "Sacra diis aliis albano ritu, græco Herculi ut ab Evandro instituta erant (Romulus) facit"; then, in general, any custom or usage. In English the word "rite" ordinarily means, the ceremonies, prayers, and functions of any religious body, whether pagan, Jewish, Moslem, or Christian. But here we must distinguish two uses of the word. We speak of any one such religious function as a rite -- the rite of the blessing of palms, the coronation rite, etc. In a slightly different sense we call the whole complex of the services of any Church or group of Churches a rite-thus we speak of the Roman Rite, Byzantine Rite, and various Eastern rites. In the latter sense the word is often considered equivalent to liturgy, which, however, in the older and more proper use of the word is the Eucharistic Service, or Mass; hence for a whole series of religious functions "rite" is preferable. A Christian rite, in this sense comprises the manner of performing all services for the worship of God and the sanctification of men. This includes therefore: (1) the administration of sacraments, among which the service of the Holy Eucharist, as being also the Sacrifice, is the most important element of all; (2) the series of psalms, lessons, prayers, etc., divided into unities, called "hours", to make up together the Divine Office; (3) all other religious and ecclesiastical functions, called sacramentals. This general term includes blessings of persons (such as a coronation, the blessing of an abbot, various ceremonies performed for catechumens, the reconciliation of public penitents, Benediction of the Blessed Sacrament etc.), blessings of things (the consecration of a church, altar, chalice, etc.), and a number of devotions and ceremonies, e.g. processions and the taking of vows. Sacraments, the Divine Office, and sacramentals (in a wide sense) make up the rite of any Christian religious body. In the case of Protestants these three elements must be modified to suit their theological opinions. II. DIFFERENCE OF RITE The Catholic Church has never maintained a principle of uniformity in rite. Just as there are different local laws in various parts of the Church, whereas certain fundamental laws are obeyed by all, so Catholics in different places have, their own local or national rites; they say prayers and perform ceremonies that have evolved to suit people of the various countries, and are only different expressions of the same fundamental truths. The essential elements of the functions are obviously the same everywhere, and are observed by all Catholic rites in obedience to the command of Christ and the Apostles, thus in every rite is administered with water and the invocation of the Holy Trinity; the Holy Eucharist is celebrated with bread and wine over which the words of institution are said; penance involves the confession of sins. In the amplification of these essential elements in the accompanying prayers and practical or ceremonies, various customs have produced the changes which make the different rites. If any rite did not contain one of the essential notes of the service it would be invalid in that point, if its prayers or ceremonies expressed false doctrine it would he heretical. Such rites would not be tolerated in the Catholic Church. But, supposing uniformity in essentials and in faith, the authority of the Church has never insisted on uniformity of rile; Rome has never resented the fact that other people have their own expressions of the same truths. The Roman Rite is the most, venerable, the most archaic, and immeasurably the most important of all, but our fellow Catholics in the East have the same right to their traditional liturgies as we have to ours. Nor can we doubt that other rites too have many beautiful prayers and ceremonies which add to the richness of Catholic liturgical inheritance. To lose these would be a misfortune second only to the loss of the Roman Rite. Leo XIII in his Encyclical, "Præclara" (20 June, 1894), expressed the traditional attitude of the papacy when he wrote of his reverence for the venerable able rites of the Eastern Churches and assured the schismatics, whom be invited to reunion, that there was no jealousy of these things at Rome; that for all Eastern customs "we shall provide without narrowness." At the time of the Schism, Photius and Cerularius hurled against Latin rites and customs every conceivable absurd accusation. The Latin fast on Saturday, Lenten fare, law of celibacy, confirmation by a bishop, and especially the use of unleavened bread for the Holy Eucharist were their accusations against the West. Latin theologians replied that both were right and suitable, each for the people who used them, that there was no need for uniformity in rite if there was unity in faith, that one good custom did not prove another to be bad, thus defending their customs without attacking those of the East. But the Byzantine patriarch was breaking the unity of the Church, denying the primacy, and plunging the East into schism. In 1054, when Cerularius's schism had begun, a Latin bishop, Dominic of Gradus and Aquileia, wrote concerning it to Peter III of Antioch. He discussed the question Cerularius had raised, the use of azymes at Mass, and carefully explained that, in using this bread, Latins did not intend to disparage the Eastern custom of consecrating leavened bread, for there is a symbolic reason for either practice. "Because we know that the sacred mixture of fermented bread is used and lawfully observed by the most holy and orthodox Fathers of the Eastern Churches, we faithfully approve of both customs and confirm both by a spiritual explanation" (Will, "Acta et scripta quæ de controversiis ecclesiæ græcæ et latinæ sæc. XI composite extant", Leipzig, 1861, 207). These words represent very well the attitude of the papacy towards other rites at all times. Three points, however, may seem opposed to this and therefore require some explanation: the supplanting of the old Gallican Rite by that of Rome almost throughout the West, the modification of Uniat rites, the suppression of the later medieval rites. The existence of the Gallican Rite was a unique anomaly. The natural principle that rite follows patriarchate has been sanctioned by universal tradition with this one exception. Since the first organization of patriarchates there has been an ideal of uniformity throughout each. The close bond that joined bishops and metropolitans to their patriarch involved the use of his liturgy, just as the priests of a diocese follow the rite of their bishop. Before the arbitrary imposition of the Byzantine Rite on all Orthodox Churches no Eastern patriarch would have tolerated a foreign liturgy in his domain. All Egypt used the Alexandrine Rite, all Syria that of Antioch-Jerusalem, all Asia Minor, Greece, and the Balkan lands, that of Constantinople. But in the vast Western lands that make up the Roman patriarchate, north of the Alps and in Spain, various local rites developed, all bearing a strong resemblance to each other, yet different from that of Rome itself. These form the Gallican family of liturgies. Abbot Cabrol, Dom Cagin, and other writers of their school think that the Gallican Rite was really the original Roman Rite before Rome modified it Paléographie musicale V, Solesmes, 1889; Cabrol, Les origines liturgiques Paris 1906). Most writers, however, maintain with Mgr Duchesne ("Origines du culte Chrétien", Paris, 1898, 8489), that the Gallican Rite is Eastern, Antiochene in origin. Certainly it has numerous Antiochene peculiarities (see GALLICAN RITE), and when it emerged as a complete rite in the sixth and seventh centuries (in Germanus of Paris, etc.), it was different from that in use at Rome at the time. Non-Roman liturgies were used at Milan, Aquileia, even at Gobble at the gates of the Roman province (Innocent I's letter to Decentius of Eugubium; Ep. xxv, in P. L., XX, 551-61). Innocent (401-17) naturally protested against the use of a foreign rite in Umbria; occasionally other popes showed some desire for uniformity in their patriarchate, but the great majority regarded the old state of things with perfect indifference. When other bishops asked them how ceremonies were performed at Rome they sent descriptions (so Pope Vigilius to Profuturus of Braga in 538; Jaffé, "Regesta Rom. Pont.", n. 907), but were otherwise content to allow different uses. St. Gregory I (590-604) showed no anxiety to make the new English Church conform to Rome, but told St. Augustine to take whatever rites he thought most suitable from Rome or Gaul (Ep. xi, 64, in P. L., LXXVII, 1186-7). Thus for centuries the popes alone among patriarchs did not enforce their own rite even throughout their patriarchate. The gradual romanization and subsequent disappearance of Gallican rites were (beginning in the eighth and ninth centuries), the work not of the popes but of local bishops and kings who naturally wished to conform to the use of the Apostolic See. The Gallican Rites varied everywhere (Charles the Great gives this as his reason for adopting the Roman Use; see Hauck, "Kirchengesch. Deutschlands", 11, 107 sq.), and the inevitable desire for at least local uniformity arose. The bishops' frequent visits to Rome brought them in contact with the more dignified ritual observed by their chief at the tomb of the Apostles, and they were naturally influenced by it in their return home. The local bishops in synods ordered conformity to Rome. The romanizing movement in the West came from below. In the Frankish kingdom Charles the Great, as part of his scheme of unifying, sent to Adrian I for copies of the Roman books, commanding their use throughout his domain. In the history of the substitution of the Roman Rite for the Gallican the popes appear as spectators, except perhaps in Spain and much later in Milan. The final result was the application in the West of the old principle, for since the pope was undoubtedly Patriarch of the West it was inevitable, that sooner or later the West should conform to his rite. The places, however, that really cared for their old local rites (Milan, Toledo) retain them even now. It is true that the changes made in some Uniat rites by the Roman correctors have not always corresponded to the best liturgical tradition. There are as Mgr Duchesne says, "corrections inspired by zeal that was not always according to knowledge " (Origines du culte, 2nd ed., 69), but they are much fewer than is generally supposed and have never been made with the idea of romanizing. Despite the general prejudice that Uniat rites are mere mutilated hybrids, the strongest impression from the study of them is how little has been changed. Where there is no suspicion of false doctrine, as in the Byzantine Rite, the only change made was the restoration of the name of the pope where the schismatics had erased it. Although the question of the procession of the Holy Ghost has been so fruitful a source of dispute between Rome and Constantinople the Filioque clause was certainly not contained in the original creed, nor did the Roman authorities insist on its addition. So Rome is content that Eastern Catholics should keep their traditional form unchanged, though they believe the Catholic doctrine. The Filioque is only sung by those Byzantine Uniats who wish it themselves, as the Ruthenians. Other rites were altered in places, not to romanize but only to eradicate passages suspected of heresy. All other Uniats came from Nestorian, Monophysite, or Monothelete sects, whose rites had been used for centuries by heretics. Hence, when bodies of these people wished to return to the Catholic Church their services were keenly studied at Rome for possible heresy. In most cases corrections were absolutely necessary. The Nestorian Liturgy, for instance, did not contain the words of institution, which had to be added to the Liturgy of the converted Chaldees. The Monophysite Jacobites, Copts, and Armenians have in the Trisagion the fateful clause: "who wast crucified for us", which has been the watchword of Monophysitism ever since Peter the Dyer of Antioch added it (470-88). If only because of its associations this could not remain in a Catholic Liturgy. In some instances, however, the correctors were over scrupulous. In the Gregorian Armenian Liturgy the words said by the deacon at the expulsion of the catechumens, long before the Consecration: "The body of the Lord and the blood of the Saviour are set forth (or "are before us") (Brightman, "Eastern Liturgies", 430) were in the Uniat Rite changed to: "are about to be before us". The Uniats also omit the words sung by the Gregorian choir before the Anaphora: "Christ has been manifested amongst us (has appeared in the midst of us)" (ibid., 434), and further change the cherubic hymn because of its anticipation of the Consecration. These misplacements are really harmless when understood, yet any reviser would be shocked by such strong cases. In many other ways also the Armenian Rite shows evidence of Roman influence. It has unleavened bread, our confession and Judica psalm at the beginning of Mass, a Lavabo before the Canon, the last Gospel, etc. But so little is this the effect of union with Rome that the schismatical Armenians have all these points too. They date from the time of the Crusades, when the Armenians, vehemently opposed to the Orthodox, made many advances towards Catholics. So also the strong romanizing of the Maronite Liturgy was entirely the work of the Maronites themselves, when, surrounded by enemies in the East, they too turned towards the great Western Church, sought her communion, and eagerly copied her practices. One can hardly expect the pope to prevent other Churches from imitating Roman customs. Yet in the case of Uniats he does even this. A Byzantine Uniat priest who uses unleavened bread in his Liturgy incurs excommunication. The only case in which an ancient Eastern rite has been wilfully romanized is that of the Uniat Malabar Christians, where it was not Roman authority but the misguided zeal of Alexius de Menezes, Archbishop of Goa, and his Portuguese advisers at the Synod of Diamper (1599) which spoiled the old Malabar Rite. The Western medieval rites are in no case (except the Ambrosian and Mozarabic Rites), really independent of Rome. They are merely the Roman Rite with local additions and modifications, most of which are to its disadvantage. They are late, exuberant, and inferior variants, whose ornate additions and long interpolated tropes, sequences, and farcing destroy the dignified simplicity of the old liturgy. In 1570 the revisers appointed by the Council of Trent restored with scrupulous care and, even in the light of later studies, brilliant success the pure Roman Missal, which Pius V ordered should alone be used wherever the Roman Rite is followed. It was a return to an older and purer form. The medieval rites have no doubt a certain archæological interest; but where the Roman Rite is used it is best to use it in its pure form. This too only means a return to the principle that rite should follow patriarchate. The reform was made very prudently, Pius V allowing any rite that could prove an existence of two centuries to remain (Bull "Quo primum", 19 July, 1570, printed first in the Missal), thus saving any local use that had a certain antiquity. Some dioceses (e.g. Lyons) and religious orders (Dominicans, Carthusians, Carmelites), therefore keep their special uses, and the independent Ambrosian and Mozarabic Rites, whose loss would have been a real misfortune (see LITURGY, MASS, LITURGY OF THE) still remain. Rome then by no means imposed uniformity of rite. Catholics are united in faith and discipline, but in their manner of performing the sacred functions there is room for variety based on essential unity, as there was in the first centuries. There are cases (e.g. the Georgian Church) where union with Rome has saved the ancient use, while the schismatics have been forced to abandon it by the centralizing policy of their authorities (in this case Russia). The ruthless destruction of ancient rites in favour of uniformity has been the work not of Rome but of the schismatical patriarchs of Constantinople. Since the thirteenth century Constantinople in its attempt to make itself the one centre of the Orthodox Church has driven out the far more venerable and ancient Liturgies of Antioch and Alexandria and has compelled all the Orthodox to use its own late derived rite. The Greek Liturgy of St. Mark has ceased to exist; that of St. James has been revived for one or two days in the year at Zakynthos and Jerusalem only (see ANTIOCHENE LITURGY). The Orthodox all the world over must follow the Rite of Constantinople. In this unjustifiable centralization we have a defiance of the old principle, since Antioch, Jerusalem, Alexandria, Cyprus, in no way belong to the Byzantine Patriarchate. Those who accuse the papacy of sacrificing everything for the sake of uniformity mistake the real offender, the oecumenical patriarch. III. THE OLD RITES (CATHOLIC AND SCHISMATICAL) A complete table of the old rites with an account of their mutual relations will be found in the article LITURGY. Here it need only be added that there is a Uniat body using each of the Eastern rites. There is no ancient rite that is not represented within the Catholic Church. That rite, liturgical language, and religious body connote three totally different ideas has been explained at length in the article GREEK RITES. The rite a bishop or priest follows is no test at all of his religion. Within certain broad limits a member of any Eastern sect might use any rite, for the two categories of rite and religion cross each other continually. They represent quite different classifications: for instance, liturgically all Armenians belong to one class, theologically a Uniat Armenian belongs to the same class as Latins, Chaldees, Maronites, etc., and has nothing to do with his Gregorian (Monophysite) fellow-countrymen (see EASTERN CHURCHES). Among Catholics the rite forms a group; each rite is used by a branch of the Church that is thereby a special, though not separate, entity. So within the Catholic unity we speak of local Churches whose characteristic in each case is the rite they use. Rite is the only basis of this classification. Not all Armenian Catholics or Byzantine Uniats obey the same patriarch or local authority; yet they are "Churches" individual provinces of the same great Church, because each is bound together by their own rites. In the West there is the vast Latin Church, in the East the Byzantine, Chaldean, Coptic, Syrian, Maronite, Armenian, and Malabar Uniat Churches. It is of course possible to subdivide and to speak of the national Churches (of Italy, France, Spain, etc.) under one of these main bodies (see LATIN CHURCH). In modern times rite takes the place of the old classification in patriarchates and provinces. IV. PROTESTANT RITES The Reformation in the sixteenth century produced a new and numerous series of rites, which are in no sense continuations of the old development of liturgy. They do not all represent descendants of the earliest rites, nor can they be classified in the table of genus and species that includes all the old liturgies of Christendom. The old rites are unconscious and natural developments of earlier ones and go back to the original fluid rite of the first centuries (see LITURGY). The Protestant rites are deliberate compositions made by the various Reformers to suit their theological positions, as new services were necessary for their prayer meetings. No old liturgy could be used by people with their ideas. The old rites contain the plainest statements about the Real Presence, the Eucharistic Sacrifice, prayers to saints, and for the dead, which are denied by Protestants. The Reformation occurred in the West, where the Roman Rite in its various local forms had been used for centuries. No Reformed sect could use the Roman Mass; the medieval derived rites were still more ornate, explicit, in the Reformers' sense superstitious. So all the Protestant sects abandoned the old Mass and the other ritual functions, composing new services which have no continuity, no direct relation to any historic liturgy. However, it is hardly possible to compose an entirely new Christian service without borrowing anything. Moreover, in many cases the Reformers wished to make the breach with the past as little obvious as could be. So many of their new services contain fragments of old rites; they borrowed such elements as seemed to them harmless, composed and re-arranged and evolved in some cases services that contain parts of the old ones in a new order. On the whole it is surprising that they changed as much as they did. It would have been possible to arrange an imitation of the Roman Mass that would have been much more like it than anything they produced. They soon collected fragments of all kinds of rites, Eastern, Roman, Mozarabic, etc., which with their new prayers they arranged into services that are hopeless liturgical tangles. This is specially true of the Anglican Prayer-books. In some cases, for instance, the placing of the Gloria after the Communion in Edward VI's second Prayer-book, there seems to be no object except a love of change. The first Lutheran services kept most of the old order. The Calvinist arrangements had from the first no connexion with any earlier rite. The use of the vulgar tongue was a great principle with the Reformers. Luther and Zwingli at first compromised with Latin, but soon the old language disappeared in all Protestant services. Luther in 1523 published a tract, "Of the order of the service in the parish" ("Von ordenung gottis diensts [sic] ynn der gemeine" in Clemen, "Quellenbuch zur prakt. Theologie", 1, 24-6), in which he insists on preaching, rejects all "unevangelical" parts of the Mass, such as the Offertory and idea of sacrifice, invocation of saints, and ceremonies, and denounces private Masses (Winkelmessen), Masses for the dead, and the idea of the priest as a mediator. Later in the same year he issued a "Formula missæ et communionis pro ecclesia Vittebergensi" (ibid., 26-34), in which he omits the preparatory prayers, Offertory, all the Canon to qui pridie, from Unde et memores to the Pater, the embolism of the Lord's Prayer, fraction, Ite missa est. The Preface is shortened, the Sanctus is to be sung after the words of institution which are to be said aloud, and meanwhile the elevation may be made because of the weak who would be offended by its sudden omission (ibid., IV, 30). At the end he adds a new ceremony, a blessing from Num., vi, 24-6. Latin remained in this service. Karlstadt began to hold vernacular services at Wittenberg since 1521. In 1524 Kaspar Kantz published a German service on the lines of Luther's "Formula missæ" (Lohe, "Sammlung liturgischer Formuläre III, Nördlingen, 1842, 37 sq.); so also Thomas Münzer the Anabaptist, in 1523 at Alstedt (Smend, "Die evang. deutschen Messen", 1896, 99 sq.). A number of compromises began at this time among the Protestants, services partly Latin and partly vernacular (Rietschel, "Lehrbuch der Liturgik", 1, 404-9). Vernacular hymns took the place of the old Proper (Introit, etc.). At last in 1526 Luther issued an entirely new German service, "Deudsche Messe und ordnung Gottis diensts" (Clemen, op. cit., 3443), to be used on Sundays, whereas the "Formula missæ", in Latin, might be kept for week-days. In the "Deudsche Messe" "a spiritual song or German psalm" replaces the Introit, then follows Kyrie eleison in Greek three times only. There is no Gloria. Then come the Collects, Epistle, a German hymn, Gospel, Creed, Sermon, Paraphrase of the Lord's Prayer, words of institution with the account of the Last Supper from I Cor, xi, 20-9, Elevation (always kept by Luther himself in spite of Karlstadt and most of his colleagues), Communion, during which the Sanctus or a hymn is sung, Collects, the blessing from Num., vi, 24-6. Except the Kyrie, all is in German; azyme bread is still used but declared indifferent; Communion is given under both kinds, though Luther preferred the unmixed chalice. This service remained for a long time the basis of the Lutheran Communion function, but the local branches of the sect from the beginning used great freedom in modifying it. The Pietistic movement in the eighteenth century, with its scorn for forms and still more the present Rationalism, have left very little of Luther's scheme. A vast number of Agendæ, Kirchenordnungen, and Prayer-books issued by various Lutheran consistories from the sixteenth century to our own time contain as many forms of celebrating the Lord's Supper. Pastors use their own discretion to a great extent, and it is impossible to foresee what service will be held in any Lutheran church. An arrangement of hymns, Bible readings (generally the Nicene Creed), a sermon, then the words of institution and Communion, prayers (often extempore), more hymns, and the blessing from Num., vi, make up the general outline of the service. Zwingli was more radical than Luther. In 1523 he kept a form of the Latin Mass with the omission of all he did not like in it ("De canone missæ epichiresis" in Clemen, op. cit., 43-7), chiefly because the town council of Zurich feared too sudden a change, but in 1525 he overcame their scruples and issued his "Action oder bruch (=Brauch) des nachtmals" (ibid., 47-50). This is a complete breach with the Mass an entirely new service. On Maundy Thursday the men and women are to receive communion, on Good Friday those of "middle age", on Easter Sunday only the oldest (die alleraltesten). These are the only occasions on which the service is to be held. The arrangement is: a prayer said by the pastor facing the people, reading of 1 Cor, xi, 20-9, Gloria in Excelsis, "The Lord be with you" and its answer, reading of John, vi, 47-63, Apostles' Creed, an address to the people, Lord's Prayer, extempore prayer, words of institution, Communion (under both kinds in wooden vessels), Ps. cxiii, a short prayer of thanksgiving; the pastor says: "Go in peace". On other Sundays there is to be no Communion at all, but a service consisting of prayer, Our Father, sermon, general confession, absolution, prayer, blessing. Equally radical was the Calvinist sect. In 1535 through Farel's influence the Mass was abolished in Geneva. Three times a year only was there to be a commemorative Supper in the baldest form; on other Sundays the sermon was to suffice. In 1542 Calvin issued "La forme des prières ecclésiastiques" " (Clemen, op. cit., 51-8), a supplement to which describes "La manière de célébrer la cène" (ibid., 51-68). This rite, to be celebrated four times yearly, consists of the reading of 1 Cor, xi, an excommunication of various kinds of sinners, and long exhortation. "This being done, the ministers distribute the bread and the cup to the people, taking care that they approach reverently and in good order" (ibid., 60). Meanwhile a psalm is sung or a lesson read from the Bible, a thanksgiving follows (ibid., 55), and a final blessing. Except for their occurrence in the reading of I Cor, xi, the words of institution are not said; there is no kind of Communion form. It is hardly possible to speak of rite at all in the Calvinist body. The other ritual functions kept by Protestants (baptism, confirmation as an introduction to Communion marriage, funerals, appointment of ministers) went through much the same development. The first Reformers expunged and modified the old rites, then gradually more and more was changed until little remained of a rite in our sense. Psalms, hymns, prayers, addresses to the people in various combinations make up these functions. The Calvinists have always been more radical than the Lutherans. The development and multiple forms of these services may be seen in Rietschel, "Lehrbuch der Liturgik", II, and Clemen, "Quellenbuch zur praktischen Theologie", I (texts only). The Anglican body stands somewhat apart from the others, inasmuch as it has a standard book, almost unaltered since 1662. The first innovation was the introduction of an English litany under Henry VIII in 1544. Cranmer was preparing further changes when Henry VIII died (see Procter and Frere, "A New History of the Book of Common Prayer" London, 1908, 29-35). Under Edward VI (1547-53) many changes were made at once: blessings, holy water, the creeping to the Cross were abolished, Mass was said in English (ibid., 39-41), and in 1549 the first Prayer-book, arranged by Cranmer, was issued. Much of the old order of the Mass remained, but the Canon disappeared to make way for a new prayer from Lutheran sources. The "Kölnische Kirchenordnung" composed by Melanchthon and Butzer supplied part of the prayers. The changes are Lutheran rather than Calvinist. In 1552 the second Prayerbook took the place of the first. This is the present Anglican Book of Common Prayer and represents a much stronger Protestant tendency. The commandments take the place of the Introit and Kyrie (kept in the first book), the Gloria is moved to the end, the Consecration-prayer is changed so as to deny the Sacrifice and Real Presence, the form at the Communion becomes: "Take and eat this in remembrance that Christ died for thee, and feed on him in thy heart by faith with thanksgiving" (similarly for the chalice). In 1558 Elizabeth's Government issued a new edition of the second Prayer-book of Edward VI with slight modifications of its extreme Protestantism. Both the Edwardine forms for communion are combined. In 1662 a number of revisions were made. In particular the ordination forms received additions defining the order to be conferred. A few slight modifications (as to the lessons read, days no longer to be kept) have been made since. The Anglican Communion service follows this order: The Lord's Prayer, Collect for purity, Ten Commandments, Collect for the king and the one for the day, Epistle, Gospel, Creed, sermon, certain sentences from the Bible (meanwhile a collection is made), prayer for the Church militant, address to the people about Communion, general confession and absolution, the comfortable words (Matt., xi, 28; John, iii, 16; 1 Tim., i, 15; 1 John, ii, 1), Preface, prayer ("We do not presume"), Consecration-prayer, Communion at once, Lord's Prayer, Thanksgiving-prayer, "Glory be to God on high", blessing. Very little of the arrangement of the old Mass remains in this service, for all the ideas Protestants reject are carefully excluded. The Book of Common Prayer contains all the official services of the Anglican Church, baptism, the catechism, confirmation, marriage, funeral, ordination, articles of religion, etc. It has also forms of morning and evening prayer, composed partly from the Catholic Office with many modifications and very considerably reduced. The Episcopal Church in Scotland has a Prayer-book, formed in 1637 and revised in 1764, which is more nearly akin to the first Prayer-book of Edward VI and is decidedly more High Church in tone. In 1789 the Protestant Episcopal Church of America accepted a book based on the English one of 1662, but taking some features from the Scotch services. The Anglican service-books are now the least removed from Catholic liturgies of those used by any Protestant body. But this is saying very little. The Non-jurors in the eighteenth century produced a number of curious liturgies which in many ways go back to Catholic principles, but have the fault common to all Protestant services of being conscious and artificial arrangements of elements selected from the old rites, instead of natural developments (Overton, "The Non-jurors", London, 1902, ch. vi). The Irvingites have a not very-successful service-book of this type. Many Methodists use the Anglican book; the other later sects have for the most part nothing but loose arrangements of hymns, readings, extempore prayers, and a sermon that can hardly be called rites in any sense. V. LITURGICAL LANGUAGE The language of any Church or rite, as distinct from the vulgar tongue, is that used in the official services and may or may not be the common language. For instance the Rumanian Church uses liturgically the ordinary language of the country, while Latin is used by the Latin Church for her Liturgy without regard to the mother tongue of the clergy or congregation. There are many cases of an intermediate state between these extremes, in which the liturgical language is an older form of the vulgar tongue, sometimes easily, sometimes hardly at all, understood by people who have not studied it specially. Language is not rite. Theoretically any rite may exist in any language. Thus the Armenian, Coptic, and East Syrian Rites are celebrated always in one language, the Byzantine Rite is used in a great number of tongues, and in other rites one language sometimes enormously preponderates but is not used exclusively. This is determined by church discipline. The Roman Liturgy is generally celebrated in Latin. The reason why a liturgical language began to be used and is still retained must be distinguished in liturgical science from certain theological or mystic considerations by which its use may be explained or justified. Each liturgical language was first chosen because it was the natural language of the people. But languages change and the Faith spreads into countries where other tongues are spoken. Then either the authorities are of a more practical mind and simply translate the prayers into the new language, or the conservative instinct, always strong in religion, retains for the liturgy an older language no longer used in common life. The Jews showed this instinct, when, though Hebrew was a dead language after the Captivity, they continued to use it in the Temple and the synagogues in the time of Christ, and still retain it in their services. The Moslem, also conservative, reads the Koran in classical Arabic, whether he be Turk, Persian, or Afghan. The translation of the church service is complicated by the difficulty of determining when the language in which it is written, as Latin in the West and Hellenistic Greek in the East, has ceased to be the vulgar tongue. Though the Byzantine services were translated into the common language of the Slavonic people that they might be understood, this form of the language (Church-Slavonic) is no longer spoken, but is gradually becoming as unintelligible as the original Greek. Protestants make a great point of using languages "understanded of the people", yet the language of Luther's Bible and the Anglican Prayerbook is already archaic. History When Christianity appeared Hellenistic Greek was the common language spoken around the Mediterranean. St. Paul writes to people in Greece, Asia Minor, and Italy in Greek. When the parent rites were finally written down in the fourth and fifth centuries Eastern liturgical language had slightly changed. The Greek of these liturgies (Apost. Const. VIII, St. James, St. Mark, the Byzantine Liturgy) was that of the Fathers of the time, strongly coloured by the Septuagint and the New Testament. These liturgies remained in this form and have never been recast in any modern Greek dialect. Like the text of the Bible, that of a liturgy once fixed becomes sacred. The formulæ used Sunday after Sunday are hallowed by too sacred associations to be changed as long as more or less the same language is used. The common tongue drifts and develops, but the liturgical forms are stereotyped. In the East and West, however, there existed different principles in this matter. Whereas in the West there was no literary language but Latin till far into the Middle Ages, in the East there were such languages, totally unlike Greek, that had a position, a literature, a dignity of their own hardly inferior to that of Greek itself. In the West every educated man spoke and wrote Latin almost to the Renaissance. To translate the Liturgy into a Celtic or Teutonic language would have seemed as absurd as to write a prayerbook now in some vulgar slang. The East was never hellenized as the West was latinized. Great nations, primarily Egypt and Syria, kept their own languages and literatures as part of their national inheritance. The people, owing no allegiance to the Greek language, had no reason to say their prayers in it, and the Liturgy was translated into Coptic in Egypt, into Syriac in Syria and Palestine. So the principle of a uniform liturgical language was broken in the East and people were accustomed to hear the church service in different languages in different places. This uniformity once broken never became an ideal to Eastern Christians and the way was opened for an indefinite multiplication of liturgical tongues. In the fourth and fifth centuries the Rites of Antioch and Alexandria were used in Greek in the great towns where people spoke Greek, in Coptic or Syriac among peasants in the country. The Rite of Asia Minor and Constantinople was always in Greek, because here there was no rival tongue. But when the Faith was preached in Armenia (from Cæsarea) the Armenians in taking over the Cæsarean Rite translated it of course into their own language. And the great Nestorian Church in East Syria, evolving her own literature in Syriac, naturally used that language for her church services too. This diversity of tongues was by no means parallel to diversity of sect or religion. People who agreed entirely in faith, who were separated by no schism, nevertheless said their prayers in different languages. Melchites in Syria clung entirely to the Orthodox faith of Constantinople and used the Byzantine Rite, yet used it translated into Syriac. The process of translating the Liturgy continued later.. After the Schism of the eleventh century, the Orthodox Church, unlike Rome, insisted on uniformity of rite among her members. All the Orthodox use the Byzantine Rite, yet have no idea of one language. When the Slavs were converted the Byzantine Rite was put into Old Slavonic for them; when Arabic became the only language spoken in Egypt And Syria, it became the language of the Liturgy in those countries. For a long time all the people north of Constantinople used Old Slavonic in church, although the dialects they spoke gradually drifted away from it. Only the Georgians, who are Slavs in no sense at all, used their own language. In the seventeenth century as part of the growth of Rumanian national feeling came a great insistence on the fact that they were not Slavs either. They Wished to be counted among Western, Latin races, so they translated their liturgical books into their own Romance language. These represent the old classical liturgical languages in the East. The Monophysite Churches have kept the old tongues even when no longer spoken; thus they use Coptic in Egypt, Syriac in Syria, Armenian in Armenia. The Nestorians and their daughter-Church in India (Malabar) also use Syriac. The Orthodox have four or five chief liturgical languages: Greek, Arabic, Church-Slavonic, and Rumanian. Georgian has almost died out. Later Russian missions have very much increased the number. They have translated the same Byzantine Rite into German, Esthonian, and Lettish for the Baltic provinces Finnish and Tartar for converts in Finland and Siberia, Eskimo, a North American Indian dialect, Chinese, and Japanese. Hence no general principle of liturgical language can be established for Eastern Churches, though the Nestorians and Monophysites have evolved something like the Roman principle and kept their old languages in the liturgy, in spite of change in common talk. The Orthodox services are not, however, everywhere understood by the people, for since these older versions were made language has gone on developing. In the case of converts of a totally different race, such as Chinese or Red Indians, there is an obvious line to cross at once and there is no difficulty about translating what would otherwise be totally unintelligible to them. At home the spoken language gradually drifts away from the form stereotyped in the Liturgy, and it is difficult to determine when the Liturgy ceases to be understood. In more modern times with the growth of new sects the conservative instinct of the old Churches has grown. The Greek, Arabic, and Church-Slavonic texts are jealously kept unchanged though in all cases they have become archaic and difficult to follow by uneducated people. Lately the question of liturgical language has become one of the chief difficulties in Macedonia. Especially since the Bulgarian Schism the Phanar at Constantinople insists on Greek in church as a sign of Hellenism, while the people clamour for Old-Slavonic or Rumanian. In the West the whole situation is different. Greek was first used at Rome, too. About the third century the services were translated into the vulgar tongue, Latin (see MASS, LITURGY OF THE), which has remained ever since. There was no possible rival language for many centuries. As the Western barbarians became civilized they accepted a Latin culture in everything, having no literatures of their own. Latin was the language of all educated people, so it was used in church, as it was for books or even letter-writing. The Romance people drifted from Latin to Italian, Spanish, French, etc., so gradually that no one can say when Latin became a dead language. The vulgar tongue was used by peasants and ignorant people only; but all books were written, lectures given, and solemn speeches made in Latin. Even Dante (d. 1321) thought it necessary to write an apology for Italian (De vulgari eloquentia). So for centuries the Latin language was that, not of the Catholic Church, but of the Roman patriarchate. When people at last realized that it was dead, it was too late to change it. Around it had gathered the associations of Western Christendom; the music of the Roman Rite was composed and sung only to a Latin text; and it is even now the official tongue of he Roman Court. The ideal of uniformity in rite extended to language also, so when the rebels of the, sixteenth century threw over the old language, sacred from its long use, as they threw over the old rite and Id laws, the Catholic Church, conservative in all these things, would not give way to them. As a bond of union among the many nations who make up he Latin patriarchate, she retains the old Latin tongue with one or two small exceptions. Along he Eastern coast of the Adriatic Sea the Roman Rite has been used in Slavonic (with the Glagolitic letters) since the eleventh century, and the Roman Mass is said in Greek on rare occasions at Rome. It is a question how far one may speak of a special liturgical Latin language. The writers of our Collects, hymns, Prefaces, etc., wrote simply in the language of their time. The style of the various elements of the Mass and Divine Office varies greatly according to the time at which they were written. We have texts from the fourth or fifth to the twentieth century. Liturgical Latin then is simply late Christian Latin of various periods. On the other hand the Liturgy had an influence on the style of Christian Latin writers second only to that of the Bible. First we notice Hebraisms (per omnia soecula soeculorum), many Greek constructions (per Dominum nostrum, meaning" for the sake of", dia) and words (Eucharistia, litania, episcopus), expressions borrowed from Biblical metaphors (pastor, liber proedestinationis, crucifigere carnem, lux, vita, Agnus Dei), and words in a new Christian sense (humilitas, compunctio, caritas). St. Jerome in his Vulgate more than any one else helped to form liturgical style. His constructions and phrases occur repeatedly in the non-Biblical parts of the Mass and Office. The style of the fifth and sixth centuries (St. Leo I, Celestine I, Gregory I) forms perhaps the main stock of our services. The mediæval Schoolmen (St. Thomas Aquinas) and their technical terminology have influenced much of the later parts, and the Latin of the Renaissance is an important element that in many cases overlays the ruder forms of earlier times. Of this Renaissance Latin many of the Breviary lessons are typical examples; a comparison of the earlier forms of the hymns with the improved forms drawn up by order of Urban VIII (1623-44) will convince any one how disastrous its influence was. The tendency to write inflated phrases has not yet stopped: almost any modern Collect compared with the old ones in the "Gelasian Sacramentary" will show how much we have lost of style in our liturgical prayers. Use of Latin The principle of using Latin in church is in no way fundamental. It is a question of discipline that evolved differently in East and West, and may not be defended as either primitive or universal. The authority of the Church could change the liturgical language at any time without sacrificing any important principle. The idea of a universal tongue may seem attractive, but is contradicted by the fact that the Catholic Church uses eight or nine different liturgical languages. Latin preponderates as a result of the greater influence of the Roman patriarchate and its rite, caused by the spread of Western Europeans into new lands and the unhappy schism of so many Easterns (see Fortescue, "Orthodox Eastern Church", 431). Uniformity of rite or liturgical language has never been a Catholic ideal, nor was Latin chosen deliberately as a sacred language. Had there been any such idea the language would have been Hebrew or Greek. The objections of Protestants to a Latin Liturgy can be answered easily enough. An argument often made from I Cor., xiv, 4-18, is of no value. The whole passage treats of quite another thing, prophesying in tongues that no one understands, not even the speaker (see 14: "For if I pray in a tongue, my spirit prayeth but my understanding is without fruit"). The other argument, from practical convenience, from the loss to the people who do not understand what is being said, has some value. The Church has never set up a mysterious unintelligible language as an ideal. There is no principle of sacerdotal mysteries from which the layman is shut out. In spite of the use of Latin the people have means of understanding the service. That they might do so still better if everything were in the vulgar tongue may be admitted, but in making this change the loss would probably be greater than the gain. By changing the language of the Liturgy we should lose the principle of uniformity in the Roman patriarchate. According to the ancient principle that rite follows patriarchate, the Western rite should be that of the Western patriarch, the Roman Bishop, who uses the local rite of the city of Rome. There is a further advantage in using it in his language, so the use of Latin in the West came about naturally and is retained through conservative instinct. It is not so in the East. There is a great practical advantage to travellers, whether priests or laymen, in finding their rite exactly the same everywhere. An English priest in Poland or Portugal could not say his Mass unless he and the server had a common language. The use of Latin all over the Roman patriarchate is a very obvious and splendid witness of unity. Every Catholic traveller in a country of which he does not know the language has felt the comfort of finding that in church at least everything is familiar and knows that in a Catholic church of his own rite he is at home anywhere. Moreover, the change of liturgical language would be a break with the past. It is a witness of antiquity of which a Catholic may well be proud that in Mass to-day we are still used to the very words that Anselm, Gregory, Leo sang in their cathedrals. A change of language would also abolish Latin chant. Plainsong, as venerable a relic of antiquity as any part of the ritual, is composed for the Latin text only, supposes always the Latin syllables and the Latin accent, and becomes a caricature when it is forced into another language with different rules of accent. These considerations of antiquity and universal use always made proportionately (since there are the Eastern Uniat rites) but valid for the Roman patriarchate may well outweigh the practical convenience of using the chaos of modern languages in the liturgy. There is also an æsthetic advantage in Latin. The splendid dignity of the short phrases with their rhythmical accent and terse style redolent of the great Latin Fathers, the strange beauty of the old Latin hymns, the sonorous majesty of the Vulgate, all these things that make the Roman Rite so dignified, so characteristic of the old Imperial City where the Prince of the Apostles set up his throne, would be lost altogether in modern English or French translations. The impossibility of understanding Latin is not so great. It is not a secret, unknown tongue, and till quite lately every educated person understood it. It is still taught in every school. The Church does not clothe her prayers in a secret language, but rather takes it for granted that people understand Latin. If Catholics learned enough Latin to follow the very easy style of the Church language all difficulty would be solved. For those who cannot take even this trouble there is the obvious solution of a translation. The Missal in English is one of the easiest books to procure; the ignorant may follow in that the prayers that lack of education prevents their understanding without it. The liturgical languages used by Catholics are: 1. Latin in the Roman, Milanese, and Mozarabic Rites (except in parts of Dalmatia). 2. Greek in the Byzantine Rite (not exclusively). 3. Syriac in the Syrian, Maronite, Chaldean, and Malabar Rites. 4. Coptic in the Coptic Rite. 5. Armenian by all the Churches of that rite. 6. Arabic by the Melchites (Byzantine Rite). 7. Slavonic by Slavs of the Byzantine Rite and (in Glagolitic letters) in the Roman Rite in Dalmatia. 8. Georgian (Byzantine Rite). 9. Rumanian (Byzantine Rite). VI. LITURGICAL SCIENCE A. Rubrics The most obvious and necessary study for ecclesiastical persons is that of the laws that regulate the performance of liturgical functions. From this point of view liturgical study is a branch of canon law. The rules for the celebration of the Holy Mysteries, administration of sacraments, etc., are part of the positive law of the Church, just as much as the laws about benefices, church property, or fasting, and oblige those whom they concern under pain of sin. As it is therefore the duty of persons in Holy orders to know them, they are studied in all colleges and seminaries as part of the training of future priests, and candidates are examined in them before ordination. Because of its special nature and complication liturgical science in this sense is generally treated apart from the rest of canon law and is joined to similar practical matters (such as preaching, visiting the sick, etc.) to make up the science of pastoral theology. The sources from which it is learned are primarily the rubrics of the liturgical books (the Missal, Breviary, and Ritual). There are also treatises which explain and arrange these rubrics, adding to them from later decrees of the S. Congregation of Rites. Of these Martinucci has not yet been displaced as the most complete and authoritative, Baldeschi has long been a favourite and has been translated into English, De Herdt is a good standard book, quite sound and clear as far as it goes but incomplete, Le Vavasseur is perhaps the most practical for general purposes. B. History The development of the various rites, their spread and mutual influence, the origin of each ceremony, etc., form a part of church history whose importance is becoming more and more realized. For practical purposes all a priest need know are the present rules that affect the services he has to perform, as in general the present laws of the Church are all we have to obey. But just as the student of history needs to know the decrees of former synods, even if abrogated since, as he studies the history of earlier times and remote provinces of the Church, because it is from these that he must build up his conception of her continuous life, so the liturgical student will not be content with knowing only what affects him now, but is prompted to examine the past to inquire into the origin of our present rite and study other rites too as expressions of the life of the Church in other lands. The history of the liturgies that deeply affect the life of Christians in many ways, that are the foundation of many other objects of study (architecture, art, music, etc.) is no inconsiderable element of church history. In a sense this study is comparatively new and not yet sufficiently organized though to some extent it has always accompanied the practical study of liturgy. The great mediæval liturgists were not content with describing the rites of their own time. They suggested historical reasons for the various ceremonies and contrasted other practices with those of their own Churches. Benedict XIV's treatise on the Mass discusses the origin of each element of the Latin liturgy. This and other books of seventeenth and eighteenth-century liturgiologists are still standard works. So also in lectures and works on liturgy in our first sense it has always been the custom to add historical notes on the origin of the ceremonies and prayers. But the interest in the history of liturgy for its own sake and the systematic study of early documents is a comparatively new thing. In this science England led the way and still takes the foremost place. It followed the Oxford Movement as part of the revived interest in the early Church among Anglicans. W. Palmer (Origines liturgicæ) and J. M. Neale in his various works are among those who gave the first impulse to this movement. The Catholic Daniel Rock ("Hierurgia" and "The Church of our Fathers") further advanced it. It has now a large school of followers. F.C. Brightman's edition of "Eastern Liturgies" is the standard one used everywhere. The monumental editions of the "Gelasian Sacramentary" by H.A. Wilson and the "Leonine Sacramentary " by C. L. Feltoe, the various essays and discussions by E. Bishop, C. Atchley, and many others keep up the English standard. In France Dom Guéranger (L'année liturgique) and his school of Benedictines opened a new epoch. Mgr Duchesne supplied a long-felt want with his "Origines du suite chrétien", Dom Cabral and Dom Leclereq ("Mon. eccl. lit.", etc., especially the monumental "Dict. d'arch. chrét. et de liturgie") have advanced to the first place among modern authorities on historical liturgy. From Germany we have the works of H. Daniel (Codex lit. eccl. universæ), Probst, Thalhofer, Gihr, and a school of living students (Drews, Rietschel, Baumstark, Buchwald, Rauschen). In Italy good work is being done by Semeria, Bonaccorsi, and others. Nevertheless the study of liturgy hardly yet takes the place it deserves in the education of church students. Besides the practical instruction that forms a part of pastoral theology, lectures on liturgical history would form a valuable element of the course of church history. As part of such a course other rites would be considered and compared. There is a fund of deeper understanding of the Roman Rite to be drawn from its comparison with others, Gallican or Eastern. Such instruction in liturgiology should include some notion of ecclesiology in general, the history and comparison of church planning and architecture, of vestments and church music. The root of all these things in different countries is the liturgies they serve and adorn. Dogmatic Value The dogmatic and apologetic value of liturgical science is a very important consideration to the theologian. It must, of course, be used reasonably. No Church intends to commit herself officially to every statement and implication contained in her official books, any more than she is committed to everything said by her Fathers. For instance, the Collect for St. Juliana Falconieri (19 June) in the Roman Rite refers to the story of her miraculous communion before her death, told at length in the sixth lesson of her Office, but the truth of that story is not part of the Catholic Faith. Liturgies give us arguments from tradition even more valuable than those from the Fathers, for these statements have been made by thousands of priests day after day for centuries. A consensus of liturgies is, therefore, both in space and time a greater witness of agreement than a consensus of Fathers, for as a general principle it is obvious that people in their prayers say only what they believe. This is the meaning of the well known axiom: Lex orandi lex credendi. The prayers for the dead, the passages in which God is asked to accept this Sacrifice, the statements of the Real Presence in the oldest liturgies are unimpeachable witnesses of the Faith of the early Church as to these points. The Bull of Pius IX on the Immaculate Conception ("Ineffabilis Deus", 8 Dec., 1854) contains a classical example of this argument from liturgy. Indeed there are few articles of faith that cannot be established or at least confirmed from liturgies. The Byzantine Office for St. Peter and St. Paul (29. June) contains plain statements about Roman primacy. The study of liturgy from this point of view is part of dogmatic theology. Of late years especially dogmatic theologians have given much attention to it. Christian Pesch, S.J., in his "Prælectiones theologiæ dogmaticæ" (9 vols., Freiburg i. Br.) quotes the liturgical texts for the theses as part of the argument from tradition. There are then these three aspects under which liturgiology should be considered by a Catholic theologian, as an element of canon law, church history, and dogmatic theology. The history of its study would take long to tell. There have been liturgiologists through all the centuries of Christian theology. Briefly the state of this science at various periods is this: Liturgiologists in the Ante-Nicene period, such as Justin Martyr, composed or wrote down descriptions of ceremonies performed, but made no examination of the sources of rites. In the fourth and fifth centuries the scientific study of the subject began. St. Ambrose's "Liber de Mysteriis" (P. L., XVI, 405-26) the anonymous (pseudo-Ambrose) "De Sacramentis" (P. L., XVI, 435-82), various treatises by St. Jerome (e. g., "Contra Vigilantium" in P. L., XXIII, 354-367) and St. Augustine, St. Cyril of Jerusalem's "Catechetical Instructions" (P. L., XXXIII, 331-1154) and the famous "Peregrinatio Silvæ" (in the "Corpus script. eccl. Latin. of Vienna: "Itinera hierosolymitana", 35-101) represent in various degrees the beginning of an examination of liturgical texts. From the sixth to the eighth centuries we have valuable texts (the Sacramentaries and Ordines) and a liturgical treatise of St, Isidore of Seville ("De eccl. officiis" in P. L., LXXXIII). The Carlovingian revival of the eighth and ninth centuries began the long line of medieval liturgiologists. Alcuin (P. L., C-CI), Amalarius of Metz (P. L., XCIX, CV), Agobard (P. L., CIV), Florus of Lyons (P. L., CXlX, 15-72), Rabanus Maurus (P. L., CVII-CXII), and Walafrid Strabo (P. L., CXIV, 916--66) form at this time a galaxy of liturgical scholars of the first importance. In the eleventh century Berno of Constance ("Micrologus" in P. L., CLI, 974-1022), in the twelfth Rupert of Deutz ("De divinis officiis" in P. L., CLXX, 9-334), Honorius of Autun ("Gemma animæ" and "De Sacramentis" in P. L., CLXXII), John Beleth ("Rationale div. offic." in P. L., CCII, 9-166), and Beroldus of Milan (ed. Magistretti, Milan, 1894) carry on the tradition. In the thirteenth century see DURANDUS) is the most famous of all the William Durandus of Mende ("Rationale div. medieval liturgiologists. There is then a break till the sixteenth century. The discussions of the Reformation period called people's attention again to liturgies, either as defenses of the old Faith or as sources for the compilation of reformed services. From this time editions of the old rites were made for students, with commentaries. J. Clichtove ("Elucidatorium eccl.", Paris, 1516) and J. Cochlæus ("Speculum ant. devotionis", Mainz, 1549) were the first editors of this kind. Claude de Sainctes, Bishop of Evreux, published a similar collection ("Liturgiæ sive missæ ss. Patrum", Antwerp, 1562). Pamelius's " Liturgies. latin." (Cologne, 157 1) is a valuable edition of Roman, Milanese, and Mozarabic texts. Melchior Hittorp published a collection of old commentaries on the liturgy ("De Cath. eccl. div. offic. " Cologne, 1568) which was re-edited in Bigne's "Bibl. vet. Patrum.", X (Paris, 1610). The seventeenth century opened a great period. B. Gavanti ("Thesaurus sacr. rituum", re-edited by Merati, Rome, 1736-8) and H. Menard, O.S.B. ("Sacramentarium Gregorianum" in P. L., LXXVIII) began a new line of liturgiologists. J. Goar, O.P. ("Euchologion", Paris, 1647), and Leo Allatius in his various dissertations did great things for the study of Eastern rites. The Oratorian J. Morin ("Comm. hist. de disciplina in admin. Sac. Poen." Paris 1651, and "Comm. de sacris eccl. ordinationibus", Paris, 1655). Cardinal John Bons ("Rerum lit. libri duo", Rome, 1671), Card. Tommasi ("Codices sacramentorum", Rome, 1680; "Antiqui libri missarum ", Rome, 1691), J. Mabillon, O.S.B. ("Musæum Italicum" Paris 1687-9), E. Martène, O.S.B. (" De ant. eccl. ritibus; Antwerp, 1736-8), represent the highest point of liturgical study. Dom Claude de Vert wrote a series of treatises on liturgical matters. In the eighteenth century the most important names are: Benedict XIV ("De SS. Sacrificio Missæ", republished at Mainz, 1879), E. Renaudot ("Lit. orient. collectio ", Paris, 1716), the four Assemani, Maronites ("Kalendaria eccl. universæ", Rome, 1755; "Codex lit. eccl. universæ", Rome, 1749-66, etc.) Muratori ("Liturgia romana vetus", Venice, 1748). So we come to the revival of the nineteenth century, Dom Guéranger and the modern authors already mentioned. ADRIAN FORTESCUE BENEDICTINE RITE The only important rite peculiar to the Benedictine Order is the Benedictine Breviary (Breviarium Monasticum). St. Benedict devotes thirteen chapters (viii-xx), of his rule to regulating the canonical hours for his monks, and the Benedictine Breviary is the outcome of this regulation. It is used not only by the so-called Black Benedictines, but also by the Cistercians, Olivetans, and all those orders that have the Rule of St. Benedict as their basis. The Benedictines are not at liberty to substitute the Roman for the Monastic Breviary; by using the Roman Breviary they would not satisfy their obligation of saying the Divine Office. Each congregation of Benedictines has its own ecclesiastical calendar. MICHAEL OTT CARMELITE RITE The rite in use among the Carmelites since about the middle of the twelfth century is known by the name of the Rite of the Holy Sepulchre, the Carmelite Rule, which was written about the year 1210, ordering the hermits of Mount Carmel to follow the approved custom of the Church, which in this instance meant the Patriarchal Church of Jerusalem: "Hi qui litteras noverunt et legere psalmos, per singulas horas eos dicant qui ex institutione sanctorum patrum et ecelesiæ approbata consuetudine ad horas singulas sunt deputati." This Rite of the Holy Sepulchre belonged to the Gallican family of the Roman Rite; it appears to have descended directly from the Parisian Rite, but to have undergone some modifications pointing to other sources. For, in the Sanctorale we find influences of Angers, in the proses traces of meridional sources, while the lessons and prayers on Holy Saturday are purely Roman. The fact is that most of the clerics who accompanied the Crusaders were of French nationality; some even belonged to the Chapter of Paris, as is proved by documentary evidence. Local influence, too, played an important part. The Temple itself, the Holy Sepulchre, the vicinity of the Mount of Olives, of Bethany, of Bethlehem, gave rise to magnificent ceremonies, connecting the principal events of the ecclesiastical year with the very localities where the various episodes of the work of Redemption has taken place. The rite is known to us by means of some manuscripts one (Barberini 659 of A. D. 1160) in the Vatican library, another at Barletta, described by Kohler (Revue de I'Orient Latin, VIII, 1900-01, pp. 383-500) and by him ascribed to about 1240. The hermits on Mount Carmel were bound by rule only to assemble once a day for the celebration of Mass, the Divine Office being recited privately. Lay brothers who were able to read might recite the Office, while others repeated the Lord's Prayer a certain number of times, according to the length and solemnity of the various offices. It may be presumed that on settling in Europe (from about A. D. 1240) the Carmelites conformed to the habit of the other mendicant orders with respect to the choral recitation or chant of the Office, and there is documentary evidence that on Mount Carmel itself the choral recitation was in force at least in 1254. The General Chapter of 1259 passed a number of regulations on liturgical matters, but, owing to the loss of the acts, their nature is unfortunately not known. Subsequent chapters very frequently dealt with the rite chiefly adding new feasts, changing old established customs, or revising rubrics. An Ordinal, belonging to the second half of the thirteenth century, is preserved at Trinity College, Dublin, while portions of an Epistolarium of about 1270 are at the Maglia, becchiana at Florence (D6, 1787). The entire Ordinal was rearranged and revised in 1312 by Master Sibert de Beka, and rendered obligatory by the General Chapter, but it experienced some difficulty in superseding the old one. Manuscripts of it are preserved at Lambeth (London), Florence, and else where. It remained in force until 1532, when a (committee was appointed for its revision; their work was approved in 1539, but published only in 1544 after the then General Nicholas Audet had introduced some further changes. The, reform of the Roman liturgical books under St. Pius V called for a corresponding reform of the Carmelite Rite, which was taken in hand in 1580, the Breviary appearing in 1584 and the Missal in 1587. At the same time the Holy See withdrew the right hitherto exercised by the chapters and the generals of altering the liturgy of the order, and placed all such matters in the hands of the Sacred Congregation of Rites. The publication of the Reformed Breviary of 1584 caused the newly established Discaleed Carmelites to abandon the ancient rite once for all and to adopt the Roman Rite instead. Besides the various manuscripts of the Ordinal already mentioned, we have examined a large number of manuscript missals and breviaries preserved in public and private libraries in the United Kingdom, France, Italy, Spain, and other countries. We have seen most of the early prints of the Missal enumerated by Weale, as well as some not mentioned by him, and the breviaries of 1480, 1490, 1504, 1516 (Horæ), 1542, 1568, 1575, and 1579. Roughly speaking, the ancient Carmelite Rite may be said to stand about half way between the Carthusian and the Dominican rites. It shows signs of great antiquity -- e.g. in the absence of liturgical colours, in the sparing use of altar candles (one at low Mass, none on the altar itself at high Mass but only acolytes' torches, even these being extinguished during part of the Mass, four torches and one candle in choir for Tenebræ); incense, likewise, is used rarely and with noteworthy restrictions; the Blessing at the end of the Mass is only permitted where the custom of the country requires it; passing before the tabernacle, the brethren are directed to make a profound inclination, not a genuflexion. Many other features might be quoted to show that the whole rite points to a period of transition. Already according to the earliest Ordinal Communion is given under one species, the days of general Communion being seven, later on ten or twelve a year with leave for more frequent Communion under certain conditions. Extreme Unction was administered on the eyes, ears, nostrils, mouth, both hands (the palms, with no distinction between priests and others) and the feet superius. The Ordinal of 1312 on the contrary orders the hands to be anointed exterius, but also without distinction for the priests; it moreover adds another anointing on the breast (super pectus: per ardorem libidinis). In the Mass there are some peculiarities. the altar remains covered until the priest and ministers are ready to begin, when the acolytes then roll back the cover; likewise before the end of the Mass they cover the altar again. On great feasts the Introit is said three times, i.e. it is repeated both before and after the Gloria Patri; besides the Epistle and Gospel there is a lesson or prophecy to be recited by an acolyte. At the Lavabo the priest leaves the altar for the piscina where he says that psalm, or else Veni Creator Spiritus or Deus misereatur. Likewise after the first ablution he goes to the piscina to wash his fingers. During the Canon of the Mass the deacon moves a fan to keep the flies away, a custom still in use in Sicily and elsewhere. At the word fregit in the form of consecration, the priest, according to the Ordinal of 1312 and later rubrics, makes a movement as if breaking the host. Great care is taken that the smoke of the thurible and of the torches do not interfere with the clear vision of the host when lifted up for the adoration of the faithful; the chalice, however, is only slightly elevated. The celebrating priest does not genuflect but bows reverently. After the Pater Noster the choir sings the psalm Deus venerunt genies for the restoration of the Holy Land. The prayers for communion are identical with those of the Sarum Rite and other similar uses, viz. domine sancte pater, Domine Jesu Christe (as in the Roman Rite), and Salve salus mundi. The Domine non sum dignus was introduced only in 1568. The Mass ended with Dominus vobiscum, Ite missa est (or its equivalent) and Placeat. The chapter of 1324 ordered the Salve regina to be said at the end of each canonical hour as well as at the end of the Mass. The Last Gospel, which in both ordinals serves for the priest's thanksgiving, appears in the Missal of 1490 as an integral part of the Mass. On Sundays and feasts there was, besides the festival Mass after Terce or Sext, an early Mass (matutina) without solemnities, corresponding to the commemorations of the Office. From Easter till Advent the Sunday Mass was therefore celebrated early in the morning, the high Mass being that of the Resurrection of our Lord; similarly on these Sundays the ninth lesson with its responsory was taken from one of the Easter days; these customs had been introduced soon after the conquest of the Holy Land. A solemn commemoration of the Resurrection was held on the last Sunday before Advent; in all other respects the Carmelite Liturgy reflects more especially the devotion of the order towards the Blessed Virgin. The Divine Office also presents some noteworthy features. The first Vespers of certain feasts and the Vespers during Lent have a responsory usually taken from Matins. Compline has various hymns according to the season, and also special antiphons for the Canticle. The lessons at Matins follow a somewhat different plan from those of the Roman Office. The singing of the genealogies of Christ after Matins on Christmas and the Epiphany gave rise to beautiful ceremonies. After Tenebræ in Holy Week (sung at midnight) we notice the chant of the Tropi; all the Holy Week services present interesting archaic features. Other points to be mentioned are the antiphons Pro fidei meritis etc. on the Sundays from Trinity to Advent and the verses after the psalms on Trinity, the feasts of St. Paul, and St. Laurence. The hymns are those of the Roman Office; the proses appear to be a uniform collection which remained practically unchanged from the thirteenth century to 1544, when all but four or five were abolished. The Ordinal prescribes only four processions in the course of the year, viz. on Candlemas, Palm Sunday, the Ascension, and the Assumption. The calendar of saints, in the two oldest recensions of the Ordinal, exhibits some feasts proper to the Holy Land, namely some of the early bishops of Jerusalem, the Patriarchs Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, and Lazarus. The only special features were the feast of St. Anne, probably due to the fact that the Carmelites occupied for a short time a convent dedicated to her in Jerusalem (vacated by Benedictine nuns at the capture of that city in 1187), and the octave of the Nativity of Our Lady, which also was proper to the order. In the works mentioned below we have given the list of feasts added in the course of three centuries, and shall here speak only of a few. The Chapter of 1306 introduced those of St. Louis, Barbara, Corpus Christi, and the Conception of Our Lady (in Conceptione seu potius veneratione sanctificationis B. V.); the Corpus Christi procession, however, dates only from the end of the fifteenth century. In 1312 the second part of the Confiteor, which till then had been very short, was introduced. Daily commemorations of St. Anne and Sts. Albert and Angelus date respectively from the beginning and the end of the fifteenth century, but were transferred in 1503 from the canonical Office to the Little Office of Our Lady. The feast of the "Three Maries" dates from 1342, those of the Visitation, of Our Lady ad nives, and the Presentation from 1391. Feasts of the order were first introduced towards the end of the fourteenth century -- viz. the Commemoration (Scapular Feast) of 16 July appears first about 1386; St. Eliseus, prophet and St. Cyril of Constantinople in 1399; St. Albert in 1411; St. Angelus in 1456. Owing to the printing of the first Breviary of the order at Brussels in 1480, a number of territorial feasts were introduced into the order, such as St. Joseph, the Ten Thousand Martyrs, the Division of the Apostles. The raptus of St. Elias (17 June) is first to be found in the second half of the fifteenth century in England and Germany; the feast of the Prophet (20 July) dates at the earliest from 1551. Some general chapters, especially those of 1478 and 1564, added whole lists of saints, partly of real or supposed saints of the order, partly of martyrs whose bodies were preserved in various churches belonging to the Carmelites, particularly that of San Martino ai Monti in Rome. The revision of 1584 reduced the Sanctorale to the smallest possible dimensions, but many feasts then suppressed were afterwards reintroduced. A word must be added about the singing. The Ordinal of 1312 allows fauxbourdon, at least on solemn occasions; organs and organists are mentioned with ever-increasing frequency from the first years of the fifteenth century, the earliest notice being that of Mathias Johannis de Lucca, who in 1410 was elected organist at Florence; the organ itself was a gift of Johannes Dominici Bonnani, surnamed Clerichinus, who died at an advanced age on 24 Oct., 1416. BENEDICT ZIMMERMAN CISTERCIAN RITE This rite is to be found in the liturgical books of the order. The collection, composed of fifteen books, was made by the General Chapter of Cîteaux, most probably in 1134; they are now included in the Missal, Breviary, Ritual, and calendar, or Martyrology. When Pius V ordered the entire Church to conform to the Roman Missal and Breviary, he exempted the Cistercians from this law, because their rite had been more than 400 years in existence. Under Claude Vaussin, General of the Cistercians (in the middle of the seventeenth century), several reforms were made in the liturgical books of the order, and were approved by Alexander Vll, Clement IX, and Clement XIII. These approbations were confirmed by Pius IX on 7 Feb., 1871, for the Cistercians of the Common as well as for those of the Strict Observance. The Breviary is quite different from the Roman, as it follows exactly the prescriptions of the Rule of St. Benedict, with a very few minor additions. St. Benedict wished the entire Psalter recited each week; twelve psalms are to be said at Matins when there are but two Nocturns; when there is a third Nocturn, it is to be composed of three divisions of a canticle, there being in this latter case always twelve lessons. Three psalms or divisions of psalms are appointed for Prime, the Little Hours, and Compline (in this latter hour the "Nunc dimittis" is never said), and always four psalms for Vespers. Many minor divisions and directions are given in St. Benedict's Rule. In the old missal before the reform of Claude Vaussin, there were wide divergences between the Cistercian and Roman rites. The psalm "Judica" was not said, but in its stead was recited the "Veni Creator"; the "Indulgentiam" was followed by the "Pater" and "Ave", and the "Oramus te Domine" was omitted in kissing the altar. After the "Pax Domini sit semper vobiscum", the "Agnus Dei" was said thrice, and was followed immediately by "Hæc sacrosancta commixtio corporis", said by the priest while placing the small fragment of the Sacred Host in the chalice; then the "Domine Jesu Christe, Fili Dei Vivi" was said, but the "Corpus Tuum" and "Quod ore sumpsimus" were omitted. The priest said the "Placeat" as now, and then "Meritis et precibus istorum et onmium sanctorum. Suorum misereatur nostri Omnipotens Dominus. Amen", while kissing the altar; with the sign of the Cross the Mass was ended. Outside of some minor exceptions in the wording and conclusions of various prayers, the other parts of the Mass were the same as in the Roman Rite. Also in some Masses of the year the ordo was different; for instance, on Palm Sunday the Passion was only said at the high Mass, at the other Masses a special gospel only being said. However, since the time of Claude Vaussin the differences from the Roman Mass are insignificant. In the calendar there are relatively few feasts of saints or other modern feasts, as none were introduced except those especially prescribed by Rome for the Cistercian Order; this was done in order to adhere as closely as possible to the spirit of St. Benedict in prescribing the weekly recitation of the Psalter. The divisions of the feasts are: major or minor feast of sermon; major or minor feast of two Masses; feast of twelve lessons and Mass; feast of three lessons and Mass; feast of commemoration and Mass; then merely a commemoration; and finally the feria. The differences in the ritual are very small. As regards the last sacraments, Extreme Unction is given before the Holy Viaticum, and in Extreme Unction the word "Peccasti" is used instead of the "Deliquisti" in the Roman Ritual. In the Sacrament of Penance a shorter form of absolution may be used in ordinary confessions. EDMOND M. OBRECHT DOMINICAN RITE A name denoting the distinctive ceremonies embodied in the privileged liturgical books of the Order of Preachers. (a) Origin and development The question of a special unified rite for the order received no official attention in the time of St. Dominic, each province sharing in the general liturgical diversities prevalent throughout the Church at the time of the order's confirmation (1216). Hence, each province and often each convent had certain peculiarities in the text and in the ceremonies of the Holy Sacrifice and the recitation of the Office. The successors of St. Dominic were quick to recognize the impracticability of such conditions and soon busied themselves in an effort to eliminate the embarrassing distinctions. They maintained that the safety of a basic principle of community life unity of prayer and worship-was endangered by this conformity with different diocesan conditions. This belief was impressed upon them more forcibly by the confusion that these liturgical diversities occasioned at the general chapters of the order where brothers from every province were assembled. The first indication of an effort to regulate liturgical conditions was manifested by Jordan of Saxony, the successor of St. Dominic. In the Constitutions (1228) ascribed to him are found several rubrics for the recitation of the Office. These insist more on the attention with which the Office should be said than on the qualifications of the liturgical books. However, it is said that Jordan took some steps in the latter direction and compiled one Office for universal use. Though this is doubtful, it is certain that his efforts were of little practical value, for the Chapters of Bologna (1240) and Paris (1241) allowed each convent to conform with the local rites. The first systematic attempt at reform was made under the direction of John the Teuton, the fourth master general of the order. At his suggestion the Chapter of Bologna (1244) asked the delegates to bring to the next chapter (Cologne, 1245) their special rubrics for the recitation of the Office, their Missals, Graduals, and Antiphonaries, "pro concordando officio". To bring some kind of order out of chaos a commission was appointed consisting of four members, one each from the Provinces of France, England, Lombardy, and Germany, to carry out the revision at Angers. They brought the result of their labours to the Chapter of Paris (1246), which approved the compilation and ordered its exclusive use by the whole Order. This same chapter approved the "Lectionary" which had been entrusted to Humbert of Romains for revision. The work of the commission was again approved by the Chapters of Montepulciano (1247) and Paris (1248). But dissatisfaction with the work of the commission was felt on all sides, especially with their interpretation of the rubrics. They had been hurried in their work, and had left too much latitude for local customs. The question was reopened and the Chapter of London (1250) asked the commission to reassemble at Metz and revise their work in the light of the criticisms that had been made; the result of this revision was approved at the Chapters of Metz (1251) and Bologna (1252) and its use made obligatory for the whole order. It was also ordained that one copy of the liturgical books should be placed at Paris and one at Bologna, from which the books for the other convents should be faithfully copied. However, it was recognized that these books were not entirely perfect, and that there was room for further revision. Though this work was done under the direction of John the Teuton, the brunt of the revision fell to the lot of Humbert of Romains, then provincial of the Paris Province. Humbert was elected Master General of the Chapter of Buda (1254) and was asked to direct his attention to the question of the order's liturgical books. He subjected each of them to a most thorough revision, and after two years submitted his work to the Chapter of Paris (1256). This and several subsequent chapters endorsed the work, effected legislation guarding against corruption, constitutionally recognized the authorship of Humbert, and thus once and for all settled a common rite for the Order of Preachers throughout the world. (b) Preservation Clement IV, through the general, John of Vercelli, issued a Bull in 1267 in which he lauded the ability and zeal of Humbert and forbade the making of any changes without the proper authorization. Subsequent papal regulation went much further towards preserving the integrity of the rite. Innocent XI and Clement XII prohibited the printing of the books without the permission of the master general and also ordained that no member of the order should presume to use in his fulfilment of the choral obligation any book not bearing the seal of the general and a reprint of the pontifical Decrees. Another force preservative of the special Dominican Rite was the Decree of Pius V (1570), imposing a common rite on the universal Church but excepting those rites which had been approved for two hundred years. This exception gave to the Order of Friars Preachers the privilege of maintaining its old rite, a privilege which the chapters of the order sanctioned and which the members of the order gratefully accepted. It must not be thought that the rite has come down through the ages absolutely without change. Some slight corruptions crept in despite the rigid legislation to the contrary. Then new feasts have been added with the permission of the Roman Pontiffs and many new editions of the liturgical books have been printed. Changes in the text, when they have been made, have always been effected with the idea of eliminating arbitrary mutilations and restoring the books to a perfect conformity with the old exemplars at Paris and Bologna. Such were the reforms of the Chapters of Salamanca (1551), Rome (1777), and Ghent (1871). Several times movements have been started with the idea of conforming with the Roman Rite; but these have always been defeated, and the order still stands in possession of the rite conceded to it by Pope Clement in 1267. (c) Sources of the rite To determine the sources of the Dominican Rite is to come face to face with the haze and uncertainty that seems to shroud most liturgical history. The thirteenth century knew no unified Roman Rite. While the basis of the usages of north-western Europe was a Gallicanized-Gregorian Sacramentary sent by Adrian IV to Charlemagne, each little locality had its own peculiar distinctions. At the time of the unification of the Dominican Rite most of the convents of the order were embraced within the territory in which the old Gallican Rite had once obtained and in which the Gallico-Roman Rite then prevailed. Jordan of Saxony, the pioneer in liturgical reform within the a order, greatly admired the Rite of the Church Paris and frequently assisted at the recitations of the Office at Notre-Dame. Humbert of Romains, who played so important a part in the work of unification, was the provincial of the French Province. These facts justify the opinion that the basis of the Dominican Rite was the typical Gallican Rite of the thirteenth century. But documentary evidence that the rite was adapted from any one locality is lacking. The chronicles of the order state merely that the rite is neither the pure Roman nor the pure Gallican, but based on the Roman usage of the thirteenth century, with additions from the Rites of Paris and other places in which the order existed. Just from where these additions were obtained and exactly what they were cannot be determined, except in a general way, from an examination of each distinctive feature. Two points must be emphasized here: (1) the Dominican Rite is not an arbitrary elaboration of the Roman Rite made against the spirit of the Church or to give the order an air of exclusiveness, nor can it be said to be more gallicanized then any use of the Gallico-Roman Rite of that period. It was an honest and sincere attempt to harmonize and simplify the widely divergent usages of the early half of the thirteenth century. (2) The Dominican Rite, formulated by Humbert, saw no radical development after its confirmation by Clement IV. When Pius V made his reform, the Dominican Rite had been fixed and stable for over three hundred years, while a constant liturgical change had been taking place in other communities. Furthermore the comparative simplicity of the Dominican Rite, as manifested in the different liturgical books, gives evidence of its antiquity. (d) Liturgical books The rite compiled by Humbert contained fourteen books: (1) the Ordinary, which was a sort of an index to the Divine Office, the Psalms, Lessons, Antiphons, and Chapters being indicated by their first words. (2) The Martyrology, an amplified calendar of martyrs and other saints. (3) The Collectarium, a book for the use of the hebdomidarian, which contained the texts and the notes for the prayers, chapters, and blessings. (4) The Processional, containing the hymns (text and music) for the processions. (5) The Psalterium, containing merely the Psalter. (6) The Lectionary, which contained the Sunday homilies, the lessons from Sacred Scripture and the lives of the saints. (7) The Antiphonary, giving the text and music for the parts of the Office sung outside of the Mass. (8) The Gradual, which contained the words and the music for the parts of the Mass sung by the choir. (9) The Conventual Missal, for the celebration of solemn Mass. (10) The Epistolary, containing the Epistles for the Mass and the Office. (11) The Book of Gospels. (12) The Pulpitary, which contained the musical notation for the Gloria Patri, the Invitatory, Litanies, Tracts, and the Alleluia. (13) The Missal for a private Mass. (14) The Breviary, a compilation from all the books used in the choral recitation of the Office, very much reduced in size for the convenience of travellers. By a process of elimination and synthesis undergone so by the books of the Roman Rite many of the books of Humbert have become superfluous while several others have been formed. These add nothing to the original text, but merely provide for the Addition of feasts and the more convenient recitation of the office. The collection of the liturgical books now contains: (1) Martyrology; (2) Collectarium; (3) Processional; (4) Antiphonary; (5) Gradual; (6) Missal for the conventual Mass; (7) Missal for the private Mass; (8) Breviary; (9) Vesperal; (10) Horæ Diurnæ; (11) Ceremonial. The contents of these books follow closely the books of the same name issued by Humbert and which have just been described. The new ones are: (1) the Horæ Diurnæ (2) the Vesperal (with notes), adaptations from the Breviary and the Antiphonary respectively (3) the Collectarium, which is a compilation from all the rubrics scattered throughout the other books. With the exception of the Breviary, these books are similar in arrangment to the correspondingly named books of the Roman Rite. The Dominican Breviary is divided into two parts: Part I, Advent to Trinity; Part II, Trinity to Advent. (e) Distinctive marks of the Dominican Rite Only the most striking differences between the Dominican Rite and the Roman need be mentioned here. The most important is in the manner of celebrating a low Mass. The celebrant in the Dominican Rite wears the amice over his head until the beginning of Mass, and prepares the chalice as soon as he reaches the altar. The Psalm "Judica me Deus" is not said and the Confiteor, much shorter than the Roman, contains the name of St. Dominic. The Gloria and the Credo are begun at the centre of the altar and finished at the Missal. At the Offertory there is a simultaneous oblation of the Host and the chalice and only one prayer, the "Suscipe Sancta Trinitas". The Canon of the Mass is the same as the Canon of the Roman Rite, but after it are several noticeable differences. The Dominican celebrant says the "Agnus Dei" immediately after the "Pax Domini" and then recites three prayers "Hæc sacrosancta commixtio" "Domine Jesu Christe", and "Corpus et sanguis" Then follows the Communion, the priest receiving the Host from his left hand. No prayers are said at the consumption of the Precious Blood, the first prayer after the "Corpus et Sanguis" being the Communion. These are the most noticeable differences in the celebration of a low Mass. In a solemn Mass the chalice is prepared just after the celebrant has read the Gospel, seated at the Epistle side of the sanctuary. The chalice is brought from the altar to the place where the celebrant is seated by the sub-deacon, who pours the wine and water into it and replaces it on the altar. The Dominican Breviary differs but slightly from the Roman. The Offices celebrated are of seven classes:--of the season (de tempore), of saints (de sanctis), of vigils, of octaves, votive Offices, Office of the Blessed Virgin, and Office of the Dead. In point of dignity the feasts are classified as "totum duplex", "duplex" "simplex" "of three lessons", and "of a memory". The ordinary "totum duplex" feast is equivalent to the Roman greater double. A "totum duplex" with an ordinary octave (a simple or a solemn octave) is equal to the second-class double of the Roman Rite, and a "totum duplex" with a most solemn octave is like the Roman first-class double. A "duplex" feast is equivalent to the lesser double and the "simplex" to the semi-double. There is no difference in the ordering of the canonical hours, except that all during Paschal time the Dominican Matins provide for only three psalms and three lessons instead of the customary nine psalms and nine lessons. The Office of the Blessed Virgin must be said on all days on which feasts of the rank of duplex or "totum duplex" are not celebrated. The Gradual psalms must be said on all Saturdays on which is said the votive Office of the Blessed Virgin. The Office of the Dead must be said once a week except during the week following Easter and the week following Pentecost. Other minor points of difference are the manner of making the commemorations, the text of the hymns, the Antiphons, the lessons of the common Offices and the insertions of special feasts of the order. There is no great distinction between the musical notation of the Dominican Gradual, Vesperal, and Antiphonary and the corresponding books of the new Vatican edition. The Dominican chant has been faithfully copied from the MSS. of the thirteenth century, which were in turn derived indirectly from the Gregorian Sacramentary. One is not surprised therefore at the remarkable similarity between the chant of the two rites. For a more detailed study of the Dominican Rite reference may be had to the order's liturgical books. IGNATIUS SMITH. FRANCISCAN RITE The Franciscans, unlike the Dominicans, Carmelites, and other orders, have never had a peculiar rite properly so called, but, conformably to the mind of St. Francis of Assisi, have always followed the Roman Rite for the celebration of Mass. However, the Friars Minor and the Capuchins wear the amice, instead of the biretta, over the head, and are accustomed to say Mass with their feet uncovered, save only by sandals. They also enjoy certain privileges in regard to the time and place of celebrating Mass, and the Missale Romano-Seraphicum contains many proper Masses not found in the Roman Missal. These are mostly feasts of Franciscan saints and blessed, which are not celebrated throughout the Church, or other feasts having a peculiar connexion with the order, e.g. the Feast of the Mysteries of the Way of the Cross (Friday before Septuagesima), and that of the Seven Joys of the Blessed Virgin (First Sunday after the octave of the Assumption). The same is true in regard to the Breviarium Romano-Seraphicum, and Martyrologium Romano-Seraphicum. The Franciscans exercised great influence in the origin and evolution of the Breviary, and on the revision of the Rubrics of the Mass. They have also their own calendar, or ordo. This calendar may be used not only in the churches of the First Order, but also in the churches and chapels of the Second Order, and Third Order Regular (if aggregated to the First Order) and Secular, as well as those religious institutes which have had some connexion with the parent body. It may also be used by secular priests or clerics who axe members of the Third Order. The order has also its own ritual and ceremonial for its receptions, professions, etc. FERDINAND HECKMANN FRIARS MINOR CAPUCHIN RITE The Friars Minor Capuchin use the Roman Rite, except that in the Confiteor the name of their founder, St. Francis is added after the names of the Apostles, and in the suffrages they make commemorations of St. Francis and all saints of their order. The use of incense in the conventual mass on certain solemnities, even though the Mass is said and not sung, is another liturgical custom (recently sanctioned by the Holy See) peculiar to their order. Generally speaking, the Capuchins do not have sung Masses except in parochial churches, and except in these churches they may not have organs without the minister general's permission. By a Decree of the Sacred Congregation of Rites, 14 May, 1890, the minister general, when celebrating Mass at the time of the canonical visitation and on solemnities, has the privileges of a domestic prelate of His Holiness. In regard to the Divine Office, the Capuchins do not sing it according to note but recite it in monotone. In the larger communities they generally recite Matins and Lauds at midnight, except on the three last days of Holy Week, when Tenebræ is chanted on the preceding evening, and during the octaves of Corpus Christi and the Immaculate Conception of the Blessed Virgin Mary, when matins are recited also on the preceding evening with the Blessed Sacrament exposed. Every day after Compline they add, extra-liturgically, commemorations of the Immaculate Conception, St. Francis, and St. Anthony of Padua. On the feast of St. Francis after second Vespers they observe the service called the "Transitus" of St. Francis, and on all Saturdays, except feasts of first and second class and certain privileged feriæ and octaves, all Masses said in their churches are votive in honour of the Immaculate Conception, excepting only the conventual mass. They follow the universal calendar, with the addition of feasts proper to their order. These additional feasts include all canonized saints of the whole Franciscan Order, all beati of the Capuchin Reform and the more notable beati of the whole order; and every year the 5th of October is observed as a commemoration of the departed members of the order in the same way as the 2nd of November is observed in the universal Church. Owing to the great number of feasts thus observed, the Capuchins have the privilege of transferring the greater feasts, when necessary, to days marked semi-double. According to the ancient Constitutions of the Order, the Capuchins were not allowed to use vestments of rich texture, not even of silk, but by Decree of the Sacred Congregation of Rites, 17 December, 1888, they must now conform to the general laws of the Church in this matter. They are, however, still obliged to maintain severe simplicity in their churches, especially when nonparochial. FATHER CUTHBERT PREMONSTRATENSIAN RITE The Norbertine rite differs from the Roman in the celebration of the Sacrifice of the Mass, in the Divine Office, and in the administration of the Sacrament of Penance. (1) Sacrifice of the Mass The Missal is proper to the order and is not arranged like the Roman Missal. The canon is identical, with the exception of a slight variation as to the time of making the sign of the cross with the paten at the "Libera nos". The music for the Prefaces etc. differs, though not considerably, from that of the Roman Missal. Two alleluias are said after the "Ite missa est" for a week after Easter; for the whole of the remaining Paschal time one alleluia is said. The rite for the celebration of feasts gives the following grades: three classes of triples, two of doubles, celebre, nine lessons, three lessons. No feasts are celebrated during privileged octaves. There are so many feasts lower than double that usually no privilege is needed for votive Masses. The rubrics regulating the various feasts of the year are given in the "Ordinarius Sen. liber cæremomarum canonici ordinis Præmonstratensis". Rubrics for the special liturgical functions are found in the Missal, the Breviary, the Diurnal, the Processional, the Gradual, and the Antiphonary. (2) Divine Office The Breviary differs from the Roman Breviary in its calendar, the manner of reciting it, arrangement of matter. Some saints on the Roman calendar are omitted. The feasts peculiar to the Norbertines are: St. Godfried, C., 16 Jan.; St. Evermodus, B. C., 17 Feb.; Bl. Frederick, Abbot, 3 Mar.; St. Ludolph, B. M., 29 Mar.; Bl. Herman Joseph, C., 7 Apr.; St. Isfrid, B. C.,' 15 June; Sts. Adrian and James, MM., 9 July; Bl. Hrosnata, 19 July, 19; Bl. Gertrude, V., 13 Aug.; Bl. Bronislava, V., 30 Aug.; St. Gilbert, Abbot, 24 Oct.; St. Siardus, Abbot, 17 Nov. The feast of St. Norbert, founder of the order, which falls on 6 June in the Roman calendar, is permanently transferred to 11 July, so that its solemn rite may not be interfered with by the feasts of Pentecost and Corpus Christi. Other feasts are the Triumph of St. Norbert over the sacramentarian heresy of Tanchelin, on the third Sunday after Pentecost, and the Translation of St. Norbert commemorating the translation of his body from Magdeburg to Prague, on the fourth Sunday after Easter. Besides the daily recitation of the canonical hours the Norbertines are obliged to say the Little Office of the Blessed Virgin, except on triple feasts and during octaves of the first class. In choir this is said immediately after the Divine Office. (3) Administration of the Sacrament of Penance The form of absolution is not altogether in harmony with that of the Roman Ritual. The following is the Norbertine formula: "Dominus noster Jesus Christus te absolvat, et ego auctoritate ipsius, mihi licet indignissimo concessa, absolvo te in primis, a vinculo excommunicationis ... in quantum possum et indiges", etc. The liturgical books of the Norbertines were reprinted by order of the general chapter held at Prémontré, in 1738, and presided over by Claude H. Lucas, abbot-general. A new edition of the Missal and the Breviary was issued after the General Chapter of Prague, in 1890. In 1902 a committee was appointed to revise the Gradual, Antiphonary, etc. This committee received much encouragement in its work by the Motu Proprio of Pius X on church music. The General Chapter of Tepl, Austria, in 1908, decided to edit the musical books of the order as prepared, in accordance with ancient MSS. by this committee G. RYBROOK SERVITE RITE The Order of Servites (see SERVANTS OF MARY) cannot be said to possess a separate or exclusive rite similar to the Dominicans and others, but follows the Roman Ritual, as provided in its constitutions, with very slight variations. Devotion towards the Mother of Sorrows being the principal distinctive characteristic of the order, there are special prayers and indulgences attaching to the solemn celebration of the five major Marian feasts, namely, the Annunciation, Visitation, Assumption, Presentation, and Nativity of our Blessed Lady. The feast of the Seven Dolours of the Blessed Virgin Mary, celebrated always on the Third Sunday of September, has a privileged octave and is enriched with a plenary indulgence ad instar Portiunculoe; that is, as often as a visit is made to a church of the order. In common with all friars the Servite priests wear an amice on the head instead of a biretta while proceeding to and from the altar. The Mass is begun with the first part of the Angelical Salutation, and in the Confiteor the words Septem beatis patribus nostris are inserted. At the conclusion of Mass the Salve Regina and the oration Omnipotens sempiterne Deus are recited. In the recitation of the Divine Office each canonical hour is begun with the Ave Maria down to the words ventris tui, Jesus. The custom of reciting daily, immediately before Vespers, a special prayer called Vigilia, composed of the three psalms and three antiphons of the first nocturn of the Office of the Blessed Virgin, followed by three lessons and responses, comes down from the thirteenth century, when they were offered in thanksgiving for a special favour bestowed upon the order by Pope Alexander IV (13 May, 1259). The Salve Regina is daily chanted in choir whether or not it is the antiphon proper to the season. LITURGICAL SCIENCE.--RENAUDOT, Liturgiarum orientalium collectio (Frankfurt, 1847); MARTENE Le antiquis ecclesioe ritibus (Antwerp and Milan, 1736-8); ASSEMANI, Codex liturgicus ecclesioe universoe (Rome, 1749-66); DANIEL, Codex liturgicus ecclesioe universoe (Leipzig, 1847); DENZIGER, Ritus Orientalium (Wurzburg, 1863); NILLES, Kalendarium manuals (Innsbruck, 1896); HAMMOND, Liturgies, Eastern and Western (Oxford, 1878); BRIGHTMAN, Eastern Liturgies (Oxford, 1896); CABROL, Introduction aux études liturgiques (Paris, 1907); RIETSCHEL, Lehrbuch der Liturgik (Berlin, 1900); CLEMEN, Quellenbuch zur praktischen Theologie, 1: Liturgik (Giessen, 1910); The Prayer-books of Edward VI and Elizabeth are reprinted in the Ancient and Modern Library of Theological Literature (London); PROCTOR AND FRERE, A New History of the Book of Common Prayer (London, 1908); MAUDE, A History of the Book of Common Prayer (London, 1899). CARMELITE RITE.--ZIMMERMAN, Le cérémonial de Maitre Sibert de Beka in Chroniques du Carmel Jambes-lez-Namur, 1903-5); IDEM, Ordinaire de l'Ordre de Notre-Dame du Mont Carmel (Paris, 1910), being the thirteenth volume of Bibliothèque liturgique; WESSELS, Ritus Ordinis in Analecta Ordinis Carmelitarum (Rome, 1909); WEALE, Bibliographia liturgica (London, 1886). The oldest Ordinal, now in Dublin but of English origin, written after 1262 and before the publication of the Constitution of Boniface VIII, "Gloriosus Deus," C. Gloriosus, de Reliquiis, in Sexto, has not yet been printed. CISTERCIAN RITE.-- Missale Cisterciense, MS. of the latter part of the fourteenth century; Mis. Cist. (Strasburg, 1486); Mis. Cist. (Paris, 1516, 1545, 1584); Regula Ssmi Patris Benedicti; Breviarium Cist. cum Bulla Pii Papoe IX die 7 Feb., 1871; BONA, Op. omnia (Antwerp, 1677); GUIGNART, Mon. primitifs de la règle cist. (Dijon, 1878); Rubriques du bréviaire cist., by a religious of La Grande Trappe (1882); TRILHE, Mémoire sur le projet de cérémonial cist. (Toulouse, 1900); IDEM, Man. Coeremoniarum juxta usum S.O. Cist. (Westmalle, 1908). DOMINICAN RITE.--MORTIER, Hist. des mattres généraux de l'Ordre des Frères Prêcheurs, I (Paris, 1903), 174, 309-312, 579 sq.; CASSITTO, Liturgia Dominicana (Naples, 1804); MASETTI, Mon. et Antiq. vet. discipl. Ord. Præd. (Rome, 1864); DANZAS, Etudes sur too temps prim. de l'ordre do S. Dominique (Paris, 1884); Acta Capitulorum Ord. Proed., ed. REICHERT (Rome, 1898-1904); Litt. Encyc. Magist. Gener. O. P., ed. REICHERT (Rome, 1900); TURON, Hist. des hommes ill. do I'Ordre de St. Dominique, 1, 341; Bullarium O. P., passim. FRANCISCAN RITE.-- Coerem. Romano-Seraph. (Quaracchi, 1908); Rit. Romano-Seraph. (Quaracchi, 1910); Promptuarium Seraph. Quaracchi, 1910). CAPUCHIN RITE.-- Ceremoniale Ord. Cap.; Analecta Ord. Cap.; Constit. ord. (Rome). P.J. GRIFFIN Rites in the United States Rites in the United States Since immigration from the eastern portion of Europe and from Asia and Africa set in with such volume, the peoples who (both in union with and outside the unity of the Church) follow the various Eastern rites arrived in the United States in large numbers, bringing with them their priests and their forms of worship. As they grew in number and financial strength, they erected churches in the various cities and towns throughout the country. Rome used to be considered the city where the various rites of the Church throughout the world could be seen grouped together, but in the United States they may be observed to a greater advantage than even in Rome. In Rome the various rites are kept alive for the purpose of educating the various national clergy who study there, and for demonstrating the unity of the Church, but there is no body of laymen who follow those rites; in the United States, on the contrary, it is the number and pressure of the laity which have caused the establishment and support of the churches of the various rites. There is consequently no better field for studying the various rites of the Church than in the chief cities of the United States, and such study has the advantage to the exact observer of affording an opportunity of comparing the dissident churches of those rites with those which belong to Catholic unity. The chief rites which have established themselves in America are these: (1) Armenian, (2) Greek or Byzantine, and (3) Syro-Maronite. There are also a handful of adherents of the Coptic, Syrian, and Chaldean rites, which will also be noticed, and there are occasionally priests of the various Latin rites. I. THE ARMENIAN RITE This rite alone, of all the rites in the Church, is confined to one people, one language, and one alphabet. It is, if anything, more exclusive than Judaism of old. Other rites are more widely extended in every way: the Roman Rite is spread throughout Latin, Teutonic, and Slavic peoples, and it even has two languages, the Latin and the Ancient Slavonic, and two alphabets, the Roman and the Glagolitic, in which its ritual is written; the Greek or Byzantine Rite extends among Greek, Slavic, Latin, and Syrian peoples, and its services are celebrated in Greek, Slavonic, Rumanian, and Arabic with service-books in the Greek, Cyrillic, Latin, and Arabic alphabets. But the Armenian Rite, whether Catholic or Gregorian, is confined exclusively to persons of the Armenian race, and employs the ancient Armenian language and alphabet. The history and origin of the race have been given in the article ARMENIA, but a word may be said of the language (Hayk, as it is called), and its use in the liturgy. The majority of the Armenians were converted to Christianity by St. Gregory the Illuminator, a man of noble family, who was made Bishop of Armenia in 302. So thoroughly was his work effected that Armenia alone of the ancient nations converted to Christianity has preserved no pagan literature antedating the Christian literature of the people; pagan works, if they ever existed, seem to have perished in the ardour of the Armenians for Christian thought and expression. The memory of St. Gregory is so revered that the Armenians who are opposed to union with the Holy See take pride in calling themselves "Gregorians," implying that they keep the faith taught by St. Gregory. Hence it is usual to call the dissidents "Gregorians," in order to distinguish them from the Uniat Catholics. At first the language of the Christian liturgy in Armenia was Syriac, but later they discarded it for their own tongue, and translated all the services into Armenian, which was at first written in Syriac or Persian letters. About 400 St. Mesrob invented the present Armenian alphabet (except two final letters which were added in the year 1200) and their language, both ancient and modern, has been written in that alphabet ever since. Mesrob also translated the New Testament into Armenian and revised the entire liturgy. The Armenians in their church life have led almost as checkered an existence as they have in their national life. At first they were in full communion with the Universal Church. They were bitterly opposed to Nestorianism, and, when in 451 the council of Chalcedon condemned the doctrine of Eutyches, they seceded, holding the opinion that such a definition was sanctioning Nestorianism, and have since remained separated from and hostile to the Greek Church of Constantinople. In 1054 the Greeks seceded in turn from unity with the Roman Church, and nearly three centuries later the Armenians became reconciled with Rome, but the union lasted only a brief period. Breaking away from unity again, the majority formed a national church which agreed neither with the Greek nor the Roman Church; a minority, recruited by converts to union with the Holy See in the seventeenth century remained united Armenian Catholics. The Mass and the whole liturgy of the Armenian Church is said in Ancient Armenian, which differs considerably from the modern tongue. The language is an offshoot of the Iranian branch of the Indo-Germanic family of languages, and probably found its earliest written expression in the cuneiform inscriptions; it is unlike the Semitic languages immediately surrounding it. Among its peculiarities are twelve regular declensions and eight irregular declensions of nouns and five conjugations of the verbs, while there are many difficulties in the way of postpositions and the like. It abounds in consonants and guttural sounds; the words of the Lord's Prayer in Armenian will suffice as an example: "Hair mier, vor herghins ies, surp iegitzi anun ko, ieghastze arkautiun ko, iegitzin garnk ko, vorbes hierghins iev hergri, zhatz mier hanabazort dur miez aissor, iev tog miez ezbardis mier, vorbes iev mek togumk merotz bardabanatz, iev mi danir zmez i porsutiun, ail perghea i chare." The language is written from left to right, like Greek, Latin or English, but in an alphabet of thirty-eight peculiar letters which are dissimilar in form to anything in the Greek or Latin alphabet, and are arranged in a most perplexing order. For instance, the Armenian alphabet starts off with a, p, k, t, z, etc., and ends up with the letter f. It may also be noted that the Armenian has changed the consonantal values of most of the ordinary sounds in Christian names; thus George becomes Kevork; Sergius, Sarkis; Jacob, Hagop; Joseph, Hovsep; Gregory, Krikori; Peter, Bedros; and so on. The usual clan addition of the word "son" (ian) to most Armenian family names, something like the use of mac in the Gaelic languages, renders usual Armenian names easy of identification (e.g., Azarian, Hagopian, Rubian, Zohrabian, etc.). The book containing the regulations for the administration of the sacraments, analogous to the Greek Euchologion or the Roman Ritual, is called the "Mashdotz," after the name of its compiler St. Mesrob, who was surnamed Mashdotz. He arranged and compiled the five great liturgical books used in the Armenian Church: (1) the Breviary (Zhamakirk) or Book of Hours; (2) The Directory (Tzutzak) or Calendar, containing the fixed festivals of the year; (3) The Liturgy (Pataragakirk) or Missal, arranged and enriched also by John Mantaguni; (4) The Book of Hymns (Dagaran), arranged for the principal great feasts of the year; (5) The Ritual or "Mashdotz," mentioned above. A peculiarity about the Armenian Church is that the majority of great feasts falling upon weekdays are celebrated on the Sunday immediately following. The great festivals of the Christian year are divided by the Armenians into five classes: (1) Easter; (2) feasts which fall on Sunday such as Palm Sunday, Pentecost, etc.; (3) feasts which are observed on the days on which they occur: the Nativity, Epiphany, Circumcision, Presentation, and Annunciation; (4) feasts which are transferred to the following Sunday: Transfiguration, Immaculate Conception, Nativity B.V.M., Assumption, Holy Cross, feasts of the Apostles, etc.; (5) other feasts, which are not observed at all unless they can be transferred to Sunday. The Gregorian Armenians observe the Nativity, Epiphany, and Baptism of Our Lord on the same day (6 January), but the Catholic Armenians observe Christmas on 25 December and the Epiphany on 6 January, and they observe many of the other feasts of Our Lord on the days on which they actually fall. The principal fasts are: (1) Lent; (2) the Fast of Nineveh for two weeks, one month before the commencement of Lent -- in reality a remnant of the ancient Lenten fast, now commemorated only in name by our Septuagesima, Sexagesima, and Quinquagesima Sundays; (3) the week following Pentecost. The days of abstinence are the Wednesdays and Fridays throughout the year with certain exceptions (e. g., during the week after the Nativity, Easter, and the Assumption). In the Armenian Church Saturday is observed as the Sabbath, commemorating the Old Law and the creation of man, and Sunday, as the Lord's Day of Resurrection and rejoicing, commemorating the New Law and the redemption of man. Most of the saints' days are dedicated to Armenian saints not commemorated in other lands but the Armenian Catholics in Galicia and Transylvania use the Gregorian (not the Julian) Calendar and have many Roman saints' days and feasts added to their ancient ecclesiastical year. In the actual arrangement of the church building for worship the Armenian Rite differs both from the Greek and the Latin. While the Armenian Church was in communion with Rome, it seems to have united many Roman practices in its ritual with those that were in accord with the Greek or Byzantine forms. The church building may be divided into the sanctuary and church proper (choir and nave.) The sanctuary is a platform raised above the general level of the church and reached by four or more steps. The altar is always erected in the middle of it and it is again a few steps higher than the level of & sanctuary. It is perhaps possible that the Armenians originally used an altar-screen or iconostasis, like that of the Greek churches, but it has long since disappeared. Still they do not use the open altar like the Latin Church. Two curtains are hung before the sanctuary: a large double curtain hangs before its entrance, extending completely across the space like the Roman chancel rail, and is so drawn as to conceal the altar, the priest, and the deacons at certain parts of the Mass; the second and smaller curtain is used merely to separate the priest from the deacons and to cover the altar after service. Each curtain opens on both sides, and ordinarily is drawn back from the middle. The second curtain is not much used. The use of these curtains is ascribed to the year 340, when they were required by a canon formulated by Bishop Macarius of Jerusalem. Upon the altar are usually the Missal, the Book of Gospels, a cross upon which the image of Our Lord is painted or engraved in low relief, and two or more candles, which are lighted as in the Roman use. The Blessed Sacrament is usually reserved in a tabernacle on the altar, and a small lamp kept burning there at all times. In the choir, usually enclosed within a low iron railing, the singers and priests stand in lines while singing or reciting the Office. In the East, the worshipper, upon entering the nave of the church, usually takes off his shoes, just as the Mohammedans do, for the Armenian founds this practice upon Ex., iii, 5; this custom is not followed in the United States, nor do the Armenians there sit cross-legged upon the floor in their churches, as they do in Asia. The administration of the sacraments is marked by some ceremonies unlike those of the Roman or Greek Churches, and by some which are a composite of the two. In the Sacrament of Baptism the priest meets the child carried in the arms of the nurse at the church door, and, while reciting Psalms li and cxxx, takes two threads (one white and the other red) and twists them into a cord, which he afterwards blesses. Usually the godfather goes to confession before the baptism, in order that he may fulfil his duties in the state of grace. The exorcisms and renunciations then take place, and the recital of the Nicene Creed and the answers to the responses follow. The baptismal water is blessed, the anointing with oil performed, the prayers for the catechumen to be baptized are said, and then the child is stripped. The priest takes the child and holds it in the font so that the body is in the water, but the head is out, and the baptism takes place in this manner: "N., the servant of God coming into the state of a catechumen and thence to that of baptism, is now baptized by me, in the name of the Father [here he pours a handful of water on the head of the child], and of the Son [here he pours water as before], and of the Holy Ghost [here he pours a third handful]." After this the priest dips the child thrice under the water, saying on each occasion: "Thou art redeemed by the blood of Christ from the bondage of sin, by receiving the liberty of sonship of the Heavenly Father, and becoming a co-heir with Christ and a temple of the Holy Ghost. Amen." Then the child is washed and clothed again, generally with a new and beautiful robe, and the priest when washing the child says: "Ye that were baptized in Christ, have put on Christ, Alleluia. And ye that have been illumined by God the Father, may the Holy Ghost rejoice in you. Alleluia." Then the passage of the Gospel of St. Matthew relating the baptism of Christ in the Jordan is read, and the rite thus completed. The Sacrament of Confirmation is conferred by the priest immediately after baptism, although the Catholic Armenians sometimes reserve it for the bishop. The holy chrism is applied by the priest to the forehead, eyes, ears, nose, mouth, palms, heart, spine, and feet, each time with a reference to the seal of the Spirit. Finally, the priest lays his hand upon and makes the sign of the cross on the child's forehead saying: "Peace to thee, saved through God." When the confirmation is thus finished, the priest binds the child's forehead with the red and white string which he twisted at the beginning of the baptism and fastens it at the end with a small cross. He gives two candles, one red and one green, to the godfather and has the child brought up to the altar where Communion is given to it by a small drop of the Sacred Blood, or, if it be not at the time of Mass, by taking the Blessed Sacrament from the Tabernacle and signing the mouth of the child with it in the form of the cross, saying in either case: "The plenitude of the Holy Ghost"; if the candidate be an adult, full Communion is administered, and there the confirmation is ended. The formula of absolution in the Sacrament of Penance is: "May the merciful God have mercy upon you and grant you the pardon of all your sins, both confessed and forgotten; and I by virtue of my order of priesthood and in force of the power granted by the Divine Command: Whosesoever sins you remit on earth they are remitted unto them in heaven; through that same word I absolve you from all participation in sin, by thought, word and deed, in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost. And I again restore you to the sacraments of the Holy Church; whatsoever good you shall do, shall be counted to you for merit and for glory in the life to come. May the shedding of the blood of the Son of God, which He shed upon the cross and which delivered human nature from hell, deliver you from your sins. Amen." As a rule Armenians are exhorted to make their confession and communion on at least five days in the year: the so-called Daghavork or feasts of Tabernacles, i.e., the Epiphany, Easter, Transfiguration, Assumption, and Exaltation of the Holy Cross. The first two festivals are obligatory and, if an Armenian neglects his duty, he incurs excommunication. The Sacrament of Extreme Unction (or "Unction with Oil," as it is called) is supposed to be administered by seven priests in the ancient form, but practically it is performed by a single priest on most occasions. The eyes, ears, nose, lips, hands, feet, and heart of the sick man are anointed, with this form: "I anoint thine eyes with holy oil, so that whatever sin thou mayst have committed through thy sight, thou mayst be saved therefrom by the anointing of this oil, through the grace of our Lord Jesus Christ", and with a similar reference to the other members anointed. The Divine Liturgy or Mass is of course the chief rite among the Armenians, whether Catholic or Gregorian, and it is celebrated with a form and ceremonial which partakes in a measure both of the Roman and Byzantine rites. As we have said, the curtains are used instead of the altar-rail or iconostasis of those rites, and the vestments are also peculiar. The Armenians, like the Latins, use unleavened bread, in the form of a wafer or small thin round cake, for consecration; but like the Greeks they prepare many wafers, and those not used for consecration in the Mass are given afterwards to the people as the antidoron. The wine used must be solely the fermented juice of the best grapes obtainable. In the Gregorian churches Communion is given to the people under both species, the Host being dipped in the chalice before delivering it to the communicant, but in the Catholic churches Communion is now given only in one species, that of the Body, although there is no express prohibition against the older form. On Christmas Eve and Easter Eve the Armenians celebrate Mass in the evening; the Mass then begins with the curtains drawn whilst the introductory psalms and prophecies are sung, but, at the moment the great feast is announced in the Introit, the curtains are withdrawn and the altar appears with full illumination. During Lent the altar remains entirely hidden by the great curtains, and during all the Sundays in Lent, except Palm Sunday, Mass is celebrated behind the drawn curtains. A relic of this practice still remains in the Roman Rite, as shown by the veiling of the images and pictures from Passion Sunday till Easter Eve. The Armenian vestments for Mass are peculiar and splendid. The priest wears a crown, exactly in the form of a Greek bishop's mitre, which is called the Saghavard or helmet. This is also worn by the deacons attending on a bishop at pontifical Mass. The Armenian bishops wear a mitre almost identical in shape with the Latin mitre, and said to have been introduced at the time of the union with Rome in the twelfth century, when they relinquished the Greek form of mitre for the priests to wear in the Mass. The celebrant is first vested with the shapik or alb, which is usually narrower than the Latin form, and usually of linen (sometimes of silk). He then puts on each of his arms the bazpans or cuffs, which replace the Latin maniple; then the ourar or stole, which is in one piece; then the goti or girdle, then the varkas or amict, which is a large embroidered stiff collar with a shoulder covering to it; and finally the shoochar, or chasuble, which is almost exactly like a Roman cope. If the celebrant be a bishop, he also wears the gonker or Greek epigonation. The bishops carry a staff shaped like the Latin, while the vartabeds (deans, or doctors of divinity; analogous to the Roman mitred abbots) carry a staff in the Greek form (a staff with two intertwined serpents). No organs are used in the Armenian church, but the elaborate vocal music of the Eastern style, sung by choir and people, is accompanied by two metallic instruments, the keshotz and zinzqha (the first a fan with small bells; the second similar to cymbals), both of which are used during various parts of the Mass. The deacon wears merely an alb, and a stole in the same manner as in the Roman Rite. The subdeacons and lower clergy wear simply the alb. The Armenian Mass may be divided into three parts: Preparation, Anaphora or Canon, and Conclusion. The first and preparatory portion extends as far as the Preface, when the catechumens are directed by the deacon to leave. The Canon commences with the conclusion of the Preface and ends with the Communion. As soon as the priest is robed in his vestments he goes to the altar, washes his hands reciting Psalm xxvi, and then going to the foot of the altar begins the Mass. After saying the Intercessory Prayer, the Confiteor and the Absolution, which is given with a crucifix in hand, he recites Psalm xlii (Introibo ad altare), and at every two verses ascends a step of the altar. After he has intoned the prayer "In the tabernacle of holiness," the curtains are drawn, and the choir sings the appropriate hymn of the day. Meanwhile the celebrant behind the curtain prepares the bread on the paten and fills the chalice, ready for the oblation. When this is done the curtains are withdrawn and the altar incensed. Then the Introit of the day is sung, then the prayers corresponding to those of the first, second, and third antiphons of the Byzantine Rite, while the proper psalms are sung by the choir. Then the deacon intones "Proschume" (let us attend), and elevates the book of the gospels, which is incensed as he brings it to the altar, making the Little Entrance. The choir then sings the Trisagion (Holy God, Holy and Mighty, Holy and Immortal, have mercy on us) thrice. The Gregorians interpolate after "Holy and Immortal" some words descriptive of the feast day, such as "who was made manifest for us," or "who didst rise from the dead," but this addition has been condemned at Rome as being a relic of the Patripassian heresy. During the Trisagion the Keshotz is jingled in accompaniment. Then the Greek Ektene or Litany is sung, and at its conclusion the reader reads the Prophecy; then the Antiphon before the Epistle is sung, and the epistle of the day read. At the end of each the choir responds Alleluia. Then the deacon announces "Orthi" (stand up) and, taking the Gospels, reads or intones the gospel of the day. Immediately afterwards, the Armenian form of the Nicene Creed is said or sung. It differs from the creed as said in the Roman and Greek Churches in that it has, "consubstantial with the Father by whom all things were made in Heaven and in Earth, visible and invisible; who for us men and our salvation came down from Heaven, was incarnate and was made man and perfectly begotten through the Holy Ghost of the most Holy Virgin Mary; he assumed from her body, soul, and mind, and all that in man is, truly and not figuratively;" and "we believe also in the Holy Ghost, not created, all perfect, who proceedeth from the Father (and the Son), who spake in the Law, in the Prophets and the Holy Gospel, who descended into the Jordan, who preached Him who was sent, and who dwelt in the Saints," and after concluding in the ordinary form adds the sentence pronounced by the First Council of Nicaea: "Those who say there was a time when the Son was not, or when the Holy Ghost was not; or that they were created out of nothing; or that the Son of God and the Holy Ghost are of another substance or that they are mutable; the Catholic and Apostolic church condemns." Then the Confession of St. Gregory is intoned aloud, and the Little Ektene sung. The kiss of peace is here given to the clergy. The deacon at its close dismisses the catechumens, and the choir sings the Hymn of the Great Entrance, when the bread and wine are solemnly brought to the altar. "The Body of our Lord and the Blood of our Redeemer are to be before us. The Heavenly Powers invisible sing and proclaim with uninterrupted voice, Holy, Holy, Holy, Lord God of Hosts." Here the curtains are drawn, and the priest takes off his crown (or the bishop his mitre). The priest incenses the holy gifts and again washes his bands, repeating Psalm xxvi as before. After the Salutation is sung, the catechumens are dismissed, and the Anaphora or Canon begins. The Preface is said secretly, only the concluding part being intoned to which the choir responds with the Sanctus. The prayer before consecration follows, with a comparison of the Old and the New Law, not found in either Greek or Roman Rite: "Holy, Holy, Holy; Thou art in truth most Holy; who is there who can dare to describe by words thy bounties which flow down upon us without measure? For Thou didst protect and console our forefathers, when they had fallen in sin, by means of the prophets, the Law, the priesthood, and the offering of bullocks, showing forth that which was to come. And when at length He came, Thou didst tear in pieces the register of our sins, and didst bestow on us Thine Only Begotten Son, the debtor and the debt, the victim and the anointed, the Lamb and Bread of Heaven, the Priest and the Oblation for He is the distributor and is always distributed amongst us, without being exhausted. Being made man truly and not apparently, and by union without confusion, He was incarnate in the womb of the Virgin Mary, Mother of God, and journeyed through all the passions of human life, sin only excepted, and of His own free will walked to the cross, whereby He gave life to the world and wrought salvation for us." Then follow the actual words of consecration, which are intoned aloud. Then follow the Offering and the Epiklesis, which differs slightly, in the Gregorian and Catholic form; the Gregorian is: "whereby Thou wilt make the bread when blessed truly the body of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ;" and the Catholic form: "whereby Thou hast made the bread when blessed truly the Body of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ." As there is actually no blessing or consecration after the Epiklesis, the Catholic form represents the correct belief. Then come the prayers for the living and the dead, and an intoning by the Deacons of the Commemoration of the Saints, in which nearly all the Armenian saints are mentioned. Then the deacon intones aloud the Ascription of Praise of Bishop Chosroes the Great in thanksgiving for the Sacrament of the Altar. After this comes a long Ektene or Litany, and then the Our Father is sung by the choir. The celebrant then elevates the consecrated Host, saying "Holy things for Holy Persons," and when the choir responds, he continues: "Let us taste in holiness the holy and honourable Body and Blood of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ who came down from heaven and is now distributed among us." Then the choir sings antiphons in honour of the sacrifice of the Body and Blood, and the small curtain is drawn. The priest kisses the sacred Victim, saying "I confess and I believe that Thou art Christ, the Son of God, who has borne the sins of the world." The Host is divided into three parts, one of which is placed in the chalice. The choir sing the communion hymns as appointed; the priest and the clergy receive the Communion first, and then the choir and people. The little curtain is withdrawn when the Communion is given, and the great curtains are drawn back when the people come up for Communion. After Communion, the priest puts on his crown (or the bishop his mitre), and the great curtains are again drawn. Thanksgiving prayers are said behind them, after which the great curtains are withdrawn once more, and the priest holding the book of gospels says the great prayer of peace, and blesses the people. Then the deacon proclaims "Orthi" (stand up) and the celebrant reads the Last Gospel, which is nearly always invariable, being the Gospel of St. John, i, 1 sqq.: "In the beginning was the Word, etc."; the only exception is from Easter to the eve of Pentecost, when they use the Gospel of St. John, xxi, 15-20: "So when they had dined, etc." Then the prayer for peace and the "Kyrie Eleison" (thrice) are said, the final benediction is given, and the priest retires from the altar. Whilst Psalm xxxiv is recited or sung by the people, the blessed bread is distributed. The Catholic Armenians confine this latter rite to high festivals only. The chief editions of the Gregorian Armenian Missals are those printed at Constantinople (1823, 1844), Jerusalem (1841, 1873, and 1884), and Etschmiadzin (1873); the chief Catholic Armenian editions are those of Venice (1808, 1874, 1895), Trieste (1808), and Vienna (1858, 1884). Armenian Catholics Armenians had come to the United States in small numbers prior to 1895. In that and the following year the Turkish massacres took place throughout Armenia and Asia Minor, and large numbers of Armenians emigrated to America. Among them were many Armenian Catholics, although these were not sufficiently numerous to organize any religious communities like their Gregorian brethren. In 1898 Msgr. Stephan Azarian (Stephen X), then Catholic Patriarch of Cilicia of the Armenians, who resided in Constantinople, entered into negotiations with Cardinal Ledochowski, Prefect of the Congregation of the Propaganda, and through him obtained the consent of Archbishop Corrigan of New York and Archbishop Williams of Boston for priests of the Armenian Rite to labour in their respective provinces for the Armenian Catholics who had come to this country. He sent as the first Armenian missionary the Very Reverend Archpriest Mardiros Mighirian, who had been educated at the Propaganda and the Armenian College, and arrived in the United States on Ascension Day, 11 May, 1899. He at first went to Boston where he assembled a small congregation of Armenian Catholics, and later proceeded to New York to look after the spiritual welfare of the Catholic Armenians in Manhattan and Brooklyn. He also established a mission station in Worcester, Massachusetts. In New York and Brooklyn the Catholics of the Armenian Rite are divided into those who speak Armenian and those who, coming from places outside of the historic Armenia, speak the Arabic language. At present this missionary is stationed at St. Stephen's church in East Twenty-eighth Street, since large numbers of Armenians live in that vicinity, but has another congregation under his charge in Brooklyn. All these Catholic Armenians are too poor to build any church or chapel of their own, and use the basement portion of the Latin churches. Towards the end of 1906 another Armenian priest, Rev. Manuel Basieganian, commenced mission work in Paterson, New Jersey, and now attends mission stations throughout New England, New Jersey, and Eastern Pennsylvania. In 1908 Rev. Hovsep (Joseph) Keossajian settled in Lawrence, Massachusetts, and established a chapel in St. Mary's Church. He also ministers to the spiritual wants of the Armenian Catholics at Boston, Cambridge, East Watertown, Newton, Lynn, Chelsea, and Lowell. In 1909 Rev. Moses Mazarian took charge of the Armenian mission at Cleveland, Ohio, and in the cities throughout the west. None of these have been able to build independent Armenian churches, but usually hold their services in the Roman Catholic churches. Besides the places already mentioned there are slender Armenian Catholic congregations at Haverhill, Worcester, Fitchburg, Milford, Fall River, Holyoke, and Whiting, in Massachusetts; Nashua and Manchester, New Hampshire; Providence, Pawtucket, and Central Falls in Rhode Island; New Britain and Bridgeport, in Connecticut; Jersey City, West Hoboken, and Newark, in New Jersey; and Philadelphia and Chicago. The number of Catholic Armenians in the United States is very small, being estimated at about 2000 to 2500 all told. So many of them reside among the other Armenians and frequent their churches, that there may be more who do not profess themselves Catholics, and purely Armenian chapels would doubtless bring to light many whom the mission priests on their rounds do not reach. Gregorian Armenians Inasmuch as Armenia was converted to the faith of St. Gregory the Illuminator, the Armenians who are not in union with the Holy See pride themselves upon the fact that they more truly hold the faith preached by St. Gregory and they are accordingly called Gregorians, since the word "Orthodox" would be likely to confuse them with the Greeks. By reason of the many schools founded in Armenia and in Constantinople by American Protestant missionaries, their attention was turned to America, and, when the massacres of 1895-96 took place, large numbers came to the United States. Many of them belonged to the Protestant Armenian Church, and identified themselves with the Congregationalists or Presbyterians; but the greater number of them belonged to the national Gregorian Church. In 1889 Rev. Hovsep Sarajian, a priest from Constantinople, was sent to the Armenians in Massachusetts, and a church which was built in Worcester in 1891, is still the headquarters of the Armenian Church in the United States. The emigration increasing greatly after the massacres, Father Sarajian was reinforced by several other Armenian priests; in 1898 he was made bishop, and in 1903 was invested with archiepiscopal authority, having Canada and the United States under his jurisdiction. Seven great pastorates were organized to serve as the nuclei of future dioceses: at Worcester, Boston, and Lawrence (Massachusetts), New York, Providence (Rhode Island), Fresno (California), and Chicago (Illinois). To these was added West Hoboken in 1906. There are numerous congregations and mission stations in various cities. Churches have been built in Worcester, Fresno, and West Hoboken; in Boston and Providence halls are rented, and in other places arrangements are often made with Episcopal churches where their services are held. The Gregorian Armenian clergy comprises the archbishop, seven resident and three missionary priests, while the number of Gregorian Armenians is given at 20,000 in the United States. There are several Armenian societies and two Armenian newspapers, and also Armenian reading-rooms in several places. II. BYZANTINE OR GREEK RITE This rite, reckoning both the Catholic and Schismatic Churches, comes next in expansion through the Christian world to the Roman Rite. It also ranks next to the Roman Rite in America, there being now (1911) about 156 Greek Catholic churches, and about 149 Greek Orthodox churches in the United States. The Eastern Orthodox Churches of Russia, Turkey, Rumania, Servia, and Bulgaria, and other places where they are found, make up a total of about 120,000,000, while the Uniat Churches of the same rite, the Greek Catholics in Austria, Hungary, Italy, Bulgaria, Asia, and elsewhere, amount to upwards of 7,500,000. The Byzantine Rite has already been fully described [see CONSTANTINOPLE, THE RITE OF; GREEK RITES; ORTHODOX CHURCH; ALTAR (IN THE GREEK CHURCH); ARCHIMANDRITE; EPIKLESIS; EUCHOLOGION; ICONOSTASIS], as well as the organization and development of the various churches using the Greek or Byzantine Rite (see EASTERN CHURCHES; GREEK CHURCH; RUSSIA). Unlike the Armenian Rite, it has not been confined to any particular people or language, but has spread over the entire Christian Orient among the Slavic, Rumanian and Greek populations. As regards Jurisdiction and authority, it has not been united and homogeneous like the Roman Rite, nor has it, like the Latin Church, been uniform in language, calendar, or particular customs, although the same general teaching, ritual, and observances have been followed. The principal languages in which the liturgy of the Greek Rite is celebrated are: (1) Greek; (2) Slavonic; (3) Arabic, and (4) Rumanian. It is also celebrated in Georgian by a small and diminishing number of worshippers, and sometimes experimentally in a number of modern tongues for missionary purposes; but as this latter use has never been approved, the four languages named above may be considered the official ones of the Byzantine Rite. A portion of the population of all the nations which use this rite, follow it in union with the Holy See, and these have by their union placed the Byzantine Rite in the position which it occupied before the schism of 1054. Thus, the Russians, Bulgarians, and Servians, who are schismatic, use the Old Slavonic in their church books and services; so likewise do the Catholic Ruthenians, Bulgarians, and Servians. Likewise the Rumanians of Rumania and Transylvania, who are schismatic, use the Rumanian language in the Greek Rite; but the Rumanians of Transylvania, who are Catholic, do the same. The Orthodox Greeks of Greece and Turkey use the original Greek of their rite; but the Italo-Greeks of Italy and Sicily and the Greeks of Constantinople, who are Catholic, use it also. The Syro-Arabians of Syria and Egypt, who are schismatic, use the Arabic in the Greek Rite; but the Catholic Melchites likewise use it. The numerous emigrants from these countries to America have brought with them their Byzantine Rite with all its local peculiarities and its language. In some respects the environment of all people professing the Greek Rite in union with the Holy See but in close touch with their countrymen of the Roman Rite has tended to change in unimportant particulars several of the ceremonies and sometimes particular phrases of the rite (see ITALO-GREEKS; MELCHITES; RUTHENIAN RITE), but not to a greater extent than the various Schismatic Churches have changed the language and ceremonies in their several national Churches. Where this has occurred in the Greek Churches united with the Holy See, it has been fiercely denounced as latinizing; but, where it has occurred in Russia, Bulgaria, or Syria, it is merely regarded by the same denouncers as a mere expression of nationalism. There is in the aggregate a larger number of Catholics of the Byzantine Rite in America than of the Orthodox. The chief nationalities there which are Catholic are the Ruthenians, Rumanians, Melchites, and Italo-Greek; the principal Orthodox ones are the Russians, Greeks, Syro-Arabians, Servians, Rumanians, Bulgarians, and Albanians. The history and establishment of each of these has been already given (see GREEK CATHOLICS IN AMERICA; GREEK ORTHODOX CHURCH IN AMERICA). As emigration from those lands increases daily, and the representatives of those rites are increasing in numbers and prosperity, a still wider expansion of the Greek Rite in the United States may be expected. Already the Russian Orthodox Church has a strong hierarchy, an ecclesiastical seminary, and monasteries, supported chiefly by the Holy Synod and the Orthodox Missionary Society of Russia, and much proselytizing is carried on among the Greek Catholics. The latter are not in such a favourable position; they have no home governmental support, but have had to build and equip their own institutions out of their own slender means. The Holy See has provided a bishop for them, but the Russians have stirred up dissensions and made his position as difficult as possible among his own people. The Hellenic Greek Orthodox Church expects soon to have its own Greek bishop, and the Serbians and Rumanians also expect a bishop to be appointed by their home authorities. III. MARONITE RITE The Maronite is one of the Syrian rites and has been closely assimilated in the Church to the Roman Rite (see MARONITES). Unlike the Syro-Chaldean or the Syro-Catholic rites, for they all use the Syriac language in the Mass and liturgy, it has not kept the old forms intact, but has modelled itself more and more upon the Roman Rite. Among all the Eastern rites which are now in communion with the Holy See, it alone has no Schismatic rite of corresponding form and language, but is wholly united and Catholic, thereby differing also from the other Syrian rites. The liturgical language is the ancient Syriac or Aramaic, and the Maronites, as well as all other rites who use Syriac, take especial pride in the fact that they celebrate the Mass in the very language which Christ spoke while He was on earth, as evidenced by some fragments of His very words still preserved in the Greek text of the Gospels (e.g., in Matt., xxvii, 46 and Mark, v, 41). The Syriac is a Semitic language closely related to the Hebrew, and is sometimes called Aramaic from the Hebrew word Aram (Northern Syria). As the use of Ancient Hebrew died out after the Babylonian captivity, the Syriac or Aramaic took its place, very much as Italian has supplanted Latin throughout the Italian peninsula. This was substantially the situation at the time of Christ's teaching and the foundation of the early Church. Syriac is now a dead language, and in the Maronite service and liturgy bears the same relation to the vernacular Arabic as the Latin in the Roman Rite does to the modern languages of the people. It is written with a peculiar alphabet, reads from right to left like the Hebrew or Arabic languages, but its letters are unlike the current alphabets of either of these languages. To simplify the Maronite Missals, Breviary, and other service books, the vernacular Arabic is often employed for the rubrics and for many of the best-known prayers; it is written, not in Arabic characters, but in Syriac, and this mingled language and alphabet is called Karshuni. The Epistle, Gospel, Creed and Pater Noster are nearly always given in Karshuni, instead of the original Arabic. The form of the Liturgy or Mass is that of St. James, so called because of the tradition that it originated with St. James the Less, Apostle and Bishop of Jerusalem. It is the type form of the Syriac Rite, but the Maronite Use has accommodated it more and more to the Roman. This form of the Liturgy of St. James constitutes the Ordinary of the Mass, which is always said in the same manner, merely changing the epistles and gospels according to the Christian year. But the Syrians, whether of the Maronite, Syrian, Catholic, or Syro-Chaldaic rite, have the peculiarity (not found in other liturgies) of inserting different anaphoras or canons of the Mass, composed at various times by different Syrian saints; these change according to the feast celebrated, somewhat analogously to the Preface in the Roman Rite. The principal anaphoras or canons of the Mass used by the Maronites are: (1) the Anaphora according to the Order of the Holy Catholic and Roman Church, the Mother of all the Churches; (2) the Anaphora of St. Peter, the Head of the Apostles; (3) the Anaphora of the Twelve Apostles; (4) the Anaphora of St. James the Apostle, brother of the Lord, (5) the Anaphora of St. John the Apostle and Evangelist; (6) the Anaphora of St. Mark the Evangelist; (7) the Anaphora of St. Xystus, the Pope of Rome; (8) the Anaphora of St. John surnamed Maro, from whom they derive their name; (9) the Anaphora of St. John Chrysostom; (10) the Anaphora of St. Basil; (11) the Anaphora of St. Cyril; (12) the Anaphora of St. Dionysius; (13) the Anaphora of John of Harran, and (14) the Anaphora of Marutha of Tagrith. Besides these they have also a form of liturgy of the Presanctified for Good Friday, after the Roman custom. Frequent use of incense is a noticeable feature of the Maronite Mass, and not even in low Mass is the incense omitted. In their form of church building the Maronites have nothing special like the Greeks with their iconostasis and square altar, or the Armenians with their curtains, but build their churches very much as Latins do. While the sacred vestments are hardly distinguishable from those of the Roman Church, in some respects they approach the Greek form. The alb, the girdle, and the maniple or cuffs on each hand, a peculiar form of amict, the stole (sometimes in Greek and sometimes in Roman form), and the ordinary Roman chasuble make up the vestments worn by the priest at Mass. Bishops use a cross, mitre, and staff of the Roman form. The sacred vessels used on the altar are the chalice, paten or disk, and a small star or asterisk to cover the consecrated Host. They, like us, use a small cross or crucifix, with a long silken banneret attached, for giving the blessings. The Maronites use unleavened bread and have a round host, as in the Roman Rite. The Maronite Mass commences with the ablution and vesting at the foot of the altar. Then, standing at the middle of the sanctuary, the priest recites Psalm xlii, "Introibo ad altare," moving his head in the form of a cross. He then ascends the altar, takes the censer and incenses both the uncovered chalice and paten, then takes up the Host and has it incensed, puts it on the paten and has the corporals and veils incensed. He next pours wine in the chalice, adding a little water, and then incenses it and covers both host and chalice with the proper veils. Then, going again to the foot of the altar, he says aloud the first prayer in Arabic, which is followed by an antiphon. The strange Eastern music, with its harsh sounds and quick changes, is a marked feature of the Maronite Rite. The altar, the elements, the clergy, servers, and people are incensed, and the Kyrie Eleison (Kurrilison) and the "Holy God, Holy strong one, etc." are sung by choir and people. Then comes the Pater Noster in Arabic, with the response: "For thine is the kingdom and the power and the glory, world without end. Amen." The celebrant and deacon intone the Synapte for peace, which is followed by a short form of the Gloria in excelsis: "Glory be to God on high, and on earth peace and good hope to the sons of men, etc." The Phrumiur is then said; this is an introductory prayer, and always comes before the Sedro, which is a prayer of praise said aloud by the priest standing before the altar while the censer is swung. It is constructed by the insertion of verses into a more or less constant framework, commemorative of the feast or season, and seems to be a survival of the old psalm verses with the Gloria. For instance, a sedro of Our Lady will commemorate her in many ways, something like our litany, but more poetically and at length; one of Our Lord will celebrate Him in His nativity, baptism, etc. Then come the commemorations of the Prophets, the Apostles, the martyrs, of all the saints, and lastly the commemoration of the departed: "Be ye not sad, all ye who sleep in the dust, and in the decay of your bodies. The living Body which you have eaten and the saving Blood which you have drunk, can again vivify all of you, and clothe your bodies with glory. O Christ, Who hast come and given peace by Thy Blood to the heights and the depths, give rest to the souls of Thy servants in the promised life everlasting!" The priest then prays for the living, and makes special intercession by name of those living or dead for whom the Mass is offered. He blesses and offers the sacred elements, in a form somewhat analogous to the Offertory in the Roman Rite. Another phrumiun and the great Sedro of St. Ephraem or St. James is said, in which the whole sacrifice of the Mass is foreshadowed. The psalm preparatory to the Epistle in Arabic is recited, and the epistle of the day then read. The Alleluia and gradual psalm is recited, the Book of Gospels incensed, and the Gospel, also in Arabic, intoned or read. The versicles of thanksgiving for the Gospel are intoned, at several parts of which the priest and deacon and precentor chant in unison. The Nicene Creed, said in unison by priest and deacon, follows, and immediately after the celebrant washes his hands saying Psalm xxvi. This ends the Ordinary of the Mass. The Anaphora, or Canon of the Mass, is then begun, and varies according to season, place, and celebrant. In the Anaphora of the Holy Catholic and Roman Church, which is a typical one, the Mass proceeds with the prayers for peace very much as they stand at the end of the Roman Mass; then follow prayers of confession, adoration, and glory, which conclude by giving the kiss of peace to the deacon and the other clergy. The Preface follows: "Let us lift up our thoughts, our conscience and our hearts! Response. They are lifted up to Thee, O Lord! Priest. Let us give thanks to the Lord in fear, and adore Him with trembling. R. It is meet and just. P. To Thee, O God of Abraham and Isaac and Jacob, O glorious and holy King of Israel, for ever! R. Glory be to the Father and the Son and the Holy Ghost, now and forever, world without end. P. Before the glorious and divine mysteries of our Redeemer, with the pleasant things which are imposed, let us implore the mercy of the Lord! R. It is meet and just" (and the Preface continues secretly). Then the Sanctus is sung, and the Consecration immediately follows. The words of Consecration are intoned aloud, the choir answering "Amen." After the succeeding prayer of commemoration of the Resurrection and hope of the Second Coming and a prayer for mercy, the Epiklesis is said: "How tremendous is this hour and how awful this moment, my beloved, in which the Holy and Life-giving Spirit comes down from on high and descends upon this Eucharist which is placed in this sanctuary for our reconciliation. With silence and fear stand and pray! Salvation to us and the peace of God the Father of all of us. Let us cry out and say thrice: Have mercy on us, O Lord, and send down the Holy and Life-giving Spirit upon us! Hear me, O Lord! And let Thy living and it descend upon me and upon this sacrifice! And so complete this mystery, that it be the Body of Christ our God for our redemption!" The prayers for the Pope of Rome, the Patriarch of Antioch, and all the metropolitans and bishops and orthodox professors and believers of the Catholic Faith immediately follow. This in turn is followed by a long prayer by the deacon for tranquillity, peace, and the commemoration of all the saints and doctors of the early Church and of Syria, including St. John Maro, with the petition for the dead at the end. Then comes the solemn offering of the Body and the Blood for the sins of priest and people, concluding with the words: "Thy Body and Thy Holy Blood are the way which leads to the Kingdom!" The adoration and the fraction follow; then the celebrant elevates the chalice together with the Host, and says: "O desirable sacrifice which is offered for us! O victim of reconciliation, which the Father obtained in Thy own person! O Lamb, Who wast the same person as the High Priest who sacrificed!" Then he genuflects and makes the sign of the Cross over the chalice: "Behold the Blood which was shed upon Golgotha for my redemption; because of it receive my supplication." The "Sanctus fortis" is again sung, and the celebrant lifts the Sacred Body on high and says: "Holy things for holy persons, in purity and holiness!" The fraction of the Host follows after several prayers, and the priest mingles a particle with the Blood, receives the Body and the Blood himself, and gives communion to the clergy and then to the people. When it is finished he makes the sign of the Cross with the paten and blesses the people. Then follow a synapte (litany) of thanksgiving, and a second signing of the people with both paten and chalice, after which the priest consumes all the remaining species saying afterwards the prayers at the purification and ablution. The prayer of blessing and protection is said, and the people and choir sing: "Alleluia! Alleluia! I have fed upon Thy Body and by Thy living Blood I am reconciled, and I have sought refuge in Thy Cross! Through these may I please Thee, O Good Lord, and grant Thou mercy to the sinners who call upon Thee!" Then they sing the final hymn of praise, which in this anaphora contains the words: "By the prayers of Simon Peter, Rome was made the royal city, and she shall not be shaken!" Then the people all say or sing the Lord's Prayer; when it is finished, the final benediction is given, and the priest, coming again to the foot of the altar, takes off his sacred vestments and proceeds to make his thanksgiving. The principal editions of the Maronite missals and service books for the deacons and those assisting at the altar are The Book of Sacrifice according to the Rite of the Maronite Church of Antioch (Kozhayya, 1816, 1838, and 1885; Beirut, 1888), and The Book of the Ministry according to the Rite of the Maronite Church of Antioch (Kozhayya, 1855). Maronites in America The Maronites are chiefly from the various districts of Mount Lebanon and from the city of Beirut, and were at first hardly distinguishable from the other Syrians and Arabic-speaking persons who came to America. At first they were merely pedlars and small traders, chiefly in religious and devotional articles, but they soon got into other lines of business and at present possess many well-established business enterprises. Not only are they established in the United States, but they have also spread to Mexico and Canada, and have several fairly large colonies in Brazil, Argentine, and Uruguay. Their numbers in the United States are variously estimated from 100,000 to 120,000, including the native born. Many of them have become prosperous merchants and are now American citizens. Several Maronite families of title (Emir) have emigrated and made their homes in the United States; among them are the Emirs Al-Kazen, Al-Khouri, Abi-Saab, and others. There is also the well-known Arabic novelist of the present day, Madame Karam Hanna (Afifa Karam) of Shreveport, Louisiana, formerly of Amshid, Mount Lebanon, who not only writes entertaining fiction, but touches on educational topics and even women's rights. Nahum Mokarzel, a graduate of the Jesuit College of Beirut, is a clever writer both in Arabic and English. The Maronites are established in New York, the New England States, Pennsylvania, Minnesota, and Alabama. The first Maronite priest to visit the United States was Rev. Joseph Mokarzel, who arrived in 1879 but did not remain. Very Rev. Louis Kazen of Port Said, Egypt, came later, but, as there were very few of his countrymen, he likewise returned. On 6 August, 1890, the Rev. Butrosv Korkemas came to establish a permanent mission, and after considerable difficulty rented a tiny chapel in a store on Washington Street, New York City. He was accompanied by his nephew, Rev. Joseph Yasbek, then in deacon's orders, who was later ordained to the priesthood by Archbishop Corrigan, and founded the Maronite mission in Boston; he is now Chor-Bishop of the Maronites and practically the head of that rite in America. A church was later established in Philadelphia, then one in Troy and one in Brooklyn, after which the Maronites branched out to other cities. At present (1911) there are fifteen Maronite churches in the United States: in New York, Brooklyn, Troy, Buffalo, Boston, Lawrence, Springfield, Philadelphia, Scranton, St. Paul, St. Louis, Birmingham, Chicago, Wheeling, and Cleveland. Meanwhile new congregations are being formed in smaller cities, and are regularly visited by missionary priests. The Maronite clergy is composed of two chor-bishops (deans vested with certain episcopal powers) and twenty-three other priests, of whom five are Antonine monks. In Mexico there are three Maronite chapels and four priests. In Canada there is a Maronite chapel at New Glasgow and one resident priest. There are only two Arabic-English schools, in New York and St. Louis, since many of the Maronite children go to the ordinary Catholic or to the public schools. There are no general societies or clubs with religious objects, although there is a Syrian branch of the St. Vincent de Paul Society. About fifteen years ago Nahum A. Mokarzel founded and now publishes in New York City the daily newspaper, "Al Hoda" (The Guidance), which is now the best known Arabic newspaper in the world and the only illustrated one. His brother also publishes an Arabic monthly magazine, "Al Alam ul Jadid" (The New World), which contains modern Arabic literature and translations of American and English writers. There are also two Maronite papers published in Mexico. The Maronites also have in New York a publishing house on a small scale, in which novels, pamphlets, and scientific and religious works are printed in Arabic, and the usual Arabic literature sold. IV. OTHER ORIENTAL RITES The rites already described are the principal rites to be met with in the United States; but there are besides them a few representatives of the remaining Eastern rites, although these are perhaps not sufficiently numerous to maintain their own churches or to constitute separate ecclesiastical entities. Among these smaller bodies are: (1) the Chaldean Catholics and the schismatic Christians of the same rite, known as Nestorians; (2) the Syrian Catholics or Syro-Catholics and their correlative dissenters, the Jacobites, and (3) finally the Copts, Catholic or Orthodox. All of these have a handful of representatives in America, and, as immigration increases, it is a question how great their numbers will become. (1) Chaldean or Syro-Chaldean Catholic Rite Those who profess this rite are Eastern Syrians, coming from what was anciently Mesopotamia, but is now the borderland of Persia. They ascribe the origin of the rite to two of the early disciples, Addeus and Maris, who first preached the Gospel in their lands. It is really a remnant of the early Persian Church, and it has always used the Syriac language in its liturgy. The principal features of the rite and the celebration of the Mass have already been described (see ADDEUS AND MARIS, LITURGY OF). The peculiar Syriac which it uses is known as the eastern dialect, as distinguished from that used in the Maronite and Syro-Catholic rites which is the western dialect. The method of writing this church Syriac among the Chaldeans is somewhat different from that used in writing it among the western Syrians. The Chaldeans and Nestorians use in their church books the antique letters of the older versions of the Syriac Scriptures which are called "astrangelo," and their pronunciation is somewhat different. The Chaldean Church in ancient times was most flourishing, and its history under Persian rule was a bright one. Unfortunately in the sixth century it embraced the Nestorian heresy, for Nestorius on being removed from the See of Constantinople went to Persia and taught his views (see NESTORIUS AND NESTORIANISM; PERSIA). The Chaldean Church took up his heresy and became Nestorian. This Nestorian Church not only extended throughout Mesopotamia and Persia, but penetrated also into India (Malabar) and even into China. The inroads of Mohammedanism and its isolation from the centre of unity and from intercommunication with other Catholic bodies caused it to diminish through the centuries. In the sixteenth century the Church in Malabar, India, came into union with the Holy See, and this induced the Nestorians to do likewise. The conversion of part of the Nestorians and the reunion of their ancient Church with the Holy See began in the seventeenth century, and has continued to the present day. The Chaldean Patriarch of Babylon (who really has his see at Mossul) is the chief prelate of the Chaldean Catholics, and has under him two archbishops (of Diarbekir and Kerkuk) and nine bishops (of Amadia, Gezireh, Mardin, Mossul, Sakou, Salmas, Seert, Sena, and Urmiah). The Malabar Christians have no regular Chaldean hierarchy, but are governed by vicars Apostolic. The number of Chaldean Catholics is estimated at about 70,000, while the corresponding schismatic Nestorian Church has about 140,000 (see ASIA; CHALDEAN CHRISTIANS). There are about 100 to 150 Chaldean Catholics in the United States; about fifty live in Yonkers, New York, while the remainder are scattered in New York City and vicinity. The community in Yonkers is cared for by Rev. Abdul Masih (a married priest from the Diocese of Diarbekir), who came to this country from Damascus some six years ago. He says Mass in a chapel attached to St. Mary's Catholic Church, and some Nestorians also attend. At present (1911) there are two other Chaldean priests in this country: Rev. Joseph Ghariba, from the Diocese of Aleppo, who is a travelling missionary for his people, and Rev. Gabriel Oussani, who is professor of church history, patrology, and Oriental languages in St. Joseph's Seminary at Dunwoodie near Yonkers, and from whom some of these particulars have been obtained. There are also said to be about 150 Nestorians in the United States, the majority of these live and work in Yonkers, New York. They have no priest of their own, and, where they do not attend the Catholic Rite, are drifting into modern Protestantism. Several of them have become members of the Episcopal Church, and they are looked after by Dr. Abraham Yohannan, an Armenian from Persia, now a minister in the Episcopal Church and lecturer on modern Persian at Columbia University. They have no church or chapel of their own. (2) Syro-Catholic Rite This rite is professed by those Syriac Christians who were subjects of the ancient Patriarchate of Antioch; these are spread throughout the plains of Syria and Western Mesopotamia, whereas the Maronites live principally on Mount Lebanon and the sea coast of Syria (see ASIA; EASTERN CHURCHES). The Syriac Mass and liturgy is, like the Maronite (which is but a variation of it), the Liturgy of St. James, Apostle and Bishop of Jerusalem. For this reason, but principally for the reason that Jacob Baradaeus and the greater part of the Syriac Church (see BARADAEUS, JACOB) embraced the Monophysite heresy of Eutyches (see MONOPHYSITES AND MONOPHYSITISM), the schismatic branch of this rite are called Jacobites, although they call themselves Suriani or Syrians. Thus we have in the three Syrian rites the historic remembrance of the three greatest heresies of the early Church after it had become well-developed. Nestorians and Chaldeans represent Nestorianism and the return to Catholicism; Jacobites and Syro-Catholics represent Monophysitism, and the return to Catholicism; the Maronites represent a vanished Monothelitism now wholly Catholic (see MONOTHELITISM AND MONOTHELITES). The Syro-Catholics like the Maronites vary the Ordinary of their Mass by a large number of anaphoras or canons of the Mass, containing changeable forms of the consecration service. The Syro-Catholics confine themselves to the anaphoras of St. John the Evangelist, St. James, St Peter, St. John Chrysostom, St. Xystus the Pope of Rome, St. Matthew, and St. Basil; but the schismatic Jacobites not only use these, but have a large number of others, some of them not yet in print, amounting perhaps to thirty or more (see SYRIA; SYRIAN RITE, EAST). The epistles, gospels, and many well-known prayers of the Mass are said in Arabic instead of the ancient Syriac. The form of their church vestments is derived substantially from the Greek or Byzantine Rite. Their church hierarchy in union with the Holy See consists of the Syrian Patriarch of Antioch with three archbishops (of Bagdad, Damascus, and Homs) and five bishops (of Aleppo, Beirut, Gezireh, Mardin-Diarbekir, and Mossul). The number of Catholics is about 25,000 families, and of the Jacobites about 80,000 to 85,000 persons. There are about 60 persons of the Syro-Catholic Rite in the eastern part of the United States, of whom forty live in Brooklyn, New York. They are mostly from the Diocese of Aleppo, and their emigration thither began only about five years ago. They have organized a church, although there is but one priest of their rite in the United States, Rev. Paul Kassar from Aleppo, an alumnus of the Propaganda at Rome. He is a mission priest engaged in looking after his countrymen and resides in Brooklyn, but he is only here upon an extended leave of absence from the diocese. There are also some thirty or forty Syro-Jacobites in the United States; they are mostly from Mardin, Aleppo, and Northern Syria, and have no priest or chapel of their own. (3) Coptic Rite There is only a handful of Copts in this country -- in New York City perhaps a dozen individuals. Oriental theatrical pieces, in which an Eastern setting is required, has attracted some of them thither, principally from Egypt. They have no priest, either Catholic or Orthodox, and no place of worship. As to their Church and its organization, see EASTERN CHURCHES; EGYPT: V. Coptic Church. I. ISSAVERDENZ, The Armenian Liturgy (Venice, 1873); IDEM, The Armenian Ritual (Venice, 1873); IDEM, The Sacred Rites and Ceremonies of the Armenian Church (Venice, 1888); PRINCE MAXIMILLAN, Missa Armenica (Ratisbon and New York, 1908); FORTESCUE, The Armenian Church (London, 1873); ASDVADZADOURIANTS, Armenian Liturgy, Armenian and English (London, 1887); BRIGHTMAN, Liturgies Eastern and Western (Oxford, 1896); NILLES, Kalendarium Manuale, II (Innsbruck, 1897); U.S. CENSUS BUREAU, Religious Bodies, pt. II (Washington, 1910). III. DANDINI, Reisebemerkungen ueber die Maroniten (Jena, 1903); ISTAFAN-AL-DAWAIHI, A History of the Maronites (Beirut, 1890); NAU, Opuscules Maronites (Paris, 1899-1900); KOHLER, Die kathol. Kirchen des Morgenlandes (Darmstadt, 1896); PRINCE MAXIMILLAN, Missa Maronitica (Ratisbon and New York, 1907); AZAR, Les Maronites (Cambrai, 1852); ETHERRIDGE, The Syrian Churcha (London, 1879); SILBERNAGL, Verfassung u. gegenwaertiger Bestand saemtlicher Kirchen des Orients (Ratisbon, 1904). ANDREW J. SHIPMAN Ritschlianism Ritschlianism Ritschlianism is a peculiar conception of the nature and scope of Christianity, widely held in modern Protestantism, especially in Germany. Its founder was the Protestant theologian, Albrecht Ritschl (born at Berlin, 25 March, 1822; died at Göttingen, 20 March, 1889). Having completed his studies in the gymnasium at Stettin, where his father resided as general superintendent of Pomerania, Ritschl attended the University of Bonn, and was for a time captivated by the "Biblical supernaturalism" of his teacher, K.J. Nitzsch. Mental dissatisfaction caused him to leave Bonn in 1841, and he continued his studies under Julius Müller and Tholuck in the University of Halle, Disabused here also as to the teachings of his professors, he sought and found peace in the reconciliation doctrine of the Tübingen professor, Ferdinand Christian Baur, through whose writings he was won over to the philosophy of Hegel. On 21 May, 1843, he graduated Doctor of Philosophy at Halle with the dissertation, "Expositio doctrinæ Augustini de creatione mundi, peccato, gratia" (Halle, 1843). After a long residence in his parents' house at Stettin, he proceeded to Tübingen, and there entered into personal intercourse with the celebrated head of the (later) Tübingen School, Ferdinand Christian Baur. He here wrote, entirely in the spirit of this theologian, "Das Evangelium Marcions und das kanonische Evangelium des Lukas" (Tübingen, 1846), wherein he attempts to prove that the apocryphal gospel of the Gnostic Marcion forms the real foundation of the Gospel of St. Luke. Having qualified as Privatdocent at Bonn on 20 June, 1846, he was appointed professor extraordinary of Evangelical theology on 22 December, 1852, and ordinary professor on 10 July, 1859. Meanwhile he had experienced a radical change in the earlier views which he had formed under Baur's influence; this change removed him farther and farther from the Tübingen School. In 1851 he had withdrawn his hypothesis concerning the origin of the Gospel of St. Luke as untenable, and in 1856 he had a public breach with Baur. Henceforth Ritschl was resolved to tread his own path. In the second edition of his "Die Entstehung der altkatholischen Kirche" (Bonn, 1857; 1st ed., 1850), he rejected outright Baur's sharp distinction between St. Paul and the original Apostles — between Paulinism and Petrinism — by maintaining the thesis that the New Testament contains the religion of Jesus Christ in a manner entirely uniform and disturbed by no internal contradictions. At Göttingen, whither he was called at Easter, 1864, his peculiar ideas first found full realization in his "Die christliche Lehre von der Rechtfertigung und Versöhnung" (3 vols., Bonn, 1870-4; 4th ed., 1895-1903). His practical conception of Christianity was described first in his lecture on "Christliche Vollkommenheit" (Göttingen, 1874; 3rd ed., 1902) and then in his "Unterricht in der christlichen Religion" (Bonn, 1875; 6th ed., 1903), which was intended as a manual for the gymnasium, but proved very unsatisfactory for practical purposes. In his small, but important, work, "Theologie und Metaphysik" (Bonn, 1881; 3rd ed., Göttingen, 1902), he denies the influence of philosophy in the formation of theology. In addition to numerous smaller writings, which were re-edited after his death under the title "Gesammelte Aufsätze" (2 vols., Göttingen, 1893-6), he compiled a "Geschichte des Pietismus" (3 vols., Bonn, 1880-6), based upon a wide study of the sources. Pietism itself, as it appeared in Calvinistic and Lutheran circles during the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries he condemns as an abortion of modern Protestantism caused by the false Catholic ideal of piety. His last and incomplete, "Fides implicita, oder eine Tintersuchung über Köhlerglauben, Wissen und Glauben, Glauben und Kirche" Bonn, 1890), appeared shortly after his death. After 1888 he suffered from heart disease, of which he died in the following year. Although Ritschl was violently attacked during his lifetime not only by the orthodox party, but also by the Erlangen school named after Hofmann, he attached to himself a large circle of enthusiastic followers with Liberal leanings, who are included under the name of Ritschlianists. The literary organs of Ritschlianism in Germany are the "Theologische Literaturzeitung", the "Zeitschrift für Theologie und Kirche", and the "Christliche Welt". To understand and rightly appraise the rather abstruse train of thought in the doctrine of justification, which constitutes the focus of Ritschl's theological system, we must go back to the epistemology on which the whole edifice rests. Influenced by the philosophy of Kant rather than of Lotze, Ritschl denies human reason the power to arrive at a scientific knowledge of God. Consequently religion cannot have an intellectual, but merely a practical-moral foundation. Religious knowledge is essentially distinct from scientific knowledge. It is not acquired by a theoretical insight into truth, but, as the product of religious faith, is bound up with the practical interests of the soul. Religion is practice, not theory. Knowledge and faith are not only distinct domains; they are independent of and separated from each other. While knowledge rests on judgments of existence (Seinsurteile), faith proceeds on independent "judgments of value" (Werturteile), which affirm nothing concerning the essence or nature of Divine things, but refer simply to the usefulness and fruitfulness of religious ideas. Anticipating to some extent the principles of Pragmatism put forward in a later generation by W. James, Schiller, etc., Ritschl declared that knowledge alone valuable which in practice brings us forward. Not what the thing is "in itself", but what it is "for us", is decisive. So far Ritschl is not original, since Schleiermacher had already banished metaphysics from Christian philosophy, and had explained the nature of religion subjectively as springing from the feeling of our absolute dependence on God. Ritschl's teaching is distinguished from that of the Berlin scholar especially by the fact that he seeks to establish a better Biblical and historical foundation for his ideas. In the latter respect he is the promoter of the so-called historical-critical method, of the application of which many Ritschlianists of the present day are thorough masters. Like Schleiermacher, Ritschl connects mankind's subjective need of redemption with Jesus Christ, the "originator of the perfect spiritual and moral religion". Since we can determine the historical reality of Christ only though the faith of the Christian community, the religious significance of Jesus is really independent of His biography and investigation into His life. A convinced Ritschlianist seems to be ready to persevere in his Christianity, even though radical criticism were to succeed in setting aside the historical existence of Christ. He could be a Christian without Christ, as there could be a Tibetan Buddhist without an historical Buddha (cf. "Christliche Welt", 1901, n. 35). Ritschl himself never wished to separate Christianity from the Person of Christ. Since, as Ritschl especially emphasizes in reply to Baur, the original consciousness of the early Christian community reveals itself with perfect consistency in the writings of the New Testament, theology must in its investigation of the authentic contents of the Christian religion begin with the Bible as source, for the more thorough understanding of which the ancient Christian professions of faith furnish an indirect, and the symbolical books of Protestants (Luther) a direct, guidance. The Reformation rightly elevated the Pauline justification by faith to the central place in Christian doctrine, and in the West carried it to a successful conclusion. As the necessary doctrine of salvation through Christ, this doctrine of justification is thus alone obligatory for theology and Church, while the other convictions and institutions of the earliest Christian community are of a subsidiary nature. For this reason, therefore, Luther himself recognized the Bible as the Word of God only in so far as it "makes for Christ". Since the Christian faith exists only through personal experience or subjective acquaintance with justification and reconciliation, the objects of faith are not presented to the mind from without through a Divine revelation as an authoritative rule of faith, but become vividly present for the Christian only through subjective experience. The revelation of God is given only to the believer who religiously lays hold of it by experience, and recognizes it as such. Justifying faith especially is no mere passive attitude of man towards God, but an active trust in Him and His grace, evincing itself chiefly in humility, patience, and prayer. It is by no means a dogmatical belief in the truth of Revelation, but it possesses essentially a thoroughly practico-moral character. Ritschlianism can thus speak without any inconsistency of an "undogmatic Christianity" (Kaftan). The harmonizing of the free-religious moral activity of the Christian with dependence on God is proclaimed by Ritschl the "master-question of theology". This fundamental problem he solves as follows: The returning sinner is at first passively determined by God, whereupon justification achieves its practical success in reconciliation and regeneration, which in their turn lead to Christian activity. Justification and reconciliation are so related that the former is also the forgiveness of sin and as such removes man's consciousness of guilt (i.e., mistrust of God), while the latter, as the cessation of active resistance to God, introduces a new direction of the will calculated to develop Christian activity in the true fulfilment of one's vocation. These two — justification and reconciliation — form the basis of our sonship as children of God. This justification identical with forgiveness of sin is however, no real annihilation of sin, but a forensic declaration of righteousness, inasmuch as God regards the believing sinner, in spite of his sins, as just and pleasing in consideration of the work of Christ. A special characteristic of Ritschlianism lies in the assertion that justifying faith is possible only within the Christian community. The Church of Christ (by which, however, is to be understood no external institution with legal organization) is on the one hand the aggregate of all the justified believers, but on the other hand has, as the enduring fruit of the work of Christ, a duration and existence prior to all its members just as the whole is prior to its parts. Like the children in the family and the citizens in the state, the believers must also be born in an already existing Christian community. In this alone is God preached as the Spirit of Love, just as Jesus Himself preached, and in this alone, through the preaching of Christ and His work, is that justifying faith rendered possible, in virtue of which the individual experiences regeneration and attains to adoption as a son of God (cf. Conrad, "Begriff und Bedeutung der Gemeinde in Ritschl's Theologie" in "Theol. Studien und Krit.", 1911, 230 sqq.). It is plain that, according to this view, Christian baptism loses all its importance as the real door to the Church. What is Ritschl's opinion of Jesus Christ? Does he consider Him a mere man? If we set aside the pious flourishes with which he clothes the form of the Saviour, we come speedily to the conviction that he does not recognize the true Divinity of Jesus Christ. As the efficacious bearer and transmitter of the Divine Spirit of Love to mankind Jesus is "superordinate" to all men, and has in the eternal decree of God a merely ideal pre-existence. He is therefore, as for the earliest community so also for us, our "God and Saviour" only in the metaphorical sense. All other theological questions — such as the Trinity, the metaphysical Divine sonship of Christ, original sin, eschatology — possess an entirely secondary importance. This self-limitation is specially injurious to the doctrine concerning God: all the Divine attributes, except such as are practico-moral, are set aside as unknowable. The essence of God is love, to which all His other attributes may be traced. Thus, His omnipotence is another phase of love inasmuch as the world is nothing else than the means for the establishment of the Kingdom of God. Even the Divine justice ends in love, especially in God's fidelity to the chosen people in the Old Testament and to the Christian community in the New. Every other explanation of the relation between the just God and sinful mankind — such as the juridical doctrine of satisfaction taught by St. Anselm of Canterbury — is called by Ritschl "sub-Christian". Only the sin against the Holy Ghost, which renders man incapable of salvation, calls forth the anger of God and hurls him into everlasting damnation. Other evils decreed by God are not punishments for sin, but punishments intended for our instruction and improvement. Sin being conceivable only as personal guilt, the idea of original sin is morally inconceivable. Although Ritschlianism has undergone manifold alterations and developments in one direction or another at the hands of its learned representatives (Harnack, Kaftan, Bender, Sell, and so on), it has remained unchanged in its essential features. The Liberal and modern-positive theology of Germany is distinctly coloured with Ritschlianism, and the efforts of orthodox Protestantism to combat it have met with poor success. More than a decade ago Adolf Zahn ("Abriss einer Geschichte der evangelischen Kirche im 19. Jahrhundert", 3rd ed., Stuttgart, 1893) passed the sharp judgment on Ritschlianism, that it was "a rationalist scepticism and Pelagian moralism, vainly decked out in the truths of the Reformers, the threadbare garment of Lutheranism, for purposes of deceit; the clearest sign of the complete exhaustion and impoverishment of Protestantism, which at the end of the nineteenth century again knows no more than the common folk have ever known: 'Do right and fear no man'." The Catholic critic will probably see in the scorn for metaphysics and the elimination of the intellectual factor the chief errors of Ritschlian theology. The separation of faith and knowledge, of theology and metaphysics, has indeed a long and gloomy history behind it. The philosophy of the Renaissance, with its doctrine of the "double truth" erected the first separating wall between faith and knowledge; this division was increased by Spinoza, when he assigned to faith the rôle of concerning itself with pia dogmata, but entrusted to philosophy alone the investigation of truth. Finally appeared Kant, who cut the last threads which still held together theology and metaphysics. By denying the demonstrability of the existence of God through reason, he consistently effected the complete segregation of faith and knowledge into two "separate households". In this he was followed by Schleiermacher and Ritschl. Since recent Modernism, with its Agnosticism and Immanentism, adopts the same attitude, it is, whether avowedly or not, the death-knell not only of Christianity, but of every objective religion. Consequently, the regulations of Pius X against Modernism represent a contest in which the vital interests of the Catholic religion are at stake. As the foremost champion of the powers and rights of reason in its relations with faith, Catholicism is the defender of the law of causality which leads to the knowledge of metaphysical and Divine truths, the guardian of a constant, eternal, and unalterable truth, and the outspoken foe of every form of Scepticism, Criticism, Relativism, and Pragmatism — always in the interests of Christianity itself, since, without a rational foundation and substructure, Revelation and faith would hang unsupported in the air. In this statement the Catholic opposition to Ritschlianism in one of the most fundamental points of difference is sufficiently characterized. O. RITSCHL, Albert Ritschl's Leben (Leipzig, 1892-6). Concerning the system Consult: FRICKE, Metaphysik u. Dogmatik in ihrem gegenseitigen Verhältnis unter besonderer Beziehung auf die Ritschl'sche Theologie (Leipzig, 1882); THICOTTER, Darstellung u. Beurteilung der Theologie A. Ritschl's (Leipzig, 1887); FLÜGEL, A. Ritschl's philosoph. Ansichten (Langensalza, 1886); LIPSIUS, Die Ritschl'sche Theologie (Leipzig, 1888); HÄRING, Zu Ritschl's Versöhnungslehre (Zurich, 1888); HERRMANN, Der evangel. Glaube u. die Theologie A. Ritschl's (Marburg, 1890); PFLEIDERER, Die Ritschl'sche Theologie (Brunswick, 1891); BERTRAND, Une nouvelle conception de la Rédemption. La doctrine de la justification et de la réconciliation dans le système théologique de Ritschl (Paris, 1891); GOYAU, L'Allemagne religieuse (Paris, 1897), 94 sqq.; GARVIE, The Ritschlian Theology (Edinburgh, 1899); KATTENBUSCH, Von Schleiermacher zu Ritschl (Halle, 1903); SCHOEN, Les origines histor. de la théol. de Ritschl (Paris, 1893); FABRE, Les principes philosophiques de la théol. de Ritschl (Paris, 1894); VON KUGELCHEN, Grundriss der Ritschl'schen Dogmatik (Göttingen, 1903); SWING, The Theology of A. Ritschl (New York, l901); FABRICIUS, Die Entwickelung in R.'s Theol. von 1874-1889 (Leipzig, 1909); HERRMANN, tr. MATHESON AND STEWART, Faith and Morals: I. Faith as Ritschl Defined it; II. The Moral Law, as Understood in Romanism and Protestantism (London, 1910). Cf. also SANDAY, Christologies Ancient and Modern (Oxford, 1910), 81 sqq. For refutation consult: STRANGE, Der dogmatische Ertrag der Ritschl'schen Theologie nach Kaftan (Leipzig, 1906); SCHÄDER, Theozentrische Theologie, I (Leipzig, 1909); EDGHILL, Faith and Fact, A Study of Ritschlianism (London, 1910) (a fundamental work). See also: O. RITSCHL in Realencykl. für prot. Theol. (Leipzig, 1906), s. v. Ritschl, Albrecht Benjamin; American Journal of Theol. (Chicago, 1906), 423 sqq.; KIEFL, Der geschichtl. Christus u. die moderne Philosophie (Mainz, 1911), 51 sqq. JOSEPH POHLE Joseph Ignatius Ritter Joseph Ignatius Ritter Historian, b. at Schweinitz, Silesia, 12 April, 1787; d. at Breslau, 5 Jan., 1857. He pursued his philosophical and theological studies at the University of Breslau, was ordained priest in 1811, and for several years was engaged in pastoral work. An annotated translation of St. John Chrysostom's treatise on the priesthood not only obtained for him the doctorate in theology, but also attracted the attention of the Prussian ministry, which in 1823 named him ordinary professor of church history and patrology at the University of Bonn. Here he made the acquaintance of Hermes, and became favorably disposed towards his system. He was in 1830 named professor and canon at Breslau. As administrator of this diocese (1840-43), he atoned for his earlier Hermesian tendencies by his fearless Catholic policy, notably in the question of mixed marriages. Later he published tracts defending the Church against the attacks of Ronge, the founder of the so-called German Catholics. Also worthy of commendation is his beneficence, exercised particularly towards deserving students. His principal writings which bear on church history and canon law are: "Handbuch der Kirchengeschichte" Elberfeld and Bonn, 1826-33; sixth edition by Ennen, Bonn, 1862; "Irenicon oder Briefe zur Förderung des Friedens zwischen Kirche u. Staat", Leipzig, 1840; "Der Capitularvicar", Münster, 1842; "Geschichte der Diöcese Breslau", Breslau, 1845. With J. W. J. Braun he brought out a new edition of Pellicia's work, "De Christianae ecclesiae politia", Cologne, 1829-38. BELLAMY, La Theologie Cath. au XIXe siecle (Paris, 1904), 36. N.A. WEBER Ritual Ritual The Ritual (Rituale Romanum) is one of the official books of the Roman Rite. It contains all the services performed by a priest that are not in the Missal and Breviary and has also, for convenience, some that are in those books. It is the latest and still the least uniform book of our rite. When first ritual functions were written in books, the Sacramentary in the West, the Euchologion in the East contained all the priest's (and bishop's) part of whatever functions they performed, not only the holy Liturgy in the strict sense, but all other sacraments, blessings, sacramentals, and rites of every kind as well. The contents of our Ritual and Pontifical were in the Sacramentaries. In the Eastern Churches this state of things still to a great extent remains. In the West a further development led to the distinction of books, not according to the persons who use them, but according to the services for which they are used. The Missal, containing the whole Mass, succeeded the Sacramentary. Some early Missals added other rites, for the convenience of the priest or bishop; but on the whole this later arrangement involved the need of other books to supply the non-Eucharistic functions of the Sacramentary. These books, when they appeared, were the predecessors of our Pontifical and Ritual. The bishop's functions (ordination, confirmation, etc.) filled the Pontifical, the priest's offices (baptism, penance, matrimony, extreme unction, etc.) were contained in a great variety of little handbooks, finally replaced by the Ritual. The Pontifical emerged first. The book under this name occurs already in the eighth century (Pontifical of Egbert). From the ninth there is a multitude of Pontificals. For the priest's functions there was no uniform book till 1614. Some of these are contained in the Pontificals; often the chief ones were added to Missals and Books of Hours. Then special books were arranged, but there was no kind of uniformity in arrangement or name. Through the Middle Ages a vast number of handbooks for priests having the care of souls was written. Every local rite, almost every diocese, had such books; indeed many were compilations for the convenience of one priest or church. Such books were called by many names-- Manuale, Liber agendarum, Agenda, Sacramentale, sometimes Rituale. Specimens of such medieval predecessors of the Ritual are the Manuale Curatorum of Roeskilde in Denmark (first printed 1513, ed. J. Freisen, Paderborn, 1898), and the Liber Agendarum of Schleswig (printed 1416, Paderborn, 1898). The Roeskilde book contains the blessing of salt and water, baptism, marriage, blessing of a house, visitation of the sick with viaticum and extreme unction, prayers for the dead, funeral service, funeral of infants, prayers for pilgrims, blessing of fire on Holy Saturday, and other blessings. The Schleswig book has besides much of the Holy Week services, and that for All Souls, Candlemas, and Ash Wednesday. In both many rites differ from the Roman forms. In the sixteenth century, while the other liturgical books were being revised and issued as a uniform standard, there was naturally a desire to substitute an official book that should take the place of these varied collections. But the matter did not receive the attention of the Holy See itself for some time. First, various books were issued at Rome with the idea of securing uniformity, but without official sanction. Albert Castellani in 1537 published a Sacerdotale of this kind; in 1579 at Venice another version appeared, arranged by Grancesco Samarino, Canon of the Lateran; it was re-edited in 1583 by Angelo Rocca. In 1586 Giulio Antonio Santorio, Cardinal of St. Severina, printed a handbook of rites for the use of priests, which, as Paul V says, "he had composed after long study and with much industry and labor" (Apostolicæ Sedis). This book is the foundation of our Roman Ritual. In 1614 Paul V published the first edition of the official Ritual by the Constitution "Apostolicæ Sedis" of 17 June. In this he points out that Clement VIII had already issued a uniform text of the Pontifical and the Cærimoniale Episcoporum, which determines the functions of many other ecclesiastics besides bishops. (That is still the case. The Cærimoniale Episcoporum forms the indispensable complement of other liturgical books for priests too.) "It remained", the pope continues, "that the sacred and authentic rites of the Church, to be observed in the administration of sacraments and other ecclesiastical functions by those who have the care of souls, should also be included in one book and published by authority of the Apostolic See; so that they should carry out their office according to a public and fixed standard, instead of following so great a multitude of Rituals". But, unlike the other books of the Roman Rite, the Ritual has never been imposed as the only standard. Paul V did not abolish all other collections of the same kind, nor command every one to use only his book. He says: "Wherefore we exhort in the Lord" that it should be adopted. The result of this is that the old local Rituals have never been altogether abolished. After the appearance of the Roman edition these others were gradually more and more conformed to it. They continued to be used, but had many of their prayers and ceremonies modified to agree with the Roman book. This applies especially to the rites of baptism, Holy Communion, the form of absolution, extreme unction. The ceremonies also contained in the Missal (holy water, the processions of Candlemas and Palm Sunday, etc.), and the prayers also in the Breviary (the Office for the Dead) are necessarily identical with those of Paul V's Ritual; these have the absolute authority of the Missal and Breviary. On the other hand, many countries have local customs for marriage, the visitation of the sick, etc., numerous special blessings, processions and sacramentals not found in the Roman book, still printed in various diocesan Rituals. It is then by no means the case that every priest of the roman Rite uses the Roman Ritual. Very many dioceses or provinces still have their own local handbooks under the name of Rituale or another (Ordo administrandi sacramenta, etc.), though all of these conform to the Roman text in the chief elements. Most contain practically all the Roman book, and have besides local additions. The further history of the Rituale Romanum is this: Benedict XIV in 1752 revised it, together with the Pontifical and Cærimoniale Episcoporum. His new editions of these three books were published by the Brief "Quam ardenti" (25 March, 1752), which quotes Paul V's Constitution at length and is printed, as far as it concerns this book, in the beginning of the Ritual. He added to Paul V's text two forms for giving the papal blessing (V, 6; VIII, 31). Meanwhile a great number of additional blessings were added in an appendix. This appendix is now nearly as long as the original book. Under the title Benedictionale Romanum it is often issued separately. Leo XIII approved an editio typica published by Pustet at Ratisbon in 1884. This is now out of date. The Ritual contains several chants (for processions, burials, Office of the Dead, etc.). These should be conformable to the Motu Proprio of Pius X of 22 Nov., 1903, and the Decree of the Sacred Congregation of Rites of 8 Jan., 1904. All the Catholic liturgical publishers now issue editions of this kind, approved by the Congregation. The Rituale Romanum is divided into ten "titles" (tituli); all, except the first, subdivided into chapters. In each (except I and X) the first chapter gives the general rules for the sacrament or function, the others give the exact ceremonies and prayers for various cases of administration. Titulus I (caput unicum) is "of the things to be observed in general in the administration of sacraments"; II, About baptism, chap. vi gives the rite when a bishop baptizes, vii the blessing of the font, not on Holy Saturday or Whitsun Eve; III, Penance and absolutions from excommunication; IV, Administration of Holy Communion (not during Mass); V, Extreme Unction, the seven penitential psalms, litany, visitation and care of the dying, the Apostolic blessing, commendation of a departing soul; VI, Of funerals, Office of the Dead, absolutions at the grave on later days, funerals of infants; VII, Matrimony and churching of women; VII, Blessings of holy water, candles, houses (on Holy Saturday), and many others; then blessings reserved to bishops and priests who have special faculties, such as those of vestments, ciboriums, statues, foundation stones, a new church (not, of course, the consecration, which is in the Pontifical), cemeteries, etc.; IX, Processions, for Candlemas, Palm Sunday, Rogation Days, Corpus Christi, etc.; X, Exorcism and forms for filling up parochial books (of baptism, confirmation, marriage, status animarum, the dead). The blessings of tit. VIII are the old ones of the Ritual. The appendix that follows tit. X contains additional forms for blessing baptism water, for confirmation as administered by a missionary priest, decrees about Holy Communion and the "Forty Hours" devotion, the litanies of Loreto and the Holy Name. Then follow a long series of blessings, not reserved; reserved to bishops and priests they delegate, reserved to certain religious orders; then more blessings (novissim) and a second appendix containing yet another collection. These appendixes grow continually. As soon as the Sacred Congregation of Rites approves a new blessing it is added to the next edition of the Ritual. The Milanese Rite has its own ritual (Rituale Ambrosianum, published by Giacomo Agnelli at the Archiepiscopal Press, Milan). In the Byzantine Rite the contents of our ritual are contained in the Euchologion. The Armenians have a ritual (Mashdotz) like ours. Other schismatical Churches have not yet arranged the various parts of this book in one collection. But nearly all the Eastern Catholics now have Rituals formed on the Roman model (see LITURGICAL BOOKS, IV). BARUFFALDI, Ad rituale romanum commentaria (Venice, 1731); CATALANI, Rituale romanum . . . perpetuis commentariis exornatum (Rome, 1757); ZACCARIA, Bibliotheca Ritualis (Rome, 1776); THALHOFER, Handbuch der kath. Liturgik, II (Freiburg, 1893), 509-36. ADRIAN FORTESCUE Ritualists Ritualists The word "Ritualists" is the term now most commonly employed to denote that advanced section of the High Church party in the Anglican Establishment, which since about 1860 has adhered to and developed further the principles of the earlier Tractarian Movement. Although this designation is one that is not adopted but rather resented by the persons to whom it is applied, it cannot exactly be called a nickname. "Ritualism" in the middle of the nineteenth century not uncommonly meant the study or practice of ritual, i. e. ecclesiastical ceremonial; while those who favoured ritualism were apt to be called "ritualists". For example, the Rev. J. Jebb, in a publication of 1856 entitled "The Principle of Ritualism Defended", defines ritualism equivalently as "a sober and chastened regard for the outward accessories of worship", and insists further that "we need something more than a lawyer's mind to examine fairly ecclesiastical questions. The Church requires that divines and ritualists should be called into counsel". It was only some time later, about 1865 or 1866, that the word came to be used as the name of a party and was printed with a capital letter. Unlike many other party names which have grown up in the course of controversy, the word "Ritualists" does very fairly indicate the original, if not the most fundamental, characteristic which has divided those so designated from their fellow-High-Churchmen. The movement headed by Newman and his friends had been primarily doctrinal. Pusey always stated that the leaders had rather discouraged as too conspicuous anything in the way of ceremonies, fearing that they might awaken prejudice and divert attention from more important issues. Nevertheless the sympathies awakened for the traditions of a Catholic past, and especially the revival of faith in the Real Presence and the Eucharistic Sacrifice, could not fail in the long run to produce an effect upon the externals of worship. Many of the followers were more venturous than the leaders approved. Moreover, the conversion of Newman and other prominent Tractarians, while somewhat breaking up the party and arresting the progress of events at Oxford, had only transferred the movement to the parish churches throughout the country, where each incumbent was in a measure free to follow his own light and to act for himself. The Rev. W. J. E. Bennett, Vicar of St. Paul's, Knightsbridge, became notorious for a number of innovations in ritual, notably in such details as the use of altar lights, cross, and coverings which brought him into conflict with his bishop (in 1850) and led in the end to his resigning his benefice. In 1859 still greater sensation was caused by the "Romish" ceremonial of the Rev. Bryan King at St: George's in the East. The roughs of the district, with some violent Evangelicals, for months together continued to interrupt the services with brawling and rioting. The English Church Union, however, founded at about this period to defend the interests of the High Church movement, lent effective aid, and public opinion turned against the authors of these disturbances. During the years that followed ceremonial innovations, imitating more and more pronouncedly the worship of the Catholic Church, spread throughout the country. A regular campaign was carried on, organized on the one side by the English Church Union and on the other by the Church Association, which latter was called into existence in 1865 and earned amongst its opponents the nickname of the "Persecution Company Limited". The lovers of ornate ceremonial were for the most part sincerely convinced that they were loyal to the true principles of Anglicanism, and that they were rightly insisting on the observance of the letter of the law embodied in the so-called "Ornaments Rubric", which stands at the head of the Morning Service in the Book of Common Prayer. It could not of course be denied that the practices which the Tractarians were introducing had long been given up in the Church of England. But though these had fallen completely into abeyance, the party contended that the letter of the Prayer Book made it a duty to revive them. It may be said indeed that it is round the Ornaments Rubric that the whole ritualistic controversy has turned down to the present day. For this reason a somewhat full account of it is indispensable. The first Prayer Book of Edward VI, which came into use on 9 June, 1549, has the following rubric at the beginning of the Mass: "Upon the day and at the time appointed for the administration of the Holy Communion, the Priest that shall execute the holy ministry shall put upon him the vesture appointed for that ministration, that is to say a white Alb plain, with a Vestment or Cope." This first Prayer Book of Edward VI remained in use for three years when it was supplanted by the second Prayer Book of Edward VI (1 Nov., 1552). In this, under the influences of Continental reformers, the rubric just quoted was expunged and the following substituted: "And here is to be noted that the Minister at the time of the Communion, and at all other times in his ministration, shall use neither Albae, Vestment or Cope". After the accession of Elizabeth a revised Prayer Book was issued in 1559, which contained the rubric in the following form: "And here it is to be noted that the minister at the time of the Communion and at all other times in his ministration shall use such ornaments in the Church as were in use by authority of Parliament in the second year of the reign of King Edward VI according to the Act of Parliament set in the beginning of the book." In spite of a brief suppression under the Long Parliament and during the Commonwealth, the same rubric was restored in substantially identical terms in the Prayer Book of 1662 which remains in force to-day. Now it must not of course be forgotten that the word "ornaments" is used in a technical sense which has been defined by the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council to include "all the several articles used in the performance of the rites and services of the Church". Vestments, books, cloths, chalices, and patens must be regarded as church ornaments. In modern times even organs and bells are held to fall under this denomination. Further there can be no doubt that if the reference to the second year of Edward VI be strictly interpreted, much Catholic ceremonial was then still retained embracing such adjuncts as lights, incense, vestments, crosses, etc. There is considerable controversy regarding the precise meaning of the rubric, but, however we regard it, it certainly gives much more latitude to the lovers of ritual than was recognized by the practice of the English Church in 1850. Although of recent years the innovators have gone far beyond those usages which could by any possibility be covered by a large interpretation of the Ornaments Rubric, it seems clear that in the beginning the new school of clergy founded themselves upon this and were not exactly accused of doing what was illegal. Their position, a position recognized in 1851 by the bishops themselves, was rather that of wishing "to restore an unusual strictness of ritual observance". Their tendencies no doubt were felt to be "popish", but they were primarily censured by the Protestant party as "ultra-rubricians". The first appeal to legal tribunals in the Westerton v. Liddell case (Mr. Liddell was the successor of Mr. Bennett) terminated, after appeal to the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council, substantially in favour of the Ritualists. It was decided that the Ornaments Rubric did establish the legality of a credence table, coloured frontals and altar coverings, candlesticks and a cross above the holy table. This gave confidence to the party in other directions and between the years 1857 and 1866 there was a considerable extension of ritual usages such as the Eucharistic vestments, altar lights, flowers, and incense, while the claim was generally made that they were all perfectly lawful. With the year 1866 began a period of almost incessant controversy. Six specific practices, known as the "Six Points", were about this time recognized as constituting the main features in the claims of the less extreme Ritualists. They were: + (1) the eastward position (i. e. that by which the minister in consecrating turns his back to the people); + (2) the use of incense; + (3) the use of altar lights; + (4) the mixed chalice; + (5) the use of vestments; + (6) the use of wafer bread. A committee of the Lower House of Convocation in 1866 expressed a strong opinion that most of these things should not be introduced into parish churches without reference to the bishop. A royal commission followed (1867-70), but came to no very clear or unanimous decision except as regards the inexpediency of tolerating any vesture which departs from what had long been the established usage of the English Church. Meanwhile the Dean of Arches, and, after appeal, the Privy Council delivered judgment in the Mackonochie case and between them decided against the legality of the elevation, use of incense, altar lights, ceremonially mixed chalice and against any position of the minister which would hide the manual acts from the communicants. Even more important was the judgement of the same Judicial Committee of the Privy Council in the Purchas Case (Ap. 1871), which besides confirming these previous decisions, even as against the opinion of the Dean of Arches, declared in more unequivocal terms the illegality of wafer-bread and of all Eucharistic vestments. The reaction among the High Church party against this sweeping condemnation was considerable, and it is probably true that much of the strong feeling which has existed ever since against the Judicial Committee as a court of appeal is traceable to this cause, Many of the Ritualists not only refuse to acknowledge the jurisdiction of a secular court in church matters but they declare themselves justified in withholding obedience from their bishops as long as the bishops are engaged in enforcing its decrees. The passing of the Public Worship Regulation Act in 1874 which, as Disraeli stated in Parliament was meant "to put down the Ritualists", seems only to have led to increased litigation, and the Risdale judgment in 1877 by which the Committee of the Privy Council, after elaborate argument by counsel on either side, reconsidered the question of Eucharistic vestments and the eastward position, reaffirming the condemnation of the former but pronouncing the latter to be lawful, providing that it did not render the manual acts invisible to the congregation gave encouragement to the Ritualists by showing that earlier decisions were not irreversible. In any case there were no signs of any greater disposition to submit to authority. The committal of four clergymen to prison in the years 1878-81 for disobedience to the order of the courts whose jurisdiction they challenged, only increased the general irritation and unrest. In 1888 came another sensation. Proceedings were taken before the Archbishop of Canterbury, sitting with episcopal assessors against Dr. King, Bishop of Lincoln, for various ritualistic practices. In his judgment subsequently confirmed by the Privy Council Archbishop Benson sanctioned under carefully defined conditions the eastward position, mixed chalice, altar lights, the ablutions, and the singing of the Agnus Dei, but forbade the signing of the cross in the air when giving the absolution and the benediction. Naturally the effect of these alternate relaxations and restrictions was not favourable to the cause of sober uniformity. The movement went on. The bishops had probably grown a little weary in repressing an energy which was much more full of conviction than their own, and in the years which followed, especially in the Diocese of London, under Bishop Temple, a large measure of licence seems to have been granted or at any rate taken. The rapid spread of "romanizing" practices, though in their extreme form they were confined to a comparatively small number of churches, began to attract general attention, while causing profound uneasiness to Evangelicals and Nonconformists. In 1898 Sir William Harcourt started a vigorous campaign against ritualistic lawlessness by a series of letters in the "Times", and almost concurrently Mr. John Kensit and his followers appealed to another phase of public opinion by their organized interruptions of the services in the churches they disapproved of. It was felt once again that something must be done and this time the remedy took the form of the so-called "Lambeth Hearings", when the Archbishops of Canterbury and York, after listening to legal and expert argument, delivered a joint "opinion upon certain burning questions, to wit + (a) the use of incense and processional lights, and + (b) the practice of reservation. On 31 July, 1899, they jointly pronounced the use of incense to be inadmissible, and on 1 May, 1900, in two independent "opinions", they concurred in forbidding any form of reservation of the consecrated elements. Very little was effected by this or by a series of Church Discipline Bills which were introduced into Parliament, but which died stillborn. Consequently in 1904 a royal commission was appointed "to inquire into the alleged prevalence of breaches or neglect of the Law relating to the conduct of Divine Service in the Church of England and to the ornaments and fittings of churches." The commission, after collecting an immense mass of evidence from ecclesiastics and laymen of every shade of opinion, not forgetting the agents employed by the Church Association to keep watch on the services in ritualistic churches, issued a voluminous report in 1906. Although the commission has accomplished little more than the propounding of certain suggestions regarding the reconstitution of the ecclesiastical courts, suggestions which have not yet been acted upon, the "Report" is a document of the highest importance for the evidence which it contains of the developments of Ritualism. The commissioners single out certain practices which they condemn as being graver in character and of a kind that demand immediate suppression. No doubt the numerical proportion of the churches in which the clergy go to these lengths is small, but the number seems to be increasing. The practices censured as of special gravity and significance, are the following: "The interpolation of prayers and ceremonies belonging to the Canon of the Mass. The use of the words 'Behold the Lamb of God' accompanied by the exhibition of a consecrated wafer or bread. Reservation of the sacrament under conditions which lead to its adoration. Mass of the presanctified. Corpus Christi processions with the sacrament. Benediction with the sacrament. Celebration of the Holy Eucharist with the intent that there should be no communicant except the celebrant. Hymns, prayers and devotions involving invocation or a confession to the Blessed Virgin or the saints. The observance of the festivals of the Assumption of the Blessed Virgin Mary and of the Sacred Heart. The veneration of images and roods." These practices are described as having an exceptional character because they are at once + (1) in flagrant contradiction with the teaching of the Articles and Prayer Book; + (2) they are illegal, and + (3) their illegality does not depend upon any judgment of the Privy Council. Similar objection is taken to any observance of All Souls' Day or of the festival of Corpus Christi which implies the "Romish" doctrine concerning purgatory or transubstantiation. But while it is quite true that the number of churches in which these extremes are practised is small, it is important to remember that private oratories,, communities, and sisterhoods, which last commonly follow forms of devotion and ritual which cannot externally be distinguished from those prevailing in the Catholic Church were not in any way touched by these investigations of the commissioners. It is in such strongholds that the ritualistic spirit is nurtured and propagated, and there is as yet no sign that the feeling which animated this revival of the religious life is less earnest than of yore. Again everything seems to point to the conclusion that if extreme practices have not spread more widely this is due less to any distaste for such practices in themselves than to a shrinking from the unpleasantness engendered by open conflict with ecclesiastical authority. Where comparative impunity has been secured, as for example by the ambiguity of the Ornaments Rubric, a notable and increasing proportion of the clergy have advanced to the very limits of what was likely to be tolerated in the way of ritualistic development. It has been stated by Archbishop Davidson that before 1850 the use of vestments in a public church was known hardly anywhere. In 1901 carefully compiled statistics showed that Eucharistic vestments of some kind (other than the stole authorized by long tradition) were used in no less than 1526 churches of the provinces of York and Canterbury, that is about twelve per cent of the whole; and the number has increased since. A slighter but not altogether contemptible indication of the drift of opinion when unchecked by authority is to be found in the familiar "Roman collar". Less than fifty years ago, at the time of the "Roman aggression" it was regarded in England as the distinctive feature of the dress of a Catholic priest, an article which by its very name manifested its proper usage. Not long afterwards it was gradually adopted by certain High Church clergymen of an extreme type. At the present day it is the rule rather than the exception among English ecclesiastics of all shades of opinion, not excepting even the Nonconformists. With regard to the present position and principles of the Ritualists we shall probably do well with Monsignor R. H. Benson (Non-Catholic Denominations, pp. 29-58) to recognize a distinction between two separate schools of thought, the moderate and the extreme. On the one hand all the members of this party seem to agree in recognizing the need of some more immediate court of appeal to settle disputed questions of dogma and ritual than can be afforded by the "Primitive Church" which the early Tractarians were content to invoke in their difficulties. On the other hand while both sections of the Ritualists are in search of a "Living Voice" to guide them, or at any rate of some substitute for that Living Voice, they have come to supply the need in two quite different ways. To the moderate Ritualists it has seemed sufficient to look back to the Book of Common Prayer. This, it is urged, was drawn up in full view of the situation created by "Roman abuses", and though it was not intended to be a complete and final guide in every detail of doctrine and discipline, the fact that it was originally issued to men already trained in Catholic principles, justifies us in supplying deficiencies by setting a Catholic interpretation upon all doubtful points and omissions. The Ritualist of this school, who of course firmly believes in the continuity of his Church with the Church of England before the Reformation, thinks it his duty to "behave and teach as a Marian priest, conforming under Elizabeth, would have behaved and taught when the Prayer Book was first put into his hands: he must supply the lacunœ and carry out the imperfect directions in as 'Catholic' a manner as possible" (Benson, op. cit., p. 32). Thus interpreted, the Prayer Book supplies a standard by which the rulings of bishops and judicial committees may be measured, and, if necessary, set aside; for the bishops themselves are no less bound by the Prayer Book than are the rest of the clergy, and no command of a bishop need be obeyed if it transgress the directions of this higher written authority. The objections to which this solution of the difficulty is open must be sufficiently obvious. Clearly the text of this written authority itself needs interpretation and it must seem to the unprejudiced mind that upon contested points the interpretation of the bishops and other officials of the Establishment is not only better authorized than that of the individual Ritualist, but that in almost every case the interpretation of the latter in view of the Articles, canons, homilies, and other official utterances is strained and unnatural. Moreover there is the undeniable fact of desuetude. To appeal to such an ordinance as the "Ornaments Rubric" as evidently binding, after it has been in practice neglected by all orders of the Church for nearly three hundred years, is contrary to all ecclesiastical as well as civil presumptions in matters of external observance. The extreme party among the Ritualists, though they undoubtedly go beyond their more moderate brethren in their sympathy with Catholic practices and also in a very definitely formulated wish for "Reunion" (see UNION OF CHRISTENDOM), do not greatly differ from them in matters of doctrine. Many adopt such devotions as the rosary and benediction, some imitate Catholic practice so far as to recite the Canon of the Mass in Latin, a few profess even to hold the infallibility of the Roman Pontiff and to receive (of course with exception of the necessity of external communion with Rome) all doctrines defined and taught by him. But the more fundamental difference which divides the Ritualists into two classes is probably to be found in their varying conceptions of the authority to which they profess allegiance. Giving up the appeal to the Prayer Book as a final rule, the extreme party find a substitute for the Living Voice in the consensus of the Churches which now make up Catholic Christendom — that is practically speaking in the agreement of Canterbury, Rome, and Moscow — if Moscow may be taken as the representative of a number of eastern communions which do not in doctrinal matters differ greatly from one another. Where these bodies are agreed either explicitly or by silence, there, according to the theory of this advanced school, is the revealed faith of Christendom; where these bodies differ among themselves, there we have matters of private opinion which do not necessarily command the assent of the individual. It is difficult perhaps for anyone who has not been brought up in a High Church atmosphere to understand how such a principle can be applied, and how Ritualists can profess to distinguish between beliefs which are de fide and those which are merely speculative. To the outsider it would seem that the Chinch of Canterbury has quite clearly rejected such doctrines as the Real Presence, the invocation of saints, and the sacrificial character of the Eucharist. But the Ritualist has all his life been taught to interpret the Thirty-Nine Articles in a "Catholic" sense. When the Articles say that transubstantiation is repugnant to the plain words of Scripture, he is satisfied to believe that some misconception of transubstantiation was condemned, not the doctrine as defined a little later by the Council of Trent. When the Articles speak of "the sacrifices of Masses — for the quick and the dead" as "blasphemous fables and dangerous deceits", he understands that this repudiation was only directed against certain popular "Romish errors" about the multiplication of the effects of such Masses, not against the idea of a propitiatory sacrifice in itself. Again the statement that "the Romish doctrine concerning . . . Invocation of Saints is a fond thing vainly invented", for him amounts to no more than a rejection of certain abuses of extreme romanizers who went perilously near to idolatry. In this way the Church of England is exonerated from the apparent repudiation of these Catholic beliefs, and the presumption stands that she accepts all Catholic doctrine which she does not explicitly reject. Hence as Rome and Moscow and Canterbury (in the manner just explained) profess the three beliefs above specified, such beliefs are to be regarded as part of the revealed faith of Christendom. On the other hand such points as papal infallibility, indulgences, and the procession of the Holy Ghost, which are admittedly rejected by one or more of the three great branches of the Catholic Church, have not the authority of the Living Voice behind them. They may be true, but it cannot be shown that they form part of the Revelation, the acceptance of which is obligatory upon all good Christians. With this fundamental view are connected many other of the strange anomalies in the modern Ritualist position. To begin with, those who so think, feel bound to no particular reverence for the Church of their baptism or for the bishops that represent her. By her negative attitude to so many points of Catholic doctrine she has paltered with the truth, She has by God's Providence retained the bare essentials of Catholicity and preserved the canonical succession of her bishops. Hence English Catholics are bound to be in communion with her and to receive the sacraments from her ministers, but they are free to criticize and up to a certain point to disobey. On the other hand the Ritualist believes that each Anglican bishop possesses jurisdiction, and that this jurisdiction particularly in the matter of confessions, is conferred upon every clergyman in virtue of his ordination. Further the same jurisdiction inherent in the canonically appointed bishop of the diocese requires that English Catholics should be in communion with him, and renders it gravely sinful for them to hear Mass in the churches of the "Italian Mission" — so the Ritualist is prone to designate the Churches professing obedience to Rome. This participation in alien services is a schismatical act in England, while on the other hand on the Continent, an "English Catholic" is bound to respect the jurisdiction of the local ordinary by hearing Mass according to the Roman Rite, and it becomes an equally schismatical act to attend the services of any English Church. The weak points in this theory of the extreme Ritualist party do not need insisting upon. Apart from the difficulty of reconciling this view of the supposed "Catholic" teaching of the Established Church with the hard facts of history and with the wording of the Articles, apart also from the circumstance that nothing was ever heard of any such theory until about twenty-five years ago, there is a logical contradiction about the whole assumption which it seems impossible to evade. The most fundamental doctrine of all in this system (for all the other beliefs depend upon it) is precisely the principle that the Living Voice is constituted by the consensus of the Churches, but this is itself a doctrine which Rome and Moscow explicitly reject and which the Church of England at best professes only negatively and imperfectly. Therefore by the very test which the Ritualists themselves invoke, this principle falls to the round or at any rate becomes a matter of opinion which binds no man in conscience. The real strength of Ritualism and the secret of the steady advance, which even in its extreme forms it still continues to make, lies in its sacramental doctrine and in the true devotion and self-sacrifice which in so many cases follow as a consequence from this more spiritual teaching. The revival of the celibate and ascetic ideal, more particularly in the communities of men and women living under religious vows and consecrated to prayer and works of charity, tends strongly in the same direction. It is the Ritualist clergy who more than any other body in the English Church have thrown themselves heart and soul into the effort to spiritualize the lives of the poor in the slums and to introduce a higher standard into the missionary work among the heathen. Whatever there may be of affectation and artificiality in the logical position of the Ritualists, the entire sincerity, the real self-denial, and the apostolic spirit of a large proportion of both the clergy and laity belonging to this party form the greatest asset of which Anglicanism now disposes. (For those aspects of Ritualism which touch upon Anglican Orders and Reunion, see ANGLICAN ORDERS and UNION OF CHRISTENDOM.) For a concise Catholic view of Ritualism at the present day, more particularly in its relations to the other parties in the Church of England, see BENSON, Non-Catholic Denominations (London, 1910). An excellent historical sketch of the movement may be found in THUREAU-DANGIN, La renaissance catholique en Angleterre au XIX ^e siècle (Paris, 1901-8), especially in the third volume. The most important Anglican account is probably WARRE-CORNISH, History of the English Church in the Nineteenth Century (London, 1910), especially Part II; a good summary is also provided by HOLLAND in the Schaff-Herzog Encyclopedia of Religious Knowledge (New York, 1910), s. v. Ritualism. The best materials for the history of the movement may be found in the Blue Books issued by the various royal commissions more especially the Report and the four accompanying volumes of minutes of evidence printed for the royal commission on ecclesiastical discipline in 1906. The letters and other documents published in such complete biographies as those of Pusey, Bishop S. Wilberforce, Archbishop Tait, Bishop Wilkinson, Archbishop Benson, Lord Shaftesbury, Charles Lowder, and others, are also very useful. See also SPENCER JONES, England and the Holy See London, 1902); MALLOCK, Doctrine and Doctrinal Disruption (London, 1908); MACCOLL, The Royal Commission and the Ornaments Rubric (London, 1906); MOYES, Aspects of Anglicanism (London, 1906); DOLLING, Ten Years in a Portsmouth Slum (London, 1898); MACCOLL, Lawlessness, Sacerdotalism and Ritualism (London, 1875); ROSCOE, The Bishop of Lincoln's Case (London, 1891); SANDAY, The Catholic Movement and the Archbishop's Decision (London, 1899); TOMILSON, Historical Grounds of the Lambeth Judgment (London, 1891), and in general The Reunion Magazine and the now extinct Church Review. HERBERT THURSTON. Luke Rivington Luke Rivington Born in London, May, 1838; died in London, 30 May, 1899; fourth son of Francis Rivington, a well-known London publisher. He was educated at Highgate Grammar School and Magdalen College, Oxford. After his ordination as an Anglican clergyman in 1862, he became curate of St. Clement's, Oxford, leaving there in 1867 for All Saint's, Margaret Street, London, where he attracted attention as a preacher. Failing in his efforts to found a religious community at Stoke, Staffordshire, he joined the Cowley Fathers and became superior of their house in Bombay. Becoming unsettled in his religious convictions he visited Rome, where in 1888 he was received into the Church. His ordination to the priesthood took place on 21 Sept., 1889. He returned to England and settled in Bayswater, not undertaking any parochial work, but devoting himself to preaching, hearing confessions, and writing controversial works. The chief of these were "Authority; or a plain reason for joint the Church of Rome" (1888); "Dust" a letter to the Rev. C. Gore on his book "Roman Catholic Claims" (1888); "Dependence; or the insecurity of the Anglican Position" (1889) "The Primitive Church and the See of Peter" (1894); "Anglican Fallacies; or Lord Halifax on Reunion" (1895); "Rome and England or Ecclesiastical Continuity" (1897); "The Roman Primacy A.D. 430-51" (1899) which was practically a new edition of "The Primitive Church and the See of Peter". He also wrote several pamphlets and brought out a new edition of Bishop Milner's "End of Religious Controversy". This was for the Catholic Truth Society of which he was long a member of the committee, and a prominent figure at the annual conferences so successfully organized by the society. His pamphlets include "Primitive and Roman" (1894) a reply to the notice of his book "The Primitive Church" in the "Church Quarterly Review"; "The Conversion of Cardinal Newman" (1896) and "Tekel" (1897) in which he criticized the reply of the Archbishops of Canterbury and York to Pope Leo XIII after the condemnation of Anglican Orders. In 1897 the pope conferred on him an honorary doctorate in divinity. During his latter years he lived near St. James church, Spanish Place, devoting himself to his literary work and the instruction of inquirers in the Catholic Faith. The Tablet (3 and 10 June, 1899); Catholic Book Notes (15 June, 1899); GILLOW, Bibl. Dict. Cath.; Annual Register (London, 1899). EDWIN BURTON Jose Mercado Rizal José Mercado Rizal Filipino hero, physician, poet, novelist, and sculptor; b. at Calamba, Province of La Laguna, Luzon, 19 June, 1861; d. at Manila, 30 December, 1896. On his father's side he was descended from Lam-co, who came from China to settle in the Philippines in the latter part of the seventeenth century. His mother was of Filipino-Chinese-Spanish origin. Rizal studied at the Jesuit College of the Ateneo, Manila, where he received the degree of Bachelor of Arts with highest honours before he had completed his sixteenth year. He continued his studies in Manila for four years and then proceeded to Spain, where he devoted himself to philosophy, literature, and medicine, with ophthalmology as a specialty. In Madrid he became a Freemason, and thus became associated with men like Zorilla, Sagasta, Castelar, and Balaguer, prominent in Spanish politics. Here and in France he began to imbibe the political ideas, which later cost him his life. In Germany he was enrolled as a law student in the University of Heidelburg and became acquainted with Virchow and Blumentritt. In Berlin was published his novel "Noli me tangere" (1886) characterized, perhaps too extravagantly, by W.D. Howells as "a great novel" written by one "born with a gift so far beyond that of any or all of the authors of our roaring literary successes." Several editions of the work were published in Manila and Spain. There is a French translation ("Bibliothèque sociologique", num 25, Paris, 1899), and two abbreviated English translations of little value: "An Eagle's Flight" (New York, 1900) and "Friars and Filipinos" (New York, 1902). The book satirizes the friars in the Philippines as well as the Filipinos. Rizal's animosity to the friars was largely of domestic origin. The friars were the landlords of a large hacienda occupied by his father; there was a vexatious litigation, and a few years later, by Weyler's order, soldiers destroyed the buildings on the land, and various members of the family were exiled to other parts of the Islands. Rizal returned to the Philippines in 1887. After a stay of about six months he set out again for Europe, passing through Japan and the United States. In London he prepared his annotated edition of Morga's "Sucesos de las Islas Filipinas" which he completed in Paris (1890). In Belgium he published (Ghent, 1891; Manila, 1900) "El Filibusterismo", a sequel to "Noli me tangere". Its animus may be judged from its dedication to three Filipino priests who were executed for complicity in the Cavite outbreak of 1872. In 1891 he arrived in Hong Kong, where he practised medicine. The following year he came to Manila, but five days before his arrival a case was filed against him for "anti-religious and anti-patriotic propaganda". On 7 July the governor-general ordered Rizal's deportation to Mindanao. The reasons given were the finding in his baggage of leaflets, "satirizing the friars and tending to de-catholicize and so de-nationalize the people"; and the "publication of 'El Filibusterismo' dedicated to the memory of three traitors_condemned and executed by competent authority_and whom he hails as martyrs". Rizal spent four years in peaceful exile in Dapitan, Mindanao, when he volunteered his services to the governor to go to Cuba as a surgeon in the Spanish Army. The offer was accepted. When he arrived in Spain, he was arrested and brought back to Manila, where he was charged with founding unlawful associations and promoting rebellion, and sentenced to be shot. Rizal had given up the practice of his religion long years before. But now he gladly welcomed the ministrations of the Jesuit Fathers, his former professors, and he wrote a retraction of his errors and of Masonry in particular. On the morning of his execution he assisted at two Masses with great fervour, received Holy Communion and was married to an Irish half-caste girl from Hong-King with whom he had cohabited in Dapitan. Almost the last words he spoke were to the Jesuit who accompanied him: "My great pride, Father, has brought me here." 30 December, the day of his execution, has been made a national holiday by the American Government and $50,000 appropriated for a monument to his memory; a new province, adjacent to Manila, is called Rizal; the two centavo postage stamp and two peso bill_the denominations in most common use_bear his picture. Whether he was unjustly executed or not, is disputed; his plea in his own defense is undoubtedly a strong one (cf. Retata). The year of his death was a year of great uprising in the Islands and feeling ran high. Whatever may be said about his sentence, its fulfillment was a political mistake. Rizal, it is said, did not favour separation from Spain, nor the expulsion of the friars. Nor did he wish to accomplish his ends_reforms in the Government_by revolutionary methods, but by the education of his countrymen and their formation to habits of industry. Besides the works mentioned above, Rizal wrote a number of poems and essays in Spanish of literacy merit, some translations and short papers in German, French, English, and in his native dialect, Tagalog. A complete list of his writings is given in Retana, "Vida y escritos del Dr. Rizal" (Madrid, 1907). CRAIG, The Story of José Rizal (Manila, 1909); El Dr. Rizal y la obra in La Juventad (Barcelona, Jan., Feb., 1897); PI, La muerte cristiana del Dr. Rizal (Manila, 1910); CRAIG, Los errores de Retana (Manila, 1910.) PHILIP M. FINEGAN Andrea Della Robbia Andrea della Robbia Nephew, pupil, assistant, and sharer of Luca's secrets, b. at Florence, 1431; d. 1528. It is often difficult to distinguish between his works and Luca's. His, undoubtedly, are the medallions of infants for the Foundling Hospital, Florence, and the noble Annunciation over the inner entrance; the Meeting of S. Francis and S. Dominic in the loggia of S. Paolo; the charming Madonna of the Architects, the Virgin adoring the Divine Child in the Crib and other pieces in the Bargello; the fine St. Francis at Assisi; the Madonna della Quercia at Viterbo; the high altar (marble) of S. Maria delle Grazie at Arezzo; the rich and variegated decorations of the vaulted ceiling, porch of Pistoia Cathedral, and many other works. Andrea had several sons, of whom Giovanni Girolamo, Luca the Younger, and Ambrogio are the best known. Giovanni executed the famous reliefs for the Ospendale del Ceppo, Pistoia; and Girolamo worked much in France, where he died. The Della Robbia school gradually lost power and inspiration, the later works being often overcrowded with figures and full of conflicting colour. See bibl. Of ROBBIA, LUCA DI SIMONE DELLA. M.L. HANDLEY Lucia di Simone Robbia Lucia di Simone Robbia Sculptor, b. at Florence, 1400; d. 1481. He is believed to have studied design with a goldsmith, and then to have worked in marble and bronze under Ghiberti. He was early invited to execute sculptures for the Cathedral of S. Maria del Fiore and the Campanile. The latter_representing Philosophy, Arithmetic, Grammar, Orpheus, and Tubalcain (1437)Ƌ are still somewhat Gothic in character. For the organ-gallery of the cathedral he made the famous panels of the Cantorie, groups of boys singing and playing upon musical instruments (1431-8), now in the Museo del Duomo. For the north sacristy he made a bronze door; figures of angels bearing candles and a fine glazed earthenware relief of Christ rising from the tomb over the entrance are also his execution. Above the entrance to the southern sacristy he made the Ascension almost entirely in his new ware. The medium was not unknown, but by dint of experimenting he brought his material to great perfection. He colours are brilliant, fresh, and beautiful in quality, the blue especially being quite inimitable. The stanniferous glaze, or enamel, contained various minerals and was Luca's own secret; in the firing, it became exceedingly hard, durable, and bright. Luca's design is generally an architectural setting with a very few figures, or half figures, and rich borders of fruits and flowers. He excels in simplicity and loveliness of composition. His madonnas have great charm, dignity, and grace. In the earlier productions colour is used only for the background, for the stems and leaves of lilies, and the eyes; an occasional touch of gold is added in coronal or lettering. Later, Luca used colour more freely. The Della Robbia earthenwares are so fresh and beautiful and so decorative that even in Luca's time there were immediately in great request. They are seen at their best in Florence. A few of the principal ones are: the crucifix at S. Miniato and the ceiling of the chapel in which it is found; the medallions of the vault (centre, the Holy Ghost; corners, the Virtues) in the chapel of Cardinal Jacopo of Portugal, also at S. Miniato; the decorations of the Pazzi chapel at Sta. Croce; the armorial bearings of the Arti at Or San Michele; the Madonna of the Apple, and a number of equally fine reliefs. Of his works outside Florence may be mentioned: the Madonna at Urbino; the tabernacle at Impruneta, the vault angels of S. Giobbe, Venice (sometimes said to be by the school only); medallions of Justice and Temperance, Museum of Cluny, Paris; arms of Réné d'Anjou, London, South Kensington Museum, and other works in Naples, Sicily, and elsewhere. The admirable and much disputed group of the Visitation at S. Giovanni Fuorcivitas, Pistoia, is attributed both to Luca and Andrea. BARBET DE JOUY, Les Della Robbia (Paris, 1855); MÜNTZ, Hist. de;'Art pendant la Renaissance (Paris, 1895); REYMOND, Les Della Robbia (Florence, 1897); CRUTWELL, Luca and Andrea Della Robbia (London, 1902). M.L. HANDLEY St. Robert St. Robert Founder of the Abbey of Chaise-Dieu in Auvergne, b. at Aurilac, Auvergne, about 1000; d. in Auvergne, 1067. On his father's side he belonged to the family of the Counts of Aurilac, who had given birth to St. Géraud. He studied at Brioude near the basilica of St-Julien, in a school open to the nobility of Auvergne by the canons of that city. Having entered their community, and being ordained priest, Robert distinguished himself by his piety, charity, apostolic zeal, eloquent discourses, and the gift of miracles. For about forty years he remained at Cluny in order to live under the rule of his compatriot saint, Abbé Odilo. Brought back by force to Brioude, he started anew for Rome in order to consult the pope on his project. Benedict IX encouraged him to retire with two companions to the wooded plateau south-east of Auvergne. Here he built a hermitage under the name of Chaise-Dieu (Casa Dei). The renown of his virtues having brought him numerous disciples, he was obliged to build a monastery, which he placed under the rule of Saint Benedict (1050). Leo IX erected the Abbey of Chaise-Dieu, which became one of the most flourishing in Christendom. At the death of Robert it numbered 300 monks and had sent multitudes all though the centre of France. Robert also founded a community of women at Lavadieu near Brioude. Through the elevation of Pierre Roger, monk of Chaise-Dieu, to the sovereign pontificate, under the name of Clement VI, the abbey reached the height of its glory. The body of Saint Robert, preserved therein, was burned by the Huguenots during the religious wars. His work was destroyed by the French Revolution, but there remain for the admiration of tourists, the vast church, cloister, tomb of Clement VI, and Clementine Tower. The feast-day of St. Robert is 24 April. A. FOURNET Robert of Arbrissel Robert of Arbrissel Itinerant preacher, founder of Fontevrault, b. c. 1047 at Arbrissel (now Arbressec) near Rhétiers, Brittany; d. at Orsan, probably 1117. Robert studied in Paris during the pontificate of Gregory VII, perhaps under Anselm of Laon and later displayed considerable theological knowledge. The date and place of his ordination are unknown. In 1089 he was recalled to his native Diocese of Rennes by Bishop Sylvester de la Guerche, who desired to reform his flock. As archpriest, Robert devoted himself to the suppression of simony, lay investiture, clerical concubinage, irregular marriages, and to the healing of feuds. This reforming zeal aroused such enmity that upon Sylvester's death in 1093, Robert was compelled to leave the diocese. He went to Angers and there commenced ascetic practices which he continued throughout his life. In 1095 he became a hermit in the forest of Craon (s.w. of Laval), living a life of severest penance in the company of Bernard, afterwards founder of the Congregation of Tiron, Vitalis, founder of Savigny, and others of considerable note. His piety, eloquence, and strong personality attracted many followers, for whom in 1096 he founded the monastery of Canons Regular of La Roé, becoming himself the first abbot. In the same year Urban II summoned him to Angers and appointed him a "preacher (seminiverbus, cf. Acts 17, 18) second only to himself with orders to travel everywhere in the performance of this duty" (Vita Baldrici). There is no evidence that Robert assisted Urban to preach the Crusade, for his theme was the abandonment of the world and especially poverty. Living in the utmost destitution, he addressed himself to the poor and would have his followers known only as the "poor of Christ", while the ideal he put forward was "In nakedness to follow Christ naked upon the Cross". His eloquence, heightened by his strikingly ascetic appearance, drew crowds everywhere. Those who desired to embrace the monastic state under his leadership he sent to La Roé, but the Canons objected to the number and diversity of the postulants, and between 1097 and 1100 Robert formally resigned his abbacy, and founded Fontevrault (q.v.). His disciples were of every age and condition, including even lepers and converted prostitutes. Robert continued his missionary journeys over the whole of Western France till the end of his life, but little is known of this period. At the Council of Poitiers, Nov., 1100, he supported the papal legates in excommunicating Philip of France on account of his lawless union with Bertrade de Montfort; in 1110 he attended the Council of Nantes. Knowledge of his approaching death caused him to take steps to ensure the permanence of his foundation at Fontevrault. He imposed a vow of stability on his monks and summoned a Chapter (September, 1116) to settle the form of government. From Hautebruyère a priory founded by the penitent Bertrade, he went to Orsan, another priory of Fontevrault, where he died. The "Vita Andreæ" gives a detailed account of his last year of life. Robert was never canonized. The accusation made against him by Geoffrey of Vendôme of extreme indiscretion in his choice of exceptional ascetic practices (see P.L., CLVII, 182) was the source of much controversy during the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries. Other evidence of eccentric actions on Robert's part and scandals among his mixed followers may have helped to give rise to these rumors. The Fontevrists did everything in their power to discredit the attacks on their founder. The accusatory letters of Marbodius of Rennes and Geoffrey of Vendôme were without sufficient cause declared to be forgeries and the MS. Letter of Peter of Saumur was made away with, probably at the instigation of Jeanne Baptiste de Bourbon, Abbess of Fontevrault. This natural daughter of Henry IV applied to Innocent X for the beatification of Robert, her request being supported by Louis XIV and Henrietta of England. Both this attempt and one made about the middle of the nineteenth century failed, but Robert is usually given the title of "Blessed". The original recension of the Rule of Fontevrault no longer exists; the only surviving writing of Robert is his letter of exhortation to Ermengarde of Brittany (ed. Petigny in "Bib. de l'école des Chartes", 1854, V, iii). Acta SS., Feb., III, 593 sqq., contains two ancient lives by BALDRIC of Dol and the monk ANDREW; PETIGNY, Robert d'Arbissel et Geoffroi de Vendôme in Bib. de l' école des Chartes; WALTER, Ersten Wanderprediger Frankreichs, I (Leipzig, 1903), a modern scientific book; IDEM, Excurs, II (1906); BOEHMER in Theologische Literaturzeitung, XXIX, col. 330, 396, a hostile review. RAYMUND WEBSTER Robert of Courcon Robert of Courçon (DE CURSONE, DE CURSIM, CURSUS, ETC.). Cardinal, born at Kedleston, England; died at Damietta, 1218. After having studied at Oxford, Paris, and Rome, he became in 1211 Chancellor of the University of Paris; in 1212 he was made Cardinal of St. Stephen on the Cedilla Hill; in 1213 he was appointed legate a latere to preach the crusade, and in 1215 was placed at the head of a commission to inquire into the errors prevalent at the University of Paris. He took an active part in the campaign against heresy in France, and accompanied the army of the Crusaders into Egypt as legate of Honorius III. He died during the siege of Damietta. He is the author of several works, including a "Summa: devoted to questions of canon law and ethics and dealing at length with the question of usury. His interference in the affairs of the University of Paris, in the midst of the confusion arising from the introduction of the Arabian translations of Aristotle, resulted in the proscription (1215) of the metaphysical as well as the physical treatises of the Stagyrita, together with the summaries thereof (Summæ de esidem). At the same time, his rescript (Denifle, "Chartul. Univ. Paris", I, 78) renews the condemnation of the Pantheists, David of Dinant, and Amaury of Bene, but permits the use, as texts, of Aristotle's "Ethics" and logical treatises. The rescript also contains several enactments relating to academic discipline. DENIFLE, Chartul. Univ. Paris, I (Paris, 1889), 72, 78; DE WULF, Hist. of Medieval Phil., tr. COFFEY (New York, 1909), 252. WILLIAM TURNER Robert of Geneva Robert of Geneva Antipope under the name of Clement VII, b. at Geneva, 1342; d. at Avignon, 16 Sept., 1394. He was the son of Count Amadeus III. Appointed prothonotary Apostolic in 1359, he became Bishop of Thérouanne in 1361, Archbishop of Cambrai in 1368, and cardinal 30 May, 1371. As papal legate in Upper Italy (1376-78), in order to put down a rebellion in the Pontifical States, he is dais to have authorized the massacre of 4000 persons at Cesena, and was consequently called "the executioner of Cesena". Elected to the papacy at Fondi, 20 Sept. 1378, by the French cardinals in opposition to Urban VI, he was the first antipope of the Great Schism. France, Scotland, Castile, Aragon, Navarre, Portugal, Savoy, and some minor German states, Denmark, and Norway acknowledged his authority. Unable to maintain himself in Italy, he took up his residence at Avignon, where he became dependent on the French Court. He created excellent cardinals, but donated the larger part of the Pontifical States to Louis II of Anjou, resorted to simony and extortion to meet the financial needs of his court, and seems never to have sincerely desired the termination of the Schism. BALUZE, Vitæ Paparum Avenionensium, I (Paris, 1693, 486 sqq.; SALEMBIER, The Great Schism of the West, (tr. New York, 1907), passim. N.A. TURNER Robert of Jumieges Robert of Jumièges Archbishop of Canterbury (1051-2). Robert Champart was a Norman monk of St. Ouen at Rouen and was prior of that house in 1037 he was elected Abbot of Jumièges. As abbot he began to build the fine Norman abbey-church, and at this time he was able to be of service to St. Edward the Confessor, then an exile. When Edward returned to England as king in 1043 Robert accompanied him and was made Bishop of London in 1044. In this capacity he became the head of the Norman party in opposition to the Saxon party under Godwin, and exerted supreme influence over the king. In 1051 Robert was appointed Archbishop of Canterbury and went to Rome for his pall, but the appointment was very unpopular among the English clergy who resented the intrusion of a foreigner into the metropolitan see. For a time he was successful in opposing Godwin even to the extent of instigating his exile, but when Godwin returned in 1052 Robert fled to Rome and was outlawed by the Wirenagemot. The pope reinstated him in his see, but he could not regain possession of it, and William of Normandy made his continued exclusion one of his pretexts for invading England. The last years of his life were spent at Jumièges, but the precise date of his death has not been ascertained, though Robert de Torigni states it as 26 May, 1055. The valuable liturgical MS. Of the "Missal of Robert of Jumièges", now at Rouen, was given by him, when Bishop of London to the abbey at Jumièges. Anglo-Saxon Chronicle, ed. THORPE, r.s., (London, 1861); Vita Eadwardi in LUARD, Lives of Edward the Confessor, R. S. (London, 1858); HOOK, Lives of the Archbishops of Canterbury (London, 1865-75); HUNT in Dict. Nat. Biog.; SEARLE, Anglo-Saxon Bishops, Nobles, and Kings (Cambridge, 1899); Obituary of the Abbey of Jumièges in Receuil de Historiens, XXIII (Rouen, 1872), 419. EDWIN BURTON Robert of Luzarches Robert of Luzarches (LUS). Born at Luzarches near Pontoise towards the end of the twelfth century; is said to have been summoned to Paris by Philip Augustus who employed him in beautifying the city, and to have had a share in the work on Notre Dame. The real fame of this master is, however, connected with the cathedral of Notre Dame in Amiens. The old cathedral was destroyed by fire in 1218 and Bishop Evrard de Fouilloy had it rebuilt in Gothic style. An inscription made in 1288 in the "labyrinth" of the floor (now removed) testified that the building had begun in 1220, and names "Robert, called of Luzarches", as the architect, and as his successors, Thomas de Cormont and the latter's son. The work was completed in later centuries. Viollet-le-Duc sees a fact of great significance in the employment of the layman, Robert; but it is not accurate that in Romanesque times the architects were always bishops, priests, or monks; or, on the other hand, that since the Gothic period the Church relinquished the direction of church-building so entirely as is now believed. Robert was not long employed on the cathedral. Under the successor of Bishop Evrard, who apparently died in 1222, Cormont appears as the architect. Before 1240 Bishop Bernard put a choir window in the provisionally completed cathedral. An intended alteration of the original plan was not used in the finished building, so that the whole remains a splendid moment to Robert. In his day it was already called the "Gothic Parthenon". Gracefully built and better lighted than several of the large churches of France, there is yet, especially about the façade, a majestic severity. It is more spacious than Notre Dame in Paris and considerably larger than the cathedral of Reims. The former is effective through its quiet simplicity, which amounts to austerity; the latter is less rich in the modelling of choir, windows, and triforium. But Robert's creation became a standard far and near, through France and beyond, on account of the successful manner in which weight and strength are counterbalanced and of the consistently Gothic style. The design presents a middle aisle and two side aisles, though the choir has five aisles and the transept has the width of seven aisles. The choir is flanked by seven chapels; that in the centre (the Lady chapel) projecting beyond the others in French style. The majestic and harmonious interior is surpassed in beauty by few cathedrals. The nave is about 470 ft. in length, 164 ft. in breadth (213 ft. in the transept), and 141 ft. in height. A poet writes aptly, "Fabrica nil demi patitur nec susinet addi" (It is not possible to add anything to or to take anything from it). G. GIETMANN Robert of Melun Robert of Melun (DE MELDUNO; MELIDENSIS; MEIDUNUS). An English philosopher and theologian, b. in England abut 1100; d. at Hereford, 1167. He gets his surname from Melun, near Paris, where after having studied under Hugh of St. Victor and probably Abelard, he taught philosophy and theology. Among his pupils were John of Salisbury and Thomas à Beckett. Through the influence of the latter he was made Bishop of Hereford in 1163. Judging from the tributes paid him by John of Salisbury in the "Metalogicus" (P.L. CXCIX), Robert must have enjoyed great renown as a teacher. On the question of Universals, which agitated the schools in those days, he opposed the nominalism of Roscelin and seemed to favour a doctrine of moderate realism. His principal work, "Summa Theologiæ" or "Summa Sententiarum" is still in MS,. Except portions which have been published by Du Boulay in his "Historia Univ. Paris", ii, 585 sqq. He also wrote "Queæstiones de Epistolis Pauli", both of which are kept in the Bibliothèque Nationale. Those who have examined the "Summa" pronounce it to be of great value in tracing the history of scholastic doctrines. Materials for the History of Thomas Beckett in Rer. Britt, SS. contains valuable data; DE WULF, Hist. of Medieval Phil., tr. COFFEY (New York, 1909), 210; HAURÉAU, Hist. de la phil. Scol. (Paris, 1872), 490 sqq. G. GIETMANN St. Robert of Molesme St. Robert of Molesme Born about the year 1029, at Champagne, France, of noble parents who bore the names of Thierry and Ermengarde; d. at Molesme, 17 April, 1111. When fifteen years of age, he commenced his novitiate in the Abbey of Montier-la-Celle, or St. Pierre-la-Celle, situated near Troyes, of which he became later prior. In 1068 he succeeded Hunaut II as Abbot of St. Michael de Tonnerre, in the Diocese of Langres. About this time a band of seven anchorites who lived in the forest of Collan, in the same diocese, sought to have Robert for their chief, but the monks, despite their constant resistance to his authority, insisted on keeping their abbot who enjoyed so great a reputation, and was the ornament of their house. Their intrigues determined Robert to resign his charge in 1071, and seek refuge in the monastery of Montier-la-Celle. The same year he was placed over the priory of St. Ayoul de Provins, which depended on Montier-la-Celle. Meantime two of the hermits of Collan went to Rome and besought Gregory VII to give them the prior of Provins for their superior. The pope granted their request, and in 1074 Robert initiated the hermits of Collan in the monastic life. As the location at Collan was found unsuitable, Robert founded a monastery at Molesme in the valley of Langres at the close of 1075. To Molesme as a guest came the distinguished canon and doctor (écolâtre) of Reims, Bruno, who, in 1082, placed himself under the direction of Robert, before founding the celebrated order of the Chartreux. At this time the primitive discipline was still in its full vigour, and the religious lived by the labour of their hands. Soon, however, the monastery became wealthy through a number of donations, and with wealth, despite the vigilance of the abbot, came laxity of discipline. Robert endeavoured to restore the primitive strictness, but the monks showed so much resistance that he abdicated, and left the care of his community to his prior, Alberic, who retired in 1093. In the following year he returned with Robert to Molesme. On 29 Nov., 1095, Urban II confirmed the institute of Molesme. In 1098 Robert, still unable to reform his rebellious monks, obtained from Hugues, Archbishop of Lyons and Legate of the Holy See, authority to found a new order on new lines. Twenty-one religious left Molesme and set out joyfully for a desert called Citeaux in the Diocese of Chalons, and the Abbey of Citeaux (q.v.) was founded 21 March, 1098. Left to themselves, the monks of Molesme appealed to the pope, and Robert was restored to Molesme, which thereafter became an ardent centre of monastic life. Robert died 17 April, 1111, and was buried with great pomp in the church of the abbey. Pope Honorius III by Letters Apostolic in 1222 authorized his veneration in the church of Molesme, and soon after the veneration of St. Robert was extended to the whole Church by a pontifical Decree. The feast was fixed at first on 17 April, but later it was transferred to 29 April. The Abbey of Molesme existed up to the French Revolution. The remains of the holy founder are preserved in the parish church. Vita S. Roberti, Abbatis Molismensis, auctore monacho molismensi sub Adone, abb. saec. XII; Exordium Cisterciensis Cenobii; CUIGNARD, Les monuments primitifs de la Regle Cistercienne (Dijon, 1878); WILLIAM OF MALMESBURY, Bk. I, De rebus gestis Anglorum, P.L., CLXXIX; LAURENT, Cart. de Molesme, Bk. I (Paris, 1907). F.M. GILDAS St. Robert of Newminster St. Robert of Newminster Born in the district of Craven, Yorkshire, probably at the village of Gargrave; died 7 June, 1159. He studied at the University of Paris, where he is said to have composed a commentary on the Psalms; became parish priest at Gargrave, and later a Benedictine at Whitby, from where, with the abbot's permission, he joined the founders of the Cistercian monastery of Fountains. About 1138 he headed the first colony sent out from Fountains and established the Abbey of Newminster near the castle of Ralph de Merlay, at Morpeth in Northumberland. During his abbacy three colonies of monks were sent out; monasteries were founded: Pipewell (1143), Roche (1147) and Sawley (1148). Capgrave's life tells that an accusation of misconduct was brought against him by his own monks and that he went abroad (1147-48), to defend himself before St. Bernard, but doubt has been cast upon the truth of his story, which may have arisen from a desire of this story, which may have arisen from a desire to associate the English saint personally with the greatest of the Cistercians. His tomb in the church of Newminster became an object of pilgrimage; his feast is kept on 7 June. RAYMUND WEBSTER Robert Pullus Robert Pullus (PULLEN, PULLAN, PULLY.) Cardinal, English philosopher and theologian, of the twelfth century, b. in England about 1080; d. 1147-50. He seems to have studied in Paris in the first decades of the twelfth century. In 1153 he began to teach at Oxford, being among the first of the celebrated teachers in the schools which were afterwards organized into the University of Oxford. After the death of Henry II he returned to Paris; thence he went to Rome, where he was appointed cardinal and Chancellor of the Apostolic See. His influence was always on the side of orthodoxy and against the encroachments of the rationalistic tendency represented by Abelard. This we know from the biography of St. Bernard written by William of St. Thierry, and from his letters. Robert wrote a compendium of theology, entitled "Sententiarum Theologicarum Libri Octo", which, for a time, held its place in the school of Western Europe as the official text book in theology. It was, however, supplanted by the "Libri Sententiarum" of Peter the Lombard, compared with whom Robert seems to have been more inclined to strict interpretation of ecclesiastical tradition than to yield to the growing demands of the dialectical method in theology and philosophy. The Lombard, however, finally gained recognition and decided the fate of scholastic theology in the thirteenth century. Robert's "Summa" was first published by the Benedictine Dom Mathoud (Paris, 1655). It is reprinted in Migne (P.L., CLXXXVI, 639 sqq.). HAUREAU, Hist. de la phil. scol., I (Paris, 1872), 483 sqq. WILLIAM TURNER St. John Roberts St. John Roberts First Prior of St. Gregory's, Douai (now Downside Abbey), b. 1575-6; martyred 10 December, 1610. He was the son of John and Anna Roberts of Trawsfynydd, Merionethshire, N. Wales. He matriculated at St. John's College, Oxford, in February, 1595-6, but left after two years without taking a degree and entered as a law student at one of the Inns of Court. In 1598 he travelled on the continent and in Paris, through the influence of a Catholic fellow- countryman, was converted. By the advice of John Cecil, an English priest who afterwards became a Government spy, he decided to enter the English College at Valladolid, where he was admitted 18 October, 1598. The following year, however, he left the college for the Abbey of St. Benedict, Valladolid; whence, after some months, he was sent to make his novitiate in the great Abbey of St. Martin at Compostella where he made his profession towards the end of 1600. His studies completed he was ordained, and set out for England 26 December, 1602. Although observed by a Government spy, Roberts and his companions succeeded in entering the country in April, 1603; but, his arrival being known, he was arrested and banished on 13 May following. He reached Douai on 24 May and soon managed to return to England where he laboured zealously among the plague-stricken people in London. In 1604, while embarking for Spain with four postulants, he was again arrested, but not being recognized as a priest was soon released and banished, but returned again at once. On 5 November, 1605, while Justice Grange was searching the house of Mrs. Percy, first wife of Thomas Percy, who was involved in the Gunpowder Plot, he found Roberts there and arrested him. Though acquitted of any complicity in the plot itself, Roberts was imprisoned in the Gatehouse at Westminster for seven months and then exiled anew in July, 1606. This time he was absent for some fourteen months, nearly all of which he spent at Douai where he founded a house for the English Benedictine monks who had entered various Spanish monasteries. This was the beginning of the monastery of St. Gregory at Douai which still exists as Downside Abbey, near Bath, England. In October, 1607, Roberts returned to England, was again arrested in December and placed in the Gatehouse, from which he contrived to escape after some months. He now lived for about a year in London and was again taken some time before May, 1609, in which month he was taken to Newgate and would have been executed but for the intercession of de la Broderie, the French ambassador, whose petition reduced the sentence to banishment. Roberts again visited Spain and Douai, but returned to England within a year, knowing that his death was certain if he were again captured. This event took place on 2 December, 1610; the pursuivants arriving just as he was concluding Mass, took him to Newgate in his vestments. On 5 December he was tried and found guilty under the Act forbidding priests to minister in England, and on 10 December was hanged, drawn, and quartered at Tyburn. The body of Roberts was recovered and taken to St. Gregory's, Douai, but disappeared during the French Revolution. Two fingers are still preserved at Downside and Erdington Abbeys respectively and a few minor relics exist. At Erdington also is a unique contemporary engraving of the martyrdom which has been reproduced in the "Downside Review" (XXIV, 286). The introduction of the cause of beatification was approved by Leo XIII in his Decree of 4 December, 1886. [ Note: In 1970, John Roberts was canonized by Pope Paul VI as one of the Forty Martyrs of England and Wales, whose joint feastday is kept on 25 October.] The earlier accounts given by CHALLONER, DOD (DODD), PLOWDEN, and FOLEY are misleading, as they confound John Roberts the Benedictine with an earlier priest of the same name. This has been shown conclusively by CAMM, whose work is the best on the subject. YEPES, Coronica general de la Orden de San Benito, IV (Valladolid, 1613), folios 58-63; POLLEN, Acts of English Martyrs (London, 1891), 143-70; CAMM, A Benedictine Martyr in England, Being the Life . . . of Dom John Roberts, O.S.B. (London, 1897); IDEM, The Martyrdom of V. John Roberts in Downside Review, XXIV, 286; BISHOP, The Beginning of Douai Convent and The First Prior of St. Gregory's in Downside Review, XVI, 21; XXV, 52; FULLERTON, Life of Luisa de Carvajal (London, 1873). G. ROGER HUDLESTON James Burton Robertson James Burton Robertson Historian, b. in London 15 Nov., 1800; d. at Dublin 14 Feb., 1877, son of Thomas Robertson, a landed proprietor in Grenada, West Indies, where he spent his boyhood. In 1809 his mother brought him to England, and placed him at St. Edmund's College, Old Hall (1810), where he remained nine years. In 1819 he began his legal studies, and in 1825 was called to the bar, but did not practise. For a time he studied philosophy and theology in France under the influence of his friends Lamennais and Gerbet. In 1835 he published his translation of Frederick Schlegel's "Philosophy of History", which passed through many editions. From 1837 to 1854 he lived in Germany of Belgium. During this time he translated Möhler. This work considerably influenced some of the Oxford Tractarians. In 1855 Dr. Newman nominated Robertson as professor of geography and modern history in the Catholic University of Ireland. In this capacity he published two series of lectures (1859 and 1864), as well as "Lectures on Edmund Burke" (1869), and a translation of Dr. Hergenröther's "Anti Janus" (1870) to which he prefixed a history of Gallicanism. He also wrote a poem, "The Prophet Enoch" (1859), and contributed several articles to the "Dublin Review". His services to literature obtained for him a pension from the Government in 1869, and the degree of Doctor of Philosophy from Pius IX (1875). He is buried in Glasnevin cemetary. Tablet (24 Feb., 1877); GILLOW in Bibl. Dict. Eng. Cath.; The Edmundian, II, no. 8 (1895). EDWIN BURTON Ven. Christopher Robinson Ven. Christopher Robinson Born at Woodside, near Westward, Cumberland, date unknown; executed at Carlisle, 19 Aug., 1598. He was admitted to the English College at Reims in 1589, and was ordained priest and sent on the mission in 1592. Two years later he was a witness of the condemnation and execution of the venerable martyr John Boste (q.v.) at Durham, and wrote a very graphic account of this, which has been printed from a seventeenth-century transcript in the first volume of the "Catholic Record Society's Publications" (London, 1905), pp. 85-92. His labours seem to have been mainly in Cumberland and Westmoreland; but nothing is known about them. Eventually he was arrested and imprisoned at Carlisle, where Bishop Robinson, who may have been a relative, did his best to persuade him to save his life by conforming, under 27 Eliz., c. 2, for being a priest and coming into the realm, suffered the last penalty with such cheerful constancy that his death was the occasion of many conversions. JOHN B. WAINEWRIGHT William Callyhan Robinson William Callyhan Robinson Jurist and educator, b. 26 July, 1834, at Norwich, Conn.; d. 6 Nov., 1911, at Washington, D.C. After preparatory studies at Norwich Academy, Williston Seminary, and Wesleyan University, he entered Dartmouth College from which he was graduated in 1854. He then entered the Theological Seminary of the Protestant Episcopal Church, was graduated in 1857, and ordained to the Episcopalian Ministry, in which he served first at Pittston, Pa. (1857-8), and then at Scranton, Pa. (1859-62). He was received into the Catholic Church in 1863, was admitted to the Bar in 1864, and was lecturer and professor in law at Yale University (1869-95). For two years (1869-71) he was judge of the City Court and later (1874-6) judge of the Court of Common Pleas at New Haven, Conn. In 1874 also he served as member of the Legislature. From Dartmouth College he received (1879) the degree LL.D., and from Yale University the degree M.A. (1881). He married 2 July, 1857, Anna Elizabeth Haviland and, 31 March, 1891, Ultima Marie Smith. His thorough knowledge of law made him eminent as a teacher and enabled him to render important service to the Church. In 1895 he was appointed professor in the Catholic University of America, where he organized the School of Social Sciences and remained as Dean of the School of Law until his death. Besides articles contributed to various periodicals, he wrote: "Life of E. B. Kelly" (1855); "Notes of Elementary Law" (1876); "Elementary Law" (Boston, 1876); "Clavis Rerum" (1883); "Law of Patents" (3 vols., Boston, 1890); "Forensic Oratory" (Boston, 1893); "Elements of American Jurisprudence" (Boston, 1900). Catholic University Bulletin (Dec., 1911); Catholic Educational Review (Dec., 1911). E.A. PACE Juan Tomas de Rocaberti Juan Tomás de Rocaberti Theologian, b. of a noble family at Perelada, in Catalina, c. 1624; d. at Madrid 13 June, 1699. Educated at Gerona he entered the Dominican convent there, receiving the habit in 1640. His success in theological studies at the convent of Valencia secured for him the chair of theology in the university. In 1666he was chosen provincial of Aragon, and in 1670 the General Chapter elected him general of the order. He became endeared to all who came in contact with him. No one, perhaps, held him in greater esteem than Clement X. The celebrated Dominican Contenson dedicated to him his "Theologia mentis el cordis". He obtained the canonization of Sts. Louis Bertrand and Rose of Lima, the solemn beatification of Pius V, and the annual celebration in the order of the feast of Bl. Albert the Great and others. In 1676 he was appointed by Charles II first Archbishop of Valencia and then governor of that province. In 1695 he was made inquisitor-general of Spain. Rocaberti is best known as an active apologist of the papacy against Gallicans and Protestants. His first work in the sense was "De Romani poniticis auctoritate" (3 vols., Valentia, 1691-94). His most important work is the "Bibliotheca Maxima Pontificia" (21 vols., Rome, 1697-00). In this monumental work the author collected and published in alphabetical order, and in their entirety, all the important works dealing with the primacy of the Holy See from an orthodox point of view, beginning with Abraham Bzovius and ending with Zacharias Boverius. An excellent summary is given in Hurter's "Nomenclator". QUETIF-ECHARD, Script. ord. Prad., II (Paris, 1721), 630,827; TOURON, Hist. des hom. Ill. De l'ordre Dom., V (Paris, 1748), 714-26; HURTER, Nomenclator, II: Année Dominicaine, XIII, 785. H.J. SCHROEDER Rocamadour Rocamadour Communal chief town of the canton of Gramat, district of Gourdon, Department of Lot, in the Diocese of Cahors and the ancient province of Quercy. This village by the wonderful beauty of its situation merits the attention of artists and excites the curiosity of archæologists; but its reputation is due especially to its celebrated sanctuary of the Blessed Virgin which for centuries has attracted pilgrims from every country, among them kings, bishops, and nobles. A curious legend purported to explain the origin of this pilgrimage has given rise to controversies between critical and traditional schools, especially in recent times. According to the latter, Rocamadour is indebted for its name to the founder of the ancient sanctuary, St. Amadour, who was none other than Zacheus of the Gospel, husband of St. Veronica, who wiped the Saviour's face on the way to Calvary. Driven forth from Palestine by persecution, Amadour and Veronica embarked in a frail skiff and, guided by an angel, landed on the coast of Aquitaine, where thy met Bishop St. Martial, another disciple of Christ who was preaching the Gospel in the south-west of Gaul. After journeying to Rome, where he witnessed the martydoms of Sts. Peter and Paul, Amadour, having returned to France, on the death of his spouse, withdrew to a wild spot in Quercy where he built a chapel in honour of the Blessed Virgin, near which he died a little later. This marvellous account, like most other similar legends, unfortunately does not make its first appearance till long after the age in which the chief actors are deemed to have lived. The name of Amadour occurs in no document previous to the compilation of his Acts, which on careful examination and on an application of the rules of the cursus to the text cannot be judged older than the twelfth century. It is now well established that St. martial, Amadour's contemporary in the legend, lived in the third not the first century, and Rome has never included him among the members of the Apostolic College. The mention, therefore, of St. martial in the Acts of St. Amadour would alone suffice, even if other proof were wanting, to prove them a forgery. The untrustworthiness of the legend has led some recent authors to suggest that Amadour was an unknown hermit or possible St. Amator, Bishop of Auxerre, but this is mere hypothesis, without any historical basis. Although the origin of the sanctuary of Rocamadour, lost in antiquity, is thus first set down along with fabulous traditions which cannot bear the light of sound criticism, yet it is undoubted that this spot, hallowed by the prayers of innumerable multitudes of pilgrims, is worthy of our veneration. After the religious manifestations of the Middle Ages, Rocamadour, as a result of war and revolution, had become almost deserted. Recently, owing to the zeal and activity of the bishops of Cahors, it seems to have revived and pilgrims are beginning to crown there again. DE GISSEY, Hist. et miracles de N. D. de Roc-Amadour au pays de Quercy (Tulle, 1666); CAILLAU, Hist. crit. Et relig. De N .D. de Rod-Amadour (Paris, 1834); IDEM, Le Jour de Marie ou le guide du pèlerin de Roc-Amadour (Paris, 1836); SERVOIS, Notice et extraits du recueil des miracles de Roc-Amadour (Paris, 1856); LIEUTAUD, La Vida de S. Amadour, texte provençal du XIV's. (Cahors, 1876); BOURRIÈRES, Saint Amadour et Sainte Véronique, disciples de Notre Seigneur et apôtres de Gauels (Paris, 1895); ENARD, Lettre pastorale sur l'hist de Roc-Amadour. . . (Cahors, 1899); RUPIN, Roc-Amadour etude hist. et archéol. (Paris, 1904), an excellent work containing the definitive history of Roc-Amadour; ALBE, Les miracles de N. D. de Rod-Amadour au XIIx s., texte et traduction des manusrits de la Bibiothèque nationale (Paris, 1907), corroborating the work of Rupin. LÉON CLUGNET Angelo Rocca Angelo Rocca Founder of the Angelica Library at Rome, b. at Rocca, now Arecevia, near Ancone, 1545; d. at Rome, 8 April, 1620. He was received at the age of seven into the Augustinian monastery at Camerino (hence also called Camers, Camerinus), studied at Perugia, Rome, Venice, and in 1577 graduated as doctor in theology from Padua. He became secretary to the superior-general of the Augustinians in 1579, was placed at the head of the Vatican printing-office in 1585, and entrusted with the superintendence of the projected editions of the Bible and the writings of the Fathers. In 1595 he was appointed sacristan in the papal chapel, and in 1605 became titular Bishop of Tagaste in Numidia. The public library of the Augustinians at Rome, formally established 23 October, 1614, perpetuated his name. It is mainly to his efforts that we owe the edition of the Vulgate published during the pontificate of Clement VIII. He also edited the works of Egidio Colonna (Venice, 1581), of Augustinus Triumphus (Rome, 1582), and wrote: "Bibliothecæ theologicæ et scripturalis epitome" (Rome, 1594); "De Sacrosancto Christi corpore romanis pontificibus iter conficientibus præferendo commentarius" (Rome, 1599); "De canonizatione sanctorum commentarius" (Rome, 1601), "De campanis" (Rome, 1612). An incomplete collection of his works was published in 1719 and 1745 at Rome: "Thesaurus pontificiarum sacrarumque antiquitatum necnon rituum praxium et cæremoniarium". OSSINGER, Bibl. August (Ingolstadt, 1768), 754-64; CHALMERS, Gen. Biol. Dict., s. v. N.A. WEBER St. Roch St. Roch Born at Montpellier towards 1295; died 1327. His father was governor of that city. At his birth St. Roch is said to have been found miraculously marked on the breast with a red cross. Deprived of his parents when about twenty years old, he distributed his fortune among the poor, handed over to his uncle the government of Montpellier, and in the disguise of a mendicant pilgrim, set out for Italy, but stopped at Aquapendente, which was stricken by the plague, and devoted himself to the plague-stricken, curing them with the sign of the cross. He next visited Cesena and other neighbouring cities and then Rome. Everywhere the terrible scourge disappeared before his miraculous power. He visited Mantua, Modena, Parma, and other cities with the same results. At Piacenza, he himself was stricken with the plague. He withdrew to a hut in the neighbouring forest, where his wants were supplied by a gentleman named Gothard, who by a miracle learned the place of his retreat. After his recovery Roch returned to France. Arriving at Montpellier and refusing to disclose his identity, he was taken for a spy in the disguise of a pilgrim, and cast into prison by order of the governor, -- his own uncle, some writers say, -- where five years later he died. The miraculous cross on his breast as well as a document found in his possession now served for his identification. He was accordingly given a public funeral, and numerous miracles attested his sanctity. In 1414, during the Council of Constance, the plague having broken out in that city, the Fathers of the Council ordered public prayers and processions in honour of the saint, and immediately the plague ceased. His relics, according to Wadding, were carried furtively to Venice in 1485, where they are still venerated. It is commonly held that he belonged to the Third Order of St. Francis; but it cannot be proved. Wadding leaves it an open question. Urban VIII approved the ecclesiastical office to be recited on his feast (16 August). Paul III instituted a confraternity, under the invocation of the saint, to have charge of the church and hospital erected during the pontificate of Alexander VI. The confraternity increased so rapidly that Paul IV raised it to an archconfraternity, with powers to aggregate similar confraternities of St. Roch. It was given a cardinal-protector, and a prelate of high rank was to be its immediate superior (see Reg. et Const. Societatis S. Rochi). Various favours have been bestowed on it by Pius IV (C. Regimini, 7 March, 1561), by Gregory XIII (C. dated 5 January, 1577), by Gregory XIV (C. Paternar. pont., 7 March, 1591), and by other pontiffs. It still flourishes. WADDING, Annales Min. (Rome, 1731), VII, 70; IX, 251; Acta SS. (Venice, 1752), 16 August; Gallia Christiana, VI ad an. 1328; ANDRE, Hist. de S. Roch (Carpentras, 1854); CHAVANNE, S. Roch Hist. complete, etc. (Lyons, 1876); COFFINIERES, S. Roch, etudes histor. sur Montpellier au XIVe siecle (Montpellier, 1855); BEVIGNANI, Vita del Taumaturgo S. Rocco (Rome, 1878); Vita del glorioso S. Rocco, figlio di Giovanni principe di Agatopoli, ora detta Montpellieri, con la storica relazione del suo corpo (Venice, 1751); BUTLER, Lives of the Saints, 16 August; LEON, Lives of the Saints of the Three Orders of S. Francis (Taunton, England, 1886); PIAZZA, Opere pie di Roma (Rome, 1679). GREGORY CLEARY Rochambeau Jean-Baptiste-Donatien de Vimeur, Count de Rochambeau Marshal, b. at Vendôme, France, 1 July, 1725; d. at Thoré, 10 May, 1807. At the age of sixteen he entered the army and in 1745 became an aid to Louis Philippe, Duke of Orleans, subsequently commanding a regiment. He served with distinction in several important battles, notably those of Minorca, Crevelt, and Minden, and was wounded at the battle of Lafeldt. When the French monarch resolved to despatch a military force to aid the American colonies in the Revolutionary War, Rochambeau was created a lieutenant-general and placed in command of a body of troops which numbered some 6000 men. It was the smallness of this force that made Rochambeau at first averse to taking part in the American War, but his sympathy with the colonial cause compelled him eventually to accept the command, and he arrived at Newport, Rhode Island July, 1780, and joined the American army under Washington, on the Hudson a few miles above the city of New York. Rochambeau performed the double duties of a diplomat and general in an alien army with rare distinction amidst somewhat trying circumstances, not the least of which being a somewhat unaccountable coolness between Washington and himself, which, fortunately, was of but passing import (see the correspondence and diary of Count Axel Fersen). After the first meeting with the American general he marched with his force to the Virginia peninsula and rendered heroic assistance at Yorktown in the capture of the English forces under Lord Cornwallis, which concluded the hostilities. When Cornwallis surrendered, 19 Oct., 1781, Rochambeau was presented with one of the captured cannon. After the surrender he embarked for France amid ardent protestations of gratitude and admiration from the officers and men of the American army. In 1783 he received the decoration of Saint-Esprit and obtained the baton of a marshal of France in 1791. Early in 1792 he was placed in command of the army of the North, and conducted a force against the Austrians, but resigned the same year and narrowly escaped the guillotine when the Jacobin revolutionary power had obtained supreme control in Paris. When the fury of the revolution had spent itself, Rochambeau was reinstated in the regard of his countrymen. He was granted a pension by Napoleon Bonaparte in 1804, and was decorated with the Cross of Grand Officer of the Legion of Honour. The last years of the distinguished military leader's life were passed in the dictation of his memoirs, which appeared in two volumes in Paris in 1809, and which throw many personal and brilliant sidelights on the events of two of the most historically impressive revolutions, and the exceptional men therein concerned. WRIGHT, Memoirs of Marshal Count de Rochambeau Relative to the War or Independence (1838); SOULÉ, Histoire des troubles de l'Amerique anglaise(Paris, 1787); standard histories of the United States may also be consulted. JARVIS KEILEY Rochester Ancient See of Rochester (ROFFA; ROFFENSIS). The oldest and smallest of all the suffragan sees of Canterbury, was founded by St. Augustine, Apostle of England, who in 604 consecrated St. Justus as its first bishop. It consisted roughly of the western part of Kent, separated from the rest of the county by the Medway, though the diocesan boundaries did not follow the river very closely. The cathedral, founded by King Ethelbert and dedicated to St. Andrew from whose monastery at Rome St. Augustine and St. Justus had come, was served by a college of secular priests and endowed with land near the city called Priestfield. It suffered much from the Mercians (676) and the Danes, but the city retained its importance, and after the Norman Conquest a new cathedral was begun by the Norman bishop Gundulf. This energetic prelate replaced the secular chaplains by Benedictine monks, translated the relics of St. Paulinus to a silver shrine which became a place of pilgrimage, obtained several royal grants of land, and proved an untiring benefactor to his cathedral city. Gundulf had built the nave and western front before his death; the western transept was added between 1179 and 1200, and the eastern transept during the reign of Henry III. The cathedral is small, being only 306 feet long, but its nave is the oldest in England and it has a fine Norman crypt. Besides the shrine of St. Paulinus, the cathedral contained the relics of St. Ithamar, the first Saxon to be consecrated to the episcopate, and St. William of Perth, who was held in popular veneration. In 1130 the cathedral was consecrated by the Archbishop of Canterbury assisted by thirteen bishops in the presence of Henry I, but the occasion was marred by a great fire which nearly destroyed the whole city and damaged the new cathedral. After the burial of St. William of Perth in 1201 the offerings at his tomb were so great, that by their means the choir was rebuilt and the central tower was added (1343), thus completing the cathedral. From the foundation of the see the arthbishops of Canterbury had enjoyed the privilege of nominating the bishop, but Archbishop Theobald transferred the right to the Benedictine monks of the cathedral who exercised it for the first time in 1148. The following is the list of bishops with the date of their accession; but the succession from Tatnoth (844) to Siward (1058) is obscure, and may be modified by fresh research: St. Justus, 604 Romanus, 624 Vacancy, 625 St. Paulinus, 633 St. Ithamar, 644 Damianus, 655 Vacancy, 664 Putta, 666-9 Cwichelm, 676 Gebmund, 678 Tobias, 693-706 Ealdwulf, 727 Dunno, 741 Eardwulf, 747 Deora, 765-72 Wærmund I, 781-5 Beornmod, 803-5 Tatnoth, 844 Beadunoth (possibly identical with Wærmund II) Wærmund II, 845-62 Cuthwulf, 860- 8 Swithwulf (date unknown) Ceolmund, 897-904 Cynefrith (date unknown) Burbric, 933 or 934 Beorhtsige (doubtful name) Daniel, 951-5 Aelfstan, c. 964 Godwine I, 995 Godwine II (date unknown) Siweard, 1058 Arnost, 1076 Gundulf, 1077 Radulphus d'Escures, 1108 Ernulf, 1115 John of Canterbury, 1125 John of Sées, 1137 Ascelin, 1142 Walter, 1148 Gualeran, 1182 Gilbert de Glanvill, 1185 Benedict de Sansetun, 1215 Henry Sandford, 1226 Richard de Wendover, 1235 (consecrated, 1238) Lawrence de St. Martin, 1251 Walter de Merton, 1274 John de Bradfield, 1277 Thomas Inglethorp, 1283 Thomas de Wouldham, 1292 Vacancy, 1317 Hamo de Hythe, 1319 John de Sheppey, 1352 William of Whittlesea, 1362 Thomas Trilleck, 1384 Thomas Brunton, 1373 William de Bottisham, 1389 John de Bottisham, 1400 Richard Young, 1404 John Kemp, 1419 (afterwards Cardinal) John Langdon, 1421 Thomas Brown, 1435 William Wells, 1437 John Lowe, 1444 Thomas Rotheram (or Scott), 1468 John Alcock, 1472 John Russell, 1476 Edmund Audley, 1480 Thomas Savage, 1492 Richard Fitz James, 1496 Bl. John Fisher, 1504 (Cardinal) Schismatical bishops: John Hilsey, 1535 Richard Heath, 1539 Henry Holbeach, 1543 Nicholas Ridley, 1547 John Poynet, 1550 John Scory, 1551 Vacancy, 1552 The canonical line was restored by the appointment in 1554 of Maurice Griffith, the last Catholic bishop of Rochester, who died in 1558. The diocese was so small, consisting merely of part of Kent, that it needed only one archdeacon (Rochester) to supervise the 97 parishes. It was also the poorest diocese in England. The cathedral was dedicated to St. Andrew the Apostle. The arms of the see were argent, on a saltire gules an Escalop shell, or. SHRUBSOLE AND DENNE, History and Antiquities of Rochester (London, 1772); Wharton, Anglia Sacra (London, 1691) pt. i, includes annals by DE HADENHAM (604-1307) and DE DENE (1314-50); PEARMAN, Rochester: Diocesan History (London, 1897); PALMER, Rochester: The Cathedral and See (London, 1897); HOPE, Architectural History of Cathedral in Kent Arch*logical Society, XXIII, XXIV (1898- 1900); ERNULPHUS, Textus Roffensis, ed. HEARNE (London, 1720), reprinted in P. L. CLXIII; PEGGE, Account of Textus Roffensis (London, 1784) in NICHOLS, Bib. Topog. Brit., (London, 1790); J. Thorpe, Registrum Roffense (London, 1769); J. THORPE, JR., Custumale Roffense (London, 1988); WINKLE, Cathedral Churches of England and Wales (London, 1860); FAIRBANKS, Cathedrals of England and Wales (London, 1907); GODWIN, De pr*sulibus Angli* (London, 1743); GAMS, Series Episcoporum (Ratisbon, 1873); SEARLE, Anglo-Saxon Bishops, Kings and Nobles (Cambridge, 1899). EDWIN BURTON Rochester Diocese of Rochester This diocese, on its establishment by separation from the See of Buffalo, 24 January, 1868, comprised the counties of Monroe, Livingston, Wayne, Ontario, Seneca, Cayuga, Yates, and Tompkins in the state of New York. In 1896, after the death of Bishop Ryan of Buffalo, the boundary line of the two dioceses was somewhat changed, the counties of Steuben, Schuyler, Chemung, and Tioga being detached from the See of Buffalo and added to that of Rochester. Bishops (1) Rev. Bernard J. McQuaid, who became a pioneer and leader in Catholic education and the founder of a model seminary, was consecrated bishop of Rochester in St. Patrick's Cathedral, New York City, on 12 July, 1868. Four days later he took possession of his small and poor diocese, containing only sixty churches administered by thirty-eight priests, seven of whom were Redemptorist Fathers. When he died, 18 Jan., 1909, after forty years spent in a laborious episcopate, his diocese was richly furnished with churches, schools, seminaries, charitable institutions, answering the manifold needs of the Catholic population, then estimated at 121,000. (2) Rev. Thomas F. Hickey was consecrated in St. Patrick's Cathedral, Rochester, 24 May, 1905, having been appointed coadjutor to Bishop McQuaid. Churches The steady growth of the Catholic population in the Diocese of Rochester, due mainly to immigration of Irish, German, French, Polish, Italian, Lithuanian and Ruthenian Catholics, taxed the resources at the disposal of Bishop McQuaid, who was anxious throughout his entire episcopate to supply the people with churches and priests of their own nationality and language, whenever they were willing and able to support them. The parishes were not allowed to become unwieldy, but were increased in number to meet the needs and conveniences of the faithful. The problem of spiritual ministration to Catholics dwelling at watering- places in the diocese in the summer found a good solution in the erection of neat summer chapels. Catholic Education The common schools in the Diocese of Rochester at the time of its creation professed to be non-sectarian. Bishop McQuaid felt that they were very dangerous to the Catholic child which really finds its church in the school. He sought a remedy in a vigorous agitation for the rights of Catholic parents, contributing to the support of the public school system by their taxes, to receive public money for the maintenance of schools, in which their children could be educated with that "amount and description of religious instruction" which conscience tells them is good, expedient, necessary. The failure of the State to remedy the injustice was met with the firm command of the bishop which was put into execution as soon as possible throughout the diocese: "Build schoolhouses then for the religious education of your children as the best protest against a system of education from which religion has been excluded by law." At Rochester in 1868, there were 2056 children in the parochial schools of the five German churches, and 441 children in the schools attached to the Churches of St. Patrick and St. Mary. Both of these had a select or pay school and a free, parish, or poor school, admitting invidious distinctions very distasteful to the new bishop. Outside of Rochester schools were attached to a few churches of the diocese, but with a very small attendance. These were the humble beginnings of the admirable parochial school system, which embraces today practically all the Catholic children of the school age in the diocese. Not all the Catholic schools were brought to their present high degree of efficiency at once; it took many years and persistent effort to accomplish this work. The brothers gradually yielded their places to the sisters, who now teach all the children in the Catholic schools, both boys and girls. Bishop McQuaid spared no pains in developing good teachers in his own order of the Sisters of St. Joseph, for whom a normal training school was established. Occasional "teachers' institutes" organized for the benefit of these sisterhoods in Rochester prepared the way for the annual conference held by the parochial teachers in the episcopal city since 1904, at which the various orders meet to discuss educational problems and to perfect in every possible way the parochial school system. As early as 1855 the Ladies of the Sacred Heart transferred their convent in Buffalo to Rochester as a more central point for their academy. About the same time the Sisters of St. Joseph in Canandaigua opened St. Mary's academy for young ladies, now Nazareth Academy attached to the new motherhouse of the order in Rochester. Advanced courses were also introduced in 1903 into the Cathedral school under the direction of Bishop Hickey, who, in 1906, converted the old Cathedral Hall into a high school, classical and commercial, open to both girls and boys. Ecclesiastical (a) Preparatory.--Believing that it was hard for a boy to become a worthy priest without first leading the normal life of the family in the world, Bishop McQuaid planned his preparatory ecclesiastical seminary as a free day-school and not a boarding-school, the students living at home under the care of their parents, or in a boarding house approved by the superiors. Within two years after the erection of the diocese, this plan was realized. On his return from the Vatican Council in 1870, St. Andrew's Preparatory Seminary was opened in a small building to the rear of the episcopal residence. It has already given nearly 175 priests to the diocese of Rochester. The rule has been made to adopt no one in this diocese who has ot spent at least two years in St. Andrew's Seminary. Through the generosity of Mgr. H. De Regge and some others, Bishop McQuaid was enabled to erect a new building in 1880 and to enlarge it in 1889; and in 1904 the younger priests of the diocese furnished him with funds to erect a fire-proof structure with fitting accommodations for the work of the school. (b) Theological.--For many years the ecclesiastical students of the Diocese of Rochester were sent mainly to the provincial seminary at Troy or to Rome and Innsbruck in Europe for their theological education. In 1879 Bishop McQuaid put aside a small legacy bequeathed him as a nucleus of a fund for the erection of suitable buildings for a diocesan seminary. Although the fund grew slowly, the bishop would not lay the first stone until nearly all the money needed for the work was in hand, nor would he open the seminary for students until the buildings were completed and paid for, and at least four professorships endowed. In April, 1887, he was able to purchase a site on the bank of the Genesee River gorge, only three miles from the cathedral. Four years later he began the erection of the buildings. In two years they were completed, and in September, 1893, the seminary was opened with 39 students. Applications for admission soon came from various parts of the United States and Canada. Four years after its establishment, it became evident that more room was necessary. A fund for an additional building was begun and in 1900, the Hall of Philosophy and Science was erected with accommodations for class-rooms, library, and living rooms. In the following year Bishop McQuaid received a recognition for these labours from Leo XIII in a Brief granting to himself and his successors the power of conferring degrees in Philosophy and Theology. The Hall of Theology was begun in 1907 and solemnly dedicated 20 August, 1908. The priests of the diocese founded the ninth endowed professorship in honour of their bishop's jubilee. An infirmary for sick students was in process of construction when Bishop McQuaid died. Charities Though Catholic education was the primary concern of Bishop McQuaid in his diocese, ample provision for its charities was not lacking. (1) As early as 1845 the R.C.A. Society of Rochester, already in existence some years, was incorporated, having for its object the support of the orphan girls in St. Patrick's Female Orphan Asylum at Rochester and the support of the orphan boys sent to the Boys' Asylum, either at Lancaster, New York, or at Lime Stone Hill near Buffalo. In 1864 St. Mary's Boys' Orphan Asylum was also established in Rochester under the care of the Sisters of St. Joseph, to whom also the Girls' Orphan Asylum was confided in 1870 on the resignation of the Sisters of Charity hitherto in charge. When the Auburn Orphan Asylum, incorporated in 1853, was transferred to Rochester in 1910, all this work was then centralized in the episcopal city. Here also special provision had been made for the German Catholic orphans since 1866, when St. Joseph's Orphan Asylum was erected and placed under the care of the Sisters of Notre-Dame. (2) In 1873 a short-lived attempt was made to supplement the work of St. Mary's Orphan Asylum by giving the boys of suitable age an opportunity of acquiring a practical knowledge of farming or of a useful trade. A similar institution for girls flourished under Mother Hieronymo for some twenty years under the name of The Home of Industry which then was changed into a home for the aged. The location did not prove desirable for such an institution, and $65,000 having been raised by a bazaar, Bishop McQuaid was enabled to erect St. Anne's Home for the Aged, admitting men as well as women. (3) The spiritual needs of another class of the destitute, the Catholic inmates of public eleemosynary and penal institution in the diocese, appealed strongly to Bishop McQuaid, who at once became their champion in the endeavour to have their religious rights respected according to the guarantee of the Constitution of the State of New York. His agitation in this noble cause was crowned with success, and the State supports today chaplains at the State Industrial School, Industry, at the State Reformatory, Elmira, at the Craig Colony (state hospital for epileptics), Sonyea, at the Soldiers' and Sailors' Home, Bath, while the county maintains a chaplain in Rochester for its public institutions of this kind. (4) The Catholic sick have one of the largest and best equipped hospitals in Rochester at their disposal in St. Mary's Hospital, established by the Sisters of Charity under Mother Hieronymo in 1857. The Sisters of Mercy have charge of St. James Hospital in Hornell, and of late years the Sisters of St. Joseph have also opened a hospital in Elmira. Statistics Priests, 163 (6 Redemptorists); churches with resident priests, 94; missions with churches, 36; chapels, 18; parishes with parochial schools, 54 with 20,189 pupils; academies for young ladies, 2 with 470 pupils (Nazareth, 352; Sacred Heart, 118); theological seminary for secular clergy, 1 with 234 students (73 for the Diocese of Rochester); preparatory seminary, 1 with 80 students; orphan asylums, 3 with 438 orphans (St. Patrick's, Girls', 119; St. Mary's Boys', 204; St. Joseph's, 115); Home for the Aged, 1 with 145 inmates (men, 25); hospitals, 3 with 3115 inmates during year (St. Mary's, Rochester, 2216; St. Joseph's, Elmira, 463; St. James, Hornell, 436); Catholics, 142,263. Conc. Balt. Plen. acta et decreta; Acta S. Sedis, III; Leonis XIII Acta xvi, xxi; Catholic Directory, (1866-1911); McQuaid: Diaries (fragmentary); IDEM, Pastorals in Annual Coll. for Eccl. students (1871-1911); IDEM, Pastoral (Jubilee) (1875); IDEM, Pastoral (Visitation) (1878); IDEM, Our American Seminaries in Am. Eccl. Rev. (May, 1897), reprint in SMITH, The Training of a Priest, pp. xxi-xxxix; IDEM, The Training of a Seminary Professor in SMITH, op. cit., pp. 237-35; IDEM, Christian Free Schools (1892), a reprint of lectures; IDEM, Religion in Schools in North Am. Rev (April, 1881); IDEM, Religious Teaching in Schools in Forum (Dec., 1889); Reports of Conferences held by parochial teachers (1904-10). FREDERICK J. ZWIERLEIN Rochet Rochet An over-tunic usually made of fine white linen (cambric; fine cotton material is also allowed), and reaching to the knees. While bearing a general resemblance to the surplice, it is distinguished from that vestment by the shape of the sleeves; in the surplice these are at least fairly wide, while in the rochet they are always tight-fitting. The rochet is decorated with lace or embroidered borders--broader at the hem and narrower on the sleeves. To make the vestment entirely of tulle or lace is inconvenient, as is the inordinate use of plaits; in both cases, the vestment becomes too effeminate. The rochet is not a vestment pertaining to all clerics, like the surplice; it is distinctive of prelates, and may be worn by other ecclesiastics only when (as, e.g., in the case of cathedral chapters) the usus rochetti has been granted them by a special papal indult. That the rochet possesses no liturgical character is clear both from the Decree of Urban VII prefixed to the Roman Missal, and from an express decision of the Congregation of Rites (10 Jan., 1852), which declares that, in the administration of the sacraments, the rochet may not be used as a vestis sacra; in the administration of the sacraments, as well as at the conferring of the tonsure and the minor orders, use should be made of the surplice (cf. the decision of 31 May, 1817; 17 Sept., 1722; 16 April, 1831). However, as the rochet may be used by the properly privileged persons as choir-dress, it may be included among the liturgical vestments in the broad sense, like the biretta or the cappa magna. Prelates who do not belong to a religious order, should wear the rochet over the soutane during Mass in so far as this is convenient. The origin of the rochet may be traced from the clerical (non- liturgical) alba or camisia, that is, the clerical linen tunic of everyday life. It was thus not originally distinctive of the higher ecclesiastics alone. This camisia appears first in Rome as a privileged vestment; that this was the case in the Christian capital as early as the ninth century is established by the St. Gall catalogue of vestments. Outside of Rome the rochet remained to a great extent a vestment common to all clerics until the fourteenth century (and even longer); according to various German synodal statutes of the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries (Trier, Passau, Cambrai, etc.), it was worn even by sacristans. The Fourth Lateran Council prescribed its use for bishops who did not belong to a religious order, both in the church and on all public appearances. The name rochet (from the medieval roccus) was scarcely in use before the thirteenth century. It is first met outside of Rome, where, until the fifteenth century, the vestment was called camisia, alba romana, or succa (subta). These names gradually yielded to rochet in Rome also. Originally, the rochet reached, like the liturgical alb, to the feet, and, even in the fifteenth century still reached to the shins. It was not reduced to its present length until the seventeenth century. BRAUN, Die liturg. Gewandung im Occident u. Orient (Freiburg, 1907), 125 sqq.; BOCK, Gesch. der liturg Gewänder, II (Bonn, 1866), 329 sqq.; ROHAULT DE BLEURY, La Messe, VII (Paris, 1888). JOSEPH BRAUN Desire Raoul Rochette Désiré Raoul Rochette Usually known as Raoul-Rochette, a French archæologist, b. at St. Amand (Cher), 9 March, 1789; d. in Paris, 3 June, 1854. His father was a physician. He made his classical studies the lyceum of Bourges, and then took up post-graduate work in the Ecole Normale Supérieure in Paris. In 1810, he obtained a chair of grammar in the lyceum Louis-le-Grand, and in the same year, married the daughter of the celebrated sculptor Houdon. Three years later, he was awarded a prize by the Institute for his "Mémoire sur les Colonies Grecques". In 1815, he became lecturer at the Ecole Normale and succeeded Guizot in the chair of modern history at the Sorbonne. It has been often said that he owed his rapid advancement only to favoritism, because of his devotion to the ruling power; this is not entirely true. He was a real scholar whose deep knowledge of archæology was admired even by his political enemies. He was elected to the Academy of Inscriptions and Belles-Lettres in 1816, and two years later, made a keeper of medals and antiques. His appointment to the position of censor (1820) aroused the hostility of his students, who prevented him from delivering his lectures and caused the course to be suspended. In 1824 he was transferred to the chair of archæology. He entered the Academy of Fine Arts in 1838, and was made it perpetual secretary in 1839. Besides his memoirs for the Institute and numerous contributions to the "Journal de Savants, he wrote many books, the chief of which are: "Histoire critique de;'etablissement des colonies grecques" (Paris, 1815); "Antiquités grecques du Bosphore Cimmérien" (Paris, 1822); "Lettres sur le Suisse" (Paris, 1826); "Mémoires inédits d'antiquité figurée grecque, étrusque et Romaine" (Paris, 1828); "Pompéi" (Paris, 1828); "Cours d'archéologie" (Paris, 1828); "Peintures antiques inédites" (Paris, 1836). LOUIS N. DELAMARRE Daniel Rock Daniel Rock Antiquarian and ecclesiologist, b. at Liverpool, 31 August, 1799; d. at Kensington, London, 28 November, 1871. He was educated at St. Edmund's College, Old Hall, where he studied from April, 1813, to Dec., 1818. There he came under the influence of the Rev. Louis Havard from whom he acquired his first interest in liturgy, and was the intimate companion of the future historian, Mark A. Tierney. He was then chosen as one of the first students sent to reopen the English College at Rome, where he remained till he took the degree of D.D. in 1825. He had been ordained priest, 13 March, 1824. On his return to London he becomes assistant priest at St. Mary's, Moorfields, till 1827, when he was appointed domestic chaplain to John, Earl of Shrewsbury, with whom he had contracted a friendship based on similarity of tastes while at Rome. He accordingly resided at Alton Towers, Staffordshire, till 1840, with the exception of two years during which Lord Shrewsbury's generosity enabled him to stay at Rome collecting materials for his great work, "Hierurgia or the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass", which was published in 1833. He had previously published two short works: "Transubstantiation vindicated from the strictures of the Rev. Maurice Jones" (1830), and "The Liturgy of the Mass and Common Vespers for Sundays" (1832). In 1840 he became chaplain to Sir Robert Throckmorton of Buckland in Berkshire, and while there wrote his greatest book, "The Church of Our Fathers", in which he studies the Sarum Rite and other medieval liturgical observances. This work, which has profoundly influenced liturgical study in England and which caused his recognition as the leading authority on the subject, was published in 1849 (vols. I and II) and 1853-4 (vol. III). After 1840 Dr. Rock was a prominent member of the "Adelphi", an association of London priests who were working together for the restoration of the hierarchy. When this object was achieved, he was elected one of the first canons of Southwark (1852). Shortly after, he ceased parochial work, and having resided successfully at Newick, Surrey (1854-64), he went to live near the South Kensington Museum in which he took the keenest interest and to which he proved of much service. His "Introduction to the Catalogue of Textile Fabrics" in that Museum has been separately reprinted (1876) and is of great authority. He also contributed frequent articles to the Archæological Journal, the Dublin Review, and other periodicals. For many years before his death he held the honourable position of President of the Old Brotherhood of the English Secular Clergy. There is an oil painting of him at St. Edmund's College, Old Hall. GILLOW, Bibl. Dict. Eng. Cath., s. v.; SUTTON in Dict. Nat. Biog., s. v. incorrectly dating his departure for Rome 1813 instead of 1818; KELLY, Life of Daniel Rock, D.D., prefixed to the modern Anglican ed. The Church of Our Fathers, ed. HART AND FRERE (London, 1903), with portrait. The Edmundian, II (1895), no. 8. EDWIN BURTON Diocese of Rockford Diocese of Rockford (ROCKFORDIENSIS). Created 23 September, 1908, comprises Jo Daviess, Stephenson, Winnebago, Boone, McHenry, Carrol, Ogle, DeKalb, Kane, Whiteside, Lee, and Kendall Counties in the north-western part of the State of Illinois. The diocese has an area of 6867 sq. miles, and a Catholic population of 50,000, mostly Irish and Germans or their descendants. The total population of the twelve counties that form the diocese, according to the last census, in 414,872. The entire territory of the Diocese of Rockford was a part of the Archdiocese of Chicago until 23 September, 1908. The city of Rockford has a population of 48,000; it is a manufacturing centre. The Right Reverend Peter James Muldoon, formerly Auxiliary Bishop of Chicago, was appointed the first Bishop of Rockford, and took possession of his see, 15 December, 1908. There are in the diocese (1911), 99 secular priests, 18 missions with attendance of 3850, 5 hospitals, 1 maternity home, 1 home for aged, and Mt. St. Mary's Academy for Girls (St. Charles) with an attendance of 84. Offic. Catholic Directory J.J. FLANAGAN Rockhampton Rockhampton Diocese in Queensland, Australia. In 1862 Father Duhig visited the infant settlement on the banks of the Fitzroy River and celebrated the first Mass there. Father Scully came from Brisbane to attend to the spiritual needs of the little congregation and in 1863 Dean Murlay was appointed first resident pastor of Rockhampton, his parish extending as far north as Cooktown and south to Maryborough. He built the first Catholic church in Rockhampton, a wooden edifice still standing, and for many years was the only priest to look after the Catholics scattered over the vast territory. A foundation of the Sisters of Mercy from All-Hallows Convent, Brisbane, was established in 1873, and Sister Mary de Sales Gorry, the first Queensland-born nun, was appointed Superioress. Rockhampton remained part of the Diocese of Brisbane until 1882. In 1876 the Holy See erected the northern portion of the colony into a pro-vicariate, and in 1882 made Rockhampton a see with a territory of some 350,000 square miles. Right Rev. Dr. Cani, a native of the papal states, who had had a distinguished scholastic career at Rome, and former pro-vicar Apostolic of North Queensland, was appointed first bishop of the new diocese. Bishop Cani, who was then administering the diocese of Brisbane, was consecrated by Archbishop Vaughan in St. Mary's Cathedral, Sydney, 21 May, 1882, and was installed in his temporary cathedral at Rockhampton on 11 June following. In the new diocese there were about 10,000 Catholics, 6 or 7 priests, 8 Catholic schools, and 1 orphanage. Bishop Cani added to the small number of priests, purchased sites for new churches, and acquired 3000 acres of fertile land near Rockhampton for a central orphanage which he had built and placed under the care of the Sisters of Mercy. His great work was the erection of St. Joseph's Cathedral, a magnificent stone edifice which he did not live to see dedicated. After a strenuous episcopate of sixteen years Dr. Cani died, 3 March, 1898. His great virtues were recognized even by those outside the Church. Humility and simplicity of life, love of the poor and orphans were his special characteristics. He was succeeded in Rockhampton by Right Rev. Dr. Higgins, a native of Co. Meath, Ireland, and now Bishop of Ballarat. Dr. Higgins studied in Maynooth, was subsequently president of the Diocesan seminary at Navan, and in 1888 was chosen auxiliary bishop to the Cardinal Archbishop of Sydney with the title of titular bishop of Antifelle. He had zealously laboured in the Archdiocese of Sydney for over ten years, when appointed to Rockhampton. He traversed his new diocese from end to end, gauged its wants, attracted priests to his aid, placed students for the mission in various ecclesiastical colleges, introduced new religious teaching orders, built and dedicated churches, convents, and schools in several centres, bringing the blessings of religion and Christian education to the children of the backblocks. On 15 October, 1899, the beautiful new cathedral was dedicated by the Cardinal Archbishop of Sydney assisted by several other distinguished Australian prelates in the presence of a great concourse of people. The remains of Dr. Cani were transferred thither. Dr. Higgins visited Rome and Ireland in 1904, and returned with renewed energy to carry on his great work. On the death of Dr. Moore, Bishop of Ballarat, Victoria, he was translated to that important See, where he has ever since laboured with characteristic zeal and devotedness. The present Bishop of Rockhampton is Right Rev. Dr. James Duhig, born at Broadford, Co. Limerick, Ireland, 1870. Dr. Duhig emigrated from Ireland with his family at the age of thirteen, studied with the Christian Brothers at Brisbane and at the Irish College, Rome, was ordained priest, 19 Sept., 1896, and, returning to Queensland in the following year, was appointed to a curacy in the parish of Ipswich. In 1905 he was appointed administrator of St. Stephen's Cathedral, Brisbane, and received the briefs of his appointment to the See of Rockhampton. At present (1911) there are in the Diocese of Rockhampton: about 28,000 Catholics; 19 missions or districts; 30 priests (4 of whom belong to the Marist congregation, who have 1 house in the diocese); 12 Christian Brothers; 150 nuns; and 26 Catholic schools, attended by about 5000 children. J. DUHIG Rococo Style Rococo Style This style received its name in the nineteenth century from French émigrés, who used the word to designate in whimsical fashion the old shellwork style (style rocaille), then regarded as Old Frankish, as opposed to the succeeding more simple styles. Essentially, it is in the same kind of art and decoration as flourished in France during the regency following Louis XIV's death, and remained in fashion for about forty years (1715-50). It might be termed the climax or degeneration of the Baroque, which, coupled with French grace, began towards the end of the reign of Louis XIV to convert grotesques into curves, lines, and bands (Jean Bérain, 1638-1711). As its effect was less pronounced on architectural construction than elsewhere, it is not so much a real style as a new kind of decoration, which culminates in the resolution of architectural forms of the interiors (pilasters and architraves) by arbitrary ornamentation after the fashion of an unregulated, enervated Baroque, while also influencing the arrangement of space, the construction of the façades, the portals, the forms of the doors and windows. The Rococo style was readily received in Germany, where it was still further perverted into the arbitrary, unsymmetrical, and unnatural, and remained in favour until 1770 (or even longer); it found no welcome in England. In Italy a tendency towards the Rococo style is evidenced by the Borrominik Guarini, and others. The French themselves speak only of the Style Régence and Louis XV, which, however, is by no means confined to this one tendency. To a race grown effeminate to the Baroque forms seemed too coarse and heavy, the lines too straight and stiff, and whole impression to weighty and forced. The small and the light, sweeps and flourishes, caught the public taste; in the interiors the architectonic had to yield to the picturesque, the curious, an the whimsical. There develops a style for elegant parlours, dainty sitting-rooms and boudoirs, drawing-rooms and libraries, in which walls, ceiling, furniture, and works of metal and porcelain present one ensemble of sportive, fantastic, and sculptured forms. The horizontal lines are almost completely superseded by curves and interruptions, the vertical varied at least by knots; everywhere shell-like curves appear to a cusp; the natural construction of the walls is concealed behind thick stucco-framework; on the ceiling perhaps a glimpse of Olympus enchants the view--all executed in a beautiful white or in bright colour tones. All the simple laws and rules being set aside in favour of free and enchanting imaginativeness, the fancy received all the greater incentive to activity, and the senses were the more keenly requisitioned. Everything vigorous is banned, every suggestion of earnestness; nothing disturbs the shallow repose of distinguished banality; the sportively graceful and light appears side by side with the elegant and the ingenious. The sculptor Bouchardon represented Cupid engaged in carving his darts of love from the club of Hercules; this serves as an excellent symbol of the Rococo style--the demigod is transformed into the soft child, the bone-shattering club becomes the heart-scathing arrows, just as marble is so freely replaced by stucco. Effeminacy, softness, and caprice attitudinize before us. In this connection, the French sculptors, Robert le Lorrain, Michel Clodion, and Pigalle may be mentioned in passing. For small plastic figures of gypsum, clay, biscuit, porcelain (Sèvres, Meissen), the gay Rococo is not unsuitable; in wood, iron, and royal metal, it has created some valuable works. However, confessionals, pulpits, altars, and even façades lead ever more into the territory of the architectonic, which does not easily combine with the curves of Rococo, the light and the petty, with forms whose whence and wherefore baffle inquiry. Even as mere decoration on the walls of the interiors the new forms could maintain their ground only for a few decades. In France the sway of the Rococo practically ceases with Oppenord (d. 1742) and Meissonier (d. 1750). Inaugurated in some rooms in the Palace of Versailles, it unfolds its magnificence in several Parisian buildings (especially the Hôtel Soubise). In Germany French and German artists (Cuvilliés, Neumann, Knobelesdorff, etc.) effected the dignified equipment of the Amalienburg near Munich, and the castles of Wurzburg, Potsdam, Charlottenburg, Brühl, Bruchsal, Schönbrunn, etc. In France the style remained somewhat more reserved, since the ornaments were mostly of wood, or, after the fashion of wood-carving, less robust and naturalistic and less exuberant in the mixture of natural with artificial forms of all kinds (e.g. plant motives, stalactitic representations, grotesques, masks, implements of various professions, badges, paintings, precious stones). As elements of the beautiful France retained, to a greater extent than Germany, the unity of the whole scheme of decoration and the symmetry of its parts. This style needs not only decorators, goldsmiths, and other technicians, but also painters. The French painters of this period reflect most truly the moral depression dating from the time of Louis XIV, even the most deliberated among them confining themselves to social portraits of high society and depicting " gallant festivals", with their informal frivolous, theatrically or modishly garbed society. The "beautiful sensuality" is effected by masterly technique, especially in the colouring, and to a great extent by quite immoral licenses or mythological nudities as in loose or indelicate romances. As for Watteau (1682-1721), the very titles of his works--e.g. Conversation, Breakfast in the Open Air, Rural Pleasures, Italian or French Comedians, Embarkment for the Island of Cythera--indicate the spirit and tendency of his art. Add thereto the figures in fashionable costume slim in head, throat, and feet, in unaffected pose, represented amid enchanting, rural scenery, painted in the finest colours, and we have a picture of the high society of the period which beheld Louis XV and the Pompadour. François Boucher (1703-770) is the most celebrated painter of ripe Rococo. For the church Rococo may be, generally speaking, compared with worldly church music. It lacks of simplicity, earnestness, and repose is evident, while its obtrusive artificiality, unnaturalness, and triviality have a distracting effect. Its softness and prettiness likewise do not become the house of God. However, shorn of its most grievous outgrowths, it may have been less distracting during its proper epoch, since it then harmonized with the spirit of the age. A development of Baroque, it will be found a congruous decoration for baroque churches. In general it makes a vast difference whether the style is used with moderation in the finer and more ingenious form of the French masters, or is carried to extremes with the consistency of the German. The French artists seem ever to have regarded the beauty of the whole composition as the chief object, while the German laid most stress on the bold vigour of the lines; thus, the lack of symmetry was never so exaggerated in the works of the former. In the church Rococo may at times have the charm of prettiness and may please by its ingenious technic, provided the objects be small and subordinate a credence table with cruets and plate, a vase, a choir desk, lamps, key and lock, railings or balustrade, do not too boldly challenge the eye, and fulfil (sic) all the requirements of mere beauty of form. Rococo is indeed really empty, solely a pleasing play of the fancy. In the sacristy (for presses etc.) and ante chambers it is m ore suitable than in the church itself--at least so far as its employment in conspicuous places is concerned. The Rococo style accords very ill with the solemn office of the monstrance, the tabernacle, and the altar, and even of the pulpit. The naturalism of certain Belgian pulpits, in spite or perhaps on account of their artistic character, has the same effect as have outspoken Rococo creations. The purpose of the confessional and the baptistery would also seem to demand more earnest forms. In the case of the larger objects, the sculpture of Rococo forms either seems pretty, or, if this prettiness be avoided, resembles Baroque. The phantasies of this style agree ill with the lofty and broad walls of the church. However, everything must be decided according to the object and circumstances; the stalls in the cathedral of Mainz elicit not only our approval but also our admiration, while the celebrated privilege d altar of Vierzehnheiligen repels us both by its forms and its plastic decoration. Thee are certain Rococo chalices (like that at the monastery of Einsiedeln which are, as one might say, decked out in choice festive array; there are others, which are more or less misshapen owing to their bulging curves or figures. Chandeliers and lamps may also be disfigured by obtrusive shellwork or want of all symmetry, or may amid great decorativeness be kept within reasonable limits. The material and technic are also of consequence in Rococo. Woven materials, wood-carvings, and works in plaster of Paris are evidently less obtrusive than works in other materials, when they employ the sportive Rococo. Iron (especially in railings) and bronze lose their coldness and hardness, when animated by the Rococo style; in the case of the latter, gilding may be used with advantage. Gilding and painting belong to the regular means through which this style, under certain circumstances, enchants the eye and fancy. All things considered, we may say of the Rococo style--as has not unreasonably been said of the Baroque and of the Renaissance--that it is very apt to introduce a worldly spirit into the church, even if we overlook the figural accessories, which are frequently in no way conducive to sentiments of devotion, and are incompatible with the sobriety and greatness of the architecture and with the seriousness of sacred functions. Ornaments Louis XV et du style Rocaille, reproduits d'apres les originaux (Paris, 1890); Recueil des oeuvres de G. M. Oppenord (Paris, 1888); Recueil des oeuvres de J. A. Meissonier (Paris, 1888); Gurlitt, Das Barock- u. Roko ko-Architektur; Jessen, Das Ornament des Rokoko (Leipzig, 1894). G. GIETMANN Rodez Rodez (RUTHENAE) The Diocese of Rodez was united to the Diocese of Cahors by the Concordat of 1802, and again became an episcopal see by the Concordat of 1817 and Bull of 1822, having jurisdiction over: (1) the ancient Diocese of Rodez with the exception of the deanery of Saint Antonin, incorporated with the Diocese of Montauban; (2) the ancient Diocese of Vabres; (3) a few scattered communes of the Diocese of Cahors. The Diocese of Rodez corresponds exactly to the Department of Aveyron (formerly Rouergue). It was suffragan of Bourges until 1676, then of Albi, and has again been suffragan of Aibi since 1822. Modern tradition attributes to St. Martial the foundation of the church of Rodez and the sanctuary of the Blessed Virgin at Ceignac, for according to Cardinal Bourret, the church of Rodez honoured St. Martial as early as the sixth century (see Limoges). There were bishops of Rodez before 675, as Sidonius Apollinaris mentions that the Goths left it at that date without bishops. Amantius, who ruled about the end of the fifth century, is the first bishop mentioned. Among others are: S. Quintianua who assisted at the Councils of Agde (508) and Orléans (511), afterwards Bishop of Clermont; 8. Dalmatius (524-80); S. Gausbert (tenth century), probably a Bishop of Cahors; Jean de Cardaillac (1371-9); Patriarch of Alexandria, who fought against English rule; Blessed Francis d'Estaing (1501-29), ambassador of Louis XII to Juluis II; Louis Avelly (1664-6) who wrote the life of St. Vincent of Paul; Joseph Bourret (1871-96), made Cardinal in 1893. The Benedictine Abbey of Vabres, founded in 862 by Raymond I, Count of Toulouse, was raised to episcopal rank in 1317, and its diocesan territory was taken from the southeastern portion of the Diocese of Rodez. Some scholars hold that within the limits of the modern Diocese of Rodez there existed in Merovingian times the See of Arisitum which, according to Mgr Duchesne, was in the neighbourhood of Alais. During the Middle Ages the Bishop of Rodez held temporal dominion over that portion of the town known as the Cité while in the eleventh century the Bourg became the County of Rodez. The cathedral of Rodez (thirteenth and fourteenth centuries) is a beautiful Gothic building, famous for its belfry (1510-26) and unique rood-beam. It was spared during the Revolution for dedication to Marat. The town of Milhau adopted Calvinism in 1534, and in 1573 and 1620 was the scene of two large assemblies of Protestant deputies. In 1629 Milhau and Saint-Afrique, another Protestant stronghold, were taken and dismantled by Louis XIII. In 1628 a pest at Villefranche carried off 8000 inhabitants within six months; Father Ambroise, a Franciscan, and the chief of police Jean de Pomayrol saved the lives of many little children by causing them to bo suckled by goats. The Cistercian Abbeys of Silbanès, Beaulieu, Loc-Dieu, Bonneval, and Bonnecombe were model-farms during the Middle Ages. Attacked by brigands in the Rouergue country on his way to Santiago di Compostella, Adalard, Viscount of Flanders, erected in 1031 a monastery known as the Domerie d'Aubrac, a special order of priests, knights, lay brothers, ladies, and lay sisters for the care and protection of travellers. At Milhau, Rodez, Nazac, and Bozouls, hospitals, styled "Commanderies", of this order of Aubrac adopted the rule of St. Augustine in 1162. The Diocese of Rodez is famous also through the Abbey of Conques and the cult of Sainte Foy. Some Christians, flying from the Saracens about 730, sought a refuge in the "Val Rocheux" of the Dourdou and built an oratory there. In 790 the hermit Dadon made this his abode and aided by Louis the Pious, then King of Aquitaine, founded an abbey, which Louis named Conques. In 838 Pepin, King of Aquitaine, gave the monastery of Figeac to Conques. Between 877 and 883 the monks carried off the body of the youthful martyr Ste-Foy from the monastery of Sainte Foy to Conques, where it became the object of a great pilgrimage. Abbot Odolric built the abbey church between 1030 and 1060; on the stonework over the doorway is carved the most artistic representation in France of the Last Judgment. Abbot Begon (1099-1118) enriched Conques with a superb reliquary of beaten gold and cloisonne's enamels of a kind extremely rare in France. Pascal II gave him permission for the name of Ste-Foy to be inserted in the Canon of the Mass after the names of the Roman virgins. At this time Conques, with Agen and Schelestadt in Alsace, was the centre of the cult of Ste. Foy which soon spread to England, Spain, and America where many towns bear the name of Santa Fe^. The statute of Ste-Foy seated, which dated from the tenth century, was originally a small wooden one covered with gold leaf. In time, gems, enamels, and precious stones were added in such quantities that it is a living treatise on the history of the goldsmiths art in France between the eleventh and sixteenth centuries. It was known during the Middle Ages as "Majesté de Sainte Foy". The shrine enclosing the relics of the Saint, which in 1590 was hidden in the masonry connecting the pillars of the choir, was found in 1875, repaired, transferred to the cathedral of Rodez for a novena, and brought back to Conques, a distance of 25 miles, on the shoulders of the clergy. Among Saints specially honoured in the Diocese of Rodez and Vabres are: S. Antoninus of Pamiers, Apostle of the Rouergue (date uncertain); S. Gratus and S. Ansutus, martyrs (fourth century); S. Naamatius, deacon and confessor (end of fifth century); Ste. Tarsicia, grand-daughter of Clothaire I and of Ste-Radegunda, who retired to the Rouergue to lead an ascetic life (sixth century); S. Africanus, wrongly styled Bishop of Comminges, who died in the Rouergue (sixth century); S. Hilarianus, martyred by the Saracens in the time of Charlemagne (eighth and ninth century); S. George, a monk in the Diocese of Vabres, afterwards Bishop of Lodève (877); 8. Guasbert, founder and first abbot of the monastery of Montsalvy in the modern Diocese of St. Flour (eleventh century). Among natives of the diocese are: Cardinal Bernard of Milhau, Abbot of St. Victor's at Marseilles in 1063, and legate of Gregory VII; Theodatus de Gozon (d. 1353) and John of La Valetta (1494-1568), grand masters of the order of St. John of Jerusalem; the former is famous for his victory over the dragon of Rhodes, the latter for his heroic defence of Malta; Frassinous (1765-1841), preacher and minister of worship under the Restoration; Bonald (1754-1840) and Laromiguière (1736-1837), philosophers; Affre (1793-1848), born at St. Rome de Tarn and slain at the Barricades as Archbishop of Paris. The chief shrines of the diocese are: Notre Dame de Ceignac, an ancient shrine rebuilt and enlarged in 1455, which over 15,000 pilgrims visit annually; Notre Dame du Saint Voile at Coupiac, another ancient shrine; Notre Dame des Treize Pierres at Villefranche, a pilgrimage dating from 1509. Before the application of the Associations' Law in 1901, there were in the Diocese of Rodez, Capuchins, Jesuits, Trappists, Pères Blancs, Premonstratensians, Fathers of Picpus, Sulpicians, Clerics of St. Victor, and many congregations of teaching brothers. This diocese furnishes more missionaries than any other in France. Of the numerous congregations for women which had their origin there, the principal are: affiliations of the Sisters of St. Francis of Sales, known as the Union, teaching orders founded in 1672, 1698, 1739, 1790, with mother-houses at St-Geniez, d'Olt, Bozouls, Lavernhe, Auzits; the Sisters of St. Joseph, founded in 1682 for teaching and district nursing, with mother-house at Marcillac, and other sisters of the same name, united in 1822, 1824, 1856, with mother-houses at Milhau, Villecomtal, Salles-la-Source; the Sisters of the Holy Family, a teaching and nursing order, founded in 1816 by Emilie de Rodat, with mother-house at Villefranche and many convents throughout the diocese; the Minim Sisters of the Sacred Heart of Mary founded in 1844 by Mile. Chauchard, with mother-house at Crújouls, for the care of the sick and children of the working classes; wo branches of Dominican Sisters, teaching orders, founded in 1843 and 1849 with mother-houses at Gramond and Bor-et-Bar; the Sisters of the Union of Ste-Foy, teaching and nursing nuns, founded in 1682 with mother-house at Rodez. At the close of the nineteenth century the religious congregations of the diocese had charge of 75 nurseries; 1 institute for the deaf and dumb; 3 orphanages for boys; 13 orphanages for girls; 2 houses of rescue; 2 houses of mercy; 1 economic bakery; 83 houses of religious women devoted to the care of the sick in their own homes; 3 hospitals. At the end of 1909 the diocese had a population of 377,299, 51 parishes, 617 auxiliary parishes, 287 curacies, and 1200 priests. Gallia Christiana, Nova (1715), I, 195-234; Instrumenta, 49-55, 203; DUCHESNE, Pastes Episcopaux, II, 39-41; SICARD, Ruthena Christiana, ed. MAISONABE in Mémoires de la société des lettres, sciences et arts de V Avyron, XIV (Rodez, 1893), 331-447; BOURRET, Documents sur les origines chrétiennes de Rouergue. Saint Martial (Rodez, 1902); SERVIÈRES, Les Saints du Rouergue (Rodez, 1872); IDEM, Histoire de l'Eglise du Rouergue (Rodez, 1875); BOUILLET AND SERVIÈRES, Sainte Foy merge et martyre (Rodez, 1900); GRIMALDI, Les Benefices du. Diocese de Rodez avant la Revolution de 1789 (Rodez, 1906); DE MARLAVAGNE, Histoire de la cathedrals de Rodez (Rodez, 1876); BOCSQUET, Tableau chronologique et biograph. des cardinaux, archevéques et évêques originaires du Rouergue (Rodez, 1850); CALMET, L'abbaye de Vabres et son erection en évêché in Ann. de St. Louis des Français (1898). GEORGES GOYAU Alexandre Rodrigues Ferreira Alexandre Rodrigues Ferreira A Brazilian natural scientist and explorer, b. at Bahia in 1756; d. at Lisbon in 1815. He was sent to Portugal for his training, and there studied at the University of Coimbra. After taking his degrees, he taught natural history subjects for a time at his Alma Mater, until in 1778 he was called to Lisbon to work in the Museo da Ajuda. He devoted his time for the next five years to cataloguing the various specimens contained in the museum, and to the writing of learned monographs and reports. As a result of his efforts he was elected a Corresponding Member of the Academy of Sciences at Lisbon. The Portuguese Government empowered him to engineer a journey of exploration for scientific purposes in the interior of his native land. He entered upon this expedition in 1783 and spent nine years in it. First examining the Island of Marajo, since important for the production of rubber, he crossed to the mainland, and followed the course of the Amazon and its tributaries, studying the natives, their languages and customs, and the fauna and flora of a vast region. On account of the energy and skill with which he conducted his investigations he became known as the Brazilian Humboldt. From 1793 until his death he was in Lisbon, acting as Director of the Gabinete de Historia Natural and of the Jardim Botanico. Most of the records of his Brazilian explorations seem to have passed from view. J.D.M. FORD Alonso Rodriguez Alonso Rodriguez Born at Valladolid, Spain, 1526; died at Seville 21 February, 1616. When twenty years of age he entered the Society of Jesus, and after completing his studies taught moral theology for twelve years at the College of Monterey, and subsequently filled the posts of master of novices for twelve more years, of rector for seventeen years, and of spiritual father at Cordova for eleven years. As master of novices he had under his charge Francis Suarez, the celebrated theologian. Alonso's characteristics in these offices were care, diligence, and charity. He was a religious of great piety and candour, hating all pride and ostentation. It was said of him by those who were personally acquainted with him, that his character and virtues were accurately depicted in "The Practice of Christian and Religious Perfection", published at Seville, 1609. This work is based on the material which he colected for his spiritual exhortations tohis brethren, and published at the request of his superiors. Although the book thus written was primarily intended for the use of his religious brethren, yet he destined it also for the profit and edification of other religious and of laymen in the world. Of set purpose it avoids the loftier flights of mysticism and all abstruse speculation. It is a book of practical instructions on all the virtues which go to make up the perfect Christian life, whether lived in the cloister or in the world. It became popular at once, and it is much used to-day by all classes of Christians as it was when it first became known. More than twenty-five edtions of the original Spanish have been issued, besides extracts and abridgements. Moe than sixty editions have appeared in French in seven different translations, twenty in Italian, at least ten in German, and eight in Latin. An English translation from the French by Fr. Antony Hoskins, S.J., was printed at St. Omer in 1612. The best known English translation, often reprinted, is that which first appeared in London, 1697, from the French of Abbe Regnier des Marais. P.O. Shea issued in New York an edition adapted to general use in 1878. The book has been translated into nearly all the European languages and into many of those of the East. No other work of the author was published. Gilmary Shea left a translation of the work which has never been published. CORDARA, Historiae Societatis Jesu: Pars Sexta, I (Rome, 1750); DE GUILHERMY, Menologe de la C. de J., Assistance d'Espagne, I (Paris, 1902), 321; a short life is prefixed to the English translation of The Practice of Christian and Religious Perfection (Dublin, 1861); SOMMERVOGEL, Bibl. de la C. de J., VI (Paris, 1895). T. SLATER Joao Rodriguez Joao Rodriguez (GIRAM, GIRAO, GIRON, ROIZ). Missionary and author, b. at Alcochete in the Diocese of Lisbon in 1558; d. in Japan in 1633. He entered the Society of Jesus on 16 December, 1576, and in 1583 began his missionary labours in Japan. His work was facilitated by his winning the esteem of the Emperor Taicosama. He studied the Japanese language ardently, and is particularly known for his efforts to make it accessible to the Western nations. His Japanese grammar ranks among the important linguistic productions of the Jesuit missionaries. Published at Nagasaki in 1604 under the title "Arte da lingoa de Japam", it appeared in 1624 in an abridged form at Macao: "Arte breve da lingoa japoa"; from the manuscript of this abridgement preserved in the National Library in Paris, the Asiatic Society prepared a French edition of the work: "Elements de la grammaire japonaise par le P. Rodriguez" (Paris, 1825). Rodriguez compiled also a Japanese-Portuguese dictionary (Nagasaki, 1603), later adapted to the French by Pagès (Paris, 1862). RÉMUSAT, in Nouv. Melanges asiat., I (Paris, 1829), 354-57; GANSEN, in Buchberger=1Cs Handlexikon, s. v. N.A. WEBER Bartholomew Roe Bartholomew Roe (VENERABLE ALBAN). English Benedictine martyr, b. in Suffolk, 1583; executed at Tyburn, 21 Jan., 1641. Educated in Suffolk and at Cambridge; he became converted through a visit to a Catholic prisoner at St. Albans which unsettled his religious views. He was admitted as a convictor into the English College at Douai, entered the English Benedictine monastery at Dieulward where he was professed in 1612, and, after ordination, went to the mission in 1615. From 1618 to 1623 he was imprisoned in the New Prison, Maiden Lane, whence he was banished and went to the English Benedictine house at Douai but returned to England after four months. He was again arrested in 1625, and was imprisoned for two months at St. Albans, then in the Fleet whence he was frequently liberated on parole, and finally in Newgate. He was condemned a few days before his execution under the statute 27 Eliz. e. 2, for being a priest. With him suffered Thomas Greene, aged eighty, who on the mission had taken the name of Reynolds. He was probably descended from the Greenes of Great Milton, Oxfordshire, and the Reynoldses of Old Stratford, Warwickshire, and was ordained deacon at Reims in 1590, and priest at Seville. He had lived under sentence of death for fourteen years, and was executed without fresh trial. They were drawn on the same hurdle, where they heard each other's confessions, and were hanged simultaneously on the same gibbet amidst great demonstrations of popular sympathy. GILLOW, Bibl. Dict. Eng. Cath., III, 36; V, 437; CHALLONER, Missionary Priests, II, nos. 166, 167; POLLEN, Acts of the English Martyrs (London, 1891), 339-43. JOHN B. WAINWRIGHT Roermond Roermond (RUBAEMUNDENSIS). Diocese in Holland; suffragan of Utrecht. It includes the Province of Limburg, and in 1909 had 332,201 inhabitants, among whom were 325,000 Catholics. The diocese has a cathedral chapter with 9 canons, 14 deaneries, 173 parishes, 197 churches with resident priests, an ecclesiastical seminary at Roermond, a preparatory seminary for boys at Rolduc, about 70 Catholic primary schools, 2 Catholic preparatory gymnasia, 1 training college for male teachers, 24 schools for philosophical, theological, and classical studies, 35 higher schools for girls, about 60 charitable institutions, 45 houses of religious (men) with about 2400 members, and 130 convents with 3900 sisters. Among the orders and congregations of men in the diocese are: Jesuits, the Society of the Divine Word of Steyl, Brothers of the Immaculate Conception, Redemptorists, Marists, Reformed Cistercians, Dominicans, Benedictines, Oblates of Mary Immaculate, Brothers of Mercy, Poor Brothers of St. Francis, Conventuals, Calced Carmelites, Missionaries of Africa, Priests of the Sacred Heart of Jesus, Brothers of the Seven Sorrows of the Blessed Virgin Mary, Brothers of St. Francis, Brothers of St. Joseph, the Society of Mary, the Congregation of the Sacred Heart of Jesus, the Congregation of the Divine Spirit, and the Congregation of Missions. Among the female orders and congregations are: Benedictines, Brigittines, Ursulines, Sisters of St. Charles Borromeo, Sisters of Tilburg, Sisters of the Child Jesus, Sisters of St. Francis, Sisters of the Divine Providence, Sisters of Mercy etc. The Diocese of Roermond was established in 1559, during the reign of Philip II, when after long and difficult negotiations with the papacy the dioceses of the Netherlands were reorganized. By these negotiations all jurisdiction of foreign bishops, e.g. that of the Archbishop of Cologne, came to an end. In this way the Diocese of Roermond, the boundaries of which were settled in 1561, became a suffragan of Mechlin. The reorganization of the dioceses, however, met with violent opposition, partly from bishops to whose territories the new dioceses had formerly belonged, partly from a number of abbots whose abbeys were incorporated in the new bishoprics. Much difficulty was also caused by the rapid growth of Calvinism in the Netherlands. In Roermond the first bishop, Lindanus, who was consecrated in 1563, could not enter upon his duties until 1569; notwithstanding his zeal and charitableness he was obliged to retire on account of the revolutionary movement; he died Bishop of Ghent. The episcopal see remained vacant until 1591; at later periods also, on account of the political turmoils, the see was repeatedly vacant. In 1801 the diocese was suppressed; the last bishop, Johann Baptist Baron van Velde de Melroy, died in 1824. When in 1839 the Duchy of Limburg became once more a part of the Netherlands, Gregory XVI separated (2 June, 1840) that part of Limburg which had been incorporated in the Diocese of Louvain in 1802, and added to this territory several new parishes which had formerly belonged to the Diocese of Aachen, and formed thus the Vicariate Apostolic of Roermond, over which the parish priest of Roermond, Johann August Paredis, was placed as vicar Apostolic and titular Bishop of Hirene. In 1841 a seminary for priests was established in the former Carthusian monastery of Roermond, where the celebrated Dionysius the Carthusian had been a monk. Upon the re-establishment of the Dutch hierarchy in 1853 the Vicariate-Apostolic of Roermond was raised to a bishopric and made a suffragan of Utrecht. The first bishop of the new diocese was Paredis. In 1858 a cathedral chapter was formed; in 1867 a synod was held, the first since 1654; in 1876 the administration of the church property was transferred, by civil law, to the bishop. During the Kulturkampf in Germany a number of ecclesiastical dignitaries driven out of Prussia found a hospitable welcome and opportunities for further usefulness in the Diocese of Roermond; among these churchmen were Melchers of Cologne, Brinkmann of Munster, and Martin of Paderborn. Bishop Paredis was succeeded by Franziskus Boreman (1886-1900), on whose death the present bishop, Joseph Hubertus Drehmann, was appointed. Gallia Christiana, V, 371 sqq.: Neerlandia catholica seu provinciae Utrajectensis historia et conditio (Utrecht, 1888), 263-335; ALBERS, Geschiedenis van het herstel der hierarchie in de Nederlanden (Nymwegen, 1893-4); MEERDINCK, Roermond in de Middeleeuwen; Onze Pius Almanak. Jaarboek voor de Katholiken van Nederland (Alkmaar, 1910), 338 sqq. JOSEPH LINS Rogation Days Rogation Days Days of prayer, and formerly also of fasting, instituted by the Church to appease God's anger at man's transgressions, to ask protection in calamities, and to obtain a good and bountiful harvest, known in England as "Gang Days" and "Cross Week", and in Germany as Bittage, Bittwoche, Kreuzwoche. The Rogation Days were highly esteemed in England and King Alfred's laws considered a theft committed on these days equal to one committed on Sunday or a higher Church Holy Day. Their celebration continued even to the thirteenth year of Elizabeth, 1571, when one of the ministers of the Established Church inveighed against the Rogation processions, or Gang Days, of Cross Week. The ceremonial may be found in the Council of Clovesho (Thorpe, Ancient Laws, I, 64; Hefele, Conciliengeschichte, III, 564). The Rogation Days are the 25th of April, called Major, and the three days before the feast of the Ascension, called Minor. The Major Rogation, which has no connexion with the feast of St. Mark (fixed for this date much later) seems to be of very early date and to have been introduced to counteract the ancient Robigalia, on which the heathens held processions and supplications to their gods. St. Gregory the Great (d. 604) regulated the already existing custom. The Minor Rogations were introduced by St. Mamertus, Bishop of Vienne, and were afterwards ordered by the Fifth Council of Orleans, which was held in 511, and then approved by Leo III (795-816). This is asserted by St. Gregory of Tours in "Hist. Franc.", II, 34, by St. Avitus of Vienne in his "Hom. de Rogat." (P.L., LVIII, 563), by Ado of Vienne (P. L., CXXIII, 102), and by the Roman Martyrology. Sassi, in "Archiepiscopi Mediolanenses", ascribes their introduction at an earlier date to St. Lazarus. This is also held by the Bollandist Henschen in "Acta SS.", II, Feb., 522. The liturgical celebration now consists in the procession and the Rogation Mass. For 25 April the Roman Missal gives the rubric: "If the feast of St. Mark is transferred, the procession is not transferred. In the rare case of 25 April being Easter Sunday [1886, 1943], the procession is held not on Sunday but on the Tuesday following". The order to be observed in the procession of the Major and Minor Rogation is given in the Roman Ritual, title X, ch. iv. After the antiphon "Exurge Domine", the Litany of the Saints is chanted and each verse and response is said twice. After the verse "Sancta Maria" the procession begins to move. If necessary, the litany may be repeated, or some of the Penitential or Gradual Psalms added. For the Minor Rogations the "Ceremoniale Episcoporum", book II, ch. xxxii, notes: "Eadem serventur sed aliquid remissius". If the procession is held, the Rogation Mass is obligatory, and no notice is taken of whatever feast may occur, unless only one Mass is said, for then a commemoration is made of the feast. An exception is made in favour of the patron or titular of the church, of whom the Mass is said with a commemoration of the Rogation. The colour used in the procession and Mass is violet. The Roman Breviary gives the instruction: "All persons bound to recite the Office, and who are not present at the procession, are bound to recite the Litany, nor can it be anticipated". ROCK, The Church of Our Fathers, III (London, 1904), 181; DUCHESNE, Chr. Worship (tr. London, 1904), 288; BINTERIM, Denkwurdigkeiten; AMBERGER, Pastoraltheologie, II, 834; VAN DER STEPPEN, Sacra Liturgia, IV, 405; NILLES, Kalendarium Manuale (Innsbruck, 1897). FRANCIS MERSHMAN Roger, Bishop of Worcester Roger, Bishop of Worcester Died at Tours, 9 August, 1179. A younger son of Robert, Earl of Gloucester, he was educated with the future king, Henry II, afterwards ordained priest, and consecrated Bishop of Worcester by St. Thomas of Canterbury, 23 Aug., 1163. He adhered loyally to St. Thomas, and though one of the bishops sent to the pope to carry the king's appeal against the archbishop, he took no active part in the embassy, nor did he join the appeal made by the bishops against the archbishop in 1166, thus arousing the enmity of the king. When St. Thomas desired Roger to join him in his exile, Roger went without leave (1167), Henry having refused him permission. He boldly reproached the king when they met at Falaise in 1170, and a reconciliation followed. After the martyrdom of St. Thomas, England was threatened with an interdict, but Roger interceded with the pope and was thereafter highly esteemed in England and at Rome. Alexander III, who frequently employed him as delegate in ecclesiastical causes, spoke of him and Bartholomew, Bishop of Exeter, as "the two great lights of the English Church". Materials for the History of Archbishop Becket in R. S. (London, 1875-85); GERVASE OF CANTERBUBY, Hist. Works in R. S. (London, 1879-80); DE DICETO, Opera Hist. in R. S. (London, 1876); P. L., CXCIX 365, gives one of his letters to Alexander III; GILES, Life and Letters of Becket (London, 1846); HOPE, Life of St. Thomas d Becket (London, 1868); MORRIS, Life of St. Thomas Becket (London, 1885); NORGATE in Dict. Nat. Biog., s.v. EDWIN BURTON Roger Bacon Roger Bacon Philosopher, surnamed Doctor Mirabilis, b. at Ilchester, Somersetshire, about 1214; d. at Oxford, perhaps 11 June, 1294. His wealthy parents sided with Henry III against the rebellious barons, but lost nearly all their property. It has been presumed that Robert Bacon, O.P., was Roger's brother; more probably he was his uncle. Roger made his higher studies at Oxford and Paris, and was later professor at Oxford (Franciscan school). He was greatly influenced by his Oxonian masters and friends Richard Fitzacre and Edmund Rich, but especially by Robert Grosseteste and Adam Marsh, both professors at the Franciscan school, and at Paris by the Franciscan Petrus Peregrinus de Maricourt (see Schlund in "Archiv. Francisc. Histor.", IV, 1911, pp. 436 sqq.) They created in him a predilection for positive sciences, languages, and physics; and to the last-mentioned he owed his entrance about 1240 (1251? 1257?) into the Franciscans, either at Oxford or Paris. He continued his learned work; illness, however, compelled him to give it up for two years. When he was able to recommence his studies, his superiors imposed other duties on him, and forbade him to publish any work out of the order without special permission from the higher superiors "under pain of losing the book and of fasting several days with only bread and water." This prohibition has induced modern writers to pass severe judgment upon Roger's superiors being jealous of Roger's abilities; even serious scholars say they can hardly understand how Bacon conceived the idea of joining the Franciscan Order. Such critics forget that when Bacon entered the order the Franciscans numbered many men of ability in no way inferior to the most famous scholars of other religious orders (see Felder, "Gesch. der wissenschaftlichen Studien im Franziskanerorden bis um die Mitte des 13. Jahrhunderts", Freiburg, 1904). The prohibition enjoined on Bacon was a general one, which extended to the whole order; its promulgation was not even directed against him, but rather against Gerard of Borgo San Donnino, as Salimbene says expressly (see "Chronica Fr. Salimbene Parmensis" in "Mon. Germ. Hist." SS.", XXII, 462, ed. Holder-Egger). Gerard had published in 1254 without permission his heretical work, "Introductorius in Evangelium æternum"; thereupon the General Chapter of Narbonne in 1260 promulgated the above-mentioned decree, identical with the "constitutio gravis in contrarium" Bacon speaks of, as the text shows (see the constitution published by Ehrle, S.J., "Die ältesten Redactionen der Generalconstitutionen des Franziskanerordens" in "Archiv für Literatur- und Kirchengeschichte des Mittelalters", VI, 110; St. Bonaventure, "Opera Omnia", Quaracchi, VIII, 456). We need not wonder then that Roger's immediate superiors put the prohibition into execution, especially as Bacon was not always very correct in doctrine; and although on the one hand it is wrong to consider him as a necromancer and astrologer, an enemy of scholastic philosophy, an author full of heresies and suspected views, still we cannot deny that some of his expressions are imprudent and inaccurate. The judgments he passes on other scholars of his day are sometimes too hard, so it is not surprising that his friends were few. The above-mentioned prohibition was rescinded in Roger's favour unexpectedly in 1266. Some years before, while still at Oxford, he had made the acquaintance of Cardinal Guy le Gros de Foulques, whom Urban IV had sent to England to settle the disputes between Henry III and the barons; others believe that the cardinal met Roger at Paris, in 1257 or 1258 (see "Archiv. Francisc. Histor.", IV, 442). After a conference about some current abuses, especially about ecclesiastical studies, the cardinal asked Roger to present his idea in writing. Roger delayed in doing this; when the Cardinal became Clement IV and reiterated his desire, Bacon excused himself because the prohibition of his superiors stood in the way. Then the pope in a letter from Viterbo (22 June, 1266) commanded him to send his work immediately, notwithstanding the prohibition of superiors or any general constitution whatsoever, but to keep the commission a secret (see letter published by Martene-Durand, "Thesaurus novus anecdotorum", II, Paris, 1717, 358, Clement IV, epp. n. 317 a; Wadding, "Annales", ad an. 1266, n. 14, II, 294; IV, 265; Sbaralea, "Bullarium Franciscanum", III, 89 n. 8f, 22 June, 1266). We may suppose that the pope, as Bacon says, from the first had wished the matter kept secret; otherwise we can hardly understand why Bacon did not get permission of his superiors; for the prohibition of Narbonne was not absolute; it only forbade him to publish works outside the order "unless they were examined thoroughly by the minister general or by the provincial together with his definitors in the provincial chapter". The removal of the prohibitive constitution did not at once remove all the obstacles; the secrecy of the matter rather produced new embarrassments, as Bacon frankly declares. The first impediment was the contrary will of his superiors: "as your Holiness", he writes to the pope, "did not write to them to excuse me, and I could not make known to them Your secret, because You had commanded me to keep the matter a secret, they did not let me alone but charged me with other labours; but it was impossible for me to obey because of Your commandment". Another difficulty was the lack of money necessary to obtain parchment and to pay copyists. As the superiors knew nothing of his commission, Bacon had to devise means to obtain money. Accordingly, he ingenuously reminded the pope of this oversight, "As a monk", he says, "I for myself have no money and cannot have; therefore I cannot borrow, not having wherewith to return; my parents who before were rich, now in the troubles of war have run into poverty; others, who were able refused to spend money; so deeply embarrassed, I urged my friends and poor people to expend all they had, to sell and to pawn their goods, and I could not help promising them to write to You and induce Your Holiness to fully reimburse the sum spent by them (60 pounds)" ("Opus Tertium", III, p. 16). Finally, Bacon was able to execute the pope's desire; in the beginning of 1267 he sent by his pupil John of Paris (London?) the "Opus Majus", where he puts together in general lines all his leading ideas and proposals; the same friend was instructed to present to the pope a burning-mirror and several drawings of Bacon appertaining to physics, and to give all explanations required by His Holiness. The same year (1267) he finished his "Opus Minus", a recapitulation of the main thoughts of the "Opus Majus", to facilitate the pope's reading or to submit to him an epitome of the first work if it should be lost. With the same object, and because in the first two works some ideas were but hastily treated, he was induced to compose a third work, the "Opus Tertium"; in this, sent to the pope before his death (1268), he treats in a still more extensive manner the whole material he had spoken of in his preceding works. Unfortunately his friend Clement IV died too soon, without having been able to put into practice the counsels given by Bacon. About the rest of Roger's life we are not well informed. The "Chronica XXIV Generalium Ordinis Minorum" says that "the Minister General Jerome of Ascoli [afterwards Pope Nicholas IV] on the advice of many brethren condemned and rejected the doctrine of the English brother Roger Bacon, Doctor of Divinity, which contains many suspect innovations, by reason of which Roger was imprisoned" (see the "Chronica" printed in "Analecta Franciscana", III, 360). The assertion of modern writers, that Bacon was imprisoned fourteen or fifteen years, although he had proved his orthodoxy by the work "De nullitate magiæ", has no foundation in ancient sources. Some authors connect the fact of imprisonment related in the "Chronica" with the proscription of 219 theses by Stephen Tempier, Bishop of Paris, which took place 7 March, 1277 (Denifle, "Chartularium Universitatis Pariensis", I, 543, 560). Indeed it was not very difficult to find some "suspect innovation" in Bacon's writings, especially with regard to the physical sciences. As F. Mandonnet, O.P., proves, one of his incriminated books or pamphlets was his "Speculum Astronomiæ", written in 1277, hitherto falsely ascribed to Blessed Albert the Great [Opera Omnia, ed. Vives, Paris, X, 629 sq.; cf. Mandonnet, "Roger Bacon et le Speculum Astronomiæ (1277) in "Revue Néo-Scolastique", XVII, Louvain, 1910, 313-35]. Such and other questions are not yet ripe for judgment; but it is to be hoped that the newly awakened interest in Baconian studies and investigations will clear up more and more what is still obscure in Roger's life. The writings attributed to Bacon by some authors amount to about eighty; many (e.g. "Epistola de magnete", composed by Petrus Peregrinus de Maricourt) are spurious, while many are only treatises republished separately under new titles. Other writings or parts of writings certainly composed by him were put in circulation under the name of other scholars, and his claim to their authorship can be established only from internal reasons of style and doctrine. Other treatises still lie in the dust of the great European libraries, especially of England, France, and Italy. Much remains to be done before we can expect an edition of the "Opera Omnia" of Roger Bacon. For the present the following statements may suffice. Before Bacon entered the order he had written many essays and treatises on the subjects he taught in the school, for his pupils only, or for friends who had requested him to do so, as he confesses in his letter of dedication of the "Opus Majus" sent to the pope: "Multa in alio statu conscripseram propter juvenum rudimenta" (the letter was discovered in the Vatican Library by Abbot Gasquet, O.S.B., and first published by him in the "English Historical Review", 1897, under the title "An unpublished fragment of a work by Roger Bacon", 494 sq.; for the words above cited, see p. 500). To this period seem to belong some commentaries on the writings of Aristotle and perhaps the little treatise "De mirabili potestate artis et naturæ et de nullitate magiæ" (Paris, 1542; Oxford, 1604; London, 1859). The same work was printed under the title "Epistola de secretis operibus artis et naturæ" (Hamburg, 1608, 1618). After joining the order, or more exactly from about the years 1256-57, he did not compose works of any great importance or extent, but only occasional essays requested by friends, as he says in the above-mentioned letter, "now about this science, now about another one", and only more transitorio (see "Eng. Hist. Rev.", 1897, 500). In the earlier part of his life he probably composed also "De termino pascali" (see letter of Clement IV in "Bull. Franc.", III, 89); for it is cited in another work, "Computus naturalium", assigned to 1263 by Charles ("Roger Bacon. Sa vie, etc.", Paris, 1861, p. 78; cf. pp. 334 sqq.). The most important of all his writings are the "Opus Majus", the "Opus Minus", and the "Tertium". The "Opus Majus" deals in seven parts with (1) the obstacles to real wisdom and truth, viz. errors and their sources; (2) the relation between theology and philosophy, taken in its widest sense as comprising all sciences not strictly philosophical: here he proves that all sciences are founded on the sacred sciences, especially on Holy Scripture; (3) the necessity of studying zealously the Biblical languages, as without them it is impossible to bring out the treasure hidden in Holy Writ; (4) mathematics and their relation and application to the sacred sciences, particularly Holy Scripture; here he seizes an opportunity to speak of Biblical geography and of astronomy (if these parts really belong to the "Opus Majus"); (5) optics or perspective; (6) the experimental sciences; (7) moral philosophy or ethics. The "Opus Majus" was first edited by Samuel Jebb, London, 1733, afterwards at Venice, 1750, by the Franciscan Fathers. As both editions were incomplete, it was edited recently by J. H. Bridges, Oxford, 1900 (The 'Opus Majus' of Roger Bacon, edited with introduction and analytical table," in 2 vols.); the first three parts of it were republished the same year by this author in a supplementary volume, containing a more correct and revised text. It is to be regretted that this edition is not so critical and accurate as it might have been. As already noted, Bacon's letter of dedication to the pope was found and published first by Dom Gasquet; indeed the dedication and introduction is wanting in the hitherto extant editions of the "Opus Majus", whereas the "Opus Minus" and "Opus Tertium" are accompanied with a preface by Bacon (see "Acta Ord. Min.", Quaracchi, 1898, where the letter is reprinted). Of the "Opus Minus", the relation of which to the "Opus Majus" has been mentioned, much has been lost. Originally it had nine parts, one of which must have been a treatise on alchemy, both speculative and practical; there was another entitled "The seven sins in the study of theology". All fragments hitherto found have been published by J. S. Brewer, "Fr. R. Bacon opp. quædam hactenus inedita", vol. I (the only one) containing: (1) "Opus Tertium"; (2) "Opus Minus"; (3) "Compendium Philos." The appendix adds "De secretis artis et naturæ operibus et de nullitate magiæ", London, 1859 (Rerum Britann. med. æv. Script.). The aim of the "Opus Tertium" is clearly pointed out by Bacon himself: "As these reasons [profoundness of truth and its difficulty] have induced me to compose the Second Writing as a complement facilitating the understanding of the First Work, so on account of them I have written this Third Work to give understanding and completeness to both works; for many things are here added for the sake of wisdom which are not found in the other writings ("Opus Tertium", I, ed. Brewer, 6). Consequently this work must be considered, in the author's own opinion, as the most perfect of all the compositions sent to the pope; therefore it is a real misfortune that half of it is lost. The parts we possess contain many autobiographical items. All parts known in 1859 were published by Brewer (see above). One fragment dealing with natural sciences and moral philosophy has been edited for the first time by Duhem ("Un fragment inédit de l'Opus Tertium de Roger Bacon précédé d'une étude sur ce fragment", Quaracchi, 1909); another (Quarta pars communium naturalis philos.) by Höver (Commer's "Jahrb. für Philos. u. speculative Theol.", XXV, 1911, pp. 277-320). Bacon often speaks of his "Scriptum principale". Was this a work quite different from the others we know? In many texts the expression only means the "Opus Majus", as becomes evident by its antithesis to the "Opus Minus" and "Opus Tertium". But there are some other sentences where the expression seems to denote a work quite different from the three just mentioned, viz. one which Bacon had the intention of writing and for which these works as well as his proeambula were only the preparation. If we may conclude from some of his expressions we can reconstruct the plan of this grand encyclopædia: it was conceived as comprising four volumes, the first of which was to deal with grammar (of the several languages he speaks of) and logic; the second with mathematics (arithmetic and geometry), astronomy, and music; the third with natural sciences, perspective, astrology, the laws of gravity, alchemy, agriculture, medicine, and the experimental sciences; the fourth with metaphysics and moral philosophy (see Delorme in "Dict. de Theol.", s. v. Bacon, Roger; Brewer, pp. 1 sq.; Charles, 370 sq., and particularly Bridges, I, xliii sq.). It is even possible that some treatises, the connection of which with the three works ("Opus Majus", "Opus Minus", "Opus Tertium") or others is not evident, were parts of the "Scriptum principale"; see Bridges, II, 405 sq., to which is added "Tractatus Fr. Rogeri Bacon de multiplicatione specierum", which seems to have belonged originally to a work of greater extent. Here may be mentioned some writings hitherto unknown, now for the first time published by Robert Steele: "Opera hactenus inedita Rogeri Baconi. Fasc. I: Metaphysica Fratris Rogeri ordinis fratrum minorum. De viciis contractis in studio theologiæ, omnia quæ supersunt nunc primum edidit R. St.", London, 1905; Fasc. II: Liber primus communium naturalium Fratris Rogeri, partes I et II", Oxford, 1909. Another writing of Bacon, "Compendium studii philosophiæ", was composed during the pontificate of Gregory X who succeeded Clement IV (1271-76), as Bacon speaks of this last-named pope as the "predecessor istius Papæ" (chap. iii). It has been published, as far as it is extant, by Brewer in the above-mentioned work. He repeats there the ideas already touched upon in his former works, as for instance the causes of human ignorance, necessity of learning foreign languages, especially Hebrew, Arabic, and Greek; as a specimen are given the elements of Greek grammar. About the same time (1277) Bacon wrote the fatal "Speculum Astronomiæ" mentioned above. And two years before his death he composed his "compendium studii theologiæ" (in our days published for the first time in "British Society of Franciscan Studies", III, Aberdeen, 1911), where he set forth as in a last scientific confession of faith the ideas and principles which had animated him during his long life; he had nothing to revoke, nothing to change. Other works and pamphlets cannot be attributed with certainty to any definite period of his life. To this category belong the "Epistola de laude Scripturarum", published in part by Henry Wharton in the appendix (auctarium) of "Jacobi Usserii Armachani Historia Dogmatica de Scripturis et sacris vernaculis" (London, 1689), 420 sq. In addition there is both a Greek and a Hebrew grammar, the last of which is known only in some fragments: "The Greek grammar of Roger Bacon and a fragment of his Hebrew Grammar, edited from the MSS., with an introduction and notes", Cambridge, 1902. Some specimens of the Greek Grammar, as preserved in a MS. of Corpus Christi College, Oxford, had been published two years before by J. L. Heiberg in "Byzantinische Zeitschrift", IX, 1900, 479-91. The above-mentioned edition of the two grammars cannot be considered very critical (see the severe criticism by Heiberg, ibid., XII, 1903, 343-47). Here we may add Bacon's "Speculum Alchemiæ", Nuremberg, 1614 (Libellus do alchimia cui titulus : Spec. Alchem.); it was translated into French by Jacques Girard de Tournus, under the title "Miroir d'alquimie", Lyons, 1557. Some treatises dealing with chemistry were printed in 1620 together in one volume containing: (1) "Breve Breviarium de dono Dei"; (2) "Verbum abbreviatum de Leone viridi"; (3) "Secretum secretorum naturæ de laude lapidis philosophorum"; (4) "Tractatus trium verborum"; (5) "Alchimia major". But it is possible that some of these and several other treatises attributed to Bacon are parts of works already mentioned, as are essays "De situ orbis", "De regionibus mundi", "De situ Palæstinæ", "De locis sacris", "Descriptiones locorum mundi", "Summa grammaticalis" (see Golubovich, "Biblioteca bio-bibliografica della Terra Santa e dell'Oriente Francescano", Quaracchi, 1906, I, 268 sq.). If we now examine Bacon's scientific systems and leading principles, his aims and his hobby, so to say, we find that the burden not only of the writings sent to the pope, but also of all his writings was: ecclesiastical study must be reformed. All his ideas and principles must be considered in the light of this thesis. He openly exposes the "sins" of his time in the study of theology, which are seven, as he had proved, in the "Opus Majus". Though this part has been lost, we can reconstruct his arrangement with the aid of the "Opus Minus" and "Opus Tertium". The first sin is the preponderance of (speculative) philosophy. Theology is a Divine science, hence it must be based on Divine principles and treat questions touching Divinity, and not exhaust itself in philosophical cavils and distinctions. The second sin is ignorance of the sciences most suitable and necessary to theologians; they study only Latin grammar, logic, natural philosophy (very superficially!) and a part of metaphysics: four sciences very unimportant, scientiæ viles. Other sciences more necessary, foreign (Oriental) languages, mathematics, alchemy, chemistry, physics, experimental sciences, and moral philosophy, they neglect. A third sin is the defective knowledge of even the four sciences which they cultivate: their ideas are full of errors and misconceptions, because they have no means to get at the real understanding of the authors from whom they draw all their knowledge, since their writings abound in Greek, Hebrew, and Arabic expressions. Even the greatest and most highly-esteemed theologians show in their works to what an extent the evil has spread. Another sin is the preference for the "Liber Sententiarum" and the disregard of other theological matters, especially Holy Scriptures; he complains: "The one who explains the 'Book of the Sentences' is honoured by all, whereas the lector of Holy Scripture is neglected; for to the expounder of the Sentences there is granted a commodious hour for lecturing at his own will, and if he belongs to an order, a companion and a special room; whilst the lector of Holy Scripture is denied all this and must beg the hour for his lecture to be given at the pleasure of the expounder of the Sentences. Elsewhere the lector of the Sentences holds disputations and is called master, whereas the lector of the [Biblical] test is not allowed to dispute" ("Opus Minus", ed. Brewer, 328 sq.). Such a method, he continues, is inexplicable and very injurious to the Sacred Text which contains the word of God, and the exposition of which would offer many occasions to speak about matters now treated in the several "Summæ Sententiarum". Still more disastrous is the fifth sin: the text of Holy Writ is horribly corrupted, especially in the "exemplar Parisiense", that is to say the Biblical text used at the University of Paris and spread by its students over the whole world. Confusion has been increased by many scholars or religious orders, who in their endeavours to correct the Sacred Text, in default of a sound method, have in reality only augmented the divergences; as every one presumes to change anything "he does not understand, a thing he would not dare to do with the books of the classical poets", the world is full of "correctors or rather corruptors". The worst of all sins is the consequence of the foregoing: the falsity or doubtfulness of the literal sense (sensus litteralis) and consequently of the spiritual meaning (sensus spiritualis); for when the literal sense is wrong, the spiritual sense cannot be right, since it is necessarily based upon the literal sense. The reasons of this false exposition are the corruption of the sacred text and ignorance of the Biblical languages. For how can they get the real meaning of Holy Writ without this knowledge, as the Latin versions are full of Greek and Hebrew idioms? The seventh sin is the radically false method of preaching: instead of breaking to the faithful the Bread of Life by expounding the commandments of God and inculcating their duties, the preachers content themselves with divisions of the arbor Porphyriana, with the jingle of words and quibbles. They are even ignorant of the rules of eloquence, and often prelates who during their course of study were not instructed in preaching, when obliged to speak in church, beg the copy-books of the younger men, which are full of bombast and ridiculous divisions, serving only to "stimulate the hearers to all curiosity of mind, but do not elevate the affection towards good" ("Opus Tertium", Brewer, 309 sq.). Exceptions are very few, as for instance Friar Bertholdus Alemannus (Ratisbon) who alone has more effect than all the friars of both orders combined (Friars Minor and Preachers). Eloquence ought to be accompanied by science, and science by eloquence; for "science without eloquence is like a sharp sword in the hands of a paralytic, whilst eloquence without science is a sharp sword in the hands of a furious man" ("Sapientia sine eloquentia est quasi gladius acutus in manu paralytici, sicut eloquentia expers sapientiæ est quasi gladius acutus in manu furiosi"; "Opus Tertium, I, Brewer, 4). But far from being an idle fault-finder who only demolished without being able to build up, Bacon makes proposals extremely fit and efficacious, the only failure of which was that they were never put into general practice, by reason of the premature death of the pope. Bacon himself and his pupils, such as John of Paris, whom he praises highly, William of Mara, Gerard Huy, and others are a striking argument that his proposals were no Utopian fancies: they showed in their own persons what in their idea a theologian should be. First of all, if one wishes to get wisdom, he must take care not to fall into the four errors which usually prevent even learned men from attaining the summit of wisdom, viz. "the example of weak and unreliable authority, continuance of custom, regard to the opinion of the unlearned, and concealing one's own ignorance, together with the exhibition of apparent wisdom" ("Fragilis et indignæ autoritatis exemplum, consuetudinis diuturnitas, vulgi sensus imperiti, et propriæ ignorantiæ occultatio cum ostentatione sapientiæ apparentis"; "Opus Majus", I, Bridges, 1, 2). Thus having eliminated "the four general causes of all human ignorance", one must be convinced that all science has its source in revelation both oral and written. Holy Scripture especially is an inexhaustible fountain of truth from which all human philosophers, even the heathen, drew their knowledge, immediately or mediately; therefore no science, whether profane or sacred, can be true if contrary to Holy Writ (see "English Hist. Rev.", 1897, 508 sq.; "Opus Tertium", XXIV, Brewer, 87 sq.). This conviction having taken root, we must consider the means of attaining wisdom. Among those which lead to the summit are to be mentioned in the first place the languages, Latin, Greek, Hebrew, and Arabic. Latin does not suffice, as there are many useful works written in other languages and not yet translated, or badly translated, into Latin. Even in the best versions of scientific works, as for instance of Greek and Arabic philosophers, or of the Scriptures, as also in the Liturgy, there are still some foreign expressions retained purposely or by necessity, it being impossible to express in Latin all nuances of foreign texts. It would be very interesting to review all the other reasons adduced by Bacon proving the advantage or even necessity of foreign languages for ecclesiastical, social, and political purposes, or to follow his investigations into the physiological conditions of language or into what might have been the original one spoken by man. He distinguishes three degrees of linguistic knowledge; theologians are not obliged to reach the second degree, which would enable them to translate a foreign text into their own language, or the third one which is still more difficult of attainment and which would enable them to speak this language as their own. Nevertheless the difficulties of reaching even the highest degree are not as insurmountable as is commonly supposed; it depends only on the method followed by the master, and as there are very few scholars who follow a sound method, it is not to be wondered at that perfect knowledge of foreign languages is so rarely found among theologians (see "Opus Tertium", XX, Brewer, 64 sq.; "Compendium Studii phil.", VI, Brewer, 433 sq.). On this point, and in general of Roger's attitude towards Biblical studies, see the present author's article "De Fr. Roger Bacon ejusque sententia de rebus biblicis" in "Archivum Franciscanum Historicum", III, Quaracchi, 1910, 3-22; 185-213. Besides the languages there are other means, e.g., mathematics, optics, the experimental sciences, and moral philosophy, the study of which is absolutely necessary for every priest, as Bacon shows at length. He takes special pains in applying these sciences to Holy Scripture and the dogmas of faith. These are pages so wonderful and evincing by their train of thought and the drawings inserted here and there such a knowledge of the subject matter, that we can easily understand modern scholars saying that Bacon was born out of due time, or, with regard to the asserted imprisonment, that he belonged to that class of men who were crushed by the wheel of their time as they endeavoured to set it going more quickly. It is in these treatises (and other works of the same kind) that Bacon speaks of the reflection of light, mirages, and burning- mirrors, of the diameters of the celestial bodies and their distances from one another, of their conjunction and eclipses; that he explains the laws of ebb and flow, proves the Julian calendar to be wrong; he explains the composition and effects of gunpowder, discusses and affirms the possibility of steam- vessels and aerostats, of microscopes and telescopes, and some other inventions made many centuries later. Subsequent ages have done him more justice in recognizing his merits in the field of natural science. John Dee, for instance, who addressed (1582) a memorial on the reformation of the calendar to Queen Elizabeth, speaking of those who had advocated this change, says: "None hath done it more earnestly, neither with better reason and skill, than hath a subject of this British Sceptre Royal done, named as some think David Dee of Radik, but otherwise and most commonly (upon his name altered at the alteration of state into friarly profession) called Roger Bacon: who at large wrote thereof divers treatises and discourses to Pope Clement the Fifth [sic ] about the year of our Lord, 1267. To whom he wrote and sent also great volumes exquisitely compiled of all sciences and singularities, philosophical and mathematical, as they might be available to the state of Christ his Catholic Church". Dee then remarks that Paul of Middleburg, in "Paulina de recta Paschæ celebratione", had made great use of Bacon's work: "His great volume is more than half thereof written (though not acknowledged) by such order and method generally and particularly as our Roger Bacon laid out for the handling of the matter" (cited by Bridges, "Opus Majus", I, p. xxxiv). Longer time was needed before Bacon's merits in the field of theological and philosophical sciences were acknowledged. Nowadays it is impossible to speak or write about the methods and course of lectures in ecclesiastical schools of the Middle Ages, or on the efforts of revision and correction of the Latin Bible made before the Council of Trent, or on the study of Oriental languages urged by some scholars before the Council of Vienne, without referring to the efforts made by Bacon. In our own day, more thoroughly than at the Council of Trent, measures are taken in accordance with Bacon's demand that the further corruption of the Latin text of Holy Scripture should be prevented by the pope's authority, and that the most scientific method should be applied to the restoration of St. Jerome's version of the Vulgate. Much may be accomplished even now by applying Bacon's principles, viz.: (1) unity of action under authority; (2) a thorough consultation of the most ancient manuscripts; (3) the study of Hebrew and Greek to help where the best Latin manuscripts left room for doubt; (4) a thorough knowledge of Latin grammar and construction; (5) great care in distinguishing between St. Jerome's readings and those of the more ancient version (see "Opus Tertium", XXV, Brewer, 93 sq.; Gasquet, "English Biblical Criticism in the Thirteenth Century" in "The Dublin Review", CXX, 1898, 15). But there are still some prejudices among learned men, especially with regard to Bacon's orthodoxy and his attitude towards Scholastic philosophy. It is true that he speaks in terms not very flattering of the Scholastics, and even of their leaders. His style is not the ordinary Scholastic style proceeding by inductions and syllogisms in the strictest form; he speaks and writes fluently, clearly expressing his thoughts as a modern scholar treating the same subject might write. But no one who studies his works can deny that Bacon was thoroughly trained in Scholastic philosophy. Like the other Scholastics, he esteems Aristotle highly, while blaming the defective Latin versions of his works and some of his views on natural philosophy. Bacon is familiar with the subjects under discussion, and it may be of interest to note that in many cases he agrees with Duns Scotus against other Scholastics, particularly regarding matter and form and the intellectus agens which he proves not to be distinct substantially from the intellectus possibilis ("Opus Majus", II, V; "Opus Tertium", XXIII). It would be difficult to find any other scholar who shows such a profound knowledge of the Arabic philosophers as Bacon does. Here appears the aim of his philosophical works, to make Christian philosophy acquainted with the Arabic philosophers. He is an enemy only of the extravagances of Scholasticism, the subtleties and fruitless quarrels, to the neglect of matters much more useful or necessary and the exaltation of philosophy over theology. Far from being hostile to true philosophy, he bestows a lavish praise on it. None could delineate more clearly and convincingly than he, what ought to be the relation between theology and philosophy, what profit they yield and what services they render to each other, how true philosophy is the best apology of Christian faith (see especially "Opus Majus", II and VII; "Compend. studii philos."). Bacon is sometimes not very correct in his expressions; there may even be some ideas that are dangerous or open to suspicion (e.g. his conviction that a real influence upon the human mind and liberty and on human fate is exerted by the celestial bodies etc.). But there is no real error in matters of faith, and Bacon repeatedly asks the reader not to confound his physics with divination, his chemistry with alchemy, his astronomy with astrology; and certainly he submitted with all willingness his writings to the judgment of the Church. It is moving to note the reverence he displayed for the pope. Likewise he shows always the highest veneration towards the Fathers of the Church; and whilst his criticism often becomes violent when he blames the most eminent of his contemporaries, he never speaks or writes any word of disregard of the Fathers or ancient Doctors of the Church, even when not approving their opinion; he esteemed them highly and had acquired such a knowledge of their writings that he was no way surpassed by any of his great rivals. Bacon was a faithful scholar of open character who frankly uttered what he thought, who was not afraid to blame whatsoever and whomsoever he believed to deserve censure, a scholar who was in advance of his age by centuries. His iron will surmounted all difficulties and enabled him to acquire a knowledge so far surpassing the average science of his age, that he must be reckoned among the most eminent scholars of all times. Of the vast Baconian bibliography we can mention only the most important books and articles in so far as we have made use of them. Besides those already cited we must mention: BALÆUS, Script. illustr. maiorus Brytann. Catalogus (Basle, 1577); Anecdota Oxon. Index Britannicæ SS. quos . . . collegit Joan. Balæus, ed. POOLE AND BATESON (OXFORD, 1902----); WOOD, Hist. et antiq. Univers. Oxon., I (Oxford, 1674); IDEM, Athenæ Oxon. (London, 1721), new ed. by BLISS (4 vols., London, 1813-20); WHARTON, Anglia sacra (London, 1691); HODY, De Bibliorum text. original., versionibus græc. et latina Vulgata, III (Oxford, 1705); LELANDUS, Comment. de Scriptor. Brittanicis, ed. HALL (Oxford, 1709); OUDIN, Comment. de Script. Ecclesiæ antiq., I (Frankfort, 1722), II-III (Leipzig, 1722); WADDING-FONSECA, Annales Ord. Min., IV-V; WADDING, Scriptores O. M. (Rome, 1650, 1806, 1906); TANNER, Bibl. Britann.-Hibern. (London, 1748); SBARALEA, Supplement. ad SS. O. M. (Rome, 1806); BERGER, De l'hist. de la Vulgate en France (Paris, 1887); IDEM, Quam notitiam linguæ hebr. habuerunt christiani med. ævi (Paris, 1893); cf. the criticism of this book by SOURY in Bibl. de l'Ecole des Chartes, LIV (1893), 733-38; DENIFLE, Die Handschr. der Bibel-Corrector. des 13. Jahrh. in Archiv f. Lit.- u. Kirchengesch. des Mittelalters, IV, 263 sqq.; 471 sqq.; DÖRING, Die beiden Bacon in Archiv f. Gesch. d. Philos., XVII, (1904), 3 sqq.; FERET, Les emprisonnements de R. Bacon in Revue des quest. histor., L (1891), 119-42; IDEM, La faculté de théol. de Paris (4 vols., Paris, 1894-96); FLÜGEL, R. Bacons Stellung in d. Gesch. d. Philologie in Philos. Studien, XIX (1902), 164 sqq.; HEITZ, Essai histor. sur les rapports entre la philos. et la foi, de Bérenger de Tours à St. Thomas (Paris, 1909), 117 sqq.; HIRSCH, Early English Hebraists: R. Bacon and his Predecessors in The Jewish Quarterly Review (Oct., 1890), reprinted in IDEM, A Book of Essays (London, 1905), 1-72; Hist. de la France, XX (Paris, 1842), 227 sqq.; HOFFMANS, La synthèse doctrinale de R. B. in Archiv f.Gesch. d. Philos. (Berne, 1907); IDEM, L'intuition mystique de la science in Revue Néo-Scholastuque (1909), 370 sqq. (cf. 1906, 371 sqq.; 1908, 474 sqq.; 1909, 33 sqq.); JARRETT, A Thirteenth-Century Revision Committee of the Bible in Irish Theological Quarterly, IV (Maynooth, 1910), 56 sqq.; JOURDAIN, Discussion de quelques points de la biogr. de R. B. in Comptes rendus Acad. Inscr. et Belles-Lettres, I (1873), 309 sqq.; KREMBS, R. B.'s Optik in Natur u. Offenbarung (1900); LANGEN, R. Bacon in Histor. Zeitschr., LI (1883), 434-50; MARTIN, La Vulgate latine au XIIIe siècle d'après R. B. (Paris, 1888); Mon. Germ. Hist.: SS., XXVIII, 569 sqq.; NARBEY, Le moine R. B. et le mouvement scientifque au XIIIe siècle in Revue des quest. histor., XXXV (1894), 115 sqq.; PARROT, R. B., sa personne, son génie, etc. (Paris, 1894); PESCH, De inspiratione S. Scripturæ (Freiburg, 1906), 163 sq.; PICAVET, Les éditions de R. B. in Journal des Savants (1905), 362-69; IDEM, Deux directions de la théol. et de l'exégèse au XIIIe siècle. Thomas et Bacon in Revue de l'hist. des religions (1905), 172, or printed separately (Paris, 1905); POHL, Das Verhältnis der Philos. zur Theol. bei R. B. (Neustrelitz, 1893); SAISSET, R. B., sa vie et son oeuvre in Revue des deux mondes, XXXIV, (1861), 361-91; IDEM, Précurseurs et disciples de Descartes (Paris, 1862); SALEMBIER, Une page inédite de l'hist. de la Vulgate (Amiens, 1890); SCHNEIDER, R. B., eine Monographie als Beitrag zur Gesch der Philos. des 13. Jahr. aus den Quellen (Augsburg, 1873); SIEBERT, R. B., sein Leben u. seine Philos. (Marburg, 1861); STARHAHN, Das opus maius des R. B. nach seinem Inhalt u. seiner Bebeutung f. d. Wissenschaft betrachtet in Kirchl. Monatsschr., XII (1893), 276-86; STRUNZ, Gesch. der Naturwissenschaften im Mittelalter (Stuttgart, 1910), 93-99; UBALD, Franciscan England in the Past in Franciscan Annals, XXXIII (1908), 369-71; XXXIV, (1909), 11-14; VALDARNINI, Esperienza e ragionamento in R. B. (Rome, 1896); VERCELLONE, Dissertazioni accademiche di vario argumento (Rome, 1864); VOGL, Die Physik R. B.'s (Erlangen, 1906); WERNER, Kosmologie u. allgem. Naturlehre R. B.'s Psychol., Erkenntniss- u. Wissenschaftslehre des R. B. in Sitzungsber. der k. k. Akad. d. W., XCIII (Vienna), 467-576; XCIV, 489-612; WITHEFORD, Bacon as an Interpreter of Holy Scripture inExpositor (1897), 349-60; WULF, (DE), Hist. de la philos. médiévale (2nd ed., Louvain, 1905), 419-27. THEOPHILUS WITZEL Ven. Roger Cadwallador Ven. Roger Cadwallador English martyr, b. at Stretton Sugwas, near Hereford, in 1568; executed at Leominster, 27 Aug., 1610. He was ordained subdeacon at Reims, 21 Sept., 1591, and deacon the following February, and in Aug., 1592, was sent to the English College at Valladolid, where he was ordained priest. Returning to England in 1594, he laboured in Herefordshire with good success especially among the poor for about sixteen years. Search was made for him in June, 1605, but it was not till Easter, 1610, that he was arrested at the house of Mrs. Winefride Scroope, widow, within eight miles of Hereford. He was then brought before the Bishop, Dr. Robert Bennet, who committed him to Hereford gaol where he was loaded with irons night and day. On being transferred to Leominster gaol he was obliged to walk all the way in shackles, though a boy was permitted to go by his side and bear up by a string the weight of some iron links which were wired to the shackles. On his arrival, he was treated with the greatest inhumanity by his gaoler. He was condemned, merely for being a priest, some months before he suffered. A very full account of his sufferings in prison and of his martyrdom is given by Challoner. He hung very long, suffering great pain, owing to the unskilfulness of the hangman, and was eventually cut down and butchered alive. Pits praises his great knowledge of Greek, from which he translated Theodoret's "Philotheus, or the lives of the Father of the Syrian deserts"; but it does not appear when or where this translation was published. JOHN B. WAINEWRIGHT Roger of Hoveden Roger of Hoveden Chronicler, was probably a native of Hoveden, or, as it is now called, Howden, in Yorkshire. From the fact that his chronicle ends rather abruptly in 1201 it is inferred that he must have died or been stricken with some mortal disease in that year. He was certainly a man of importance in his day. He was a king's clerk (clericus regis) in the time of Henry II, and seems to have been attached to the court as early as 1173, while he was also despatched on confidential missions, as for example to the chiefs of Galloway in 1174. In 1189 he served as an itinerant justice in the north, but he probably retired from public life after the death of Henry II, and it has been suggested that he became parish priest of his native village, Howden, devoting the rest of his life to the compilation of his chronicle. Like most other historical writings of that date the earlier portion of his work is little more than a transcript of some one narrative to which he had more convenient access or which he considered specially worthy of confidence. His authority from 732 down to 1154 was an abstract, still extant in manuscript, "Historia Saxonum vel Anglorum post obituary Bedae". From 1154 to 1192 he uses his authorities much more freely, basing his narrative upon the well-known "Gesta Henrici", commonly attributed to Benedict of Peterborough. But from 1192 to 1201 his work is all his own, and of the highest value. Hoveden had a great appreciation of the importance of documentary evidence, and we should be very ill informed regarding the political history of the last quarter of the twelfth century if it were not for the state papers, etc., which Hoveden inserts and of which, no doubt, his earlier connection with the chancery and its officials enabled him to obtain copies. As a chronicler, he was impartial and accurate. His profoundly religious character made him somewhat credulous, but there is no reason, as even his editor, Bishop Stubbs, admits, to regard him on that account as an untrustworthy authority. The one reliable edition of Hoveden is that prepared by STUBBS for the Rolls Series in four vols., 1868-71. A full account of Hoveden and his works is, given in the preface to these vols. HERBERT THURSTON Roger of Wendover Roger of Wendover Benedictine monk, date of birth unknown; d. 1236, the first of the great chroniclers of St. Albans Abbey. He seems to have been a native of Wendover in Buckinghamshire and must have enjoyed some little consideration among his brethren as he was appointed prior of the cell of Belvoir, but from this office he was deposed and retired to St. Albans, where he probably wrote his chronicle, known as the "Flores Historiarum", extending from the Creation to 1235. From the year 1202 it is an original and valuable authority, but the whole material has been worked over and in a sense re-edited with editions by Matthew Paris (q.v.) in his "Chronica Majora". Wendover is less prejudiced than Paris, but he is also less picturesque, and whereas Paris in his generalizations and inferences as to the causes of events anticipates the scope of the modern historian, Wendover is content to discharge the functions of a simple chronicler. The "Flores Historiarum" was edited for the English Historical Society in 1841 by H. O. Coxe in five volumes, beginning with the year 447, when Wendover for the first time turns directly to the history of Britain. But in 1886-1889 the more valuable part of the work (from 1154 to 1235) was re-edited by H. G. Hewlett as part of the Rolls Series in three volumes. HUNT in Dict. Nat. Biog., s. v. WENDOVER; LUARD, prefaces to the earlier volumes of MATTHEW PARIS, Chronica Majora in the Rolls Series; HARDY, Catalogue of Materials of Brit. Hist., III (London, 1871), and the prefaces to the editions of Flores Historiarum. HERBERT THURSTON Peter Roh Peter Roh Born at Conthey (Gunthis) in the canton of Valais (French Switzerland), 14 August, 1811; d. at Bonn, 17 May, 1872. Up to his thirteenth year he spoke only French, so that he had to learn German from a German priest in the vicinity before he was able to begin his gymnasial studies in the boarding-school kept by the Jesuits at Brig in Switzerland. Later he became a day-pupil at the gymnasium kept by the Jesuits at Sittin. While here he resolved to enter the Society of Jesus (1829); strange to say the external means of bringing him to this decision was the reading of Pascal's pamphlet "Monita Secreta". He taught the lower gymnasial classes at the lyceum at Fribourg. During these years of study Roh showed two characteristic qualities: the talent of imparting knowledge in a clear and convincing manner, and an unusual gift for oratory. These abilities determined his future work to be that of a teacher and a preacher. He was first (1842-5) professor of dogmatics at Fribourg, then at the academy at Lucerne which had just been given to the Jesuits. At the same time he preached and aided as opportunity occurred in missions. These labors were interrupted by the breaking out of the war of the Swiss Sonderbund, during which he was military chaplain; but after its unfortunate end he was obliged to flee into Piedmont, from there to Linz and Gries, finally finding a safe refuge at Rappoltsweiler in Alsace as tutor in the family of his countryman and friend Siegwart-Müller, also expatriated. Here he stayed until 1849. A professorship of dogmatics at Louvain only lasted a year. When the missions for the common people were opened in Germany in 1850 his real labors began; as he said himself, "Praise God, I now come into my element." Both friend and foe acknowledge that the success of these missions was largely due to Roh, and his powerful and homely eloquence received the highest praise. He was an extemporaneous speaker; the writing of sermons and addresses was, as he himself confessed, "simply impossible" to him; yet, thoroughly trained in philosophy and theology, he could also write when necessary, as several articles from him in the "Stimmen aus Maria-Laach" prove. His pamphlet "Das alte Lied: der Zweck heiligt die Mittel, im Texte verbessert und auf neue Melodie gesetzt" has preserved a certain reputation until the present day, as Father Roh declared he would give a thousand gulden to the person who could show to the faculty of law of Bonn or Heidelberg a book written by a Jesuit which taught the principle that the end justifies the means. The prize is still unclaimed. Some of his sermons have also been preserved; they were printed against his will from stenographic notes. Father Roh's greatest strength lay in his power of speech and "he was the most powerful and effective preacher of the German tongue that the Jesuits have had in this century". KNABENBAUER, Erinnerungen an P. Peter Roh S. J., reprint of the biography in Stimmen aus Maria-Laach (1872). N. SCHEID Rohault de Fleury Rohault de Fleury A family of French architects and archaeologists of the nineteenth century, of which the most distinguished member was Charles Rohault de Fleury, b. in Paris 23 July, 1801; d. there 11 August, 1875. After a scientific course pursued at the Ecole Polytechnique at Paris, he studied sculpture, but abandoned this study for architecture in 1825. He designed several public and private buildings which adorn one of the most artistic sections of the present Paris and was the author of the first edition of the "Manuel des lois du batiment" published by the Central Society of Architects (Paris, 1862). The last years of his life he devoted to religious archaeology and published the important results of his studies in the following magnificently illustrated works: "Les instruments de la Passion", Paris, 1870 (see CROSS, IV, 531); "L'évangile, études iconographiques et archéologiques", Tours, 1874; "La Sainte Vièrge", Paris, 1878; "Un Tabernacle chrétien du Ve siècle", Arras, 1880; "La Messe, études archéologiques sur ses monuments", Paris, 1883-98. Some of these works were published after his death by his son George (1835-1905) who was himself a prominent archaeological writer. The latter's works treat of Italian art-monuments: "Monuments de Pise au moyen âge", Paris, 1866; "La Toscane au moyen âge, lettres sur l'architecture civile et militaire en 1400", Paris 1874; "Le Latran au moyen âge", Paris 1877. Oeuvres de Charles Rohault de Fleury, architecte (Paris, 1884). N.A. WEBER Rene Francois Rohrbacher Réné François Rohrbacher Ecclesiastical historian, b. at Langatte (Langd) in the present Diocese of Metz, 27 September, 1789; d. in Paris, 17 January, 1856. He studied for several months at Sarrebourg and Phalsebourg (Pfalzburg) and at the age of seventeen had completed his Classical studies. He taught for three years at the college of Phalsebourg; entered in 1810 the ecclesiastical seminary at Nancy, and was ordained priest in 1812. Appointed assistant priest at Insming, he was transferred after six months to Lunéville. A mission which he preached in 1821 at Flavigny led to the organization of a diocesan mission band. Several years later he became a member of the Congregation of St. Peter founded by Félicité and Jean de La Mennais, and from 1827 to 1835 directed the philosophical and theological studies of young ecclesiastics who wished to become the assistants of the two brothers in their religious undertakings. When Felicite de La Mennais refused to submit to the condemnation pronounced against him by Rome, Rohrbacher separated from him and became professor of Church history at the ecclesiastical seminary of Nancy. Later he retired to Paris where he spent the last years of his life. His principal work is his monumental "Histoire Universelle de l'Église Catholique" (Nancy, 1842-49; 2nd ed., Paris, 1849-53). Several other editions were subsequently published and continuations added by Chantrel and Guillaume. Written from an apologetic point of view, the work contributed enormously to the extirpation of Gallicanism in the Church of France. Though at times uncritical and devoid of literary grace, it is of considerable usefulness to the student of history. It was translated into German and partially recast by Hülskamp, Rump, and numerous other writers. (For the other works of Rohrbacher, see Hurter, "Nomenclator Lit.", III [Innsbruck, 1895], 1069-71.) ROHRBACHER, Hist. Univ. de l'Eglise Cath., ed. by GUILLAUME XII, (Paris, 1885), 122-33; MCCAFFREY, Hist. of the Cath. Ch. in the XIX Century, II (Dublin, 1909), I, 60, II, 448, 475. N.A. WEBER Francisco de Rojas y Zorrilla Francisco de Rojas y Zorrilla Spanish dramatic poet, b. at Toledo, 4 Oct., 1607; d. 1680. Authentic information regarding the events of his life is rather fragmentary, but he probably studied at the Universities of Toledo and Salamanca, and for a time followed a military career. When only twenty-five he was well known as a poet, for he is highly spoken of in Montalban's "Para todos" (1632), a fact which shows that he enjoyed popularity, when Lope de Vega, Tirso de Molina, and Calderon were in the height of their fame. The announcement published in 1638 of the assassination of Francisco de Rojas did not refer to the poet, for the first and second parts of his comedies, published by himself at Madrid, bear the dates of 1640 and 1645 respectively. A third part was promised but it never appeared. He was given the mantle of the Order of Santiago in 1644. The writings of Rojas consist of plays and autos sacramentales written alone and in collaboration with Calderon, Coello, Velez, Montalbán, and others. No complete edition of his plays is available, but Mesonero gives a very good selection with biographical notes. Among the best of them are "Del Rey abajo ninguno", "Entre bobos anda el juego", "Donde hay agravio no hay celos", and "Casarse por vengarse", the last of which is claimed to have been the basis of Le Sage's novel, "Gil Blas de Santillane". TICKNOR, History of Spanish Literature (Boston, 1866); MESONERO, Biblioteca de Autores Espanoles, LIV (Madrid, 1866). VENTURA FUENTES John Gage Rokewode John Gage Rokewode Born 13 Sept., 1786; died at Claughton Hall, Lancashire, 14 Oct., 1842. He was the fourth son of Sir Thomas Gage of Hengrave, and took the name Rokewode in 1838 when he succeeded to the Rokewode estates. He was educated at Stonyhurst, and having studied law under Charles Butler he was called to the bar, but never practiced, preferring to devote himself to antiquarian pursuits. He was elected a fellow of the Society of Antiquaries in 1818, and was director from 1829 till 1842. He also became a fellow of the Royal Society. In 1822 he published "The History and Antiquities of Hengrave in Suffolk" and in 1838 " The History and Antiquities of Suffolk ". His edition of Jocelin de Brakelond's chronicle published by the Camden Society in 1840 furnished Carlyle with much of his materials for "Past and Present" (1843). Many papers by him appeared in "Archaeologia", many of these being republished as separate pamphlets, including the description of the Benedictionals of St. Æthelwold and of Robert of Jumieges; he also printed the genealogy of the Rokewode family with charters relating thereto in "Collectanea Topographica et Genealogica", II. He contributed to the "Orthodox Journal" and the "Catholic Gentleman's Magazine". Many of his MSS. were sold after his death with his valuable library. The Society of Antiquaries possess a bust of him by R.C. Lucas. He died suddenly while out shooting. Orthodox Journal, XV, 276; COOPER in Dict. Nat. Biog. GILLOW, Bibl. Dict. Eng. Caths. EDWIN BURTON Rolduc Rolduc (RODA DUCIS, also Roda, Closterroda or Hertogenrade). Located in S. E. Limburg, Netherlands. It became an Augustinian abbey in 1104 under Ven. Ailbertus, a priest, son of Ammoricus, a nobleman of Antoing, Flanders. Ailbertus is said to have been guided by a vision towards this chosen spot, which was in the domain of Count Adelbert of Saffenberch, who, before Bishop Othert of Liège, turned over the property destined for abbey and church in 1108. Ailbertus was the first abbot (1104-11). Later he went to France where he founded the Abbey of Clairfontaine. Desiring once more to see Rolduc, he died on the way, at Sechtem, near Bonn, 19 Sep., 1122 (Acta SS.). Thirty-eight abbots succeeded Ailbertus, the last one being Peter Joseph Chaineux (1779-1800). The abbey acquired many possessions in the Netherlands, and became the last resting-place of the Dukes of Limburg. It possesses the famous "Catalogue Librorum", made A.D. 1230, containing one hundred and forty theological and eighty-six philosophical and classical works. The beautiful crypt, built by Ailbertus, was blessed 13 Dec., 1106, and in 1108 the church was dedicated to the Blessed Virgin and St Gabriel. In 1122 Pope Calixtus II confirmed by a Bull, preserved in the archives of Rolduc, the donation of the property. The church, completed in 1209, was then solemnly dedicated by Philip, Bishop of Ratzeburg. Dr. R. Corten completed the restoration of the churoh in 1893, and transferred the relics of Ven. Ailbertus into a richly sculptured sarcophagus in the crypt, 1897. The church possesses a particle of the Holy Cross, five inches long, reputed to be authentic and miraculous (Archives of Rolduc, by Abbot Mathias Amezaga); also the body of St. Daphne, virgin and martyr, brought over from the Catacombs of Praetextatus in 1847. Rolduc became the seminary of Liège in 1831, under Right Rev. Cornelius Van Bommel, and the little seminary of Roermond, and academy in 1841. The present institution has an attendance of 420 pupils. HEYENDAL, Annales Rodenses usque ad annum 1700; Diarium rerum memorabilium abbatiae Rodensis in the archives of Aix-la-Chapelle; Acta SS.; HABETS, Geschiedenis van het Bisdom Roermond, III (1875-92); ERNST, Histoire du Limbourg, (Liège, 1837-52); DARIS, Notice Historique sur les eglises du diocese de Liège, XV (Liège, 1894); NEUJEAN, Notice historique sur l'abbaye de Rolduc (Aix-la-Chapelle, 1868); HELYOT, Histoire des ordres monastiques, religieux et militaires, II (Paris, 1714-19); CUYPERS, Revue de l'art chretien (1892); LENNARTZ, Die Augustiner Abtei Klosterrath; KERSTEN, Journal Historique et Litteraire, XIV (Liège); CORTEN, Rolduc in Woord en Beeld (Utrecht, 1902). THEOPHILE STENMANS Hermann Rolfus Hermann Rolfus Catholic educationist, b. at Freiburg, 24 May, 1821; d. at Buhl, near Offenburg, 27 October, 1896. After attending the gymnasium at Freiburg, he studied theology and philology at the university there from 1840 to 1843, and was ordained priest on 31 August, 1844. After he had served for brief periods at various places, he was appointed curate at Thiengen in 1851, curate-in-charge at Reiselfingen in 1855, parish priest at the last named place in 1861, parish priest at Reuthe near Freiburg in 1867 at Sasbach in 1875, and at Buhl in 1892. In 1867 the theological faculty at Freiburg gave him the degree of Doctor of Theology. Rolfus did much for practical Catholic pedagogics, especially in southern Germany, by the work which he edited in conjunction with Adolf Pfister, "Real-Encyclopädie des Erziehungsund Unterrichtswesens nach katholischen Principien" (4 vols., Mainz, 1863-1866; 2nd. ed. 1872-74). A fifth volume ("Ergänzungsband", 1884) was issued by Rolfus alone; a new edition is in course of preparation. Another influential publication was the "Suddeutsches katholisches Schulwochenblatt", which he edited, also jointly with Pfister, from 1861 to 1867. Of his other literary works, the following may be mentioned: "Der Grund des katholischen Glaubens" (Mainz, 1862); "Leitfaden der allgemeinen Weltgeschichte" (Freiburg, 1870; 4th ed., 1896); "Die Galubens- und Sittenlehre der katholischen Kirche" (Einsiedeln, 1875; frequently re-edited), jointly with F. J. Brändle; "Kirchengeschichtliches in chronologischer Reihenfolge von der Zeit des letzten Vaticanischen Concils bis auf unsere Tage" (2 vols., Mainz, 1877-82; 3rd vol. by Sickinger, 1882); "Geschichte des Reiches Gottes auf Erden" (Freiburg, 1878-80; 3rd. ed., 1894-95); "Katholischer Hauskatechismus" (Emsiedeln, 1891-92). In addition to the works mentioned, he also wrote a large number of pedagogic, political, apologetic, and polemical brochures, ascetic treatises, and works for the young. KELLER, Festschrift zum funfzigjahrigen Priesterjubilaum, des hochw. Herrn. Pfarrers u. Geistl. Rats Dr. Hermann Rolfus (Freiburg, im Br., 1894), with prortrait; KNECHT in Badische Biographien, V (Heidelberg, 1906), 670 sq. FRIEDRICH LAUCHERT Richard Rolle de Hampole Richard Rolle de Hampole Solitary and writer, b. at Thornton, Yorkshire, about 1300; d. at Hampole, 29 Sept., 1349. The date 1290, sometimes assigned for his birth-year, is too early, as in a work written after 1326 he alludes to himself as "juvenculus" and "puer", words applicable to a man of under thirty, but not to one over that age. He showed such promise as a school-boy, while living with his father William Rolle, that Thomas de Neville, Archdeacon of Durham, undertook to defray the cost of his education at Oxford. At the age of nineteen he left the university to devote himself to a life of perfection, not desiring to enter any religious order, but with the intention of becoming a hermit. At first he dwelt in a wood near his home, but fearing his family would put him under restraint, he fled from Thornton and wandered about till he was recognized by John de Dalton, who had been his fellow student at Oxford, and who now provided him with a cell and the necessaries for a hermit's life. At Dalton he made great progress in the spiritual life as described by himself in his treatise "De incendio amoris". He spent from three to four years in the purgative and illuminative way and then attained contemplation, passing through three phases which he describes as calor, canor, dulcor. They appeared successively, but once attained they remained with him continually, though he did not feel them all alike or all at the same time. Sometimes the calor prevailed; sometimes the canor, but the dulcor accompanied both. The condition was such, he says, "that I did not think anything like it or anything so holy could be received in this life". After this he wandered from place to place, at one time visiting the anchoress, Dame Margaret Kyrkby, at Anderby, and obtaining from God her cure. Finally he settled at Hampole near the Cistercian nunnery, and there he spent the rest of his life. After his death his tomb was celebrated for miracles, and preparations for his canonization, including the composition of a mass and office in his honour, were made; but the cause was never prosecuted. His writings were extremely popular throughout the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries, and very many MSS. copies of his works are still extant in English libraries. His writings show he was much influenced by the teaching of St. Edmund of Canterbury in the "Speculum Ecclesiae". The Lollards, realizing the power of his influence, tampered with his writings, interpolating passages favouring their errors. To defeat this trickery, the nuns at Hampole kept genuine copies of his works at their house. His chief works are "De emendatione vitae" and "De incendio amoris", both written in Latin, of which English versions by Ricahrd Misyn (1434- 5) have been published by the Early English Text Society, 1896; "Contemplacyons of the drede and love of God" and "Remedy against Temptacyons", both printed by Wynkyn de Worde in 1506; and "The Pricke of Conscience", a poem printed for the Philological Society in 1863. This was his most popular work and MSS. of it are very common. They have been collated by Andreae (Berlin, 1888) and Bulbring (Transactions of Philological Society, 1889-1890). Ten prose treatises found in the Thornton MS. in Lincoln Cathedral Library were published by the Early English Text Society, 1866. "The Form of Perfect Living", "Meditations on the Passion", and many shorter pieces were edited by Horstman (London, 1896). Rolle translated many parts of Scripture into English but only his version of the Psalms has been printed. His English paraphrase of the Psalms and canticles was published in 1884 (Clarendon Press, Oxford). This work of translation is noteworthy in face of the persistent though discredited Protestant tradition ascribing all the credit of translating the Scriptures into English to Wyclif. Latin versions of Rolle's works are very numerous. They were collected into one edition (Paris, 1618) and again reprinted in the "Bibliotheca Patrum Maxima" (Lyons, 1677). Modernized English versions of the Meditations on the Passion have been published by Mgr. Benson in "A Book of the Love of Jesus" (London, 1905) and by the present writer (C. T. S. London, 1906). Breviarium Eccl. Eboracensis. The lessons in the Officium de S. Ricardo, II, are the chief authority for the events of his life. PERRY, Introduction to Rolle's English Prose Treatises (London, 1866); VON ULLMAN, Studien zu Richard Rolle de Hampole in englische Studien (Heilbronn, 1877), VII; VON KRIBEL, Hampole-Studien, ibidem, VIII; ADLER, Ueber die Richard Rolle de Hampole zugeschriebene Paraphrase der sieben Busspsalmen (1885); MIDDENDORFF, Studien uber Richard Rolle (Magdeburg, 1888); HORSTMAN, Richard Rolle of Hampole and his followers (London, 1896); HARVEY, Introduction to the Fire of Love, E.E.T.S. (London, 1896); BENSON, Short Life of Richard Rolle in A Book of the Love of Jesus (London, 1905); INGE, Studies of English Mystics (London, 1906); HODGSON, The Form of Perfect Living (London, 1910). EDWIN BURTON Charles Rollin Charles Rollin Born in Paris, 1661; died there, 1741. The son of a cutler, intended to follow his father's trade, he was remarkable for the piety with which he served Mass and which secured for him a collegiate scholarship. He studied theology and received the tonsure, but not Holy Orders. He was assistant professor, and then professor of rhetoric at the Collège de Plessis; of Latin eloquence at the Collège Royal (1688), and at the age of thirty-three was appointed rector of the university. In 1696 he became principal of the Collège Beauvais, from which post he was dismissed in 1722 because of his opposition to the Bull "Unigenitus". He was a member of the Academy of Inscriptions from 1701. His works were written during his retirement. He was nearly sixty when he began the "Traité des Etudes", sixty-seven when he undertook his "Histoire Ancienne", seventy-seven when he became engaged on his "Histoire Romaine", which death prevented him from finishing. The "Traité des Etudes" (in 12°, 1726-31) explains the method of teaching and studying belles-lettres; it contains ideas which seem hackneyed, but which then were fairly new, e.g. the necessity of studying national history and of making use of school-books written in the vernacular. The "Histoire Ancienne" (1730-38) consists of twelve volumes in 12°. The "Histoire Romaine", of which he was able to finish only five volumes out of the nine composing the work, displays facility, interest, enthusiasm, but lack of a critical spirit. Rollin was a talented writer, though according to his own statement he was sixty years old when he decided to write in French. He was upright and serene, a pious and sincere Christian, whom it is deplorable to find concerned in the ridiculous scenes at the cemetery of St. Médard near the tomb of the deacon Paris. Without the annoyances due to his Jansenism, his pure conscience, sweet gaiety, vigorous health, and the esteem he enjoyed should have made him one of the most fortunate men of his times. TROGNON, Eloge (Paris, 1818); GUENEAU DE MUSSY, Traite des Etudes de Rollin (Paris, 1805); SAINTE-BEUVE, Causeries du lundi, VI (Paris, 1851-62). GEORGES BERTRIN Rolls Series Rolls Series A collection of historical materials of which the general scope is indicated by its official title, "The Chronicles and Memorials of Great Britain and Ireland during the Middle Ages". The publication of the series was undertaken by the British Government in accordance with a scheme submitted in 1857 by the Master of the Rolls (the official Custodian of the Records of the Court of Chancery and of the other Courts), then Sir John Romilly. A previous undertaking of the same kind, the "Monumenta Histories Britannica", had come to grief after the publication of the first volume (1036 folio pages, London, 1848) owing partly to the death of the principal editor, Henry Petrie, partly to its cumbrous form and other causes. Strong representations were, however, made by a very earnest worker in the field of historical research, Rev. Joseph Stevenson (q.v.), and the scheme of 1857 was the direct outcome of this appeal. In the new Series "preference was to be given in the first instance to such materials as were most scarce and valuable", each chronicle was to be edited as if the editor were engaged upon an editio princeps, a brief account was to be provided in a suitable preface of the life and times of the author as well as a description of the manuscripts employed, and the volumes were to be issued in a convenient octavo form. In accordance with this scheme 255 volumes, representing 99 separate works, have now been published. With the exception of the series of legal records known as the "Year Books" of Edward I and Edward III, the further issue of these materials has for some time past been suspended. Almost all the great medieval English chronicles have in turn been included, for it was found that most of the existing editions published by the scholars of the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries were unsatisfactory. It would be impossible here to give a catalogue of the materials edited in the course of this great undertaking. It must be sufficient to mention the magnificent edition of the "Chronica Majora" of Matthew Paris by Luard; the Hoveden, Benedict of Peterborough, Ralph de Diceto, Walter of Coventry, and others, all edited by Bishop Stubbs; the works of Giraldus Cambrensis by Brewer, and the "Materials for the History of St. Thomas Becket" by Canon Robertson. But the scope of the Series is by no means limited to the ordinary English Chroniclers. Legal records and tractates, such as the "Year Books", the "Black Book of the Admiralty", and Bracton's great work "De Legibus et Consuetudinibus Angliaeö; materials of a more or less legendary character relating to Ireland and Scotland, such as Whitley Stokes's edition of "the Tripartite Life of St. Patrick", or the Icelandic Sagas edited by Vigfusson and Dasent; rhymed chronicles like those of Robert of Gloucester and Robert of Brunne in English, and that of Pierre de Langtoft in French; even quasi-philosophical works like those of Friar Roger Bacon and Alexander Neckam, together with folklore materials like the three volumes of "Leechdoms, Worteunning and Starcraft" of Anglo-Saxon times, have all been included in the Series. It need hardly be said that hagiographical documents, dealing for example with the lives of St. Dunstan, St. Edward the Confessor, St. Hugh of Lincoln, St. Thomas, as well as St. Wilfrid and other northern saints, occupy a prominent place in the collection. The vast bulk of the texts thus edited are in Latin, and these are printed without translation. Those in old French, Anglo-Saxon, Irish, Gaelic, Welsh, old Norse, etc. always have a translation annexed. The progress of the Rolls Series may best be traced in the Annual Reports of the Deputy Keeper of the Public Records, but a general account is also given in Gross, The Sources and Literature of English History (New York, 1900); Potthast, Bibliotheca Historieca (Berlin, 1896). HERBERT THURSTON Thomas Rolph Thomas Rolph Surgeon, b. 1800; d. at Portsmouth, 17 Feb., 1858. He was a younger son of Dr. Thomas Rolph and Frances his wife, and brother of John Rolph, the Canadian insurgent. Having qualified as a surgeon, he began to practice in Crutchedfriars, where he came into conflict with the Anglican rector of St. Olave, Hart Street, on the subject of tithes, a dispute which led him to petition the House of Commons on the subject and to publish two pamphlets: "Address to the Citizens of London" and "Letter addressed to the Rev. H.B. Owen, D.D." (1827). He also took a prominent part in Catholic affairs. In 1832 he went to the West Indies, the United States, and Canada, where his brother John had become chairman of committee in the Upper Canada House of Assembly. For a time Thomas Rolph settled in Canada, acting as Government emigration agent, but he returned to England in 1839 and published a series of works on emigration: "Comparative advantages between the United States and Canada for British Settlers" (1842); "Emigrants' Manual" (1843); "Emigration and Colonization" (1844). In his earlier life he had published two pamphlets on the proceedings of the Religious Tract society, and one against phrenology. He was also a constant contributor to the "Truthteller", a Catholic magazine published by William Eusebius Andrews. He spent his last years at Portsmouth where he died of apoplexy. Allibone, Critical Dict. of Eng. Lit. (Philadelphia, 1869-71); Gillow, Bibl. Dict. Eng. Cath., s.v. EDWIN BURTON Roman Catechism Roman Catechism This catechism differs from other summaries of Christian doctrine for the instruction of the people in two points: it is primarily intended for priests having care of souls (ad parochos), and it enjoys an authority equalled by no other catechism. The need of a popular authoritative manual arose from a lack of systematic knowledge among pre-Reformation clergy and the concomitant neglect of religious instruction among the faithful. The Reformers had not been slow in taking advantage of the situation; their popular tracts and catechisms were flooding every country and leading thousands of souls away from the Church. The Fathers of Trent, therefore, "wishing to apply a salutary remedy to this great and pernicious evil, and thinking that the definition of the principal Catholic doctrines was not enough for the purpose, resolved also to publish a formulary and method for teaching the rudiments of the faith, to be used by all legitimate pastors and teachers" (Cat. praef., vii). This resolution was taken in the eighteenth session (26 February, 1562) on the suggestion of St. Charles Borromeo; who was then giving full scope to his zeal for the reformation of the clergy. Pius IV entrusted the composition of the Catechism to four distinguished theologians: Archbishops Leonardo Marino of Lanciano and Muzio Calini of Zara, Egidio Foscarini, Bishop of Modena, and Francisco Fureiro, a Portuguese Dominican. Three cardinals were appointed to supervise the work. St. Charles Borromeo superintended the redaction of the original Italian text, which, thanks to his exertions, was finished in 1564. Cardinal William Sirletus then gave it the final touches, and the famous Humanists, Julius Pogianus and Paulus Manutius, translated it into classical Latin. It was then published in Latin and Italian as "Catechismus ex decreto Concilii Tridentini ad parochos Pii V jussu editus, Romae, 1566" (in-folio). Translations into the vernacular of every nation were ordered by the Council (Sess. XXIV, "De Ref.", c. vii). The Council intended the projected Catechism to be the Church's official manual of popular instruction. The seventh canon, "De Reformatione", of Sess. XXIV, runs: "That the faithful may approach the Sacraments with greater reverence and devotion, the Holy Synod charges all the bishops about to administer them to explain their operation and use in a way adapted to the understanding of the people; to see, moreover, that their parish priests observe the same rule piously and prudently, making use for their explanations, where necessary and convenient, of the vernacular tongue; and conforming to the form to be prescribed by the Holy Synod in its instructions (catechesis) for the several Sacraments: the bishops shall have these instructions carefully translated into the vulgar tongue and explained by all parish priests to their flocks . . .". In the mind of the Church the Catechism, though primarily written for the parish priests, was also intended to give a fixed and stable scheme of instruction to the faithful, especially with regard to the means of grace, so much neglected at the time. To attain this object the work closely follows the dogmatic definitions of the council. It is divided in four parts: I. The Apostles' Creed; II. The Sacraments; III. The Decalogue; IV. Prayer, especially The Lord's Prayer. It deals with the papal primacy and with Limbo (q.v.), points which were not discussed or defined at Trent; on the other hand, it is silent on the doctrine of Indulgences (q. v.), which is set forth in the "Decretum de indulgentiis", Sess. XXV. The bishops urged in every way the use of the new Catechism; they enjoined its frequent reading, so that all its contents would be committed to memory; they exhorted the priests to discuss parts of it at their meetings, and insisted upon its being used for instructing the people. To some editions of the Roman Catechism is prefixed a "Praxis Catechismi", i.e. a division of its contents into sermons for every Sunday of the year adapted to the Gospel of the day. There is no better sermonary. The people like to hear the voice of the Church speaking with no uncertain sound; the many Biblical texts and illustrations go straight to their hearts, and, best of all, they remember these simple sermons better than they do the oratory of famous pulpit orators. The Catechism has not of course the authority of conciliary definitions or other primary symbols of faith; for, although decreed by the Council, it was only published a year after the Fathers had dispersed, and it consequently lacks a formal conciliary approbation. During the heated controversies de auxiliis gratiae between the Thomists and Molinists, the Jesuits refused to accept the authority of the Catechism as decisive. Yet it possesses high authority as an exposition of Catholic doctrine. It was composed by order of a council, issued and approved by the pope; its use has been prescribed by numerous synods throughout the whole Church; Leo XIlI, in a letter to the French bishops (8 Sept., 1899), recommended the study of the Roman Catechism to all seminarians, and the reigning pontiff, Pius X, has signified his desire that preachers should expound it to the faithful. The earliest editions of the Roman Catechism are: "Romae apud Paulum Manutium", 1566; "Venetiis, apud Dominicum de Farrisö, 1567; "Coloniae", 1567 (by Henricus Aquensis); "Parisuis, in aedibus. Jac. Kerver", 1568; "Venetiis, apud Aldum", 1575; Ingolstadt, 1577 (Sartorius). In 1596 appeared at Antwerp "Cat. Romanus . . . quaestionibus distinctus, brevibusque exhortatiunculis studio Andreae Fabricii, Leodiensis". (This editor, A. Le Fevre, died in 1581. He probably made this division of the Roman Catechism into questions and answers in 1570). George Eder, in 1569, arranged the Catechism for the use of schools. He distributed the main doctrines into sections and subsections, and added perspicuous tables of contents. This useful work bears the title: "Methodus Catechismi Catholici". The first known English translation is by Jeremy Donovan, a professor at Maynooth, published by Richard Coyne, Capel Street, Dublin, and by Keating & Brown, London, and printed for the translator by W. Folds & Son, Great Shand Street, 1829. An American edition appeared in the same year. Donovan's translation was reprinted at Rome by the Propaganda Press, in two volumes (1839); it is dedicated to Cardinal Fransoni, and signed: "Jeremias Donovan, sacerdos hibernus, cubicularius Gregorii XVI, P. M." There is another English translation by R.A. Buckley (London, 1852), which is more elegant than Donovan's and claims to be more correct but is spoiled by the doctrinal notes of the Anglican translator. The first German translation, by Paul Hoffaeus, is dated Dillingen, 1568. J. WILHELM Roman Catholic Roman Catholic A qualification of the name Catholic commonly used in English-speaking countries by those unwilling to recognize the claims of the One True Church. Out of condescension for these dissidents, the members of that Church are wont in official documents to be styled "Roman Catholics" as if the term Catholic represented a genus of which those who owned allegiance to the pope formed a particular species. It is in fact a prevalent conception among Anglicans to regard the whole Catholic Church as made up of three principal branches, the Roman Catholic, the Anglo-Catholic and the Greek Catholic. As the erroneousness of this point of view has been sufficiently explained in the articles CHURCH and CATHOLIC, it is only needful here to consider the history of the composite term with which we are now concerned. In the "Oxford English Dictionary", the highest existing authority upon questions of English philology, the following explanation is given under the heading "Roman Catholic". "The use of this composite term in place of the simple Roman, Romanist, or Romish; which had acquired an invidious sense, appears to have arisen in the early years of the seventeenth century. For conciliatory reasons it was employed in the negotiations connected with the Spanish Match (1618-1624) and appears in formal documents relating to this printed by Rushworth (I, 85-89). After that date it was generally adopted as a non-controversial term and has long been the recognized legal and official designation, though in ordinary use Catholic alone is very frequently employed" (New Oxford Dict., VIII, 766). Of the illustrative quotations which follow, the earliest in date is one of 1605 from the "Europae Speculum" of Edwin Sandys: "Some Roman Catholiques will not say grace when a Protestant is present"; while a passage from Day's "Festivals" of 1615, contrasts "Roman Catholiques" with "good, true Catholiques indeed". Although the account thus given in the Oxford Dictionary is in substance correct, it cannot be considered satisfactory. To begin with the word is distinctly older than is here suggested. When about the year 1580 certain English Catholics, under stress of grievous persecution, defended the lawfulness of attending Protestant services to escape the fines imposed on recusants, the Jesuit Father Persons published, under the pseudonym of Howlet, a clear exposition of the "Reasons why Catholiques refuse to goe to Church". This was answered in 1801 by a writer of Puritan sympathies, Percival Wiburn, who in his "Checke or Reproofe of M. Howlet" uses the term "Roman Catholic" repeatedly. For example he speaks of "you Romane Catholickes that sue for tolleration" (p. 140) and of the "parlous dilemma or streight which you Romane Catholickes are brought into" (p. 44). Again Robert Crowley, another Anglican controversialist, in his book called "A Deliberat Answere", printed in 1588, though adopting by preference the forms "Romish Catholike" or "Popish Catholike", also writes of those "who wander with the Romane Catholiques in the uncertayne hypathes of Popish devises" (p. 86). A study of these and other early examples in their context shows plainly enough that the qualification "Romish Catholic" or "Roman Catholic" was introduced by Protestant divines who highly resented the Roman claim to any monopoly of the term Catholic. In Germany, Luther had omitted the word Catholic from the Creed, but this was not the case in England. Even men of such Calvinistic leanings as Philpot (he was burned under Mary in 1555), and John Foxe the martyrologist, not to speak of churchmen like Newel and Fulke, insisted on the right of the Reformers to call themselves Catholics and professed to regard their own as the only true Catholic Church. Thus Philpot represents himself as answering his Catholic examiner: "I am, master doctor, of the unfeigned Catholic Church and will live and die therein, and if you can prove your Church to be the True Catholic Church, I will be one of the same" (Philpot, "Works", Parker Soc., p. 132). It would be easy to quote many similar passages. The term "Romish Catholic" or "Roman Catholic" undoubtedly originated with the Protestant divines who shared this feeling and who were unwilling to concede the name Catholic to their opponents without qualification. Indeed the writer Crowley, just mentioned, does not hesitate throughout a long tract to use the term "Protestant Catholics" the name which he applies to his antagonists. Thus he says "We Protestant Catholiques are not departed from the true Catholique religion" (p. 33) and he refers more than once to "Our Protestant Catholique Church," (p. 74) On the other hand the evidence seems to show that the Catholics of the reign of Elizabeth and James I were by no means willing to admit any other designation for themselves than the unqualified name Catholic. Father Southwell's "Humble Supplication to her Majesty" (1591), though criticized by some as over-adulatory in tone, always uses the simple word. What is more surprising, the same may be said of various addresses to the Crown drafted under the inspiration of the "Appellant" clergy, who were suspected by their opponents of subservience to the government and of minimizing in matters of dogma. This feature is very conspicuous, to take a single example, in "the Protestation of allegiance" drawn up by thirteen missioners, 31 Jan., 1603, in which they renounce all thought of "restoring the Catholic religion by the sword", profess their willingness "to persuade all Catholics to do the same" and conclude by declaring themselves ready on the one hand "to spend their blood in the defence of her Majesty" but on the other "rather to lose their lives than infringe the lawful authority of Christ's Catholic Church" (Tierney-Dodd, III, p. cxc). We find similar language used in Ireland in the negotiations carried on by Tyrone in behalf of his Catholic countrymen. Certain apparent exceptions to this uniformity of practice can be readily explained. To begin with we do find that Catholics not unfrequently use the inverted form of the name "Roman Catholic" and speak of the "Catholic Roman faith" or religion. An early example is to be found in a little controversial tract of 1575 called "a Notable Discourse" where we read for example that the heretics of old "preached that the Pope was Antichriste, shewing themselves verye eloquent in detracting and rayling against the Catholique Romane Church" (p. 64). But this was simply a translation of the phraseology common both in Latin and in the Romance languages "Ecclesia Catholica Romana," or in French "l'Eglise catholique romaine". It was felt that this inverted form contained no hint of the Protestant contention that the old religion was a spurious variety of true Catholicism or at best the Roman species of a wider genus. Again, when we find Father Persons (e.g. in his "Three Conversions," III, 408) using the term "Roman Catholic", the context shows that he is only adopting the name for the moment as conveniently embodying the contention of his adversaries. Once more in a very striking passage in the examination of one James Clayton in 1591 (see Cal. State Papers, Dom. Eliz., add., vol. XXXII, p. 322) we read that the deponent "was persuaded to conforme himself to the Romaine Catholique faith." But there is nothing to show that these were the actual words of the recusant himself, or that, if they were, they were not simply dictated by a desire to conciliate his examiners. The "Oxford Dictionary" is probably right in assigning the recognition of "Roman Catholic" as the official style of the adherents of the Papacy in England to the negotiations for the Spanish Match (1618-24). In the various treaties etc., drafted in connection with this proposal, the religion of the Spanish princess is almost always spoken of as "Roman Catholic". Indeed in some few instances the word Catholic alone is used. This feature does not seem to occur in any of the negotiations of earlier date which touched upon religion, e.g. those connected with the proposed d'Alencon marriage in Elizabeth's reign, while in Acts of Parliament, proclamations, etc., before the Spanish match, Catholics are simply described as Papists or Recusants, and their religion as popish, Romanish, or Romanist. Indeed long after this period, the use of the term Roman Catholic continued to be a mark of condescension, and language of much more uncomplimentary character was usually preferred. It was perhaps to encourage a friendlier attitude in the authorities that Catholics themselves henceforth began to adopt the qualified term in all official relations with the government. Thus the "Humble Remonstrance, Acknowledgment, Protestation and Petition of the Roman Catholic Clergy of Ireland" in 1661, began "We, your Majesty's faithful subjects the Roman Catholick clergy of Ireland". The same Practice seems to have obtained in Maryland; see or example the Consultation entitled "Objections answered touching Maryland", drafted by Father R Blount, S.J., in 1632 (B. Johnston, "Foundation of Maryland, etc., 1883, 29), and wills proved 22 Sep., 1630, and 19 Dec., 1659, etc., (in Baldwin, "Maryland Cat. of Wills", 19 vols., vol. i. Naturally the wish to conciliate hostile opinion only grew greater as Catholic Emancipation became a question of practical politics, and by that time it would appear that many Catholics themselves used the qualified form not only when addressing the outside public but in their domestic discussions. A short-lived association, organized in 1794 with the fullest approval of the vicars Apostolic, to counteract the unorthodox tendencies of the Cisalpine Club, was officially known as the "Roman Catholic Meeting" (Ward, "Dawn of Cath,. Revival in England", II, 65). So, too, a meeting of the Irish bishops under the presidency of Dr. Troy at Dublin in 1821 passed resolutions approving of an Emancipation Bill then before a Parliament, in which they uniformly referred to members of their own communion as "Roman Catholics". Further, such a representative Catholic as Charles Butler in his "Historical Memoirs" (see e.g. vol. IV, 1821, pp. 185, 199, 225, etc.,) frequently uses the term "roman-catholic" [sic] and seems to find this expression as natural as the unqualified form. With the strong Catholic revival in the middle of the nineteenth century and the support derived from the uncompromising zeal of many earnest converts, such for example as Faber and Manning, an inflexible adherence to the name Catholic without qualification once more became the order of the day. The government, however, would not modify the official designation or suffer it to be set aside in addresses presented to the Sovereign on public occasions. In two particular instances during the archiepiscopate of Cardinal Vaughan this point was raised and became the subject of correspondence between the cardinal and the Home Secretary. In 1897 at the Diamond Jubilee of the accession of Queen Victoria, and again in 1901 when Edward VII succeeded to the throne, the Catholic episcopate desired to present addresses, but on each occasion it was intimated to the cardinal that the only permissible style would be "the Roman Catholic Archbishop and Bishops in England". Even the form "the Cardinal Archbishop and Bishops of the Catholic and Roman Church in England" was not approved. On the first occasion no address was presented, but in 1901 the requirements of the Home Secretary as to the use of the name "Roman Catholics" were complied with, though the cardinal reserved to himself the right of explaining subsequently on some public occasion the sense in which he used the words (see Snead-Cox, "Life of Cardinal Vaughan", II, 231-41). Accordingly, at the Newcastle Conference of the Catholic Truth Society (Aug., 1901) the cardinal explained clearly to his audience that "the term Roman Catholic has two meanings; a meaning that we repudiate and a meaning that we accept." The repudiated sense was that dear to many Protestants, according to which the term Catholic was a genus which resolved itself into the species Roman Catholic, Anglo-Catholic, Greek Catholic, etc. But, as the cardinal insisted, "with us the prefix Roman is not restrictive to a species, or a section, but simply declaratory of Catholic." The prefix in this sense draws attention to the unity of the Church, and "insists that the central point of Catholicity is Roman, the Roman See of St. Peter." It is noteworthy that the representative Anglican divine, Bishop Andrewes, in his "Tortura Torti" (1609) ridicules the phrase Ecclesia Catholica Romana as a contradiction in terms. "What," he asks, "is the object of adding 'Roman'? The only purpose that such an adjunct can serve is to distinguish your Catholic Church from another Catholic Church which is not Roman" (p. 368). It is this very common line of argument which imposes upon Catholics the necessity of making no compromise in the matter of their own name. The loyal adherents of the Holy See did not begin in the sixteenth century to call themselves "Catholics" for controversial purposes. It is the traditional name handed down to us continuously from the time of St. Augustine. We use this name ourselves and ask those outside the Church to use it, without reference to its signification simply because it is our customary name, just as we talk of the Russian Church as "the Orthodox Church", not because we recognize its orthodoxy but because its members so style themselves, or again just as we speak of "the Reformation" because it is the term established by custom, though we are far from owning that it was a reformation in either faith or morals. The dog-in-the manger policy of so many Anglicans who cannot take the name of Catholics for themselves, because popular usage has never sanctioned it as such, but who on the other hand will not concede it to the members of the Church of Rome, was conspicuously brought out in the course of a correspondence on this subject in the London "Saturday Review" (Dec., 1908 to March, 1909) arising out of a review of some of the earlier volumes of THE CATHOLIC ENCYCLOPEDIA. The historical facts summarized in this article are given in an extended form in a paper contributed by the present writer to The Month (Sept. 1911). See also "The Tablet" (14 Sept., 1901), 402, and Snead-Cox, Life of Cardinal Vaughan, cited above. HERBERT THURSTON Roman Catholic Relief Bill Roman Catholic Relief Bill IN ENGLAND With the accession of Queen Elizabeth (1558) commenced the series of legislative enactments, commonly known as the Penal Laws, under which the profession and practice of the Catholic religion were subjected to severe penalties and disabilities. By laws passed in the reign of Elizabeth herself, any English subject receiving Holy Orders of the Church of Rome and coming to England was guilty of high treason, and any one who aided or sheltered him was guilty of capital felony. It was likewise made treason to be reconciled to the Church of Rome, and to procure others to be reconciled. Papists were totally disabled from giving their children any education in their own religion. Should they educate them at home under a schoolmaster who did not attend the parish church, and was not licenced by the bishop of the diocese, the parents were liable to forfeit ten pounds a month, and the schoolmaster himself forty shillings a day. Should the children be sent to Catholic seminaries beyond the seas, their parents were liable to forfeit one hundred pounds, and the children themselves were disabled from inheriting, purchasing, or enjoying any species of property. Saying Mass was punished by a forfeiture of 200 marks; hearing it by one of 100 marks. The statutes of recusancy punished nonconformity with the Established Church by a fine of twenty pounds per lunar month during which the parish church was not attended, there being thirteen of such months in the year. Such non-attendances constituted recusancy in the proper sense of the term, and originally affected all, whether Catholics, or others, who did not conform. In 1593 by 35 Eliz. c. 2, the consequences of such non-conformity were limited to Popish recusants. A Papist, convicted of absenting himself from church, became a Popish recusant convict, and besides the monthly fine of twenty pounds, was disabled from holding any office or employment, from keeping arms in his house, from maintaining actions or suits at law or in equity, from being an executor or a guardian, from presenting to an advowson, from practising the law or physic, and from holding office civil or military. He was likewise subject to the penalties attaching to excommunication, was not permitted to travel five miles from his house without licence, under pain of forfeiting all his goods, and might not come to Court under a penalty of one hundred pounds. Other provisions extended similar penalties to married women. Popish recusants convict were, within three months of conviction, either to submit and renounce their papistry, or, if required by four justices, to abjure the realm. If they did not depart, or returned without licence, they were guilty of a capital felony. At the outset of Elizabeth's reign, an oath of supremacy containing a denial of the pope's spiritual jurisdiction, which therefore could not be taken by Catholics, was imposed on all officials, civil and ecclesiastical. The "Oath of allegiance and obedience" enacted under James I, in 1605, in consequence of the excitement of the Gunpowder Plot, confirmed the same. By the Corporation Act of 1661, no one could legally be elected to any municipal office unless he had within the year received the Sacrament according to the rite of the Church of England, and likewise, taken the Oath of Supremacy. The first provision excluded all non-conformists; the second Catholics only. The Test Act (1672) imposed on all officers, civil and military, a "Declaration against Transubstantiation", whereby Catholics were debarred from such employment. In 1677 it was enacted that all members of either House of Parliament should, before taking their seats, make a "Declaration against Popery", denouncing Transubstantiation, the Mass and the invocation of saints, as idolatrous. With the Resolution of 1688 came a new crop of penal laws, less atrocious in character than those of previous times, but on that very account more likely to be enforced, and so to become effective, the sanguinary penalties of the sixteenth century, having in great measure defeated their own end, and being now generally left on the statute book in terrorem. In 1689 (1 William and Mary, i, c. 9) a shorter form of the Oath of Allegiance and Supremacy was substituted, the clause aimed against Catholics being carefully retained. It was likewise ordered that all Papists and reputed Papists should be "amoved" ten miles from the cities of London and Westminster. In 1700 (11 and 12 William III, c. 4.) a reward of one hundred pounds was promised to anyone who should give information leading to the conviction of a Popish priest or bishop, who was made punishable by imprisonment for life. Moreover, any Papist who within six months of attaining the age of eighteen failed to take the Oath of Allegiance and Supremacy and subscribe to the Declaration against Popery, was disabled in respect to himself (but not of his heirs or posterity) from acquiring or holding land, and until he submitted, his next of kin who was a Protestant might enjoy his lands, without being obliged to account for the profits. The recusant was also incapable of purchasing, and all trusts on his behalf were void. In 1714 (George I, c. 13) a new element was introduced, namely Constructive Recusancy. The Oath of Allegiance and Supremacy might be tendered to any suspected person by any two Justices of the Peace, and persons refusing it were to be adjudged Popish recusants convict and to forfeit, and be proceeded against accordingly. Thus the refusal of the Oath was placed on the same footing as a legal conviction, and the person so convicted was rendered liable to all penalties under those statutes. At the same time an obligation was imposed on Catholics requiring them to register their names and estates, and to enroll their deeds and wills. These penal laws remained on the statute book unmitigated till late in the eighteenth century, and although there was less and less disposition to put them in force, there was ever the danger, which upon occasion grew more acute. In 1767 a priest named Malony was tried at Croydon for his priesthood, and condemned to perpetual imprisonment, which, at the end of two or three years, was commuted, "by the mercy of the Government" to banishment. In 1768 the Reverend James Webb was tried in the Court of King's Bench for saying Mass but was acquitted, the Chief Justice, Lord Mansfield, ruling that there was no evidence sufficient to convict. In 1769 and on other occasions, seemingly as late as 1771, Dr. James Talbot, coadjutor to Bishop Challoner, was tried for his life at the Old Bailey, on the charge of his priesthood and of saying Mass, but was acquitted on similar grounds. Such instances were not solitary. In 1870, Mr. Charles Butler found that one firm of lawyers had defended more than twenty priests under prosecutions of this nature. In 1778 a Catholic committee was formed to promote the cause of relief for their co-religionists, and though several times elected afresh, continued to exist until 1791, with a short interval after the Gordon Riots. It was always uniformly aristocratic in composition, and until 1787 included no representation of the hierarchy and then but three co-opted members. In the same year, 1778, was passed the first Act for Catholic Relief (18 George III c. 60). By this, an oath was imposed, which besides a declaration of loyalty to the reigning sovereign, contained an abjuration of the Pretender, and of certain doctrines attributed to Catholics, as that excommunicated princes may lawfully be murdered, that no faith should be kept with heretics, and that the pope has temporal as well as spiritual jurisdiction in this realm. Those taking this oath were exempted from some of the most galling provisions of the Act of William III passed in 1700. The section as to taking and prosecuting priests were repealed, as also the penalty of perpetual imprisonment for keeping a school. Catholics were also enabled to inherit and purchase land, nor was a Protestant heir any longer empowered to enter and enjoy the estate of his Catholic kinsman. The passing of this act was the occasion of the Gordon Riots(1780) in which the violence of the mob was especially directed against Lord Mansfield who had balked various prosecutions under the statutes now repealed. In 1791 there followed another Act (31 George III, c. 32) far more extensive and far-reaching. By it there was again an oath to be taken, in character much like that of 1778, but including an engagement to support the Protestant Succession under the Act of Settlement (12 and 13 William III). No Catholic taking the oath was henceforward to be prosecuted for being a Papist, or for being educated in the Popish religion, or for hearing Mass or saying it, or for being a priest or deacon or for entering into, or belonging to, any ecclesiastical order or community in the Church of Rome, or for assisting at, or performing any Catholic rites or ceremonies. Catholics were no longer to be summoned to take the Oath of Supremacy, or to be removed from London; the legislation of George I, requiring them to register their estates and wills, was absolutely repealed; while the professions of counsellor and barrister at law, attorney, solicitor, and notary were opened to them. It was however provided that all their assemblies for religious worship should be certified at Quarter Sessions; that no person should officiate at such assembly until his name had been recorded by the Clerk of the Peace: that no such place of assembly should be locked or barred during the meeting; and that the building in which it was held, should not have a steeple or bell. The Relief Act of 1791 undoubtedly marked a great step in the removal of Catholic grievances, but the English statesmen felt, along with the Catholic body, that much more was required. Pitt and his rival, Fox, were alike pledged to a full measure of Catholic Emancipation, but they were both thwarted by the obstinacy of King George III, who insisted that to agree to any such measure would be a violation of his coronation oath. There were also at this period considerable dissensions within the Catholic ranks. These concerned first the question of Veto on the appointment of bishops in Ireland, which it was proposed to confer on the English Government, and belongs chiefly to the history of Emancipation in that country. There was another cause of dissension, more properly English, which was connected with the adjuration of the supposed Catholic doctrines contained in the oath imposed upon those who wished to participate in the benefits conferred by the Act of 1791, as previously by that of 1778. The lay members of the Catholic committee who had framed this disclaimer were accused by the vicars Apostolic, who then administered the Church in England, of tampering with matters of ecclesiastical discipline; and although the bishops had their way in the matter of the oath, the feud survived, and was proclaimed to the world by the formation in 1792 of the Cisalpine Club (q. v.), the members whereof were pledged "to resist any ecclesiastical interference which may militate against the freedom of English Catholics". Such internal dissension, no doubt, did much to retard the course of Emancipation. Its final triumph was due more than aught else to the pressure which the Catholic body in Ireland was able to put upon the Government, for it was acknowledged by the Duke of Wellington and Sir Robert Peel themselves, who carried the Bill, that their action was due to the necessity of pacifying Ireland which had found so powerful a leader in Daniel O'Connell (q. v.), and of thus averting the danger of a civil war. It would take too much space to go into details regarding the provisions of the Act of Emancipation. Its general effect was to open public life to Catholics taking the prescribed oath, to enable them to sit in Parliament, to vote at elections (as previously they could not in England or Scotland, though they could in Ireland) to fill all offices of State with a few exceptions, viz.: A Catholic cannot succeed to the throne, and a sovereign becoming a Catholic or marrying one, thereby forfeits the crown, and a Catholic cannot hold the office of Regent. It is uncertain whether the English Chancellorship and the Irish Viceroyalty are barred to Catholics or not. Like the previous Relief Acts, that of 1829 still retained the "Roman Catholic Oath", to be imposed upon those who desire to enjoy its benefits. it likewise added something in the way of penal legislation by a clause prohibiting religious orders of men to receive new members, and subjecting those who should disobey to banishment as misdemeanants. This prohibition is still upon the statute book, and within the present century an attempt has been made to give it effect. Finally, in 1871 (34 and 35 Victoria, c. 48) the invidious Roman Catholic Oath was abolished, as also the still more objectionable declaration against Transubstantiation. IN IRELAND When Elizabeth became Queen of England, her Irish deputy was ordered "to set up the worship of God in Ireland as it is in England". The Irish Parliament soon enacted that all candidates for office should take the Oath of Supremacy; and by the Act of Uniformity the Protestant liturgy was prescribed in all churches. For a time, however, these Acts were but mildly enforced. But when the pope excommunicated the queen, and the Spanish king made war on her, and both in attempting to dethrone here found that the Irish Catholics were ready to be instruments and allies, the latter, regarded as rebels and traitors by the English sovereign and her ministers, were persecuted and hunted down. Their chiefs were outlawed, their churches laid in ruins, their clergy driven to exile or death. The expectations of a harassed people and an outlawed creed -- that better times had come with the advent of the Stuarts -- were falsified by the repeated proclamations against priests, by the Plantation of Ulster, and, later, by the attempted confiscations of Strafford. Charles II had special reasons for being grateful to large masses of Irish, who fought his battles at home and supported him abroad; yet at the Restoration he left them to their fate, and confirmed the gigantic scheme of confiscation which had been carried out by Cromwell. He was not indeed much attached to any religion, and disliked religious persecution; and more than once during his reign he tried to interpose between the Catholics and the Acts of Uniformity and Supremacy. But the militant and aggressive Protestantism of the English Parliament would have no Catholic in any office, civil or military, and none in the corporations; and Charles was too politic to strain unduly the allegiance of these intolerant legislators. Had James II been equally politic he would have gradually allayed Protestant prejudice; and perhaps there would have been no long-drawn-out penal code, and no wearisome struggle for emancipation. But he insisted on Catholic predominance and soon picked a quarrel with his Protestant subjects which resulted in the loss of his crown. The war which followed in Ireland was terminated by the Treaty of Limerick, and had its terms been kept, the position of the Catholics would have been at least tolerable. Granted such privileges as they had enjoyed in the reign of Charles II, with an Oath of Allegiance substituted for the Oath of Supremacy, and with a promise of a further relaxation of the penal enactments in force, they could practice their religion without hindrance, sit in Parliament and vote for its members, engage in trade and in the learned professions, and fill all civil and military offices; and they were protected in the possession of the lands they held. William III, whose name has been made a rallying-cry for bigotry, was in favour of these, and even more generous terms. But the forces of intolerance on both sides of the Channel were too strong. A small minority of Protestants in Ireland, pampered by privileges and possessing confiscated lands, thought that their only chance of security was to trample upon the Catholic majority surrounding them. Sustained and encouraged by England, in defiance of the solemn obligations of public faith, they tore the Treaty of Limerick into tatters, refused to ratify its concessions, and elaborated a penal code which every fair-minded Englishman now blushes to recall. For more than a quarter of a century the work of outlawry and proscription was continued by an exclusively Protestant Parliament at Dublin; and when the work was completed the position of the vast majority of Irishmen was that of slaves. An Irish Judge declared in 1760 that the law did not recognize the existence of an Irish Catholic, and, assuredly the penal code had placed him effectually beyond its pale. It branded Catholics with proscription and inferiority, struck at every form of Catholic activity, and checked every symptom of Catholic enterprise. It excluded them from Parliament, from the corporations, from the learned professions, from civil and military offices, from being executors, or administrators, or guardians of property, from holding land under lease, or from owning a horse worth 5. They were deprived of arms and of the franchise, denied education at home and punished if they sought it abroad, forbidden to observe Catholic Holy Days, to make pilgrimages, or to continue to use the old monasteries as the burial places of their dead. For the clergy there was no mercy, nothing but prison, exile, or death. After the Catholics had vainly protested against the Bill "To Prevent the Further Growth of Popery" of 1704, their protests ceased. The more energetic of them went abroad; those at home were torpid and inert, the peasantry steeped in poverty and ignorance, the clergy and gentry sunk in servitude and all of them afraid even to complain of their condition lest the anger of their tyrants might be provoked. At last the tide turned. The Irish Parliament became less bigoted, and after 1750 or thereabouts no more penal laws were passed. Indeed the work of crushing and debasing the Catholics had been so well done that they were paupers and slaves, and to crush them still further would give the Protestants no additional security. Some Catholics had made money in trade and lent it to needy Protestant landlords and these and their friends in Parliament would naturally favour toleration; the fact that the Catholics had so long been peaceable, and had given no support to the Pretenders showed that they no longer clung to the Stuarts; and this greatly strengthened their position both in England and Ireland. The growth of a strong sentiment of nationality among Irish Protestants also helped their cause. Claiming powers which it did not possess, the British Parliament asserted and exercised the right to legislate for Ireland, treated the Irish Parliament with disdain, and in the interests of English manufacturers imposed ruinous commercial restrictions on Irish trade, Dissatisfied with their English friends, the Irish Protestants turned to their own Catholic countrymen, and the more Catholics and Protestants came together, the better for the cause of religious toleration. This turn of affairs inspired the Catholics with hope and courage, and three of them, Dr. Curry, a Dublin physician, Mr. Wyse of Waterford, and Mr. Charles O'Connor, formed, in 1759, a Catholic Association, which was to meet at Dublin, correspond with representative Catholics in the country, and watch over Catholic interests. But such was the spiritless condition of the Catholics that the gentry and clergy held aloof, and the new association was chiefly manned by Dublin merchants. Under its auspices a loyal address was presented to the viceroy, and another to George III on his accession to the throne, and the Catholics rejoiced that both addresses were graciously received. These friendlier dispositions, however, were slow to develop into legislative enactments, and not until 1771 did the first instalment of emancipation come. By the Act of that year Catholics were allowed to reclaim and hold under lease for sixty-one years fifty acres of bog but it should not be within a mile of any city or market town. Three years later an oath of allegiance was substituted for that of supremacy. A further concession was granted in 1778 when Catholics were allowed to hold leases of land for 999 years, and might inherit land in the same way as Protestants, the preamble of the Act declaring that the law was passed to reward Catholics for their long-continued peaceable behaviour, and for the purpose of allowing them to enjoy "the blessings of our free constitution". Distrust of them, however, continued, and though they subscribed money to equip the volunteers, they would not be admitted within the ranks. Nor was the Irish Parliament of 1782 willing to do more than to repeal the law compelling bishops to quit the kingdom, and the law binding those who had assisted at Mass to give the celebrant's name. Further, Catholics were no longer prohibited from owning a horse worth 5, and Catholic schools might be opened with the consent of the Protestant bishop of the diocese. These small concessions were not supplemented by others for ten years. Dissensions and jealousies were largely responsible for this slow progress. Between the Catholic landed sentry and the Catholic merchants there was little in common except their religion. The timidity and submission to authority of the former, and the bolder and freer spirit of the latter were difficult to blend, and in 1763 the Catholic Association fell to pieces. After ten years of inactivity a Catholic committee was formed partly out of the debris of the defunct association. Its chairman was the Earl of Kenmare, and again it was sought to have all Catholics act together. But Kenmare was not the man to reconcile divergent views and methods, to form a homogeneous party out of discordant elements, and then with such a party to adopt a vigorous policy. His manner was cold his tone one of patronage and superiority; he disliked agitation as savouring of vulgarity and sedition, and preferred to seek redress by submissive petitions, slavish protestations of loyalty, and secret intrigue; and when an overwhelming majority of the Catholic Committee favoured manlier measures, he and sixty-eight others who sympathized with him seceded from its ranks. This was in 1791. The committee then chose for its leader John Keogh, a Dublin merchant of great ability, strong manly, fearless, prudent but firm, a man who favoured bolder measures and a decisive tone. Instead of begging for small concessions he demanded the repeal of the whole penal code, a demand considered so extravagant that it had few friends in Parliament. When that assembly was made independent it had not been reformed; and Grattan had foolishly allowed the volunteers to lay aside their swords before the battle of reform had been won. Unrepresentative and corrupt, Parliament continued to be dominated by pensioners and placemen, and under the influence of Fitzgibbon and Foster, two Irishmen and two bigots, it refused to advance further on the path of concession. Even Charlemont and flood would not join emancipation with parliamentary reform, and while willing to safeguard Catholic liberty and property would give Catholics no political power. But this attitude of intolerance and exclusion could not be indefinitely maintained. The French Revolution was in progress, and a young and powerful republic had arisen preaching the rights of man, the iniquity of class distinctions and religious persecution, and proclaiming its readiness to aid all nations who were oppressed and desired to be free. These attractive doctrines rapidly seized on men's minds, and Ireland did not escape the contagion. The Ulster Presbyterians celebrated with enthusiasm the fall of the Bastille, and in 1791 founded the Society of United Irishmen, having as the two chief planks in its programme Parliamentary reform and Catholic Emancipation. The Catholics and Dissenters, so long divided by religious antagonism, were coming together, and if they made a united demand for equal rights for all Irishmen, without distinction of creed, the ascendency of the Episcopalian Protestants, who were but a tenth of the population, must necessarily disappear. Yet the selfish and corrupt junta who ruled the Parliament, and ruled Ireland, would not yield an inch of ground, and only under the strongest pressure from England was an act passed in 1792 admitting Catholics to the Bar, legalizing marriages between Catholics and Protestants, and allowing Catholic schools to be set up without the necessity of obtaining the permission of a Protestant bishop. Such grudging concessions irritated rather than appeased in the existing temper of the Catholic body. To consider their position and take measures for the future the Catholic Committee had delegates appointed by the different parishes in Ireland, and in December, 1792, a Catholic convention commenced its sittings in Dublin. By the Protestant bigots it was derisively called the Back Lane Parliament, and every effort was made to discredit its proceedings and identify it with sedition. Fitzgibbon excited the fears of the Protestant landlords by declaring that the repeal of the penal code would involve the repeal of the Act of Settlement, and invalidate the titles by which they held their lands. The Catholic convention, however, went on unheeding, and turning with contempt from the Dublin Parliament sent delegates with a petition to London. The relations between Catholics and Dissenters were then so friendly that Keogh became a United Irishman, and a Protestant barrister named Theobald Wolfe Tone, the ablest of the United Irishmen, became secretary to the Catholic Committee. And when the Catholic delegates on their way to London passed through Belfast, their carriage was drawn through the streets by Presbyterians amid thunders of applause. Had the Prime Minister, Pitt, advised the king to receive the Catholics coldly, he would certainly have earned the goodwill of a small clique in Ireland, to whom their own interests were everything and the interests of England little. But he would have intensified disaffection among nine-tenths of the Irish people and this at a time when the French had beheaded their king, hurled back the Prussian attack at Valmy, conquered Belgium, and, maddened with enthusiasm for liberty and with hatred of monarchy, were about to declare war on England. The king graciously received the Catholics, and Pitt and Dundas, the Home Secretary, warned the Irish junta that the time for concessions had come, and that if rebellion broke out in Ireland, Protestant ascendency would not be supported by British arms. And then these Protestants, whom Fitzgibbon and the viceroy painted as ready to die rather than yield quietly, gave way; and in 1793 a bill was passed giving the Catholics the parliamentary and municipal franchise, and admitting them to the university and to office. They were still excluded from Parliament and from the higher offices, and from being king's counsel, but in all other respects they were placed on a level with Protestants. In the Commons Foster spoke and voted against the Bill. In the Lords, though not opposing it, Fitzgibbon spoiled the effect of the concession by a bitter speech, and by having an Act passed declaring the Catholic convention illegal, and prohibiting all such conventions, Catholic or otherwise, in the future. Relief from so many disabilities left the Catholics almost free. Few of them were affected by exclusion from the higher offices, fewer still by exclusion from the inner Bar; and Liberal Protestants would always be found ready to voice Catholic interests in Parliament if they owed their seats to Catholic votes. Besides, in the better temper of the times, it was certain that these last relics of the penal code would soon disappear. Meantime what was needed was a sympathetic and impartial administration of the law. But with Fitzgibbon the guiding spirit of Irish government this was impossible. The grandson of a Catholic peasant, he hated Catholics and seized upon every occasion to cover them and their religion with insults. Autocratic and overbearing, he commanded rather than persuaded, and since he became attorney-general in 1783, his influence in Irish government was immense. His action on the regency question in 1789 procured him the special favour of the king and of Pitt, and he became a peer and Lord Chancellor. It was one of the anomalies of the Irish constitution that a change of measures did not involve a change of men, and hence the viceroy and the chief secretary, who had opposed all concessions to Catholics, were retained in office, and Fitzgibbon was still left as if to prevent further concessions and to nullify what had been done. For a brief period, however, it seemed as if men as well as measures were to be changed. At the end of 1794 a section of the English Whigs joined Pitt's administration. The Duke of Portland became Home Secretary, with Irish affairs in his department, and Earl Fitzwilliam became Lord Lieutenant. He came to Ireland early in 1795. His sympathy with the Catholics was well known; he was the friend of Grattan and the Ponsonbys the champions of Emancipation, and in coming to Ireland he believed he had the full sanction of Pitt to popularize Irish Government and finally settle the Catholic question. At once he dismissed Cooke, the Under Secretary, a determined foe of concession and reform and also John Beresford who, with his relatives filled so many offices that he was called the "King" of Ireland. Fitzgibbon and Foster he seldom consulted. Further, when Grattan at the opening of Parliament introduced an Emancipation Bill, Fitzwilliam determined to support it. Of all that he did or intended to do he informed the English Ministry, and got no word of protest in reply, and then when the hopes of the Catholics ran high, Pitt turned back and Fitzwilliam was recalled. Why he was thus repudiated, after being allowed to go so far, has never been satisfactorily explained. It may be because Pitt changed his mind, and meditating a union wished to leave the Catholic question open. It may be because of the dismissal of Beresford who had powerful friends. It may be that Fitzwiiliam, misunderstanding Pitt, went further than he wished him to go; and it seems evident that he managed the question badly and irritated interests he ought to have appeased. Lastly, it is certain that Fitzgibbon poisoned the king's mind by pointing out that to admit Catholics to Parliament would be to violate his coronation oath. However the change be explained, it was certainly complete. The new viceroy was instructed to conciliate the Catholic clergy by establishing a seminary for the education of Irish priests, and he established Maynooth College. But all further concessions to Catholics and every attempt to reform Parliament he was firmly to oppose. He was to encourage the enemies of the people and frown upon their friends, and he was to rekindle the dying fires of sectarian hate. And all this he did. Beresford and Cooke were restored to office, Foster favoured more than ever, Fitzgibbon made Earl of Clare, Grattan and Ponsonby regarded with suspicion, and the corrupt majority in Parliament petted and caressed. The religious factions of the "Defenders" and the "Peep o' Day Boys" in Ulster became embittered with a change of names. The Defenders became United Irishmen, and these, despairing of Parliament, became republicans and revolutionists, and after Fitzwilliam's recall were largely recruited by Catholics. Their opponents became identified with the Orange society recently formed in Ulster, with William of Orange as its patron saint, and intolerance of Catholicism as the chief article in its creed. These rival societies spread to the other provinces, and while every outrage done by Catholics was punished by Government, those done by Orangemen were condoned. In rapid succession Parliament passed an Arms Act, an Insurrection Act, an Indemnity Act, and a suspension of the Habeas Corpus Act, and these placed the Catholics beyond the protection of law. An undisciplined soldiery recruited from the Orangemen were let loose among them; destruction of Catholic property, free quarters, flogging, picketing, half-hanging, outrages on women followed, until at last Catholic patience was exhausted. Grattan and his friends, vainly protesting, withdrew from Parliament, and Clare and Foster had then a free hand. They were joined by Viscount Castlereagh, and under their management the rebellion of 1798 broke out with all its attendant horrors. When it was suppressed Pitt's policy of a legislative union gradually unfolded itself, and Foster and Clare, who had so long acted together, had reached the parting of the ways. The latter, with Castlereagh, was ready to go on and support the proposed union; but Foster drew back, and in the union debates his voice and influence were the most potent on the opposition side. His defection was considered a serious blow by Pitt, who vainly offered him offices and honours. Others followed the lead of Foster, incorruptible amidst corruption; Grattan and his friends returned to Parliament; and the opposition became so formidable that Castlereagh was defeated in 1799, and had to postpone the question of a union to the following year. During this interval, with the aid of Cornwallis who succeeded Camden as viceroy in 1798, he left nothing undone to ensure success, and threats and terrors, bribery and corruption were freely employed. Cornwallis was strongly in favour of emancipation as part of the union arrangement, and Castlereagh was not averse; and Pitt would probably have agreed with them had not Clare visited him in England and poisoned his mind. That bitter anti-Catholic boasted of his success; and when Pitt in 1799 brought forward his union resolutions in the British Parliament, he would only promise that at some future time something might be done for the Catholics, dependent, however on their good conduct, and on the temper of the times. But something more than this was required. The anti-Unionists were making overtures to the Catholics, knowing that the county members elected by Catholic votes could be decisively influenced by Catholic voters. In these circumstances Castlereagh was authorized to assure the leading Irish Catholics that Pitt and his colleagues only waited for a favourable opportunity to bring forward emancipation, but that this should remain a secret lest Protestant prejudice be excited and Protestant support lost. These assurances obtained Catholic support for the union. Not all of the Catholics, however, favoured it, and many of them opposed it to the last. Many more would have been on the same side had they not been repelled by the bigotry of Foster, who stubbornly refused to advocate emancipation, and in doing so failed to make the fight against the union a national struggle. As for the uneducated Catholics, they did not understand political questions, and viewed the union contest with indifference. The gentry had no sympathy with a Parliament from which they were excluded, nor the clergy for one which encouraged the atrocities of the recent rebellion. Gratitude for the establishment of Maynooth College inclined some of the bishops to support the Government; and Pitt's assurances that concessions would come in the United Parliament inclined them still more. From the first, indeed, Dr. Moylan, Bishop of Cork, was a Unionist, as was Dr. Troy, Archbishop of Dublin. In 1798 the latter favoured a union provided there was no clause against future emancipation, and, early in the following year, he induced nine of his brother bishops to concede to the Government a veto on episcopal appointments in return for a provision for the clergy. The bent of his mind was to support authority, even when authority and tyranny were identified, and through the terrible weeks of the rebellion his friendly relations with Dublin Castle were unbroken. He was foremost in every negotiation between the Government and the Catholics, and he and some of his colleagues went so far in advocating the union, that Grattan angrily described them as a "band of prostituted men engaged in the service of Government". This language is unduly severe, for they were clearly not actuated by mercenary motives; but they certainly advanced the cause of the union. Remembering this, and the assurances given by Castlereagh, they looked for an early measure of emancipation, and when in 1801 the United Parliament first opened its doors, their hopes ran high. The omission of all reference to emancipation in the King's Speech disappointed them; but when Pitt resigned and was succeeded by Addington, an aggressive anti-Catholic, they saw that they had been shamefully betrayed. In Parliament Pitt explained that he and his colleagues wished to supplement the Act of Union by concessions to the Catholics, and that, having encountered insurmountable obstacles they resigned, feeling that they could no longer hold office consistently with their duty and their honour. Cornwallis, on his own behalf and on behalf of the retiring ministers, assured the Irish Catholic leaders, and in language which was free from every shade of ambiguity, that the blame rested with George III, whose stubborn bigotry nothing could overcome. He promised that Pitt would do everything to establish the Catholic cause in public favour, and would never again take office unless emancipation were conceded; and he advised the Catholics to be patient and loyal, knowing that with Pitt working on their behalf the triumph of their cause was near. Cornwallis noted with satisfaction that this advice was well received by Dr. Troy and his friends. But those who knew Pitt better had no faith in his sincerity, and their estimate of him was proved to be correct, when he again became Prime Minister in 1804, no longer the friend of the Catholics but their opponent. The fact was that he had played them false throughout. He knew that the king was violently opposed to them; that he had assented to the Union in the hope that it would "shut the door to any further measures with respect to the Roman Catholics" that he believed that to assent to such measures would be a violation of his coronation oath. Had Pitt been sincere he would have endeavoured to change the king's views, and failing to persuade he would have resigned office, and opposed his successor. And if he had acted thus the king must have yielded, for no government to which the great minister was opposed could have lived. Pitt's real reason for resigning in 1801 was, that the nation wanted peace, and he was too proud to make terms with Napoleon. He supported Addington's measures; nor did he lift a finger on behalf of the Catholics; and when the Treaty of Amiens was broken and the great struggle with France was being renewed, he brushed Addington aside with disdain. In 1801 the king had one of his fits of insanity, and when he recovered complained that Pitt's agitation of the Catholic question was the chief cause of his illness; in consequence of which, when Pitt returned to power, in 1804, he bound himself never again to agitate the question during the lifetime of the king. In the meantime, one bitter enemy of the Catholics disappeared, in 1802, with the death of Lord Clare. Hating Ireland and Catholicism to the last, he strove in the British House of Lords to arouse anti-Irish prejudice by representing Ireland as filled with disaffection and hatred of England; he defended all the Government atrocities of 1798, and advocated for Ireland perpetual martial law. Once he had declared that he would have the Irish as tame as cats; and a Dublin mob retorted by groaning and hooting before his house as he lay dying, by creating disorder at his funeral, and at the graveside they poured a shower of dead cats upon his coffin. Pitt himself died in 1806, after having opposed the Catholic claims in the preceding year. A brief period of hope supervened when the "Ministry of all the Talents" took office; but hope was soon dissipated by the death of Fox, and by the dismissal of Grenville and his colleagues. They had brought into Parliament a bill assimilating the English law to the Irish by allowing Catholics in England to get commissions in the army. But the king not only insisted on having the measure dropped, but also that ministers should pledge themselves against all such concessions in the future; and when they indignantly refused he dismissed them. The Duke of Portland then became premier, with Mr. Perceval leader in the Commons; and the ministry going to the country in 1807 on a No Popery cry, were returned with an enormous majority. Grattan was then in Parliament. He had entered it in 1805 with reluctance, partly at the request of Lord Fitzwilliam, chiefly in the hope of being able to serve the Catholics. He supported the petition presented by Fox; he presented Catholic petitions himself in 1808 and 1810; and he supported Parnell's motion for a commutation of tithes; but each time he was defeated, and it was plain that the Catholic cause was not advancing. The Catholic Committee, broken up by the rebellion, had been revived in 1805. But its members were few, its meetings irregularly held, its spirit one of diffidence and fear, its activity confined to preparing petitions to Parliament. Nor were its leaders the stamp of men to conduct a popular movement to success. Keogh was old, and age and the memory of the events he had passed through chilled his enthusiasm for active work. Lord Fingall was suave and conciliatory, and not without courage, but was unable to grapple with great difficulties and powerful opponents. Lords Gormanston and Trimbleston were out of touch with the people; Lord French, Mr. Hussey, and Mr. Clinch were men of little ability; Mr. Scully was a clever lawyer who had written a book on the penal laws; and Dr. Dromgoole was a lawyer with a taste for theology and Church history, a Catholic bigot ill-suited to soften Protestant prejudice or win Protestant support. As for Dr. Troy, he was still the courtly ecclesiastic, and neither Pitt's treachery nor the contempt with which the Catholics were treated could weaken his attachment to Dublin Castle. He still favoured the Veto, but an event which occurred in 1808 showed that he was no longer supported by his brethren of the episcopacy. An English bishop, Dr. Milner, who had sometimes acted as English agent for the Irish bishops, thought it right to declare to Grattan in their name that they were willing to concede the Veto; and Lord Fingall took a similar liberty with the Catholic Committee. The former, as having exceeded his powers, was promptly repudiated by the Irish bishops, the latter by the Catholic Committee, and this repudiation of the Veto was hailed with enthusiasm throughout Ireland. By this time it was clear that the old method of presenting loyal petitions was out of date, that the time had come for more vigourous action, for a united nation to demand its rights. For this a leader was required, and he was found in the person of Daniel O'Connell. Called to the Bar in 1800 he had already acquired a lucrative practice, and had given valuable assistance in the work of the Catholic Committee. Having seen the horrors of the French Revolution and those of 1798, he abhorred revolution and rebellion, and believed that Catholic grievances might be redressed by peaceful agitation, unstained either by violence or crime. And nature itself seemed to have destined him for an agitator. Capable of extreme endurance, mental and physical, he had great courage, great resource, great perseverance, a readiness in debate, an eloquence of speech, and a power of invective rarely combined in a single man. He spoke with a voice of singular volume and sweetness, and under the influence of his words his audience were sad or gay, vengeful or forgiving, determined or depressed; and when he cowed the Orange lawyer, or ridiculed the chief secretary or viceroy, the exultation of the Catholics knew no bounds. From 1810 his position was that of leader, and the fight for emancipation was the fight made by O'Connell. It was an uphill fight. Anxious to attract the Catholic masses, and at the same time not to infringe on the Convention Act, he had drawn up the constitution of the Catholic Committee in 1809 with great care; but it went down before a viceregal proclamation, and the same fate befell its successor, the Catholic Board. The fact was that the viceroys of the time were advised by the Orangemen, and governed by coercion acts. O'Connell's difficulties were increased by the continued agitation of the Veto. In opposing it he was aided by the bishops and the clergy; but Dr. Troy and Lord Fingall, aided by the English Catholics, procured a rescript from Rome in their favour. It was sent by Quarantotti, Prefect of the Propaganda, in 1814, while Pius VII was a prisoner of Napoleon. When the pope returned to Rome he disavowed it, though not at once; and the agitation of the question for years weakened all Catholic efforts for emancipation. In 1813, Grattan, supported by Canning and Castlereagh, passed through its second reading a Catholic Relief Bill, which however was lost in Committee. Nothing daunted, he continued his efforts. To allay the groundless fears of unreasoning bigotry he conceded the Veto, and yet each year the motion he brought forward was rejected. When he died in 1820 another great Irishman, Plunket, took the matter in hand, and in 1821 succeeded in passing a Bill through the House of Commons. Even the concession of the Veto could not buy off the hostility of the House of Lords, who threw out the bill; and it seemed as if emancipation would never come. The visit of George IV to Ireland in 1821 brought a brief period of hope. The king had once been the declared friend of the Catholics, and if he had opposed them since he became regent, in 1810, it might be because he disliked opposing his father's views while his father lived. The Catholics by public resolution in 1812 blamed the witchery of his mistress, and the regent was known to be very wroth with what came to be called "The Witchery Resolution". But the Catholics in a forgiving mood felt sure that their resolution was forgotten; that the king was returning to his first and more enlightened opinions; and that his visit meant friendship and concession. Thus disposed, they welcomed him with enthusiasm. The king before leaving Ireland expressed his gratitude to his subjects, and counselled the different classes to cultivate moderation and forbearance. But he had no rebuke for Orange insolence and no message of hope for the Catholics, and to the end of his reign continued to oppose their claims. Depression settled down heavily on the whole Catholic body. Agitation ceased, outrages commenced coercion followed and continued; and in 1823, while the Catholics were apathetic and dispirited and the Orangemen more than usually aggressive, O'Connell founded the Catholic Association. His chief assistant was a young barrister named Sheil. They were old friends, but had quarrelled about the Veto, and now composed their quarrels and became friends again. To evade the Convention Act the new association, specially formed to obtain emancipation "by legal and constitutional means", was merely a club, its members paying a subscription, its meetings open to the Press. At first its progress was slow and not infrequently it was difficult to get a sufficient number together to form a quorum. But it gradually made headway. Dr. Doyle, Bishop of Kildare, joined it at an early stage, as did Dr. Murray Coadjutor Archbishop of Dublin, and many hundreds of the clergy. Subsidiary clubs arose throughout the country, the members paying a penny a month, the "Catholic Rent". They met under the presidency of the priests, and discussed all public questions, transmitted the rent to the central association, and received in return advice and assistance. The Government became so alarmed at the strength of an organization which had 30,000 collectors and hundreds of thousands of members, that it was suppressed in 1825. At the same time a Catholic Relief Bill passed the House of Commons, but was thrown out in the Lords, and all that Ireland got from Parliament was the act suppressing the Association, or the Algerine Act, as it was often called. It was easily evaded. Its provisions did not affect any religious society, nor any formed for purposes of charity, science, agriculture, or commerce; and for these purposes the Catholic Association, changing its name into the New Catholic Association and remodelling its constitution, continued its work. It was to build churches, obtain cemeteries, defend Catholic interests, take a census of the different religions, and for these the "New Catholic Rent" was subscribed, and meetings were held in Dublin, where Catholic grievances were discussed. Aggregate meetings nominally independent of the association, but really organized by it, were also held in different parishes, and larger assemblies took the form of county and provincial meetings. Attended by the local gentry, by the priests, by friendly Protestants sometimes by O'Connell and Shell, the boldness and eloquence of speech used gave courage to the Catholics and struck terror into their foes. Nor was this all. The Relief Act of 1793 had conferred the franchise on the forty-shilling freeholders, and landlords, to increase their own political influence, had largely created such freeholds. These freeholders living in constant poverty, frequently in arrears of rent, always dependent on the forbearance of their landlords, had hitherto been driven to the polls like cattle to vote for their landlords nominee. A new spirit appeared at the General Election of 1826. Relying on these freeholders, the Catholic Association nominated Mr. Stewart against Lord Beresford for Waterford. The threats employed by a powerful family were met on the other side by appeals to religion, to conscience, to the sacredness of the voter's oath; the priests craved of the voters to strike a blow for country and creed; and O'Connell reminded them that a Beresford had caused the recall of Lord Fitzwilliam, that another flogged Catholics to death in 1798, and that wherever the enemies of Ireland were gathered together a Beresford was in their midst. The contest was soon decided by the return of the Catholic nominee; and Monaghan, Louth, and Westmeath followed the lead of Waterford. The next year Canning became premier. His consistent advocacy of the Catholic claims brought him the enmity of the king and exclusion from office for many years. When he joined Lord Liverpool's government in 1823, he insisted that emancipation should be an open question in the Cabinet, and on the Catholic Relief Bill of 1825 the strange spectacle was seen of Peel, the home secretary, voting on one side while Canning, the foreign secretary, was on the opposite side. As premier the latter was powerless in consequence of the hostility of the king, but had he lived he might probably have forced the king's hand. He died, however, in August, 1827, and by his death the Catholics lost one of their stoutest champions. His successor, Goderich, held office only for a few months, and then, early in 1828 the Duke of Wellington became premier, with Peel as his leader in the House of Commons. These two were declared enemies of reform and emancipation, and instead of being willing to concede they would have wished to put down the Catholic Association by force. But such an undertaking was one from which even the strongest Government might have recoiled. The forty-shilling freeholders, effectually protected by the "New Rent" which was specially levied for their benefit, laughed at the threats of the landlords; the Catholic forces organized into parish and county Liberal Clubs, and in correspondence with the Catholic Association at Dublin as head club, sought out and published every local grievance; Catholic churchwardens in each parish collected subscriptions and sent the money to Dublin, getting in return advice in all their difficulties and legal assistance whenever it was necessary. So disciplined were the Catholic masses that 800,000 of them petitioned Parliament for the repeal of the Test and Corporation Acts, which were repealed in 1828; and the same year in 1500 parishes throughout Ireland meetings were held on the same day to petition for emancipation, and a million and a half Catholic signatures were obtained. Foreign writers came to Ireland to see for themselves and published in foreign papers and reviews what they saw, and in France, Germany, and Italy England was held up to public odium because of her treatment of Ireland. Across the Atlantic the Irish element was already strong, and all over America meetings were held to demand justice for Ireland. At these meetings money was subscribed liberally and sent to Ireland to swell the coffers of the Catholic Association, and language of menace and defiance was used towards England. Yet Wellington and Peel were still unyielding, and in the session of 1828 the latter opposed Sir Francis Burdett's motion in favour of emancipation, and Wellington helped to defeat it in the Lords. The Catholic Association answered these unfriendly acts by a resolution to oppose all Government candidates; and when Mr. Vesey Fitz Gerald, on being promoted to the Cabinet, sought re-election for Clare, a Catholic Association candidate was nominated against him. As no Catholic could sit in Parliament if elected, it was at first resolved to nominate Major Macnamara, a popular Protestant landlord of Clare; but after some hesitation he declined the contest. Then was remembered what John Keogh had once said: "John Bull thinks that to grant emancipation would rekindle the fires of Smithfield. But he is jealous of a subject's constitutional privileges, and if a Catholic M.P. be debarred from taking his seat on account of objectionable oaths he will have such oaths modified so that the constituency shall not be put outside the constitution." In all this there was wisdom, and O'Connell himself determined to stand for Parliament and issued his address to the electors of Clare. The historic contest opened in July. Dr. Doyle sent O'Connell a letter of recommendation praying that the God of truth and justice might prosper him; Father Tom Maguire, a noted polemic, came all the way from Leitrim to lend his aid; Jack Lawless came from Ulster; O'Gorman, Mahon, and Steele from Clare itself worked with a will; the eloquent Sheil came from Dublin; above all the priests of Clare strained every nerve; and with the aid of all these O'Connell had a noted triumph. The gentry and the larger freeholders were all with Fitz Gerald; the forty-shilling freeholders were with O'Connell, and influenced by the priests bade defiance to their landlords; and the enthusiasm displayed was not more remarkable than the discipline and self-restraint. During the six days of the polling, 30,000 from all parts of Clare bivouacked in the streets of Ennis, and yet there was no disorder, no riot, no violence, no drunkenness, nothing to call for the interference of soldiers or police. Even the blindest could see that a crisis had come. The Orangemen became restive and aggressive. In compliment to the reigning family they formed clubs, modelled on the Liberal clubs of the Catholics, and in language of menace proclaimed their determination to resist the Catholic claims even by force. The Catholics were equally defiant, and all the efforts of O'Connell on the one side and of the Lord Lieutenant, the Marquess of Anglesey, on the other, were scarcely sufficient to prevent Catholics and Orangemen from coming to blows. Anglesey privately warned the prime minister that even the soldiers were not to be relied on, and were cheering for O'Connell; and Dr. Curtis, an old friend of the Duke of Wellington, implored of him to yield. His reply was that if the Catholics ceased to agitate, and if a period of quiet supervened, something might be done; and when Anglesey advised the Catholics to continue their agitation he was instantly removed from office. Excitement grew, party passions were further inflamed, men's minds were constantly agitated by hopes and fears; and as the gloomy days of winter passed and a new year was ushered in, the conviction was general that peace could not be maintained, and that there must be concession or civil war. At last Wellington and Peel surrendered. The former worked upon the fears of the king and compelled him to yield; the latter managed the House of Commons with consummate ability, and in March a Catholic Relief Bill was introduced, and in the following month passed into law. Under its provisions Catholics were admitted to Parliament and to the corporations; but they were still excluded from some of the higher offices, civil and military, such as those of Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, Commander-in-chief of the Army, and Lord Chancellor both in England and Ireland; priests were forbidden to wear vestments outside their churches, and bishops to assume the titles of their dioceses; Jesuits were to leave the kingdom, and other religious orders were to be rendered incapable of receiving charitable bequests. Further, the franchise being raised to ten pounds, the forty-shilling freeholders were disfranchised; and the Act not being retrospective O'Connell on coming to take his seat was tendered the old oath, which he refused and then had to seek re-election for Clare. These concessions to bigotry -- they were said to be made especially to placate the king -- helped to spoil the healing effect of the measure. The provisions regarding priests and bishops were indeed of little value, and were either evaded or despised; but the disfranchisement of the forty-shilling freeholders was a grievous wrong; and the denial of his seat to O'Connell was a personal insult, and was felt to be an insult to all Ireland. IN ENGLAND: BUTLER, Historical Account of the Laws Respecting the Roman Catholics, and of the Laws passed for their Relief, etc. (London, 1795); IDEM, Historical memoirs of the English, Irish and Scottish Catholics from the Reformation to the resent time, 4 volumes (1812-1821); AMHERST, History of Catholic Emancipation (London, 1885); LILLY AND WALTER, A Manual of the Law especially affecting Catholics (London, 1893); BLÖTZER, Die Katholiken emanzipation in Grossbritannien u. Irland (Freiburg, 1905); DAIN, Catholic Emancipation in Cambridge Modern History, X; c. 19. IN IRELAND: Journals of the Irish House of Commons; Irish Parliamentary Debates (1781-97); Annual Register (1800-29); LECKY, History of Ireland in the Eighteenth Century (London, 1897); MITCHEL, History of Ireland (Glasgow, 1869); D'ALTON, History of Ireland (London, 1910); PLOWDEN, History of Ireland, 1800-1810 (Dublin, 1811); Castlereagh Correspondence (London. 1848); Cornwallis Correspondence (London, 1859); INGRAM, History of the Legislative Union (London. 1887);MACNEILL, How the Union was carried (London, 1887); Grattan's Memoirs (London 1839); Grattan's Speeches (London, 1822); STANHOPE, Life of Pitt (London, 1861); Plunket's Speeches (Dublin); WYSE, History of the Catholic Association (London, 1829); WALPOLE, History of England (London, 1879); Greville's Memoirs (London, 1904); FITZPATRICK, Correspondence of O'Connell (London, 1888); O'Connell's Speeches, ed. O'CONNELL (Dublin); SHEIL, Speeches (Dublin); MACDONAGH, Life of O'Connell (London, 1903); DUNLOP, Daniel O'Connell (London and New York, 1900); SHAW LEFEVRE, Peel and 'Connell (London, 1887); LECKY, Leaders of Public Opinion in Ireland (London, 1903); Colchester's Diary (London, 1861); PELLEW, Life of Lord Sidmouth (London, 1847); Canning's Correspondence, ed. STAPLETON (London, 1887); Creevey Papers (London, 1903); Peel's Memoirs (London, 1856). JOHN GERARD & E.A. D'ALTON Roman Colleges Roman Colleges This article treats of the various colleges in Rome which have been founded under ecclesiastical auspices and are under ecclesiastical direction, with the exception of those that are treated separately under their respective titles throughout the Catholic Encyclopedia. The word "college" is used here to designate institutions established and maintained in Rome for the education of ecclesiastics; it is equivalent to "seminary". While the word seminario is applied occasionally, e.g. the Seminario Romano (S. Apollinare), the majority of these institutions, and especially those which have a national character, are known as "colleges". The training of priests in general is described in the article SEMINARY; here it suffices to note that the Roman colleges, in addition to the obvious advantages for study which Rome offers, also serve in a certain measure to keep up in the various countries of the world that spirit of loyal attachment to the Holy See which is the basis of unity. With this end in view the popes have encouraged the founding of colleges in which young men of the same nationality might reside and at the same time profit by the opportunities which the city affords. So too it is significant that within the last half century several colleges have developed as offshoots of the Propaganda (Urban College) in which the students from various countries were received until each nationality became numerous enough to form the nucleus of a distinct institution. The colleges thus established are halls of residence in which the students follow the usual seminary exercises of piety, study in private, and review the subjects treated in class. In some colleges there are special courses of instruction (languages, music, archaeology etc.). but the regular courses in philosophy and theology are given in a few large central institutions, such as the Propaganda, the Gregorian University, the Roman Seminary, and the Minerva, i.e. the school of the Dominicans. The Roman colleges are thus grouped in several clusters, each of which included a centre for purposes of instruction and a number of affiliated institutions. Each college has at its head a rector designated by the episcopate of the country to which the college belongs and appointed by the pope. He is assisted by a vice-rector and a spiritual director. Discipline is maintained by means of the camerata system in which the students are divided into groups each in charge of a prefect who is responsible for the observance of rule. Each camerata occupies its own section of the college building, has its own quarters for recreation, and goes its own way about the city on the daily walk prescribed by the regulations. Meals and chapel exercises are in common for all students of the college. While indoors, the student wears the cassock with a broad cincture; outside the college, the low-crowned three-cornered clerical hat and a cloak or soprana are added. The scholastic year begins in the first week of November and ends about the middle of July. In most of the courses the lecture system is followed and at stated times formal disputations are held in accordance with scholastic methods. The course of studies, whether leading to a degree or not, is prescribed and it extends, generally speaking, through six years, two of which are devoted to philosophy and four to theology. To philosophy in the stricter sense are added courses in mathematics, languages, and natural sciences. Theology includes, besides dogmatic and moral theology, courses in liturgy, archaeology, Church history, canon law and Scripture. An oral examination is held in the middle of the year and a written examination (concursus) at the close. The usual degrees (baccalaureate, licentiate, and doctorate) are conferred in philosophy, theology, and canon law; since 1909 degrees in Sacred Scripture are conferred upon students who fulfill the requirements of the Biblical Institute. Each college spends the summer vacation at its villegiatura or country house located outside the city and generally in or near one of the numerous towns on the slopes of the neighbouring hills. Student life in the "villa" is quite similar to the routine of the academic year in regard to discipline and religious exercises; but a larger allowance is made for recreation and for occasional trips through the surrounding country. And while each student has more time for reading along lines of his own choice, he is required to give some portion of each day to the subjects explained in the classroom during the year. What has been said outlines fairly will the work of the Roman colleges. In matters of detail some variations will be found, and these are due chiefly to natural characteristics or to the special purpose for which the college was established. ALMO COLLEGIO CAPRANICENSE (CAPRANICA) This is the oldest Roman college, founded in 1417 by Cardinal Domenico Capranica in his own palace for 31 young clerics, who received an education suitable for the formation of good priests. Capranica himself drew up their rules and presented the college with his own library, the more valuable portion of which was later transferred to the Vatican. The cardinal's brother, Angelo, erected opposite his own palace a suitable house for the students. When the Constable de Bourbon laid siege to Rome in 1527 the Capranica students were among the few defenders of the Porta di S. Spirito, and all of them with their rector fell at the breach. The rector according to the university custom of those days was elected by the students and was always one of themselves. Alexander VII decided that the rector should be appointed by the protectors of the college. After the Revolution the college was re-established in 1807; the number of free students was reduced to 13, but paying students were admitted. Those entering must have completed their seventeenth year; they attend the lectures at the Gregorian University. The college counts among its graduates many cardinals and bishops; not a few of the students have passed into the diplomatic service. The country seat is a villa at Monte Mario. SEMINARIO ROMANO Hardly had the Council of Trent in its 23rd session decreed the establishment of diocesan seminaries, when Pius IV decided to set a good example, and on 1 Feb 1565, the seminary was solemnly opened with 60 students. The rules were drawn up by P. Lainez, General of the Society of Jesus, and to this order Pius IV entrusted the management of the college. Up to 1773 the students attended the lectures in the Collage Romano; the residence was changed several times before 1608, when they settled in the Palazzo Borromeo in the Via del Seminario (now the Gregorian University). A country seat was erected for the students in a portion of the baths of Caravalla. Each year, at Pentecost, a student delivered a discourse on the Holy Ghost in the papal chapel. In 1773 the seminary was installed in the Collegio Romano of the Jesuits. After the changes in 1798 the number of the students, generally about 100, was reduced to 9. Pius VII restored the seminary which continued to occupy the Collegio Romano until 1824, when Leo XII gave back this building to the Jesuits and transferred the seminary to S. Apollinare, formerly occupied by the Collegio Germanico; the seminary, however, retained its own schools comprising a classical course, and a faculty of philosophy and theology, to which in 1856 a course of canon law was added. The direction of the seminary and,as a rule, the chairs were reserved to the secular clergy. After the departure of the Jesuits in 1848 the seminary again removed to the Collegio Romano. In the seminary there are 30 free places for students belonging to Rome; the remaining students, who may be from other dioceses, pay a small pension. The Collegio Cerasoli with four burses for students of the Diocese of Bergamo endowed by Cardinal Cerasoli, is connected with the seminary. The students take part in the ceremonies in the church of the Seminario Pio. Their cassock is violet. The seminary possesses an excellent library. At the present time, by order of Pius X, a new building for the seminary is in process of construction near the Lateran Basilica. The schools of the seminary are attended by students from other colleges and religious communities. Gregory XV, Clement IX, Innocent XIII, and Clement XII were educated in this seminary. SEMINARIO PIO Also situated in the Palazzo di S. Apollinare, this was founded in 1853 by Pius IX for the dioceses of the Pontifical States. Each diocese is entitled to send a student who has completed his humanities; Sinigaglia may send two; the number of pupils is limited to 62. All must spend nine years in the study of philosophy, theology, canon law, and literature; they are supported by the revenues of the seminary and are distinguished by their violet sash. The seminary has a villa outside the Porta Portese. The students bind themselves by oath to return to their dioceses on the completion of their studies. SEMINARIO VATICANO Founded in 1636 by Urban VIII for the convenience of the clerics serving in the Vatican Basilica (St. Peter's). Its government was entrusted to the Vatican Chapter which appointed the rector. Shortly afterward a course of grammar and somewhat later, courses of philosophy and theology were added. Paying students were also admitted. In 1730 the seminary was transferred from the Piazza Rusticucci to its present location behind the apse of St. Peter's. From 1797 till 1805 it remained closed; on its reopening only 6 free students could be received, but the number rose to 30 or 40. After the events of 1870 the seminary dwindled. Leo XIII endeavoured to restore it, re-establishing the former courses and granting it a country residence in the Sabine hills. In 1897 it was authorized to confer degrees. In 1905 Pius X suppressed the faculties of philosophy and theology, the students of the former subject going to S. Apollinare, and of the latter to the Gregorian. They wear a purple cassock with the pontifical coat-of-arms on the end of their sash. SEMINARIO DEI SS. PIETRO E PAOLO Established in 1867 by Pietro Avanzani, a secular priest, to prepare young secular priests for the foreign missions. Pius IX approved it in 1874 and had a college erected, but this was later pulled down and since then the seminary has changed its location several times; at present it is in the Armenian College. The students follow the courses at the Propaganda; at home they have lectures on foreign languages, including Chinese. They number 12. The college has a country residence at Montopoli in the Sabine hills. On finishing their studies the students go to the Vicariate Apostolic of Southern Shen-si or to Lower California. SEMINARIO LOMBARDO DEI SS. AMBROGIO E CARLO This college, founded in 1854 chiefly through the generosity of Cardinal Borromeo and Duke Scotti of Milan, was located in the palace of the confraternity of S. Carlo al Corso. Owing to the insufficiency of its revenues it remained closed from 1869 to 1878. Leo XIII allowed the other bishops of Upper Italy as well as of Modena, Parma, and Placenta to send their subjects who, numbering over 60, pay for their maintenance and follow the lectures at the Gregorian University; not a few of these students are already priests when the enter the seminary. They may be known by their black sashes with red borders. Since 1888 the seminary has had its own residence in the Prati di Castello. COLLEGIO GERMANICO-UNGARICO After the Collegio Capranica, the oldest college in Rome. The initiative towards its foundation was taken by Cardinal Giovanni Morone and St. Ignatius of Loyola, and by the energetic labour of the saint the plan was carried into effect. Julius III approved of the idea and promised his aid, but for a long time the college to struggle against financial difficulties. The first students were received in November 1552. The administration was confided to a committee of six cardinal protectors, who decided that the collegians should wear a red cassock, in consequence of which they have since been popularly known as the gamberi cotti (boiled lobsters). During the first year the higher courses were given in the college itself; but in the autumn of 1553 St. Ignatius succeeded in establishing the schools of philosophy and theology in the Collegio Romano of his Society. He also drew up the first rules for the college, which served as models for similar institutions. During the pontificate of Paul IV the financial conditions became such that the students had to be distributed among the various colleges of the Society in Italy. To place the institution on a firmer basis it was decided to admit paying boarders regardless their nationality, and without the obligation of embracing the ecclesiastical state; German clerics to the number of 20 or more were received free and formed a separate body. In a short time 200 boarding students, all belonging to the flower of European nobility, were received. This state of affairs lasted till 1573. Under Pius V, who had placed 20 of his nephews in the college, there was some idea of suppressing the camerata of the poveri tedeschi. Gregory XIII, however, may be considered the real founder of the college. He transferred the secular department to the Seminario Romano, and endowed the college with the Abbey of S. Saba all' Aventino and all its possessions, both on the Via Portuense and on the Lake of Bracciano; moreover he incorporated with it the Abbeys of Fonte Avellana in the Marches, S. Cristina, and Lodiveccio in Lombardy. The new rector P. Lauretano, drew up another set of regulations. The college had already changed its location five times. In 1574 Gregory XIII assigned it the Palace of S. Apollinare and in 1575 gave it charge of the services in the adjoining church. The splendour and majesty of the functions as well as the music executed by the students under the Spaniard Ludovico da Vittoria and other celebrated masters (Stabile, Orgas, Carissimi, Pittoni, and others) constantly drew large crowds to the church. Too much attention indeed was given to music under P. Lauretano, so that regulations had to be made at various times to prevent the studies from suffering. The courses were still given in the Collegio Roman; but when Bellarmine terminated his lectures on controversy, a chair for this important branch of learning was established in the Collegio Germanico and somewhat later a chair of canon law. As a special mark of his favour, Gregory XIII ordered that each year on the Feast of All Saints a student of the college should deliver a panegyric in presence of the pope. Meanwhile in 1578 the Collegio Ungherese had been founded through the efforts of another Jesuit, P. Szántó who obtained for it the church and convent of S. Stefano Rotondo on the Caelian Hill, and of S. Stefanino behind the Basilica of St. Peter, the former belonging to the Hungarian Pauline monks, and the latter to the Hungarian pilgrims' hospice. In 1580 the union of the two colleges was decreed, a step which at first gave rise to difficulties. The students generally numbered about 100, sometimes, however, there were but 54, at other times as many as 150. During the seventeenth century several changes occurred, in particular the new form of oath exacted from all the students of foreign colleges. Mention must be made of the work of P. Galeno, the business manager who succeeded in consolidating the finances of the college so as to raise the revenue to 25,000 scudi per annum. A country residence was acquired at Parioli. In the eighteenth century the college became gradually more aristocratic. Benedict XIV performed the ceremony of laying the corner stone of the new church of S. Apollinare in 1742, on the completion of which a new Palace of S. Apollinare was erected. At the suppression of the Society (1773) the direction was entrusted to secular priests; lectures were delivered in the college itself, and the professors were Dominicans. Discipline and studies declined rapidly. Moreover, Joseph II sequestrated the property situated in Lombardy and forbade his subjects to attend the college. The buildings, however, were increased by the addition of the palace opposite to S. Agostino. On the proclamation of the Roman Republic the property of the foreign national colleges was declared escheated to the Government and was sold for an absurdly small sum. On that occasion the library and the precious archives of sacred music were scattered. Pius VII restored whatever remained unsold and ordered the rest to be repurchased as far as possible. In the first years the revenues were employed to pay off the debts contracted in this repurchase. In 1824 the palace of S. Apollinare as well as the villa at Parioli was reunited to the Seminario Romano. The first students were received in 1818 and lived in the professed house of the Jesuits at the Gesu, and there the college remained till 1851. From that time the administration was entrusted to the general of the Jesuits, who appointed the rector and other fathers in charge of the college. In 1845 the estate of S. Pastore near Zagarolo was acquired. In 1851 the residence was transferred to the Palazzo Borromeo in the Via del Seminario where it remained till 1886. In 1873 when the Collegio Romano was taken away from the Jesuits, the Collegio Germanico found a home in the Gregorian University. In 1886 owing to the necessity of having more extensive quarters, the Collegio Germanico was transferred to the Hotel Costanzi in the Via S. Nicola da Tolentino. The college receives German students from the old German Empire and from Hungary; places are free, but there are some students who pay (cf. Steinhuber, "Geschichte des Collegium Germanicum-Hungaricum in Rom", Freiburg, 1896; Hettinger, "Aus Welt und Kirche," I, Freiburg, 1897). COLLEGIO TEUTONICO DI S. MARIA DELL' ANIMA In 1399 Theodoric of Niem founded a hospice for German pilgrims. A confraternity in aid of the suffering souls in purgatory was soon after formed, and in 1499 the first stone of the beautiful church was laid, near the Church of S. Maria della Pace. In 1859 this pia opera was reorganized; a college of chaplains to officiate in the church was established; the chaplains were to remain only two or at the most three years, and at the same time were to continue their studies. They devote themselves chiefly to canon law with a view to employing their knowledge in the service of their respective dioceses; and they receive living and tuition gratis. Other priests also are admitted who come to Rome at their own expense for the purpose of study. At present there are 8 chaplains and about 10 other priests residing there. The college continues to assist poor Germans who come to Rome, either to visit the holy places or in search of occupation. COLLEGIO TEUTONICO DEL CAMPO SANTO Established in 1876 to receive priests belonging to the German Empire or German provinces of Austria, who remain there for two or, at the most, three years pursuing their studies and officiating in the Church of S. Maria della Pieta near St. Peter's. The revenues of the Campo Santo and the chaplaincies that have been founded devote themselves to the study of Christian archeology or Church history; they publish a quarterly review, the "Römische Quartalschrift fur christliche archaeologie und Kirkengeschichte". The site of the Campo Santo dei Tedeschi goes back to the days of Charlemagne and was then called the Schola Francorum. In the course of time the German residents in Rome were buried in the church of the Schola, then called S. Salvatore in Turri. In 1454 a confraternity was established, and in addition the guilds of German bakers and cobblers had their quarters there. In 1876 owing to the altered conditions of modern times the institute was put to its present purpose (cf. de Waal, "Der Campo Santo der Deutschen zu Rom", Freiburg, 1897.) COLLEGIO PONTIFICO GRECO (THE GREEK PONTIFICAL COLLEGE) This is also a foundation of Gregory XIII, who established it to receive young Greeks belonging to any nation in which the Greek Rite was used, and consequently for Greek refugees in Italy as well as the Ruthenians and Malchites of Egypt and Syria. These young men had to study the sacred sciences, in order to spread later sacred and profane learning among their fellow-countrymen and facilitate the reunion of the schismatical Churches. The construction of the College and Church of S. Atanasio, joined by a bridge over the Via dei Greci, was begun at once. The same year (1577) the first students arrived, and until the completion of the college were housed elsewhere. Gregory XIII endowed the college. The direction was entrusted to five cardinal protectors; the rector was selected at first either from the secular clergy or from the regulars. Under Sixtus V, but for the energetic resistance of Cardinal di S. Severina, this promising college would have been suppressed. Gregory XIV on the suggestion of the learned Pietro Arendius, a former student of the college, entrusted the direction to the Jesuits (1591), who introduced a new method of government and a new disciplinary spirit. Within a short time the number of collegians rose to 56; some paying students were admitted as boarders. Studies were pursued in the college itself; some of the professors were Jesuits, some secular priests, and some laymen. In 1602 when Cardinal Guistiniani became cardinal protector, so many changes were introduced that the Jesuits withdrew from the care of the college which was entrusted first to the Somaschians and then to the Dominicans; but in 1622, at the request of the students, the Jesuits returned. Urban VIII ordered all the alumni to bind themselves by oath to remain in the Greek Rite, and this applied to Latins who entered the college surreptitiously; the regulation, however, was frequently disregarded in the eighteenth century. After 1773 secular priests took charge. The college was closed during the Revolution and not reopened till 1849; in the meantime the Greeks were admitted to the College of the Propaganda. The direction was entrusted first to secular priests, then to the Resurrectionists (1886), and finally to the Jesuits (1889). In 1897 Leo XIII reorganized the college. Owing to the generosity of the Emperor of Austria and the Ruthenian episcopacy a college was provided especially for the Ruthenians, while the Rumanians were sent to the College of the Propaganda. The direction of the College of S. Atanasio was entrusted to the Benedictines, who adopted the Greek Rite. The students perform the sacred functions of their rite with the greatest possible splendor in the Church of S. Atanasio. Formerly the Latin Rite also was celebrated in the church, but Leo XIII reserved it entirely for the Greek Rite. The students are all maintained gratuitously out of the revenues of the college. They number about 30 to 35 and follow courses in the Propaganda, besides having lectures at home in Greek language and literature. They wear a blue cassock with a red sash, and an Oriental cloak with large sleeves (cf. De Meester, "Le Collège Pontifical Grec de Rome", Rome, 1910). PONTIFICIO-RUTENO COLLEGIO (THE RUTHENIAN PONTIFICAL COLLEGE) This was founded, as said above, in 1897, and the Church of SS. Sergio e Bacco was assigned to it. At first it was in charge of the Jesuits but some years later it was entrusted to the Ruthenian Basilian monks. There are about 20 students, who are supported partly by the Ruthenian bishops and partly by paying a small fee. They follow the lectures at the Propaganda, and wear a blue cassock and soprana (cloak) with a yellow sash. COLLEGIO INGLESE (VENERABILE COLLEGIUM ANGLORUM) See THE ENGLISH COLLEGE in Rome. COLLEGIO BEDA United to the English College and intended for converted Anglican clergymen wishing to prepare for the priesthood. It was founded in 1852 by Pius IX; and increased under Leo XIII. Cardinal Howard bequeathed to the two colleges his valuable library. The country seat of the two colleges is at Monte Porzio. COLLEGIO SCOZZESE (THE SCOTS COLLEGE) Established in 1600 by Clement VIII for the education of Scottish priests for the preservation of Catholicism in their Fatherland; it was assigned the revenues of the old Scots hospice, which were increased by the munificence of the pope and other benefactors. In 1634 the college was transferred to its present situation and in 1649 the Countess of Huntley constructed a church dedicated to Saint Andrew and Saint Margaret, Queen of Scotland. From 1615 till 1173 it was under the direction of the Jesuits. The students, numbering about 20, are supported partly by the revenues of the college and partly by the Scottish bishops and by their own money. They attend the Gregorian University and have a villa at Marino. They wear a purple cassock, with a crimson sash and black soprana. COLLEGIO IRLANESE See IRISH COLLEGE, IN ROME. COLLEGIO URBANO DI PROPAGANDA (THE URBAN COLLEGE) The foundation of this college is due to the zeal of P. Ghislieri, a Theatine, and to the generosity of Mgr. G. Batta Vives, a Spaniard, consultor of the Sacred Congregation of the Propaganda, then established by Gregory XV. Urban VIII approved of the plan of erecting a college for the evangelization of the East and enlarged the palace given by Mgr. Vives; and under Alexander VII the Church of the Three Magi was added. Vives established in addition six free scholarships; foundations were made by other pontiffs and prelates, especially by Innocent XII, Clement XII, and the brother of Urban VIII, Cardinal Antonio Barberini. The college depends on the Sacred Congregation of the Propaganda, which appoints the rector, who at first was a Theatine but for centuries has always been a secular prelate, who is the parish priest of all who live in the Palace of the Propaganda; there are also a vice-rector, a bursar, and an assistant. Alexander VII imposed on all the students an oath binding them to remain under the jurisdiction of the Propaganda, not to enter a religious order without special permission, and to return after ordination to the priesthood to their dioceses or provinces to engage in the sacred ministry, and to send each year if in Europe, or every second year otherwise, a report of their apostolic work. Students are recommended by the bishops subject to the Propaganda, and the governing body select the students according to the number of vacancies, the places always being free. In 1798 the college was closed; some of the students were received by the Lazarists at Montecitorio. This lasted till 1809 when all that remained of the college was suppressed. In 1814 some of the Propaganda students were again received by the Lazarists, and in 1817 the college was reopened. From 1836 till 1848 it was under the direction of the Jesuits. The number of students is about 120. From the foundation of the college there have been courses of classics, philosophy, and theology, in which academic degrees are granted. The classical course lasts four years; the course of philosophy, including physics, and chemistry, and the history of philosophy, two years; the course of theology, four years. On the feast of the Epiphany the schools hold a solemn academy in various languages. The college possesses a valuable library. In addition to the many ecclesiastical dignitaries among the past students there were four martyrs: the Belgian Jacques Foelech (1643); Pietro Cesy (1680, in Ethiopia); the Armenian Melchior Tasbas (1716, at Constantinople); Nicholas Boscovich (1731). COLLEGIO DEI MARONITI (THE MARONITE COLLEGE) This was founded by Gregory XIII, and had its first site near the Church of S. Maria della Ficoccia near the Piazza di Trevi. It was richly endowed by Sixtus V and Cardinal Antonio Caraffa, and also by other popes, and was entrusted to the Jesuits; the pupils attended the Gregorian University. During the Revolution of 1798 the College was suppressed, and the Maronites who wished to study at Rome went to the Collegio Urbano. In 1893 Mgr. Khayat, the Maronite Patriarch, obtained the restoration of the college from Leo XIII. The Holy See gave part of the funds, the remainder was collected in France, and in 1894 the new college was inaugurated. In 1904 it acquired its own residence, and is now under the charge of Maronite secular priests. The students numbered 8 at the beginning, there are now 19; the greatest number that can be received is 24. COLLEGIO BELGA (THE BELGIAN COLLEGE) Established in 1844 through the initiative of Mgr. Aerts, aided by the nuncio in Belgium, then Mgr. Pecci, and by the Belgian bishops. At first it was located in the home of Mgr. Aerts, rector of the Belgian national Church of S. Guiliano. In 1845 the ancient monastery of Gioacchino ed Anna at the Quattro Fontane was purchased. The Belgian episcopate supports the students and proposes the president. The students, 20 and more in number, attend the Gregorian; their dress is distinguished by two red stripes at the ends of the sash. COLLEGIO DEGLI STATI UNITI DELL' AMERICA DEL NORD See THE AMERICAN COLLEGE, IN ROME. COLLEGIO POLACCO (THE POLISH COLLEGE) In 1583, St. Philip Neri, and in about 1600, King John Casimir had begun the foundation of a college for Poles, but their institute was short-lived. In 1866 a college was finally opened due to the efforts of the Congregation of the Resurrection, which raised the first funds to which Princess Odelscalchi, Pius IX, and others contributed later. In 1878 the college was transferred to its present location, the former Maronite College, and the adjoining church was dedicated to St. John Cantius. The students, some of whom pay a small pension, number 30 and are distinguished by their green sashes; they attend the lectures in the Gregorian. The college is under the care of the Resurrectionists and possesses a villa at Albano. COLLEGIO ILLIRICO (THE ILLYRIAN COLLEGE) This was established in 1863 by Pius IX to prepare priests for Dalmatia, Croatia, Bosnia, and Slavonia, and was located in the Illyrian hospice near the Church of S. Girolamo degli Schiavoni; but after a few years no more students were received. In 1900, Leo XIII reorganized the Illyrian hospice and decided to form a college of priests of the above-mentioned provinces, who would attend to the services in the church and at the same time pursue ecclesiastical studies. SEMINARIO FRANCESE (THE FRENCH SEMINARY) The French bishops at the Council of La Rochelle (1853) petitioned Pius IX to approve of their plan of founding a French Seminary in Rome for the special purpose of training a body of priests strongly attached to the Holy See and prepared to counteract the influence of Gallican ideas. The seminary was opened the same year with 12 students under the direction of P. Lamurien of the Congregation of the Holy Ghost, which order still directs it, while the students attend the lectures at the Gregorian. The students are in part priests who wish to perfect their knowledge, and partly seminarists preparing for the priesthood. The seminary is located in the Via del Seminario; its first site was the old Irish college near the Trajan Forum. In 1856 Pius IX assigned to the seminary the Church of S. Chiara with the adjoining Poor Clare convent, founded in 1560 by St. Charles Borromeo on the ruins of the baths of Agrippa. The church was rebuilt on the plan of Notre-Dame-des-Victoires in Paris; in 1883 the monastery was entirely remodeled to suit its present purpose. Leo XIII declared it a pontifical seminary in 1902. The students pay a pension, though in some cases it is paid from the funds of their diocese; students not belonging to France are also admitted. The seminarists generally number between 100 and 120 (c.f. Escheat, "Le séminaire français de Rome", Rome, 1903. COLLEGIO DEI CAPPELLANI DI S. LUIGI DEI FRANCESI This is another French institution. The church dating from 1496 served as a parish for the French residents at Rome. In 1840 on the proposal of Cardinal Bonnechose the parish was suppressed and the revenue applied to create chaplaincies for young students, French priests, who wished to specialize at Rome in canon law, archeology, or ecclesiastical history. Until 1906 the chaplains published the "Annales de St. Louis des Francais", devoted specially to history. After the decease of Mgr Cadene, they undertook the continuation of the "Analecta Ecclesiastica" containing the Acts of the Holy See, as well as moral and canonical dissertations. COLLEGIO BOEMO (THE BOHEMIAN COLLEGE) Established in 1884 partly with the revenues of the ancient Bohemian hospice founded by Emperor Charles IV, and with contributions of Leo XIII and the Bohemian bishops. The site was transferred several times, but in 1888 the old monastery of S. Francesca Romana in the Via Sistina was purchased. The rector is always one of the professors in the Propaganda, which the students attend. They number from 24 to 28 and are distinguished by their black sashes with two yellow stripes at the extremities. They have a villa at Trevi in Umbria. COLLEGIO ARMENO (THE ARMENIAN COLLEGE) Gregory XIII in 1584 had decreed the erection of a college for the Armenians (Bull "Romana Ecclesia"), but the plan fell through. When the Collegio Urbano of the Propaganda was founded later there were always some places for students of this nation. Finally, in 1885, Gregory's proposal was carried into effect, thanks to the generosity of some wealthy Armenians and of Leo XIII. The college was granted the Church of S. Nicola da Tolentino in the street of that name. The president is an Armenian prelate; the students numbering from 20 to 25 attend the lectures at the Propaganda, and wear red sashes and large-sleeved Oriental cloaks. COLLEGIO SPAGNUOLO (THE SPANISH COLLEGE) Founded in 1892 through the initiative of Leo XIII and the generosity of the episcopacy, the royal family, and other benefactors in Spain. Installed at first in the national hospice of S. Maria in Monserrato, it was transferred later to the Palazzo Altemps near S. Apollinare. The students numbering 70 are for the most part supported by their bishops; they attend the Gregorian, and are distinguished by a pelerine and a sky-blue sash. The direction is entrusted to the pious Spanish Congregation of the Operarii Diocesani. COLLEGIO CANADESE (THE CANADIAN COLLEGE) Cardinal Howard took the first steps towards the erection of this institute. The Canadian Congregation of St. Sulpice undertook to defray the expenses. The building was soon erected (1887) in the Via delle Quattro Fontane, and in 1888 the first pupils were enrolled. Some of the students are priests and follow the lectures in the Propaganda, and those who have already completed their studies in Canada are privileged to receive a degree after two years in Rome. The Sulpicians are in charge of the college. PONTIFICO COLLEGIO PORTOGHESE (THE PORTUGUESE PONTIFICAL COLLEGE) Founded in 1901 by Leo XIII; its direction is entrusted to Italian secular priests, and the students attend the lectures at S. Apollinare. COLLEGIO APOSTOLICO LEONIANO Owes its origin to P. Valentini, a Lazarist, who, aided by a pious lady, received in a private house the students who could not otherwise gain admittance to the other colleges. This college and the revenue left by the lady were taken over later by the Holy See and a large building was erected in the Prati di Castello. The direction was committed to the Jesuits. The students, mainly of the southern provinces that have no special college at Rome, attend the lectures at the Gregorian University. APPENDIX: "IN PRAECIPUIS" The Apostolic Constitution "In præcipuis", 29 June, 1913, promulgates the new regulations concerning the training of the Roman and Italian clergy. In brief, there are to be two seminaries: a smaller, for "gymnasial" students, in the present Vatican Seminary; and a greater, for philosophers and theologians, in the new Lateran building. To the latter are transferred the Seminario SS. Ambrogio e Carlo, now to be part of the Roman Seminary; and the Seminario Pio, which retains the laws as to its scope and character. The faculties of philosophy and theology of the Roman Seminary are to be in the Lateran Seminary; the law department goes to the Collegio Leoniano, but remains a school of the Seminary. The Collegio Leoniano shall receive only priests duly authorized to pursue higher studies. The Academia Theologica of the Sapienza remains at S. Apollinare. All Italian clerical students must abide in the Lateran or the Vatican Seminaries, excepting those preparing for the heathen missions or who are eligible for the Collegio Capranica. L'organisation et administration centrale de l'eglise (Paris, 1900), 600 sqq. DANIEL; BAUMGARTEN; DE WAAL, Rome, Le chef supreme; MORONI, Dizionario, XIII (Venice, 1842), LXIV (ibid., 1853). U. BENIGNI The Roman Congregations The Roman Congregations Certain departments have been organized by the Holy See at various times to assist it in the transaction of those affairs which canonical discipline and the individual interests of the faithful bring to Rome. Of these the most important are, without doubt, the Roman Congregations (Sacræ Cardinalium Congregationes), as is evident from the mere consideration of the dignity of their membership, consisting, as it does, of cardinals who are officially the chief collaborators of the sovereign pontiff in the administration of the affairs of the Universal Church. Nevertheless it should be noted that cardinals have not always participated in the administration of ecclesiastical affairs in the same way. A research on the various usages that have obtained in this connexion would lead us too far from our present subject, but is taken up under CARDINAL; CONSISTORY, PAPAL. The Roman Congregations originated in the necessity, felt from the beginning, of studying the questions submitted for pontifical decision, in order to sift the legal questions arising and to establish matters of fact duly. This work, at first entrusted to the papal chaplains, was afterwards divided between the p nitentiarii and the auditores, according as questions of the internal or the external forum (i. e., jurisdiction) were to be considered. Thereafter, cardinals in greater or less number were associated with them. Often, however, they were not merely entrusted with the preparation of the case, but were given authority to decide it. As, on the other hand, the increased numbers of cases to be passed upon occupied a great number of persons, while the proper administration of justice required that those persons should be of the most experienced, it appeared to be advisable, if not necessary, to divide this business into various and distinct groups. This division would evidently facilitate the selection of wise and experienced men in all branches of ecclesiastical affairs. Hence also a natural division into executive cases, assigned to the offices (officia), judicial cases, reserved to the tribunals, and administrative cases, committed to the Roman Congregations. Sixtus V was the first to distribute this administrative business among different congregations of cardinals; and in his Constitution "Immensa" (22 Jan., 1588) he generalized the idea, already conceived and partly reduced to practice by some of his predecessors, of committing one or another case or a group of cases to the examination, or to the decision, of several cardinals. By a judicious division of administrative matters, he established that permanent organization of these departments of the Curia, which since then have rendered such great services to the Church. The congregations at first established by Sixtus V were officially designated as: 1. for Holy Inquisition; 2. for the Signature of Grace; 3. for the erection of churches and consistorial provisions; 4. for the abundance of supplies and prosperity of the Church's temporal dominions; 5. for sacred rites and ceremonies; 6. for equipping the fleet and maintaining it for the defence of the Church's dominions; 7. for an index of forbidden books; 8. for the execution and interpretation of the Council of Trent; 9. for relieving the ills of the States of the Church; 10. for the University of the Roman study (or school); 11. for regulations of religious orders; 12. for regulations of bishops and other prelates; 13. for taking care of roads, bridges, and waters; 14. for the Vatican printing-press; 15. for regulations of the affairs of the Church's temporal dominions. From this it will be seen that, while the chief end of the Congregations of Cardinals was to assist the sovereign pontiff in the administration of the affairs of the Church, some of these congregations were created to assist in the administration of the temporal States of the Holy See. The number of these varied according to circumstances and the requirements of the moment; In the time of Cardinal De Luca there were about nineteen of them, as he himself tells us in his admirable work "Relatio Romanæ Curiæ forensis", without counting other congregations of a lower order, consisting of prelates, as were, for example, the "Congregatio baronum et montium" and the "Congregatio computorum". Other congregations were added by different popes, until the present organization was established by Pius X in his Constitution "Sapienti consilio" of 29 June, 1908, according to which there are thirteen congregations, counting that of the Propaganda as only one. As, however, the last-named congregation is divided into two parts: Congregation of the Propaganda for Affairs of the Latin Rite, and Congregation of the Propaganda for Affairs of the Oriental Rites, it may well be considered as two congregations; so that the total number of the congregations is fourteen. Sixtus V granted ordinary jurisdiction to each of the congregations which he instituted within the limits of the cases assigned to it, reserving to himself and to his successors the presidency of some of the more important congregations, such as the Congregation of the Holy Inquisition and that of the Signature of Grace. As time went on, the congregations of cardinals, which at first dealt exclusively with administrative matters, came to pass upon the legal points of the cases submitted to them, until the congregations overshadowed the ecclesiastical tribunals and even the Roman Rota in fact almost took their places. In time the transaction of business was impeded by the cumulation of jurisdictions, different congregations exercising jurisdiction rendering decisions, and enacting laws in the same matters; Pius X resolved to define the competency of each congregation more precisely and to provide otherwise for the better exercise of its functions. It would not be possible to relate here all the changes effected in this connexion. The reader seeking detailed information may consult the commentaries that have already appeared on the Constitution "Sapienti consilio" (see General Bibliography at the end of this article). Mention will be made here of only the chief among those innovations which, besides the principal one of the demarcation of competency, are to be found in the following provisions. All decisions of the sacred congregations require pontifical approval, unless special powers have been given previously by the pope. The officials of the congregations are divided into two classes: minor officers who are to be chosen by competitive examination and named by a letter of the cardinal prefect, and major officers, freely selected by the pope, and named by a note of the cardinal secretary of State. There is to be henceforth no cumulation of offices in the hands of one individual, not only to satisfy the requirements of distributive justice, but also because the tenure of several offices by the same person often results in detriment to the service. Wherefore, it is forbidden for an officer of one of the congregations to serve in any way as an agent, or as a procurator or advocate, in his own department or in any other ecclesiastical tribunal. The competency of the congresso in each congregation is determined. The congresso consists of the major officers under the presidency of the cardinal who presides over the congregation. It deals with the matters of less importance among those that are before the congregation, while those of greater moment must be referred to the full congregations of cardinals. It is also the business of the congresso to prepare for their discussion those matters that are to be considered by the full congregation. On the other hand, the congresso is charged with the execution of the orders of the full congregation that have received the approval of the pope. As examples of matters of greater importance which must be considered by the full congregation, the special rules (normæ peculiares) mention the solution of doubts or of questions that may arise in regard to the interpretation of ecclesiastical laws, the examination of important administrative controversies, and kindred matters. The normæ peculiares and the normæ communes, together with the Constitution "Sapienti consilio", constitute the entire code of the new organization of the Roman ecclesiastical departments. I. CONGREGATION OF THE HOLY OFFICE As the Roman Inquisition (Romana Inquisitio) this congregation is of very ancient origin, dating from Innocent III (1194-1216), although some authorities attribute its establishment to Lucius III (1181-85). In the beginning of the thirteenth century Innocent III established at Rome an inquisitorial tribunal against the Albigenses and other innovators of the south of France. From its first title of Romana Inquisitio was derived the usage of calling this body Congregation of the Holy Roman Universal Inquisition. Sixtus V, in the Bull "Immensa", calls it Congregatio pro S. inquisitione and also Congregatio sanct inquisitionis hæreticæ pravitatis. Benedict XIV calls it Romanæ Universalis Inquisitionis Congregatio (Const. "Sollicita"). Later it had the official title Suprema Congregatio sanctæ romanæ et universalis inquisitionis. Pius X in his recent Constitution calls it, simply, Congregatio S. Officii. The qualification of Suprema was omitted, possibly to avoid the appearance of an inequality of dignity among the congregations, they being all of the same rank and dignity, since they are composed of cardinals. According to Leitner, the name Inquisition was suppressed in order to shield this congregation from the hatred inspired by that name. It retains, therefore, the title of Holy Office, so well suited to the most holy office to which it is assigned, namely, that of removing the faithful from the danger of deviation from the Faith through the influence of false doctrine. In 1251 Innocent IV gave the Dominicans charge of this tribunal. In view of the progress of the Reformation, Paul III, by the Bull "Licet ab initio", of 21 July, 1542, declared the Roman Inquisition to be the supreme tribunal for the whole world; and he assigned to it six cardinals. Simier (La curie romaine, cf. S. n. I) is of opinion that Paul III appointed the six cardinals of S. Clemente, S. Sisto, S. Balbina, S. Cecilia, S. Marcello, and S. Silvestro general inquisitors, with universal powers, not, however, to act collegialiter, as a tribunal, but individually and independently of one another. The Constitution "Licet ab initio" lends itself to that interpretation. But the Holy Office did not begin its existence as a congregation until 1558, in the reign of Paul IV. As time went on, the number of cardinals assigned to the Holy Office was increased, and the tribunal took a form like that of the other congregations. Formerly a cardinal used to be selected to preside over the Holy Office with the title of prefect; the first to be appointed to this charge was Cardinal Michele Ghislieri, afterwards Pius V. The prefecture of the congregation, however, has long been reserved by the pope to himself. Like all the other congregations, the Holy Office has officials of the second order. The first of these is the assessor, one of the highest officers of the Curia; next comes the commissary, always a Dominican. Sometimes, as an exception, these two officials are invested with the episcopal character. Among the other officers who complete the personnel of the Holy Office are a vice-commissary, a first associate (socius), and a second associate, all Dominicans, also a sommista, a fiscal advocate, an advocatus reorum and some notaries. It may appear strange that so many positions in this congregation are filled by Dominicans. The reason is to be found in the great solicitude of Pius V for the Holy Office, which solicitude led him to reserve all these functions for his fellow-Dominicans, especially those of the Province of Lombardy, to which he himself had belonged, and in whose members he reposed great confidence. It is to be observed that, whereas the assessor now takes precedence of the commissary, the contrary order obtained in former times, even in the days of Cardinal De Luca (Relatio curiæ forensis disc., 14, n. 6), for the commissary had the faculties of a true judge in ordinary, while the assessor was merely an assessor or consultor, as in other tribunals. According to Simier (La curie romaine, ch. i, n. I) this change occurred towards the middle of the seventeenth century. Besides the officers already mentioned, the Holy Office, like most other congregations, has a number of consultors, chosen from among the most esteemed and learned prelates and religious. Some are ex officio consultors by virtue of a right anciently granted; these are called natural consultors (consultori nati). They are the Master General of the Order of Preachers, the Master of the Sacred Palace (of the same order by a privilege granted by Pius V), and a religious of the Order of Friars Minor added by Sixtus V, himself a Friar Minor. This congregation also has certain officers peculiar to itself, required by the nature of its attributes. They are the qualifiers (qualificatores), explained by the function of these officials, theologians whose duty it is to propose to the cardinals the particular note or censure by which objectionable propositions are to be condemned, since all such propositions do not affect the Faith in the same degree, and therefore are condemned by the Holy Office not in a general, but in a specific way, being termed heretical, erroneous, temerarious, false, injurious, calumnious, scandalous, or qualified by the ancient special phrase piarum aurium offensiv, "offensive to pious ears". Since the promulgation of the recent Constitution by the reigning pope, giving a new organization to the Curia, while all that has been referred to in regard to the internal status of this congregation has remained, a new division, to deal with indulgences, has been added to the Holy Office. For this division a congresso has also been established. Although no mention is made in the basic constitution of a congress (congresso) for the main part of this congregation, the Holy Office itself, the fact that it is said in the "Normæ peculiares" that the Holy Office shall retain its former methods of procedure insures to it a kind of congress analogous to that of the other congregations and consisting of the assessor, the commissary, the first associate, and a few other officers. Its duties are to examine the various cases, and to decide which of them must be submitted to the congregation of the consultors and which others may be disposed of without further proceedings, as is the case in matters of minor importance or of well-established precedent. The Decree often makes it clear that the case has been determined in this way, as when use is made of the formula: "D. N... Papa.. per facultates R. P. D. Assessori S. Off. impertitas..." The congresso of the new division consists of the cardinal, secretary, the assessor, the commissary, and the surrogate for indulgences. The Congregation of the Holy Office defends Catholic teaching in matters of faith and morals: "Hæc S. Congregatio . . .doctrinam fidei et morum tutatur." Whence it follows, and is explicitly affirmed in the "Sapienti consilio", that the Holy Office deals with all matters which, directly or indirectly, concern faith and morals; it judges heresy, and the offences that lead to suspicion of heresy; it applies the canonical punishments incurred by heretics, schismatics, and the like. In this the Holy Office differs from all the other congregations, which are without judicial power, or, at least, may exercise it only at the request of the parties interested, while the Holy Office has both judicial and administrative power, since the legislator rightly believed that the congregation exclusively empowered to pass upon a doctrine, and qualify and condemn it as heretical, should also be the judge in heretical and kindred cases. From the fact that the purpose of this congregation is to defend the Faith, it follows that dispensation from the impediments of disparity of worship and of mixed religion (which by their nature imperil faith, and which, by Divine law itself is granted only upon guarantees given by the non-Catholic party) pertains to the Holy Office. The same is true of the Pauline privilege. And as the judicial causes connected with this privilege and with impediments of disparity of worship and mixed religion have a remote connexion with the Faith, it was declared that these causes belonged to the jurisdiction of the Holy Office (see decision of the Cong. of the Consistory, January, 1910). With regard, however, to the substantial form of the celebration of mixed marriages, the pope withdrew all authority from this congregation, wishing article 11 of the Decree "Ne temere" to remain in force. The Holy Office formerly had a more ample jurisdiction, acquired by spontaneous development as time went on. Thus it dispensed from abstinence, from fasting, and from the observance of feasts (all of which now pertains to the Congregation of the Council); it dispensed from vows made in religious institutions, a function now exercised by the Congregation of Religious, and it dealt with the nomination of bishops, according to the Motu Proprio of Pius X (17 December, 1903), which business now belongs to the Congregation of the Consistory. In former times the Holy Office even dealt with causes of canonization, a matter which is now assigned to the Congregation of Rites. Grimaldi (op. cit. infra in general bibliography) gives as an example of such cases the Decree of the Holy Office in confirmation of the cult of the Blessed Colomba of Rieti, who died in the odour of sanctity at Perugia in 1507; and he adds: "Ce genre de causes est devenu ensuite l'apanage de la congrégation des Rites; mais si la vraie sainteté échappe actuellement à la juridiction de l'inquisition, ce tribunal a conservé le privilège de juger la fausse sainteté. Dans cet ordre d'idées nous trouvons les procès, qui se font en cour de Rome pour examiner les prophéties et révélations" (Causes of this kind afterwards became the province of the Congregation of Rites. But if true sanctity is no longer the jurisdiction of the Inquisition, that tribunal has kept the privilege of judging questions of spurious sanctity. Of this order are the processes carried on in the Roman Curia to examine prophesies and revelations). All persons are subject to the Holy Office except cardinals, who may be judged only by the pope. Mention should be made of the strict secrecy which characterizes the proceedings of this congregationa most prudent measure indeed, for the protection of the good name of individuals in a congregation which must deal with most grievous offences against the Faith. Grimaldi (op. cit.) rightly says, speaking of the secrecy of the Holy Office: "Le saint-office ayant à s'occuper des délits commis non seulement contre la foi, mais encore d'autres qui ne relèvent que de très loin de l'intelligence, il s'ensuit qu'être cité à ce tribunal n'est pas une recommendation, et en sortir même par la porte d'un acquitement, ne sera jamais un titre de gloire. Aussi doit-on bénir ce mystère qui protège celui qui comparait devant ce tribunal, et dont le procès se déroule sans qu'aucune phase n'en ait transpiré dans le public" (As the Holy Office has to deal not only with offences against the Faith, but also with others which are very remotely connected with the intelligence, it follows that to be cited before this tribunal is no recommendation, and to leave it, even by the door of acquittal, will never be a title to glory. We should bless that mystery which protects him who appears before the tribunal and whose trial proceeds without any phase of it becoming public). For the discussion of matters before the Holy Office there are three kinds of reunions, or, as they are called, congregations. The first is the so-called congregation of the consultors at which the consultors and the greater officials of the congregation are present under the presidency of the assessor. This meeting is held on Monday of each week in the Palace of the Holy Office behind the colonnade of St. Peter's. The most important matters are discussed at this meeting, and the views of the consultors are given for the enlightenment of the cardinals of the Holy Office, who, on the following Wednesday, consider the same matters and pass judgment upon them at the congregation of cardinals which used to be held at the residence of the general of the Dominicans near Santa Maria sopra Minerva, but since 1870 has been held at the Palace of the Holy Office. The third congregation is held in the presence of the pope, who approves or modifies the decisions rendered by the cardinals on the previous day. This third congregation, formerly held every Thursday, is now held only on occasion of the most exceptional cases. Instead of the congregation, the assessor refers the decisions of the cardinals to the Holy Father on Wednesday evenings, after which the pope gives the final decision. It was formerly customary, both at the congregation of cardinals and at that of Thursdays in the presence of the pope (coram Sanctissimo), for the consultors to wait in the antechamber in case they might be called upon by the cardinals or the Holy Father for explanations. This custom has been abolished. As regards the doctrinal value of Decrees of the Holy Office it should be observed that canonists distinguish two kinds of approbation of an act of an inferior by a superior: first, approbation in common form (in forma communi), as it is sometimes called, which does not take from the act its nature and quality as an act of the inferior. Thus, for example, the decrees of a provincial council, although approved by the Congregation of the Council or by the Holy See, always remain provincial conciliar decrees. Secondly, specific approbation (in forma specifica), which takes from the act approved its character of an act of the inferior and makes it the act of the superior who approves it. This approbation is understood when, for example, the pope approves a Decree of the Holy Office ex certa scientia, motu proprio, or plenitudine suâ potestatis. Even when specifically approved by the pope, decrees of the Holy Office are not infallible. They call for a true assent, internal and sincere, but they do not impose an absolute assent, like the dogmatic definitions given by the pope as infallible teacher of the Faith. The reason is that, although an act of this congregation, when approved by the pope specifically, becomes an act of the sovereign pontiff, that act is not necessarily clothed with the infallible authority inherent in the Holy See, since the pope is free to make the act of an inferior his own without applying his pontifical prerogative to its performance. Similarly, when he acts of his own volition, he may teach ex cathedra or he may teach in a less decisive and solemn way. Examples of specific approbation of the Decrees of the Holy Office which yet lack the force of ex cathedra definitions are given by Choupin ("Valeur des décisions doctrinales et disciplinaires du Saint-Siège", Paris, 1907, ch. ix, sect. 9). The disciplinary Decrees of the Holy Office have the same force as those of the other congregations, that is, they are binding upon all the faithful if they be formally universal; and they are binding only upon the parties interested if they be merely personal, e. g., judicial sentences, which are law for the parties in the case. If, however, they be personal and at the same time equivalently universal, canonists are not fully agreed as to their force. For a discussion of this point see Choupin, op. cit., ch. iv, sect. 33, and the authors cited by him. II. CONGREGATION OF THE CONSISTORY This congregation was established by Sixtus V under the title of Congregation for the Erection of Churches and for Consistorial Provisions (pro erectione ecclesiarum et provisionibus consistorialibus). Its original organization was somewhat different from that of the modern congregations of cardinals. It was a mixed congregation composed of cardinals and of prelates, similar to the original Congregation of Propaganda (De Luca, op. cit., dis. 23). It had also a secretary who, as a rule, was not a prelate but an advocate (peritus togatus). As time went on it took the form of the other congregations, which consisted entirely of cardinals, to whom, in this congregation, two subaltern officers were added, one who filled the office of secretary and another who acted as surrogate (sostituto). These two prelates filled the same offices for the College of Cardinals. Originally, the cardinal dean was the prefect of this congregation, but later, the prefecture was reserved by the pope to himself. The recent Constitution of Pius X has in part changed the organization of this congregation. The prefecture is still retained by the sovereign pontiff, and the congregation is formed exclusively of cardinals, selected by the pope; the secretary, however, is no longer a prelate but a cardinal priest, who is appointed by the Holy Father himself and who, as will be seen, has become one of the most important officers of the Curia. To the cardinal in control of the congregation is attached a prelate who has the title of assessor, and who, at the present time also, is the secretary of the Sacred College. There is, likewise, a surrogate. These are major officials, and therefore, together with the cardinal secretary, form the congresso. This congregation has numerous inferior officers. At present, its personnel is completed by several consultors, as had been the case in former times, before that office was suppressed. These consultors, with the exception of two, are selected by the pope; the exceptions are the assessor of the Holy Office, and the secretary of the Congregation of Extraordinary Ecclesiastical Affairs, who are ex-officio consultors of the Congregation of the Consistory. The work of the congregation formerly was to prepare the matters to be proposed and examined in the Consistory, and to bestow such honours on ecclesiastics who sought them as it might seem fit to grant. The new constitution, however, has greatly extended the scope of the Congregation of the Consistory, to the degree that, although in that Constitution the latter is named second among the congregations, it might be considered the first in importance, on account of the great number of matters which have been assigned to it, and its great influence in the affairs of the Church from both the disciplinary and the administrative point of view. The Holy Office, however, retains its priority, whether by reason of ancient custom or because it deals with matters concerning the Faith. The great volume of the business which now falls to the Congregation of the Consistory and the great importance of the matters with which it has to deal have necessitated a division of the congregation into two very distinct parts, corresponding to two distinct classes of business. One section of the congregation has been formed for the purpose of preparing the business to be brought before the Consistory; to establish in places, not subject to Propaganda, new dioceses and collegiate as well as cathedral chapters; to elect bishops, Apostolic administrators, suffragans or assistants of other bishops; to prepare the processes in such cases and to examine the candidates in doctrine. As regards these processes, it may be observed that when the appointment is to be made in a place where the Holy See has a diplomatic representative, the preparation of the necessary documents is left to the office of the cardinal secretary of State, which is in a position more easily to obtain the necessary information and to collect the necessary documents. These documents and information are transmitted to the Congregation of the Consistory, which prepares the report, or official sheet, on the matter to be distributed among the cardinals. The other section of this congregation transacts all the business that relates to the government of dioceses not under Propaganda: within its scope is the supervision of bishops in regard to the fulfilment of their duties, the review of reports on the state of their Churches presented by bishops, announcements of apostolic visitations, the review of those previously made, and, with the approval of the sovereign pontiff, the prescription of necessary or opportune remedies; finally, the supervision of all that concerns the government, discipline, temporal administration, and studies in seminaries. It is clear that the legislator intended to give to the Congregation of the Consistory complete authority in all that relates to a diocese as a juridical institution, including its establishment and its conservation; whence the power of electing bishops, of supervising them in the performance of their duties, and of controlling the seminaries so intimately connected with the future of the dioceses. For the same reason it would appear that the Congregation of the Consistory has authority in all that pertains to the creation of diocesan societies or committees, rural banks, and kindred establishments within a diocese. On the other hand, a very high function was given to this congregation in the new organization of the Curia, namely, the power of settling any doubts in relation to the competency of the other congregations, exception being made for the Holy Office, which is empowered to determine for itself all such doubts. Nevertheless, the Holy Office did not disdain to submit to the judgment of the Congregation of the Consistory a question that arose in regard to the competency of the former, after the promulgation of the Constitution "Sapienti consilio", It is the duty of the Congregation of the Consistory to send to bishops the invitations to assist at solemn canonizations or other solemn pontifical ceremonies, according to ancient custom. Its proceedings are characterized by the same strict secrecy that marks the deliberations of the Holy Office. As to the division of business between the congresso and the full congregation of cardinals, the same arrangement obtains as in the other congregations, which is to leave to the congresso the matters of minor importance while matters of greater interest are considered in the full congregation. Among such matters are the nomination of bishops or of Apostolic administrators (except, in regard to the latter, in cases of urgency, in which the congresso acts alone), the creation of new dioceses, or the unification of existing ones, the erection of chapters, the drafting of general rules for the direction of seminaries, and other similar matters the enumeration of which would take us beyond the necessary limits of this article. III. CONGREGATION OF THE SACRAMENTS This congregation, which owes its existence to the recent Constitution "Sapienti consilio", exercises a great influence upon ecclesiastical discipline through the authority given to it in its establishment, to regulate all sacramental discipline. Its numerous and important duties were formerly divided among the other congregations and offices. As regards matrimony, for example, causes of matrimony ratified and not consummated were referred to the Congregation of the Council, dispensations for the external forum were granted by the Dataria or, in certain cases, the P nitentiaria; many matters relating to the Sacrament of the Eucharist belonged to the Congregation of Rites. Many other examples could be cited; now, however, all such matters pertain to the Congregation of the Sacraments, excepting the rights of the Holy Office, as said above, and the power of the Congregation of Rites to determine all that concerns the ceremonies to be observed in the administration of the sacraments. With so wide and important a field of activities, this congregation required a special organization. Accordingly, besides its cardinals, one of whom is its prefect, it has a secretary, who deals with all the matters referred to it, and who was later given three sub-secretaries -- a feature in which it differs from all other congregations. Each one of these sub-secretaries is the director of one of the following sections of the congregation. A. The first section deals with all matrimonial dispensations, except those that imply disparity of religion, which pertain to the Holy Office. With regard to these dispensations it is important to note the distinction introduced by the Special Rules between impediments in the major degree and impediments in minor degree, and correspondingly between major and minor dispensations. Minor dispensations concern impediments of relationship or affinity of the third and the fourth degrees in the collateral line, whether of equal degrees, or of unequal degrees -- i. e., of the fourth degree with the third or of the third degree with the second. Minor dispensations are also given from impediments of affinity in the first degree, or in the second degree, whether simple or mixed -- i. e., of the first with the second degree -- when this impediment arises from illicit relations, or from spiritual kinship of whatever nature, or from impediments of public decorum, whether arising out of espousals or out of ratified marriage already dissolved by pontifical dispensation. Dispensations from these minor impediments are now granted ex rationalibus causis a S. Sede probatis, which means that none of the reasons formerly required, called canonical, are now necessary for obtaining the dispensations in question. Moreover, these dispensations are supposed to be given motu proprio and with certain knowledge, from which it follows that they are not vitiated by obreption or by subreption. The other impediments, and therefore the other dispensations are considered as of the major order, and the Special Rules show that the dispensations of this order more frequently granted are those relating to the impediment of consanguinity in the second collateral degree, or the mixed second or third degree with the first; those relating to affinity of the first or of the second equal collateral degree, or of the second or third with the first; finally, those relating to crime arising from adultery with a promise of future marriage. B. The second section of the Congregation of the Sacraments also deals exclusively with matrimony, and exercises its functions in all matters concerning that sacrament, except dispensations from impediments. Of its competency, therefore, are the concessions of sanatio in radice, the legitimation of illegitimate children, dispensations from marriage ratified and not consummated, the solution of doubts concerning matrimonial law, and the hearing of causes concerning the validity of marriages. In regard to the latter, however, it is to be noted that, the new Constitution on the Curia having established a complete separation between those departments which exercise judicial power and those which are administrative, and, on the other hand, the very nature of matrimonial causes making it impossible to determine them administratively, this power granted to the Congregation of the Sacraments should be interpreted reasonably, in such a way as not to be at variance with the spirit of the new Constitution. It seems, therefore, that this faculty should be held to signify only that, in special cases, in which the sovereign pontiff, for special reasons, might consider it desirable to withdraw a matrimonial cause from the Rota, and submit it to the judgment of a congregation, the Congregation of the Sacraments should be considered the competent congregation under such circumstances. It must be admitted, further, that if a matrimonial cause be brought before this congregation, the congregation may, if it please, hastily review any matrimonial cause brought before it and reject it, if found futile, ab ipso limine. If, however, the cause be found admissible, the congregation should refer it to the Rota (unless there be a special commission of the pope to the contrary), seeing that the very nature of causes concerning the matrimonial bond, in which not private interests are at issue but the public welfare, demands that those causes be determined judicially, and not administratively. None of this, however, applies to dispensation from a ratified, but not consummated, marriage, because the nature of such a case requires that it be determined administratively, since it relates to the concession of a grace. This does not do away with the necessity of establishing beyond doubt the non-consummation, or the existence of the requisite conditions for the dispensation, since these conditions constitute the proof that the sovereign pontiff has power, in the concrete case under consideration, to grant the dispensation validly and licitly, and therefore come within the domain of administrative power. On the other hand the congregation is always free to refer to the Rota the establishment of the fact of non-consummation. C. The third section of this congregation deals with all matters concerning the other six sacraments than matrimony. It has authority in all matters touching the validity of ordinations, in all matters of discipline that concern these six sacraments and also the dispensations in such matters. In the Special Rules, as examples to illustrate the competency of this congregation, specification is made of some of the dispensations or graces reserved to it; these may be mentioned here for the guidance of those who may wish to apply to the Holy See. This section grants permission to preserve the Blessed Sacrament in churches or chapels which are not so authorized by common Law; to celebrate Mass in private chapels, exercising over them due supervision; to celebrate Mass before dawn, after midday, or in the open air; to celebrate Mass on Holy Thursday, or the three Masses of Christmas, at night, in private chapels; to wear a skull-cap or a wig either while celebrating Mass or in the exposition of the Blessed Sacrament; to blind and partially blind priests to celebrate the Votive Mass of the Blessed Virgin; to celebrate Mass aboard ship; to consecrate a bishop on a day other than those established by the Pontifical, or to confer Holy orders extra tempora, that is, on other days than those appointed by law; finally, to dispense the faithful -- even members of religious orders -- from the Eucharistic fast in cases of necessity. The competency of this congregation is limited in relation both to persons and to places; its authority does not extend to places subject to Propaganda, or to members of religious orders, who for dispensations, relating even to the sacraments, must go to the Congregation of Religious (an exception being made in regard to the Eucharistic fast, as stated above). As to the sacrament of matrimony, however, the competency of the Congregation of the Sacraments is universal in relation to place; objectively, however, all that concerns the impediments of mixed religion or of disparity of worship and the Pauline privilege pertains exclusively to the Holy Office. IV. CONGREGATION OF THE COUNCIL When the Council of Trent had brought its gigantic work to an end, the Fathers were greatly concerned for the practical application of their disciplinary decrees. The council therefore made a strong appeal to the sovereign pontiff to make provision for this important end, as is shown by the last (the twenty-fifth) session of the council, entitled De recipiendis et observandis decretis. Pius IV, in his zeal for the execution of the Decrees of the Council of Trent, besides other measures taken by him to this end (see the Constitution "Benedictus Deus" of 26 January, 1563), by a Motu Proprio of 2 August, 1564, commissioned eight cardinals to supervise the execution of the Tridentine Decrees and gave them ample faculties to that end, providing however, that cases of doubt or of difficulty, as he had already decreed in the Constitution "Benedictus Deus", should be referred to him. In this Motu Proprio, Pius IV referred to the congregation of cardinals thus created as "Congregatio super exsecutione et observatione S. Concilii Tridentini". As time went on, and in view of the interpretation of frequent doubts, the congregation received from the successors of Pius IV the power also to interpret the Decrees of the Council of Trent, so that Sixtus V, in his Constitution "Immensa", already calls it "Congregatio pro exsecutione et interpretatione Concilii Tridentini", a title given to it before his time. Gregory XIV afterwards conferred upon it authority to reply to questions in the name of the pope. The number of cardinals composing the Congregation of the Council was never restricted to eight, for to that number, which had been assigned by Pius IV, four more were soon added. The number was generally greater than the original eight, and always variable, depending upon circumstances and upon the wishes of the Holy Father. One of its cardinals has the office of prefect, it also has a secretary, and that office has always been filled by eminent men, some of them famous -- to take a few examples, Fagnano, Petra, and Prospero Lambertini, afterwards Benedict XIV. A sub-secretary and other minor officials complete the personnel of the Congregation of the Council. In its origin, and indeed until the new Constitution on the Curia, this congregation was without consultors, although a special congregation created by Pius IX for the revision of provincial councils had consultors from 1849, and these consultors in course of time were employed in the transaction of the business of the Congregation of the Council. The recent Constitution, which suppressed the special congregation for the synods, endowed the Congregation of the Council with consultors, to be selected by the pope, some of whom must be conversant with matters of administration. The competency of this congregation, extending to the interpretation and to the execution of the Decrees of the Council of Trent, which relate to almost all the branches of canon law, was very great. When the Rota ceased to exercise judicial functions, matrimonial causes were referred to the Congregation of the Council. There were also added to this congregation a Commission of prelates, established by Benedict XIV, for the examination of the reports of bishops on the state of their dioceses (which was commonly called "the Little Council"), and the special congregation, mentioned above, created by Pius IX, for the revision of provincial councils. At present, the interpretation of the Decrees of the Council of Trent is no longer of the exclusive competency of the Congregation of the Council, but is shared by each congregation within the limits of its particular jurisdiction. On the other hand, the tribunals of the Curia may, upon occasion, interpret those Decrees judicially, in their application to concrete cases. The present competency of the Congregation of the Council, although differing a good deal from what it formerly was, is nevertheless extensive. In general this congregation has the supervision of discipline of the secular clergy and of the Christian people. From which it may be seen that, while this congregation has lost jurisdiction in many matters that formerly pertained to it -- the sacraments, the religious orders, matrimonial causes, and other matters -- it has almost absorbed the business of the former Congregation of Bishops and Regulars -- in so far as relates to bishops. It has charge of the observance of ecclesiastical precepts; consequently, fasting, abstinence, tithes, and the observance of feast days are within its jurisdiction, and to it recourse must be had for dispensations in those matters. Parish priests and canons, pious sodalities, pious unions, beneficent societies, stipends for Masses, rural banks, diocesan tributes, ecclesiastical benefices, and kindred interests are also under its jurisdiction. In brief, it exercises jurisdiction over diocesan activities In regard to both clergy and laity, as the Congregation of the Consistory exercises authority over the diocese in relation to its constitution, its conservation, and its development. In this congregation, as in others, matters of greater importance are considered by the full congregation of the cardinals; among these matters are the interpretation of laws in doubtful cases, the granting of unusual dispensations, the revision of provincial councils, and the like. Matters of less moment are determined by the congresso, To give an idea of the methods of procedure, it may be said, for example, that in the revision of a provincial council, all the records of the council are referred to a consultor who is required to give a written opinion upon them. This report is printed, and is distributed to at least five other consultors, if not to all of the consultors, together with the records of the council. After the private preparation which each is bound to make, the chosen consultors, or the entire college of consultors, meet and, in as many sessions as the case may require, discuss all the Acts of the council. The written opinion above referred to, with a report of the discussion of the consultors and of the proposed corrections and modifications, is then submitted to the full congregation of the cardinals, who, in turn, examine all the records of the matter, order the corrections to be made, and approve the council. V. CONGREGATION OF RELIGIOUS Sixtus V first erected by a Brief of 17 May, 1586, and afterwards, by the Constitution "Immensa", confirmed, a congregation "super consultationibus regularium" distinct from the congregation "super consultationibus episcoporum et aliorum prælatorum" mentioned in the same Constitution. In 1601 these two congregations were already combined in the Congregation of Bishops and Regulars, to which, in course of time, were united three other congregations whose functions were closely related. These three were: the Congregation on the State of Religious (super statu regularium), created by Innocent X on 15 August, 1652, for the reformation of regulars in Italy, and suppressed by lnnocent XII on 4 August, 1698; the Congregation on Regular Discipline (super disciplina regulari), instituted by Innocent XII on 18 July, 1695, for the reformation of regulars not only in Italy but throughout the whole world; the Congregation on the State of the Regular Orders (super statu regularium ordinum), created by Pius IX on 17 June, 1847. The last-named and the one on regular discipline were suppressed by Pius X, by the Motu Proprio of 26 May, 1906, which united these congregations with that of Bishops and Regulars. The new Constitution of Pius X abolishes the Congregation of Regulars and Bishops and transfers that part of its business which concerns bishops to the Congregation of the Council, and that part of it which concerns regulars to a congregation (oongregatio negotiis religiosorum sodalium præposita) created by the new Constitution, and which by common usage sanctioned by the legend on the official seal of the congregation, has received the name of Congregation of Religious. This body has the usual organization of the Roman Congregations. It is formed of several cardinals, who are chosen by the pope, and one of whom is the prefect of the congregation; these cardinals are assisted by a secretary and a sub-secretary, who are the major officials of the congregation, and by several minor officials. In regard to the latter it is to be noted that, as the amount of its business necessitates a division of the congregation into three parts (as in the case of the Congregation of the Sacraments), the highest dignitaries among the minor officials are the three assistants who are placed over the three sections. One of these sections has to deal with matters relating to religious orders; another, with the business of religious congregations or associations of men, of whatever nature those associations may be; the third, with business relating to congregations of women. This congregation also has a college of consultors. The Constitution of Pius X clearly defines the competency of this congregation, which is to pass judgment upon all matters relating to religious persons of either sex, whether bound by solemn or by simple vows, or to those persons who, although they be not religious in the canonical sense of the word, live as religious -- such as the oblates of certain communities of men or of women, who, without being bound by vows, live a common life under an approved rule. The third orders, consisting of seculars, are also under this congregation. It decides in litigations between members of religious orders, or between religious and bishops, and it is the competent tribunal in eases which have to be dealt with in the way of discipline (in via disciplinari) where a religious appears either as plaintiff or as defendant. Hence it is to be inferred, and indeed is expressly stated in the Constitution, that causes which have to be dealt with in the judicial way must be referred to the Rota, the rights of the Holy Office being always safeguarded. Finally, all common law dispensations to regulars pertain to this congregation, excepting dispensation from the Eucharistic fast, which, as said above, pertains to the Congregation of the Sacraments. The Congregation of Religious is alone competent to approve new religions institutes and their constitutions, as well as to modify institutes already approved, and these being matters of grave importance, the full congregation deals with them. VI. CONGREGATION OF PROPAGANDA This is the abbreviated title of the congregation officially known as Sacra Congregatio de propaganda fide, or christiano nomini propagando, the chief functions of which concern the regulation of ecclesiastical affairs in what are commonly known as "missionary countries". It had its origin in a commission of cardinals established under Gregory XIII (1572-85), which became a congregation properly so called under Gregory XV (1621-23). Before the Constitution "Sapienti consilio" (29 June, 1908) came into force, the Congregation of Propaganda had jurisdiction over several countries in which normal Catholic hierarchies of the Latin Rite were established, but the Constitution adopted, in general, the plan of leaving to Propaganda only those countries or districts (excepting for the Oriental rites mentioned below) where ecclesiastical authority is vested in vicars or prefects Apostolic. Thus, Great Britain, the United States, Canada, Holland, and the Duchy of Luxemburg were removed from the jurisdiction of Propaganda, although, as an exception to the general rule, Australia, where a normal hierarchy exists, was allowed to remain under that jurisdiction. Besides its territorial jurisdiction, however, the congregation is invested with a personal jurisdiction over the spiritual affairs of all Catholics, in any part of the world, who belong to any of the Oriental rites. (A full account of the history, scope, methods, and work of this congregation will be found in the separate article PROPAGANDA, SACRED CONGREGATION OF.) VII. CONGREGATION OF THE INDEX There has always been felt in the Church, especially since the invention of printing, the necessity of preventing the faithful from reading books that might ruin either faith or morals. As early as 1501 a Constitution of Alexander VI, addressed to the four ecclesiastical provinces of Germany, contains very wise prescriptions, later confirmed and extended to the whole world by Leo X in the Fifth Council of the Lateran (1515). In keeping with these laws, catalogues of the books prohibited were published by private enterprise, and sometimes with ecclesiastical authority, not, however, the supreme authority of the Church. Among these mention should be made of the three of Louvain, 1546 (approved by the emperor and published by the university), 1550, and 1558; that of Spain; that of Paris, published by the Sorbonne in 1542; that of Cologne, published by the university in 1549; that of Venice, published by Casa, the Apostolic nuncio, in 1549, and another, published in 1554 by the Inquisition; that of Florence, 1552, also published by the Inquisition; that of Milan, published in 1554 by the archbishop. The custom of forming these indexes having been established (the catalogues being sometimes arranged alphabetically) there soon asserted itself the necessity for a general index under the supreme authority of the Church, and Paul IV commissioned the Holy Office to prepare such an index, which was accordingly published in 1557, and again, more accurately, in 1559. Later appeared the Tridentine Index, so called because its publication was ordered by the great council. It was approved and published by Pius IV in 1564. This index was often reprinted, always with new additions, and it is now followed, having been modified and corrected by Leo XIII who, in 1900, published it with his Constitution "Officiorum ac munerum", in which he abolished the old laws and established new ones for the condemnation and for the preliminary censure of books. In 1571 Pius V created the Congregation for the Reform of the Index and for the Correction of Books (de reformando indice et corrigendis libris). In the following year Gregory XIV gave a better form to this congregation, which Sixtus V confirmed by his Constitution "Immensa", It retains its primitive organization to the present day, the Constitution of Pius X having introduced no notable alterations. Like all the other congregations it consists of a number of cardinals, one of whom is its prefect; the master of the Sacred Palace (a Dominican) is ex officio its assistant. Pius V, by a Motu Proprio of 1570, had already amply authorized that functionary to correct published books. Another Dominican is the secretary of the Congregation of the Index, which has a college of consultors whose office is to deliver written opinions on the books submitted to their judgment by the congregation. The Congregation of the Index censures and condemns books which it considers dangerous to faith or morals. Its jurisdiction is universal, extending to all Catholics. It can therefore grant permission for the reading of a book that has been condemned, or for the publication of corrected editions of books that have been proscribed. Its functions are naturally related to those of the Holy Office, of which it may with some reason be considered an appendix or auxiliary congregation. The Constitution of Pius X provides that, notwithstanding the strict secrecy to which the officers of both congregations are held, they may communicate to each other, upon occasion, those proceedings which relate to the prohibition of books, though they may communicate nothing else. One change made by Pius X in the functions of this congregation considerably widens the scope of its activities: the traditional rule was that the Index did not condemn any book which had not been denounced to it; now, on the contrary, the congregation is charged with the work of seeking out pernicious publications, and, after mature examination, condemning and proscribing them. The procedure of the congregation was accurately determined by an instruction of Clement VIII and by a Constitution (9 July, 1753) of Benedict XIV. The consultor or consultors selected for the examination of a book to be judged, having made their written report, if it appears that the book should be condemned, a preparatory congregation is held, which consists of the Master of the Sacred Palace, the Secretary of the Index, and six consultors, versed in the matter of which the book treats and selected by the cardinal prefect. At this meeting, the passages of the publication of which complaint is made are diligently examined, and the question whether or not they contain errors is discussed. The secretary prepares an accurate report of the views of the preparatory congregation, and then refers it to the full congregation of the cardinals, at which the cause is carefully examined and final judgment is rendered. Benedict XIV required great consideration to be shown to any distinguished Catholic writer who enjoyed a good name. Not only did this pope prescribe that the work of such a writer should not be condemned without some formula calculated to mitigate the severity of the condemnation, such as donec corrigatur or donec expurqetur ("until it be corrected," "until it be expurgated"), but, he provided that the matter should first be referred to the author himself, and his attention called to the objectionable passages. If the author then refused to deal with the congregation, or rejected the corrections that were required, the decree of condemnation was to be published. If, however, the author prepared a new edition, the decree of condemnation was not to be published, unless a great number of the copies containing the errors had been circulated, in which case, of course, the public welfare would require the publication of the decree; but the pope provided that it should be made clear that only the first edition was comprised in the condemnation. VIII. CONGREGATION OF RITES This congregation was established by Sixtus V in his Constitution "Immensa", to which frequent reference has already been made. The organization of the Congregation of Rites does not differ from that of other Roman congregations, there being a certain number of cardinals, assisted by a secretary and a surrogate (sostituto), and also by an adequate number of minor officials. Besides these, the Congregation of Rites, in view of special functions to which reference will be made further on, has a great number of prelates, officials, and consultors. The order of precedence among the consultors is determined by length of service in their office. The prelate-officials sit in the following order: first, after the secretary of the congregation, is the sacristan to His Holiness, after whom comes one of the Apostolic prothonotaries permanently attached to this office, next is the dean of the Rota, with the two oldest auditors, after these the master of the Sacred Palace, the promotor of the Faith, and the assessor, or sub-promotor. Although there are no ex-officio consultors, that is, no consultors who by reason of theft office in the Curia are entitled to sit among the consultors of this congregation, there are, nevertheless, certain religious orders -- the Friars Minor, the Servites, the Barnabites, the Jesuits -- which have obtained from different popes the privilege of being represented by one member each in this college of consultors. The Congregation of Rites has a double function. It is charged with the direction of the Liturgy of the Latin Church, and therefore, with the supervision of the performance of the rites prescribed by the Church for the celebration of the sacred mysteries and other ecclesiastical functions and offices, and also, with the granting of all privileges, personal or local, temporary or perpetual, which relate to the rites or ceremonies of the Church. It is manifest that the duties of this congregation are of the highest importance: they are concerned with the solemnity of the worship offered to God, the maintenance of the Faith, and the development of devotion and of Christian sentiment among the faithful. The same congregation has another Charge of no less importance: the decision of causes of beatification and canonization of servants of God, and of the veneration of their relics. In the process of beatification and canonization the most important official is the promotor of the Faith, whose chief duty it is to diligently examine the local investigations carried out by the authority of the bishops, or, at Rome, of the pope, and to bring out in them all that may in any way cast doubt upon the heroic virtue of the servant of God whose cause is under consideration. It is on account of this duty, which implies a systematic opposition to the proofs of sanctity, that the official in question has come to be popularly called "the devil's advocate". It is easy to see, however, that this office conduces to the splendour of the Church and to the honour of the Faith; for to declare a servant of God to be a saint is to propose him as a model to the faithful, and one cannot fail to see how necessary it is that this be done only in the case of one truly heroic, of whose virtue in the heroic degree the pontiff has acquired the greatest moral certainty that human means can establish. It is true that the assistance of the Holy Ghost cannot fail the head of the Church of Jesus Christ in a matter of this kind; but the sovereign pontiff is not on that account exempt from the obligation of acting in the premises with all the circumspection that human prudence requires. And in this effort to attain human certainty the pope is greatly assisted by the promotor of the Faith, who, after a preliminary study of the cause, has to propose objections in regard to the validity of the proceedings and the credibility of the testimony as well as all the objections possibly to be found in the life of the servant of God whose cause is being examined, and in the miracles alleged to have been performed by God at the intercession of that servant. These objections are presented in the three congregations, or meetings, held to consider the question of virtue, and in the other three which are held to consider the question of the miracles. The promotor of the Faith is always selected from among the Consistorial advocates, and always has the assistance of a sub-advocate who takes his place, upon occasion, and who in every instance acts in the name of the promotor. The latter official formerly had the power to appoint, and to remove, his assistant. Besides these two chief officials, the congregation has a special notary for that part of its functions which concerns canonization. The congregations, or meetings held to consider the question of virtue, like those at which the question of miracles is considered, are generally three in number. The first of them is called the ante-preparatory, and is attended by the prelate-officials and the consultors, under the presidency of the cardinal relator of the cause, who does not vote, but who, upon the votes of the others who are present, determines whether the case deserves to go beyond this hearing. The second meeting, called the preparatory, is attended by all the cardinals of the congregation, by the prelate-officials, and by the consultors. At this meeting the cardinals do not vote, but, after hearing the votes of the others present, determine whether the cause may be carried to a discussion before the pope, which is done only when there is moral certainty of a successful issue. This meeting is the most interesting of all; in it the cause not infrequently falls to the ground. Assuming, however, that the cardinals do not throw out the case definitively, it very often happens that another preparatory meeting called nova preparatoria is required, to elucidate some point relating to the virtue of the servant of God or to the miracles in question. Sometimes there is even a third meeting for the same purpose. The regular third meeting is called the general congregation. It is held under the presidency of the sovereign pontiff himself and is attended by all the cardinals who form the Congregation of Rites, the prelate-officials, and the consultors, all of whom vote -- the consultors and the prelate-officials first, and then, when the consultors have withdrawn, the cardinals. The pope decides definitively; as a rule, however, he does not pronounce his judgment at once, but takes time to deliberate and to implore Divine light upon the question. Besides the above meetings, others, called ordinary and special ordinary, are held for the purpose of examining the proceedings and the proof of the fame of sanctity which is necessary for the introduction of a cause of beatification. (See also BEATIFICATION AND CANONIZATION.) Returning to the first duty of this congregation, which is the supervision and direction of the Liturgy, it may be said that the inspection, correction, and condemnation of liturgical books of whatever kind pertain to the Congregation of Rites (saving always the prerogatives of the Holy Office in matters of faith), as well as the approbation of new liturgical Offices and calendars, and especially the authoritative solution of all doubts which may arise on liturgical matters. Recourse must be had, therefore, to this congregation for all faculties, indulgences, and dispensations relating to liturgical functions. Thus, for example it is for the Congregation of Rites to grant the faculty to bless sacred vestments, the authorization to expose upon the altar the image of one who has been beatified, or to dedicate an altar to such a servant of God, the right to wear special insignia during choral offices, etc. In the performance of these functions, the Congregation of Rites is assisted by three commissions, established within its own body. The first of these is the Liturgical Commission, created for the revision of Decrees concerning rites. This work was begun and finished by Leo XIII, the congregation publishing an authentic edition of its Decrees (1898-1900). Although the work for which it was created has been done, this commission remains, and is now consulted on more important questions which may arise concerning the sacred rites. The second commission, also instituted by Leo XIII, in 1902, is the Historico-Liturgical Commission, which has the function of judging historical questions concerning the sacred rites. The third is the Commission on Sacred Music, created by Pius X, in 1904, the functions of which are connected with the Motu Proprio on sacred music of 1903 and with other acts of Pius X on the same subject. (See the letter of 8 December, 1903, to Cardinal Respighi, the Decree of 8 January, 1904, the Motu Proprio of the 25 April, 1904, on the Vatican edition of the liturgical books, and the other two Decrees of 11 and 14 August, 1905.) IX. CONGREGATION OF CEREMONIES It is not quite certain who created this congregation. Many attribute its establishment to Sixtus V, others to his immediate predecessor, Gregory XIII. Haine says that the latter opinion is proved to be correct by the records of the congregation itself. Supposing this to be the case, the error of certain authors is apparent, when they consider this congregation to be little more than a branch of the Congregation of Rites or to have derived its existence from the latter. It is, on the contrary, more ancient than the last-named congregation, and deals directly with the highest division of the Liturgy, considering the personages whom it concerns. For this congregation is charged with the direction of all the papal ceremonies, as well as of the ceremonial of cardinals, whether in the pontifical court (aula) or chapel (cappella pontificia), or elsewhere. It is reasonable that a special congregation should have under its care ceremonies so august and solemn, since it is of the highest importance that when the supreme head of the Church participates in ecclesiastical functions attended by the most illustrious dignitaries of the Church, all should be in keeping with that decorum which befits their exalted character. As in all courts there is a grand master of ceremonies, charged with the direction of the sovereign's acts on occasions of State, so it was necessary that at the pontifical Court there should be an authority to preside over such functions. This requirement is supplied by the Congregation of Ceremonies, which, besides the direction of liturgical functions, is charged with the direction of the pontifical court ceremonial for the reception of sovereigns or of ambassadors. It also communicates instructions to the legates of the Holy See for the maintenance of due decorum in transacting the affairs of their missions. This congregation also instructs the members of the Noble Guard and the ablegate who are sent to convey to new cardinals, living in Catholic states outside of Rome, the news of their promotion, together with the cardinal's hat and the red biretta. It instructs newly-promoted cardinals, too, on the etiquette to be followed conformably with their new dignity. Finally, it solves the questions of precedence which arise among cardinals or among ambassadors to the Holy See. X. CONGREGATION OF EXTRAORDINARY ECCLESIASTICAL AFFAIRS In former times, when questions of exceptional interest to the Church presented themselves, and circumstances required that they should in prudence be treated with secrecy, the popes were wont to establish special congregations of cardinals for the consideration of those matters. These congregations were called congregations of State. Pius VI, following this custom, on the occasion of the revolutionary conditions of France in 1793, established a congregation of this kind, which he called the Congregation for the Ecclesiastical Affairs of France (Congregatio super negotiis ecclesiasticis regni Galliarum), a title which Pius VII, in 1805, changed to Congregation for Extraordinary Ecclesiastical Affairs (Congregatio de negotiis ecclesiasticis extraordinariis). This congregation remained in existence until 1809, when the exile of Pius VII brought it to an end. In 1814, when Pius VII returned to Rome, the needs of the Church being still exceptional, the pope re-established this congregation under the title of Extraordinary Congregation for the Ecclesiastical Affairs of the Catholic World (Congregatio extraordinaria præposita negotiis ecclesiasticis orbis catholici). In 1827, however, the congregation reassumed its former name of Congregation for Extraordinary Ecclesiastical Affairs, which it retains to the present time. At the head of this congregation is the secretary of State, who presides over it not as prefect, but in virtue of his office; and although it has a secretary and a sub-secretary, the congregation nevertheless has no secretary's office of its own, the first section of the office of the secretary of State serving the purpose. The scope of the powers of this congregation is not fixed. It was created for extraordinary affairs, and deals only with such matters as the sovereign pontiff, through his secretary of State, may submit to its study and judgment. XI. CONGREGATION OF STUDIES Sixtus V, by his Constitution "Immensa", established a special congregation for the Roman University (Congregatio pro universitate studii romani). This establishment of learning was founded by Boniface VIII in 1303; it was later known by the name of Sapienza, and in time became extinct. In 1824, Leo XII created a new congregation to preside over the studies not only of Rome, but of all the Pontifical States. After the events of 1870, this congregation remained intact, and acquired new importance. Consisting, like all the others, of an adequate number of cardinals, the Congregation of Studies has a secretary of its own, under whom are several officials, and a college of consultors. Pursuant to the provisions of the new Constitution of Pius X, the jurisdiction of this congregation is no longer limited to the Pontifical States, much less to Rome. On the contrary, the Congregation of Studies exercises its influence throughout the Catholic world; for it directs the studies of all the greater universities or faculties under the authority of the Church, not excepting those under religious orders or congregations. It grants the faculty of conferring academic degrees, which it may also confer itself, in which case they have the same value as those conferred by an ecclesiastical university. It authorizes the establishment of new universities as well as changes in the conditions of universities already established, the authorization in either case being given by means of a pontifical Brief. As in other congregations, all graver matters must be referred to the full congregation of cardinals, which therefore determines the establishment of new universities, the more important changes in universities already existing, and the graver questions which may present themselves for solution in such institutions, the general conduct of which it also directs. Matters of minor importance are determined by its congresso. XII. CONGREGATION OF LORETO From the time of Sixtus IV, the care of the famous sanctuary of Loreto has been reserved exclusively to the Holy See, the arrangement having been confirmed by many successive pontiffs and especially by Julius II and Paul V. Innocent XII, in 1698, established a congregation of cardinals to preside over the affairs of the Sanctuary of Loreto; and this congregation was not abolished by the recent Constitution of Pius X, which, on the contrary, provides that the Congregation of Loreto shall remain distinct from the others, although united to the Congregation of the Council. Until the time of Gregory XVI, the Congregation of Loreto which consists of a suitable number of cardinals, had the cardinal secretary of State for its prefect; now, however, this office is filled by the prefect of the Congregation of the Council; while the secretary of the latter congregation is also secretary of the Congregation of Loreto, an office formerly belonging to the sub-datary. The competency of this congregation, until the reign of Pius VII, was extensive, since it included jurisdiction not only over the Holy House of Loreto and its property, but also over civil and criminal matters connected with that sanctuary. This jurisdiction was restricted by Pius VII, but was again extended by Leo XII. The new Constitution of Pius X does not define the powers of the Congregation of Loreto; they are certainly much diminished, however, by the events of the last fifty years in Italy and now relate chiefly to the restorations of the basilica and supervision of the numerous pilgrimages to the shrine. The Congregation of the Council transacts the business of the Congregation of Loreto according to the rules of procedure in all other matters of its competency. XIII CONGREGATION OF THE FABRIC OF ST. PETER'S When the ancient Basilica of St. Peter was crumbling through age, Julius II conceived the grand project of building a new temple in the place of the old one, after the plans of Bramante; and on the Saturday next after Easter, 1506, he laid its foundation stone. He realized the enormous expense that must be entailed by the realization of his project, which was to be accomplished by the charity of the faithful, convinced of the glory that would accrue to Jesus Christ and to His Church through the completion of so majestic a work. If in the Old Testament, God had wished a most sumptuous temple to stand in Jerusalem, it was right that in the New Testament another, most majestic, temple should rise to the glory of His Christ, the Man God. And, to encourage the faithful to contribute to so holy a work, the popes were bountiful in the concession of privileges and of indulgences in favour of the generous contributors to the great work. Clement VII, in 1523, established a college of sixty members which was charged with providing for the building of the basilica. This college having been suppressed, Clement VIII replaced it with a special congregation which he named the Congregation of the Fabric of St. Peter's. From the time of Sixtus V, the cardinal archpriest of the basilica itself was the prefect of this congregation. Benedict XIV introduced considerable changes: he left to the congregation the constitution given it by Clement VIII, with its cardinal prefect, its numerous prelates and officials, such as the auditor and the treasurer of the Apostolic Camera, and others, but to this congregation he added a special one consisting of the cardinal prefect and three other cardinals, which was to have precedence in everything and to exercise and have the exclusive economical control of the basilica. The general congregation was to occupy itself thereafter only with contentious causes, since the Congregation of the Fabric still had jurisdiction in such cases, and in fact was the only competent tribunal for causes connected with the building. Pius IX, having abolished special tribunals, including that of the Fabric, saw that the general congregation was left without any province. He thereupon abolished the two congregations of Benedict XIV and established a single one, consisting not of three, but of more than three, cardinals, to which he confided the economical administration and the conservation of the basilica, adding to this charge that of the administration of many pious legacies and of Mass stipends, with authority to modify them according to circumstances. This congregation, therefore, was empowered to grant reductions of the obligations of Masses and permission to defer the celebration of these Masses for a longer time than that allowed by the rule; to allow the executors of pious legacies to make adjustments for past omissions, to delegate this power more or less extensively to bishops, and so forth. Pius X, by his new Constitution, has restricted the competency of this congregation to the administration of the property, and to the maintenance of the basilica, a task by no means light, seeing that immense sums are expended upon it. Grimaldi (Les congrégations romaines, xxii) asserts that the expense amounts to 190,000 lire (nearly $38,000) each year, which is not surprising, when it is considered that the lay employees of the basilica and those of the second class, called San Pietrini, alone amount to nearly 300 in number. Under the authority of this congregation is also the Studio del mosaico established by Sixtus V, and famous throughout the world for the perfection of its work and for the exquisite beauty of its art. I. A QUEMADA, Tract. de fisco inquisitionis (Toledo, 1564); LOCATI, Opus judiciale inquisitorum (Rome, 1572); VANDERANI, Enchiridion inquisitionis (Venice, 1575); EYMERICUS, Directorium inquisitorum (Rome, 1578); BERNARDUS DE COMO, Lucerna inquisitorum hæreticæ pravitatis (Rome, 1584); MENDEZ DE VASCONCELLOS, De sententiis inquisitionis (Rome, 1596); DE PARAMO, De origine et progressu sanctae inquisitionis et de delegata inquisitorum potestate (Madrid, 1598); IDEM, Pro defensione jurisdictionis sanctæ inquisitionis (Madrid, 1598); FARINACCI, Decisiones criminales de judiciis et tortura (Vicenza, 1607); GARCIA, Processus s. inquisitionis (Madrid, 1607); PEÑA, Inquirendorum hæreticorum lucerna (Milan, 1610); MASINI, Sacro arsenale, ovvero prattica dell' Officio della S. Inquisitione (Genoa, 1625); CARENA, Tract. de officio S. Inquisitionis et modo procedendi in causis fidei (Cremona, 1641); ALBERGHINI, Manuale qualificatorum S. Inquisitionis, in quo omnia, quâ ad illud tribunal ac hæresium censuram pertinent, brevi methodo adducuntur (Palermo, 1642); SALLELLES, De materiis tribunalium s. inquisitionis seu de regulis multiplicibus pro formando quovis eorum ministro, pr sertim consultore; pr missis XII prolegomenis de origine et progressu dictorum tribunalium (Rome, 1651); PEÑA-CARENA, Instructio seu praxis inquisitorum (Cremona, 1655); RODRIGUEZ, Allegationes fiscales, seu de confiscatione bonorum in officio sanctae inquisitionis (Lyons, 1663); BORDONI, Sacrum tribunal judicum in causis sanctæ fidei (Lyons, 1665); SAUSSAY, Aphorismi inquisitorum (Lyons, 1669); DEL BENE, De officio S. Inquisitionis (Rome, 1672); MACEDO, Schema S. Congregationis S. Officii romani cum elogiis cardinalium (Padua, 1676); DE LUCA, Il Cardinale pratico (Rome, 1680), xxv; ALBIZI, De inconstantia in fide (Amsterdam, 1683); NERI, De judice s. inquisitionis (Florence, 1685); MENGHINI, Regole del tribunale di S. Offizio (Ferrara, 1687); ALBIZI, De inconstantia in judiciis (Rome, 1698); MASINI, Sacro arsenale, ovvero pratica dell' offizio della s. inquisitione (Rome, 1730); DANIELI, Recentior praxis curia romanae, IV (Rome, 1759), tit. 28; DE LUCA, Relatio curia roman (Venice, 1759), dissert. 14; CAMACHO GUERRIERO DE ABOYM, De privilegiis familiarum officialiumque s. inquisitionis (Lisbon, 1859); SIMOR, De sacris congregationibus romanis et illarum auctoritate in Archiv. f. k. KR., XI (Mainz, 1864), 410-23; SIMOR, De s. Congreg. romanis s. officii et concilii in Archiv. f. k. KR., XV (1866), 133-40; CADÈNE, De secreto s. officii in Anal. eccl. (Rome), V, 498; CAUZONS, Hist. de l'inquisition en France: I. Les origines de l'inquisition (Paris, 1909); ANTONIUS CORDUBENSIS, Opus de indulgentiis (Alcalá, 1554); THEODORUS A SP. SANCTO, Tract. dogm. moralis de indulgentiis (Rome, 1743); FALISE, S. Congregationis indulgentiarum resolutiones authentica, pt. I (Louvain, 1862); PRINZIVALLI, Resolutiones seu decreta authentica S. Congregationis indulgentiis sacrisque reliquiis pr posita ab anno 1860 ad ann. 1861 accurate collecta (Rome, 1862); Decreta authentica S. Congregationis Indulgentiarum edita jussu et auctoritate Leonis XIII (Ratisbon, 1883); SCHNEIDER (ed.), Rescripta authentica S. Congr. Indulgentiarum, nec non summaria indulgentiarum (Ratisbon, 1885); MELATA, Manuale de indulgentiis (Rome, 1892); MOCCHEGIANI, Collectio indulgentiarum theologice, canonice ac historice digesta (Quaruacchi, 1897); LEPICIER, Le indulgenze, loro origine, natura e svolgimento. Opera tradotta dall' originale inglese del sac. Luigi Cappelli (Siena, 1897); GOTTLOB, Kreuzablass und Almosenablass (1905). II. MARCELLI, De sacris c rem, sive ritib. eccl. S. R. E. (Rome, 1560); PALEOTTI, De Sacri consistorii consultationibus (Rome, 1592); GABRIELLI, Tract. de sacri consistorii consultationibus (Venice, 1594); COHELLIUS, Notitia cardinalatus . . . Congr. VII pro erectione ecclesiarum et provision. consistorial. (Rome, 1653); LUNADORO, Relazione della corte di Roma (Venice, 1664), cap. vi, Della congreg. concist.; PLETTENBERG, Notitia congregationum et tribunalium curia romana (Hildesheim 1593); DE MATTA, De consistorialibus causis (Naples, 1694); PLATUS, Tract. de cardinals dignitate et officio (Rome, 1746), cap. xxviii; App. un. de Consistorio et de S. R. E. cardin. Congreg. ac de aliis Pap magistrat.; DANIELI, Recentior praxis curi roman (Venice, 1759); DE LUCA, Rel. cur. rom. (Cologne, 1683), il cardinale pratico, cap. xxx della Congreg. Concist. IV. Thesaurus resolutionum S. Congr. Concilii (ab anno 1718); COHELLIUS, op. Cit., Congr. VI super executione et interpretatione Sacri Concilii Tridentini; LUNADORO, op. cit., x, Della congregatione del concilio a della congregazione particolare sullo stato delle chiese, del secretario e di altri ministri di dette congregazioni; FAGNANUS, Comm. in quinque libros Decretalium, in cap. Quoniam de constitutionibus (Venice, 1674); DE LUCA, Il Cardinale pratico; cap. della congr. del Concilio di Trento; DANIELI, op. cit., s. v.; MÜHLBAUER, Thesaurus resolutionum S. Congr. Concilii usque ad annum 1871 (Munich, 1872-); ZAMBONI, Collectio declarationum, S. Congr. Card. Conc. Trid. interpretum (Rome, 1816); GAMBERINI, Resolutiones select S. Congr. Concilii, qu consentanee ad Trid. PP. decreta aliasque juris canonici sanctiones prodierunt in causis propositis per summaria precum, ann, 1823-1825 (1842); STREMLER, Traités des peines eccl. de l'appel et des Congrég. rom. (Paris, 1860); RICHTER-SCHULTE, Canones et decreta Concilii Tridentini (Leipzig, 1853); PALLOTTINI, Coll. omnium conclusionum et resolutionum qu in causis propositis apud S. Congreg. Cardinalium prodierunt ab anno 1564 ad annum 1860 (Rome, 1868-); LINGEN-REUSS, Caus select in S. Congr. Card. Conc. Trid. interpr. proposit per summaria precum ab anno 1823 usque ad annum 1869 (Ratisbon, 1871); PARAYRE, La s. congrégation du concile (1897); SÄGMÜLLER, Die Geschichte der Congr. Conc, Trid. vor d. Motuproprio "Alias nos" v. 2 aug., 1564, in Arch. f. k. KR., LXXX (1900); IDEM, Die visitatio liminum SS. Apostolorum bis Bonifaz VIII in Theol. Quartalschr., LXXXII (1900), 69 sqq. V. COHELLIUS, op. cit., Congr. VIII pro consultationibus episcoporum et aliorum prelatorum; Congr. IX pro consultationibus regularium; LUNADORO, op. cit., cap. xi, Della congregazione dei vescovi e dei regolari, del segretario e di altri ministri di detta congregazione; cap. xiii, Della congregazione della disciplina regolare; DE LUCA, Rel. rom. curi for., disc. 16; IDEM, Il cardinale pratico, cap. xxvii, Della congregazione sopra i negozi dei vescovi e dei regolari dell' uno e dell' altro sesso; DANIELLI, op. cit., s. v.; BIZZARRI, Collectanea in usum secretari S. Congr. episcoporum et regularium (Rome, 1885); BASTIEN, Directoire canonique à l'usage des congrégations à v ux simples (Maredsous, 1904); BATTANDIER, Guide canonique pour les constitutions des instituts à v ux simples (2nd ed., Paris, 1905); ARNDT, Rechtsbestimmungen für Orden und Kongregationen (Paderborn, 1908). VII. COHELLIUS, op. cit.; Congr. X pro indice librorum prohibitorum; GRETSER, De jure et more prohibendi expurgandi et abolendi libros hæreticos et noxios (Ingoldstadt, 1653); RAYNAUDUS, Erotemata de malis ac bonis libris deque justa aut injusta eorum confixione (Lyons, 1653); LUNADORO, op. cit., cap. ix, Della congregazione dell' indice e del segretario della medesima; DE LUCA, Rel. rom. Curiæ for., disc. 19; FRANCUS, Disquisitio academica de papistarum indicibus librorum prohibendorum et expurgandorum (Leipzig, 1684); ORTLOB, Diss, phil. de Ephesinorum libris curiosis combustis (Leipzig, 1708); BOEHMER, Dissert. jurid. de jure circa libros improbatæ lectionis (Magdeburg, 1726); SCHÖTTGEN, De indicibus librorum prohibit. et expurg. eorumque n vis (Dresden, 1733); RUELE, Saggio dell' istoria dell' indice romano (Rome, 1739); CATALANI, De secretario S. Congregationis Indicis (Rome, 1751); SCHENEIDT, Jus et obligatio prohibendi libros (Würzburg, 1768); FRITSCH, Dissertationes de censura librorum et propositionum in negotiis religionis (Breslau, 1775); ZACCARIA, Storia polemica della proibisione dei libri (Rome, 1777); PEIGNOT, Dictionnaire critique, littéraire et bibliographique des principaux livres condamnés au feu, supprimés ou censurés (Paris, 1806); MENDHAM, The Literary Policy of the Church of Rome exhibited in an Account of Her Damnatory Catalogues or Indices (London, 1826); ERNESTI, Ueber das recht bes. der Hierarchie auf Censur und Bücherverbote (1829); HEYMANS, De ecclesiastica librorum aliorumque scriptorum in Belgio prohibitione (Brussels, 1849); FESSLER, Das kirchliche Bücherverbot (Vienna, 1858); Die römische Indexcongregation und ihr Wirken (Munich, 1863); BALLÈS, La s. congrégation de l'index mieux connue et vengée (1866); SACHSE, Die Anfänge der Büchercensur in Deutschland (1870); ZIGLIARA, Il dimittatur e la spiegazione datane dalla s. congr. dell' indice ed il cardinal Zigliara (Rome, 1882); REUSCH, Der Index d. verbotenen Bücher (Bonn, 1883); POULAIN, L'index; son origine, son but et sa valeur (Dieppe, 1884); PETIT, L'index; son histoire, ses lois, sa force obligatoire (Paris, 1888); PÉRIES, Du droit de l'Eglise de prohiber les livres dangereux in Journal du droit canon. (1892); ARNDT, De libris prohibitis commentarii (Ratisbon, 1895); DILGSKRON, De revisione et approbatione librorum typis describendorum in Anal. eccl. (1891-97); HOLLWECK, Das kirchliche Bücherverbot (Mainz, 1897); PLANCHARD, L'Index in Rev. théol, franc. (March-june, 1897); DESJARDINS, La nouvelle constitution apostolique sur l'index in Etudes (March-May, 1897); PENNACCHI, In conts. ap. "Officiorum ac munerum" de prohibitione et censura librorum a Leone d. pr. PP. XIII latam brevis commentatio (Rome, 1898); PÉRIES, L'index, comment. de la constitution apostolique "Officiorum" (Paris, 1898); MOUREAU, La nouvelle législation de l'index (Lille, 1898); BOUDINHON, La nouvelle legislation de l'index (Paris, 1899); HILGERS, Zur kirch. Gesetsgebung über verbot. Bücher in Stimmen aus Maria Laach, I (1899), 258 sqq.; SCHNEIDER, Die neuen Büchergesetze der katholischen Kirche (Mainz, 1899); ARNDT, Die Vorschriften über das Verbot und die Censur der Bücher (Trier, 1900); HILGENREINER, D. kirchl. Vorzensur u. d. Particularrecht (Vienna, 1901); SCHNEIDER, D. neue Index in Arch. f. k. KR., LXXXI (1901), 291, 302; HILGENREINER, Der Index der vorbotenen Bücher in Th. prat. Qrtschr., pt. II (1901); SLEUTJES De prohibitione et censura librorum (Gulpen, 1903); HILGERS, Der Index der verbotenen Bücher in seiner neuen Fassung dargelegt und rechtlich-historisch gewürdigt (Freiburg i. Br., 1904); GENNARI, La costituzione "Officiorum" brevemente commentata (Rome, 1905); CIOLLI, Comm. breve della costituzione leonina riguardo ai libri proibiti (Rome, 1906); VERMEERSCH, De prohibitione et censura librorum dissertatio canonico-moralis (Rome, 1906); HILGERS, Die Bücherverbote in Pabstbriefen (Freiburg, 1907); ARENDT, De quibusdam dubiis qu occurrunt in doctrinali interpretatione leoninæ constitutionis de prohibitione librorum brevis disceptatio (Rome, 1907); HURLEY, Comment. on the Present Index Legislation (Dublin, 1908). VIII. COHELLIUS, op. cit., Congr. V pro sacris ritibus et c remoniis; LUNADORO, op. Cit., cap. xiv, Della congregazione de' sagri riti, del promotore della fede e di altri personaggi di detta congregazione; DE LUCA, Rel. rom. curiæ for., disc, 18; DANIELI, op. cit., s. v.; BENEDICT XIV, De servorum Dei beatificatione et beatorum canonizatione (Rome, 1747-49); Acta canonizationis SS. Fidelis a Sigmaringa, Camilli de Lellis, Petri Regalati, Iosephi a Leonissa, et Catharinæ de Riciis una cum apostolicis litt. SS. D. N. Benedicti XIV et vaticana basilicae ornatus descriptione (Rome, 1749); BENEDICT XIV, Appendices ad quatuor libros de servorum Dei beatificatione et beatorum canonizatione (Rome, 1749); SS. D. N. Benedicti XIV P. O. M. acta et decreta in causis beatificationum et canonizationum aliisque ad sacrorum rituum materiam pertinentibus ad annum pontificatus sui decimum (Rome, 1751); DE AZEVEDO, SS. D. N. Benedicti PP. XIV doctrina de servorum Dei beatificatione et beatorum canonizatione in synopsim redacta (Naples, 1854); Decreta authentica Congr. Sacrorum Rituum ex actis ejusdem collecta, ejusque auctoritate promulgata (Rome, 1898-). IX. LUNADORO, op. cit., cap. xiv, Della congregazione dei ceremoniale e dei maestri delle ceremonie. XI. COHELLIUS, op. cit., Congregatio XIX pro universitate studii romani; CATERINI, Collectio legum et ordinationum de recta studiorum ratione iussu Emi. ac Rmi. Domini Cardinalis Aloysii Lambruschini SS. D. N. Gregorii XVI P. M. a Secretis Status, Sacra Congregationis studiis moderandis pr fecti (Rome, 1841); CAPALTI, Collectio legum et ordinationum de recta studiorum ratione ab anno 1842 usque ad annum 1852 jussu Card. Raphaelis Fornari pr fecti . . . continuata (Rome, 1852). XIII. VESPIGNANI, Compendium privilegiorum rev, fabric S. Petri (Rome, 1674); CANCELLIERI, De secretariis basilica Vaticana veteris et nov (Rome, 1786); DE NICOLAIS, De Vaticana basilica S. Petri ac de ejusdem privilegiis (Rome, 1817). AUBERY, Histoire générale des cardinaux (Paris, 1642); COHELLIUS, Notitia cardinalatus in qua nedum de S. R. E. cardinalium origine dignitate pr eminentia et privilegiis sed de pr cipuis romana aulae officialibus pertractatur (Rome, 1653); LUNADORO, Relatione della corte di Roma (Venice, 1664); DE LUCA, Il cardinale pratico (Rome, 1680); PLETTENBERG, Notitia congregationum et tribunalium curia romanae (Hildesheim, 1693); DE LUCA, Relatio curia romana forensis eiusque tribunalium et congregationum (Venice, 1759); PLATUS, Tract, de cardinalis dignitate et officio (Rome, 1746), cap. xxviii, app.; BANGEN, Die römische Kurie, ihre gegenwärt. Zusammensetzung und ihr Geschäftsgang (MÜNSTER, 1854); HAINE, Synopsis S. R. E. Cardinalium Congregationum (Louvain, 1857); IDEM, De la cour romaine sous le pontificat de Pie IX (Louvain, 1859); PHILLIPS, Kirchenrecht, VI (Ratisbon, 1864); SIMOR, De sacr. congr. et illarum auctoritate in Arch. f. k. KR., XI (1864), 410 sqq.; GRIMALDI, Les conqrégations romaines (Siena, 1890), this work is on the Index; SÄGMÜLLER, Die Tätigkeit und Stellung der Kardinäle bis P. Bonifaz VIII (Freiburg, 1896); LEGA, Pr lect. in textum jur. can. de judiciis ecclesiasticis, II (Rome, 1896), 6 sqq.; IDEM, De origine et natura sacr. roman. congregationum in Anal. eccl., IV (1896), 45 sqq.; IDEM, De modo procedendi congregationibus romanis communi in Anal. eccl., IV, 277 sqq.; WERNZ, Jus decretalium, II (Rome, 1906), 619 sqq.; HILLING, Die römische Kurie (Paderborn, 1906); HOFMANN, Die Neuregelung der röm. Kurie durch Pius X in Zeitschr. f. k. Theol., XXXIII, 198 sqq.; PARAYRE, La nouvelle organisation du gouvernement central de l'Eglise (Lyons, 1908); FOURNERET, La réforme de la curie rom. in Le canoniste cont., 33, 16, 65; CHOUPIN in Etudes (1908), 308, 604; OJETTI, De romana curia (Rome, 1910); SIMIER, La curie romaine (Paris, 1909); CAPPELLO, De curia romana juxta reform. a Pio X sapient. inductam (Rome, 1911). BENEDETTO OJETTI Roman Curia Roman Curia Strictly speaking, the ensemble of departments or ministries which assist the sovereign pontiff in the government of the Universal Church. These are the Roman Congregations, the tribunals, and the offices of Curia (Ufficii di Curia). The Congregations, being the highest and most extensive departments of the Pontifical Government, are treated elsewhere under ROMAN CONGREGATIONS. This article deals in particular with the tribunals and the offices of Curia (Ufficii di Curia), in addition to which something will be said of the commissions of cardinals and the pontifical family. I. TRIBUNALS According to the Constitution "Sapienti consilio" of Pius X, the tribunals of the Curia are three: the Sacred Penitentiaria, the Sacred Roman Rota, and the Apostolic Signatura. A. The Sacred Penitentiaria The origin of this tribunal cannot be assigned with any reasonable certainty. Some authors, like Cardinal De Luca (Relatio curisae rom. forensis, diss. xii), think that the office of penitentiary dates from the primitive Church; Lega (Prael. de judiciis eccl., II, 263, not.) refers it to the time of Pope Cornelius (204), who is said to have appointed penitentiaries pro lapsis. Penitentiaries are certainly more ancient in the East than in the West. The Fourth Lateran Council (1215) ordained the establishment of a penitentiary in each cathedral. The Roman Church, if not the first, was at least one of the first in the West to establish penitentiaries. According to some authorities, from the seventh century, that is from the pontificate of Benedict II, the penitentiary of the Roman Church was a cardinal priest; this was certainly the case before Gregory X (d. 1276). Gregory IX calls Cardinal Nicola de Romania "poenitentiarius felicis recordationis Honorii pap. praedecessoris". Prior to 1205 Giraldus Cambrensis mentions Giovanni di S. Paolo, of the title of St. Priscilla, as one who heard confessions in the place of the pope; he was probably a cardinal of that title. The office of penitentiary assumed greater importance when the reservation of cases to the pope or the bishops began. At the end of the sixth century (592) St. Gregory the Great reserved to himself the excommunication with which he threatened Archbishop John of Larissa for unjustly deposing Adrian, Bishop of Thebes. The first universally recognized case of a general papal reservation of an offence is that of Innocent II, who, at the Council of Clermont (1130), reserved to himself in every case absolution from the crime of striking a cleric. This reservation was confirmed by him in the following year at the Council of Reims, where he also reserved to himself the absolution of incendiaries and their accomplices. Thenceforth reservations increased in number, and an office became necessary to answer those who, guilty of some offence, asked of the sovereign pontiff absolution from the censure incurred, and reserved to the Holy See, or, being unable to repair to Rome, asked to be absolved from some sin reserved to the pope by a priest of their own land, who would of course require a special delegation. In the time of Cardinal Bérenger Frédol, penitentiary from 1309 to 1323, the office of the Penitentiaria was in existence, with various subordinates and employees, under the direction of a cardinal penitentiary, whom Clement V called paenitentiarius major [c. ii. de elect, etc. (I. 3) in Clem.]. Under Alexander IV and Urban IV, Cardinal Hugo of St-Cher (or of San Caro) was called poenitentiarius summus, or sedis apostolicae paenilentiarius generalis. For the earlier history of this tribunal see the excellent work of P. Chouet, "La sacrée pénitencerie apostolique" (Lyons, 1908), in which may be found the details of its original constitution. The present article deals only with the recent constitution of this tribunal. The Sacred Penitentiary consists in the first place of the cardinal chief penitentiary (paenitentiarius major) appointed by a Brief of the sovereign pontiff. Pius V, followed by Benedict XIV, decreed that this functionary should be chosen from among the cardinal priests, and must be a master in theology or doctor of canon law (magister in theologia seu decretorum doctor). He must transact the business of his office personally, or if prevented from so doing, he must provide a substitute in another cardinal qualified as above stated, and who takes the title of pro-chief penitentiary. During his term of office he acts in his own name, and not in that of the cardinal by whom he is delegated. To the cardinal chief penitentiary is assigned a regent of the Penitentiaria. This officer, like the others of whom we shall speak, is selected by the cardinal penitentiary and presented to the pope; and if approved by him is appointed by a letter of the cardinal himself. After the regent comes the theologian, whom it has long been usual to select from the Society of Jesus; then come the datary, the canonist, the corrector, the sealer (sigillatore), and some copyists, besides a secretary, a surrogate (sostituto), and an archivist. The signatura (Segnatura) of the Penitentiaria (its congress) is the meeting at which the most important cases are considered. It is formed of the cardinal penitentiary, the theologian, the datary, the corrector, the sealer (sigillatore), and the canonist, the secretary also taking part in it, but without a vote. The other members of the meeting are only consulted, the decision of the case being left entirely to the cardinal penitentiary, who, if in doubt as to the extent of his faculties, refers the matter to the Holy Father. The minor penitentiaries of certain Roman churches and of the Holy House of Loreto must be mentioned as in some way related to the Sacred Penitentiaria. At Rome, they are attached to the three Basilicas of St. John Lateran, St. Peter, and St. Mary Major. At St. John Lateran the office is filled by the Friars Minor. At St. Peter's it was formerly filled by Jesuits, but, at the suppression of the Society by Clement XIV, their place was taken by Minor Conventuals, who still retain it; these are thirteen in number, but there are also at St. Peter's fourteen other "adjunct" penitentiaries -- Carmelites, Friars Minor, Augustinians, Servites. At St. Mary Major the penitentiaries are Dominicans. At Loreto the Jesuits served as penitentiaries until their suppression, when they were succeeded by the Minor Conventuals, who still hold the office. The minor penitentiaries may not be removed by their superiors, either from Rome or from Loreto, without the permission of the Holy See. They are authorized to hear the confessions of all the faithful, not excepting religious, who may come to the minor penitentiaries without the permission of their religious superiors. The faculties of these penitentiaries are very ample; and care is taken, as a rule, that there may be priests of different languages among them, to hear the confessions of pilgrims or other foreigners who do not speak Italian. The cardinal penitentiary assists the pope at the hour of death, reciting the customary prayers for the dying, etc. It is he, also, who at the beginning of a jubilee, offers to the pope the golden hammer, to give the first three knocks at the Holy Door (Porta Santa) of St. Peter's, which door is opened only during the Holy Year, or year of the jubilee. After the pope, the cardinal penitentiary himself knocks twice with the hammer. It is also the office of the cardinal penitentiary, at the end of the jubilee year, when the Holy Door is to be closed, to present to the pope the trowel and the mortar, to begin the walling up of the door. In Holy Week, the cardinal penitentiary, surrounded by those officers who constitute the signatura, or congress of the Penitentiaria, sits four times -- Palm Sunday, Wednesday, Good Friday, and Holy Saturday -- in the penitential cathedra, or chair, set in each of the three above-mentioned Roman basilicas, and awaits for some time those who may wish to confess to him, striking lightly upon the head with his traditional rod (also used by the minor penitentiaries) those who may kneel before him with that intention, beginning with the officers of the Sacred Penitentiaria. On the part of the faithful this ceremony is public confession of having sinned against God, and a request for forgiveness by ecclesiastical authority of sins committed. The Sacred Penitentiaria was always provided with great powers, formerly of internal jurisdiction only, but as time went on, of external jurisdiction also. Under the latter head its work so increased that the administration of this tribunal was greatly hampered. Several popes disapproved of this, especially Pius IV, who planned a reform both of its constitution and of its field of action, or competency. Death prevented him from carrying this into effect: it was realized by St. Pius V, who, in 1569, by his Constitution "In omnibus", reformed the organization of the Penitentiaria, while he modified its competency by his other Constitution "Ut bonus paterfamilias", both dated 18 May of that year. The competency of the Penitentiaria was confined to matters of internal jurisdiction. Little by little, the successors of Pius V increased the faculties of this tribunal; and, as many of these new concessions were made by word of mouth (vivae vocis oraculo), there arose new doubts to be solved; wherefore, to remove uncertainties Innocent XII, in 1682, formulated a new list of faculties for the Penitentiaria; but, the sovereign pontiff having delayed the solution of some doubts, and difficulties having arisen in regard to the interpretation of his Constitution, the desired end was not attained while, on the other hand, new faculties were granted to the Sacred Penitentiaria by succeeding popes. Consequently, Benedict XIV as constrained to define better the faculties of this tribunal, which that learned pontiff did by his famous Constitution, "Pastor bonus", of April, 1744, wherein he enumerated the faculties of the Sacred Penitentiaria more or less as they had been granted by Pius V, although broader in some respects. It is more remarkable that he granted some powers of external jurisdiction; hence until now the Penitentiaria has had, as an exceptional faculty, the power of dispensing destitute or needy persons from public matrimonial impediments. The Constitution "Sapienti consilio" of Pius X has confined the competency of the Penitentiaria to its former scope, limiting it to internal jurisdiction. The power to dispense from matrimonial impediments in relation to external jurisdiction, for all classes of people, having been granted to the Congregation of the Sacraments, the tribunal of the Penitentiaria received jurisdiction in all internal matters, in relation to which it is empowered to grant graces of all kinds -- absolutions, dispensations, commutations, ratifications in matter of impediments, condonations. This tribunal also deals with questions of conscience submitted to the judgment of the Holy See. It should be observed here that the chief penitentiary's powers of internal jurisdiction, even before the recent Constitution, held during the vacancy of the Holy See, while his power of external jurisdiction, with a few exceptions, was suspended. As to the procedure of the Penitentiaria, it follows the rules set down in the Constitution "In apostolicae" of Benedict XIV, in all that is not at variance with the new Constitution of Pius X. It transacts its business under the greatest secrecy, and gratuitously (omnino secreto et gratis). It is chiefly a tribunal of mercy, as Benedict XIV asserts in his Constitution "Pastor bonus"; wherefore it is appropriate that its seal should bear, as is the case, an image of the Virgin Mother with the Child in her arms. Recourse is had to the Penitentiaria by means of a letter (written by the party interested or by that party's confessor) exposing the case, without, however, naming the person concerned. The letter is addressed to the cardinal penitentiary, and may be written in any language. The name and address of the person to whom the answer is to be sent must be clearly given. The following may serve as an example of applications to be made to the Penitentiaria: "Your Eminence: Tizio and Caia [which must be fictitious names] wishing to be united in the bonds of holy matrimony ask Your Eminence for dispensation from the following impediments: (1) an impediment of the first degree in the direct line, that now is, and most probably will remain, concealed, originating in illicit relations between Tizio and the mother of Caia, after the latter's birth; (2) an impediment of crime, which is also concealed, originating in adultery between the petitioners while the first wife of Tizio still lived, with a mutual promise of marriage in case of the first wife's death. The reasons for this petition are . . . [here the facts are given]. The answer may be addressed as follows. . . ." Fictitious names may be given, with the request that the answer be sent to the General Delivery, or, if preferred, to the confessor of the interested party. The letter containing the petition should be addressed: "To His Eminence the Cardinal Chief Penitentiary, Palace of the Holy Office, Rome". We give this example of petitions to the Sacred Penitentiary as the faithful are in frequent need of recourse to that tribunal. The grace that is sought and the reasons why it should be granted vary, of course, in different cases. B. The Sacred Roman Rota See SACRA ROMANA ROTA. C. The Apostolic Signatura In former times, there was only one Signatura, i.e. there were a few assistants who were commissioned by the sovereign pontiff to investigate the petitions addressed to the Holy See, and to report concerning them. These functionaries were called Referendarii apostolici. Vitale, in his "Comm. de iure signaturae justitiae", says that there is record of the referendaries as such in 1243. Innocent IV mentions them. As time went on, recourse to the Holy See becoming more and more frequent, whether to obtain graces or to submit cases to the decision of the pope, the number of the referendaries increased considerably. Alexander VI deemed it expedient to define their office better, which he did by creating a double Signatura -- the Signatura of Grace, and the Signatura of Justice -- to which the referendaries were severally assigned. As the office of referendary was a very honourable one, it came to be conferred frequently as a merely honorary title, so that the number of the referendaries was unduly increased; and Sixtus V was constrained, in 1586, to limit the referendaries of the Signatura of Justice to 100, and those of the Signatura of Grace to 70. Alexander VII combined the referendaries of both Signaturas into a college, with a dean. These were called "voting referendaries",' and actually exercised their office. The others remained as "supernumerary referendaries" (extra numerum). In 1834 Gregory XVI gave a new organization to the Signatura of Justice. On the other hand, the Signatura of Grace gradually disappeared: no mention is made of it after 1847 in the catalogues of the tribunals and officials of the Curia. The Signatura of Grace, also called Signatura of the Holy Father (Signatura Sanctissimi), was held in the presence of the sovereign pontiff, and there were present at it some cardinals and many prelates, chief among the latter being the voters of this Signatura. At the invitation of the Holy Father, the voters voted upon the matters under consideration, but that vote was merely consultative. The Holy Father reserved to himself the decision in each case, announcing it then and there, or later, if he chose, through his "domestic auditor", as De Luca calls him, or "auditor of the Holy Father" (auditor sanctissimi), as he was called later. The Signatura of Justice was a genuine tribunal, presided over in the name of the pope by a cardinal prefect. The voters of this Signatura were present at it, and their vote was not consultative, but definitive. As a rule, the cardinal prefect voted only when his vote was necessary for a decision. Pius X, in the Constitution by which he reorganized the Curia, abolished the two ancient Signaturas, and created a new one that has nothing in common with the other two. The Signatura now consists of six cardinals, appointed by the pope, one of whom is its prefect. It has a secretary, a notary, who must be a priest, some consultors, and a few subordinate officers. The present Signatura is a genuine tribunal which ordinarily has jurisdiction in four kinds of cases, namely: + accusations of suspicions against an auditor of the Rota; + accusations of violation of secrecy by an auditor of the Rota; + appeals against a sentence of the Rota; + petitions for the nullification of a decision of the Rota that has already become res judicata. As a temporary commission, the pope gave to the Signatura the mandate and the power to review the sentences passed by the Roman Congregations before the Constitution "Sapienti Consilio". This commission was given to the Signatura through an answer by the Consistorial Congregation on the subject of a doubt relating to a case of this kind. Of course the Holy Father may on special occasions give other commissions of this nature to the Apostolic Signatura. II. OFFICES OF CURIA These are five in number: The Apostolic Chancery; Apostolic Dataria; Apostolic Camera; Secretariate of State; Secretariate of Briefs. A. The Apostolic Chancery (Cancelleria Apostolica) This office takes its name from civil law and from the imperial chanceries, and is certainly of very ancient origin in its essence. The primacy of the Roman See made it necessary that the sovereign pontiff should have in his service officers to write and to transmit his answers to the numerous petitions for favours and to the numerous consultations addressed to him. This office, in course of time, underwent many transformations, to the most important of which only we shall refer. After Martin V had instituted a large number of offices in the Chancery, Sixtus V placed many of them in the class of vacabili, as they were then called. The origin of this institution was as follows: The pope was often compelled, in defence of Christendom, to wage war, to fit out expeditions, or at least to give financial assistance to the princes who waged such wars at his exhortation. But the pontifical treasury, on the other hand, was often without the means to defray even the expenses of the Pontifical States, and it became imperative to raise funds. Accordingly, the popes resorted to the expedient of selling several lucrative offices of the Curia, and, as a rule, to the highest bidder. It should be observed, however, that what was sold was not the office itself, but the receipts of the office, e.g., the taxes for the favours granted through the office in question. Some offices were sold with the right of succession by the heirs of the purchaser. This, however, could be done only in the case of an office of minor importance, in the exercise of which no special ability was required. Those offices which entailed grave responsibilities, and which could be filled only by pious and learned men, were sold on the condition that they should revert to the Curia at the death of the purchaser. An aleatory contract, therefore, was made, the uncertainty being, on the one side, the amount of the income of the office and, on the other, the length of life of the purchaser. The prices of the offices, especially of the more desirable ones, were considerable: Lorenzo Corsini, afterwards Clement XII, bought the office of regent of the Chancery for 30,000 Roman scudi -- a large fortune for those times. The hazard was not necessarily confined to the life of the purchaser; he was free to establish it upon the life of another person, provided the latter (called the intestatary) were expressly designated. The purchaser was also allowed to change the life hazard from one person to another, providing this were done forty days before the death of the last preceding intestatary. The offices of the Chancery which were transformed into vacabili by Sixtus V were those of the regent, of the twenty-five solicitors, of the twelve notaries, auditors of the causes of the Holy Palace, and others. Sixtus V assigned the proceeds of these sales to the vice-chancellor (see below) as part of the latter's emoluments; but this too liberal prescription in favour of the cardinal who presided over the Chancery was revoked by Innocent XI, who assigned the revenue in question to the Apostolic Camera. Alexander VIII restored these revenues to the vice-chancellor, who, at that time, was the pope's nephew, Pietro Ottoboni. Under Napoleon I the Government redeemed many of the vacabili, and but few remained. Pius VII, after his return to Rome, undertook a reform of the Chancery, and wisely reduced the number of the offices. But, as he himself granted to the vacabili the privilege that, by a legal fiction, time should be regarded as not having transpired (quod tempus et tempera non currant), and many proprietors of vacabili having obtained grants of what was called sopravivevza by which deceased intestataries were considered to be living, it came to pass that certain offices remained vacabili in name, but not in fact. Finally, Leo XIII (1901) suppressed all the vacabili offices, ordering his pro-datary to redeem them, when necessary, the datary's office being substituted for the proprietors. Since the Constitution of Pius X, the Chancery has been reduced to a forwarding office (Ufficio di Spedizione) with a small personnel; there are, besides the cardinal who presides over the Chancery, the regent, with the college of Apostolic prothonotaries, a notary, secretary and archivist, a protocolist, and four amanuenses. The presiding cardinal, prior to the recent Constitution, was called vice-chancellor. The authors who wrote on the Chancery gave many ingenious reasons why that dignitary should not have received the more obvious title of chancellor. Cardinal De Luca regarded these explanations as senseless (simplicitates et fabllae), and proposed an explanation of his own, without, however, insisting on its correctness. According to him, it was probable that the title of vice-chancellor arose in the same way as the title of pro-datary, the custom having been to call the head of the datary office (dataria) the datary (datario), if he were not a cardinal, and the pro-datary (pro datario), if he were a cardinal. The reason for this must be sought in the fact that the office of datary was really not that of a cardinal, but rather of minor dignity; wherefore it did not seem well to give the title of datary to a cardinal. The same custom still obtains in the case of a nuncio who is elevated to the cardinalate: he retains his position for a time, but with the title of pro-nuncio. This theory of De Luca's, if not altogether certain, is at least probable. The new Constitution, however, establishes that the head of the Chancery shall hereafter be called chancellor, a very reasonable provision, seeing that this office has been filled for centuries by cardinals. For the rest, the office in question was always regarded as one of the most honourable and most important of the Curia, as may be seen from Moroni's account of the funeral of Cardinal Alexander Farnese, vice-chancellor, and arch-priest of the Vatican Basilica. The authority of the vice-chancellor was increased when, under Alexander VIII in 1690, there was added to his office, in perpetuity, that of compiler (sommista). At present the chancellor retains little of his former influence and attributes. He acts as notary in the consistories and directs the office of the chancery. The greatest splendour of the chancellor was under Leo X, from whose successor, Clement VII, this functionary received as residence the Palazzo Riario, long known as the Cancelleria Apostolica, where he resides at the present day. His former residence was in the Palazzo Borgia, from which he moved to the Palazzo Sforza Cesarini, the latter palace being, on this account, known for a long time as the Cancelleria Vecchia. The removal of the vice-chancellor's residence and office to the majestic Palazzo Riario, in the Campo di Fiori, was due to the confiscation of the property of Cardinal Raffaele Riario for his share, with Cardinals Petrucci, Sacchi, Soderini, and Castellesi, in a conspiracy against the life of Leo X. Contiguous to the Cancelleria, in fact forming a part of it, is the Church of San Lorenzo in Damaso. When Clement VII assigned this palace as the perpetual residence of the vice-chancellor, he provided that the vice-chancellor should always have the title of that church; and, as it happens that the chancellors are not always of the same order in the Sacred College, being sometimes cardinal-deacons, sometimes cardinal-priests, and sometimes cardinal-bishops, this church does not follow the rule of the other cardinalitial churches, which have a fixed grade, being titular -- that is churches over which cardinals of the order of priests are placed -- or deaconries -- churches over which are placed cardinal-deacons. San Lorenzo, on the contrary, is a titular when the chancellor ia of the order of priests, and a deaconry when he is a cardinal-deacon. When, on the other hand, he is a sub-urbicarian bishop, the chancellor retains this church in commendam. The Regency, which is the next office in the order of precedence in the Chancery after the chancellorship, was created in 1377, when Gregory XI returned from France to his see. Cardinal Pierre de Monteruc, who was the chancellor at that time, refused to follow the pope from Avignon to Rome; and, as it was necessary that someone should direct the office of the Chancery, the pope, leaving the title of vice-chancellor to Montéruc, appointed the Archbishop of Ban, Bartolommeo Prignano, regent of this important office. At the death of Gregory XI, in 1378, Prignano was elected pope, and he appointed a successor to himself in the office of regent of the Chancery, which was thereafter maintained, even when the vice-chancellor re-established his residence at Rome. There is not space here to refer in detail to the other offices of the Chancery, and the subject is the less important, since the greater number of those offices have now disappeared for good. At present the Chancery is charged only with the expedition of Bulls for consistorial benefices, the establishment of new dioceses and new chapters, and other more important affairs of the Church. (For the various forms of Apostolic Letters, see BULLS AND BRIEFS.) One fact concerning the expedition of Bulls should be mentioned. Formerly, there were four different ways of issuing these documents, namely, by way of the Curia (per viam curios), by way of the Chancery (per cancellarium), secretly (per viam secretam), and by way of the Apostolic Camera (per viam cameras). The reason for this is that, while some Bulls were taxed, there was no taxation on others, and it was necessary to determine upon what Bulls the proprietors of the vacabili offices had a right to receive taxes. Bulls, therefore, which concerned the government of the Catholic world, being exempt from all taxation, were said to be issued by way of the Curia. Those Bulls of which the expedition was by way of the Chancery were the common Bulls, which, after being reviewed by the abbreviators of the greater presidency (see ABBREVIATORS), were signed by them and by the proprietors of the vacabili, the latter of whom received the established taxes. The Bulls said to be issued secretly were those in favour of some privileged persons -- as the palatine prelates, the auditors of the Rota, and the relatives of cardinals. They were signed by the vice-chancellor, and they, too, were exempt from taxation. Finally, the Bulls of which the expedition was said to be by way of the Camera were those that concerned the Apostolic Camera. Since the style and the rules of the Chancery could not be adapted to these Bulls, they were issued by the sommista, whose office was created by Alexander VI and later, as was said above, united by Alexander VIII with that of the vice-chancellor. At the present time, all the vacabili having been abolished, these various forms of expedition have been suppressed, the new Constitution providing that all Bulls be issued by way of the Chancery, on order of the Congregation of the Consistory for all matters of the competency of that body, and by order of the pope for all others. This is in keeping with the new organization of the Chancery as a merely issuing office. The Constitution "Sapienti consilio" provided that the ancient formulae of Bulls should be changed, and the duty of preparing new ones was given to a commission of cardinals composed of the chancellor, the datary, and the secretary of the Consistorial Congregation. This commission has already reformed the Bulls for the Consistorial benefices, and Pius X, by his Motu Proprio of 8 December, 1910, approved the new formula; and ordered them to be used exclusively after 1 January, 1911. The college of the abbreviators of the greater presidency having been suppressed, and the abbreviators of the lesser presidency having become extinct in fact, the Apostolic prothonotaries in actual office have been appointed to sign the Bulls. A very reasonable change has also been made in regard to the dating of Bulls. Formerly Bulls were dated according to the year of the Incarnation, which begins on 25 March. This medieval style of dating remained peculiar to papal Bulls, and in time gave rise to much confusion. Pius X ordered these documents to be dated in future according to common custom, by the year which begins on 1 January. Mention should here be made of what are known as the Rules of the Chancery. This name was given to certain Apostolic Constitutions which the popes were in the habit of promulgating at the beginning of their pontificate, in regard to judicial causes and those concerning benefices. In many cases the pope merely confirmed the provisions of his predecessor; in others he made additions or suppressions. The result has been an ancient collection of standing rules which remained unmodified even in the recent reorganization of the Curia. These Rules are usually divided into three classes: rules of direction or expedition, which concern the expedition of Bulls; beneficial or reservatory rules, relating to benefices and reservations; lastly, judicial rules, concerning certain prescriptions to be observed in judicial matters, especially with relation to appeals. The Rules of the Chancery have the force of law, and are binding wherever exceptions have not been made to them by a concordat. In ancient times, these rules ceased to be in force at the death of the sovereign pontiff, and were revived only upon the express confirmation of the succeeding pope. Urban VIII, however, declared that, without an express confirmation, the Rules of the Chancery should be in force on the day after the creation of the new pope. It would be outside of the scope of this article to enter into a minute examination of these rules, all the more because the commission of cardinals charged with the reformation of the formulae of Bulls has also charge of revising the Rules of the Chancery. B. The Apostolic Dataria According to some authorities, among them Amydenus (De officio et jurisdictione datarii necnon de stylo Datariae), this office is of very ancient origin. It is not so, however, as appears from the fact that the business which eventually fell to it was originally transacted elsewhere. The Dataria was entrusted, chiefly, with the concession of matrimonial dispensations of external jurisdiction, and with the collation of benefices reserved to the Holy See. To this double faculty was added that of granting many other indults and graces, but these additions were made later. Until the time of Pius IV matrimonial dispensations were granted through the Penitentiaria; and as to the collation of reserved benefices, that authority could not have been granted in very remote times, since the establishment of those reservations is comparatively recent: although some vestige of reservations is found even prior to the twelfth century, the custom was not frequent before Innocent II, and it was only from the time of Clement IV that the reservation of benefices was adopted as a general rule [c. ii, "De pract. et dignit." (III, 4) in 6°]. It may be said that, while this office certainly existed in the fourteenth century, as an independent bureau, it is impossible to determine the precise time of its creation. The Dataria consists, first, of a cardinal who is its chief and who, until the recent Constitution, was called the pro-datary, but now has the official title of datary. There was formerly as much discussion about the title of pro-datary as about that of vice-chancellor (see above). Some are of opinion that it is derived from the fact that this office dated the rescripts or graces of the sovereign pontiff, while others hold it to be derived from the right to grant and give (dare) the graces and indults for which petition is made to the pope. It is certain that, on account of these functions the datary enjoyed great prestige in former times, when he was called the eye of the pope (oculus papae). After the cardinal comes the subdatary, a prelate of the Curia who assists the datary, and takes the latter's place, upon occasion, in almost all of his functions. In the old organization of the Dataria there came after the subdatary a number of subordinate officials who, as De Luca says, bore titles that were enigmatical and sibyllic, as, for example, the prefect of the per obitum, the prefect of the concessum, the cashier of the componenda, an officer of the missis, and the like. Leo XIII had already introduced reforms into the organization of the Dataria, to make it harmonize with modern requirements, and Pius X, reducing the competency of the office, gave it an entirely new organization in his Constitution "Sapienti consilio", according to which the Dataria consists of the cardinal datary, the sub-datary, the prefect and his surrogate (sostituto), a few officers, a cashier, who has also the office of distributor, a reviser, and two writers of Bulls. The new Constitution retains the theological examiners for the competitions for parishes. Among the Datary offices that have been abolished mention should be made of that of the Apostolic dispatchers, which, in the new organization of the Curia, has no longer a reason for being. Formerly these officials were necessary, because private persons could not refer directly to the Dataria, which dealt only with persons known to, and approved by, itself. Now, however, anyone may deal directly with the Dataria, as with any of the other pontifical departments. The Dataria, which, as noted above, was commissioned to grant many papal indults and graces, has now only to investigate the fitness of candidates for Consistorial benefices, which are reserved to the Holy See, to write and to dispatch the Apostolic Letters for the collation of those benefices, to dispense from the conditions required in regard to them, and to provide for the pensions, or for the execution of the charges imposed by the pope when conferring those benefices. It would be both lengthy and difficult to retrace the former modes of procedure of this office, all the more as it was mainly regulated by tradition, while this tradition was jealously guarded by the officers of the Datary, who were generally laymen, and who had in that way established a species of monopoly as detrimental to the Holy See as profitable to themselves; thus it happened that these offices often passed from father to son, while the ecclesiastical superiors of the officials were to a great extent blindly dependent upon them. Leo XIII began the reform of this condition of things so unfavourable to good administration, and Pius X has totally abolished it. C. The Apostolic Camera In the Constitution "Sapienti consilio" Pius X provided that during vacancies of the Holy See its property should be administered by this office. The cardinal-camerlengo (see CAMERLENGO) presides over the Camera, and is governed in the exercise of his office by the rules established in the Constitution, "Vacante sede apostolica", of 25 December, 1906. (For history and general treatment see APOSTOLIC CAMERA.) D. The Secretariate of State After the promulgation of the Constitution of Innocent XII, in 1692, the cardinal nephews were succeeded by the secretaries of State. Of the cardinal nephews many authors have written with greater severity than is justified by the facts, although the dignitaries in question may on more than one occasion have given cause of complaint. In times when the life of the pope was in jeopardy from conspiracies formed in his own court (such, for instance, as that against Leo X mentioned above, under A. The Apostolic Chancery), it was a necessity for the sovereign pontiff to have as his chief assistant one in whom he might repose implicit confidence, and such he could nowhere more surely find than in his own family. The cardinal nephew was called "Secretarius Papae et superintendens status ecclesiasticæ". The cardinal secretary of State, who fills the place of the nephew, has been, and is, in the present day, the confidential assistant of the pope. Hence the office is vacated upon the death of the reigning pontiff. Before the promulgation of the recent Constitution of Pius X, this office of Curia comprised, besides the cardinal secretary himself, a surrogate, also called secretary of the cipher, and some clerks and subaltern officials. Now, however, there have been amalgamated with it certain other offices which were formerly independent. The Secretariate of State, therefore, is at present divided into three sections, the first of which deals with certain extraordinary ecclesiastical affairs, the second with ordinary affairs, including grants of honours, titles, and decorations by the Holy See otherwise than through the majordomo, the third with the expediting of pontifical Briefs. For the work of the first section, see what is said on the subject of the Congregation of Extraordinary Ecclesiastical Affairs, under ROMAN CONGREGATIONS. The second section deals with the relations of the Holy See with secular princes, whether through Apostolic nuncios or legates or through the ambassadors accredited to the Vatican. This section of the office of the secretary of State has charge of the distribution of offices of the Curia, and of the election of the various officers. Through this section titles of nobility -- as prince, marquis, count palatine, etc. -- are granted and the decorations of the Holy See, which, besides the golden cross pro Ecclesia et Pontifice, instituted by Leo XIII, include such distinctions as the Supreme Order of Christ (or Order of the Militia of Jesus Christ, as it is called by Pius X in his brief of 7 February, 1905), the Order of Pius IX, established by that pontiff in 1847, the Order of Saint Gregory the Great, created by Gregory XVI in 1831; the Order of Saint Sylvester; the Order of the Golden Militia, or of the Golden Spur, restored by Pius X, and the Order of the Holy Sepulchre, of which Pius X has reserved to himself the supreme mastership. As has already been said, the third section of the Secretariate of State is exclusively concerned with the expediting of Briefs. E. The Secretariate of Briefs to Princes and of Latin Letters The Secretariate of Briefs to Princes consists of the secretary and two office assistants. The secretary is a prelate whose duty it is to write the pontifical Briefs addressed to emperors, kings, civil princes, or other exalted personages. He also prepares the allocutions which the pope pronounces at Consistories, and the Encyclicals or Apostolic Letters addressed to the bishops and to the faithful. All this he does according to the instructions of the pope. He must be a proficient Latinist, since Latin is the language in which these documents are written. The secretary for Latin letters is also a prelate or private chamberlain (cameriere segreto), his duties being to write the letters of less solemnity which the sovereign pontiff addresses to different personages. He has an office assistant. III. COMMISSIONS OF CARDINALS AND THE PONTIFICAL FAMILY Certain commissions of cardinals which still exist are the Commissions for Biblical Studies, for Historical Studies, for the Administration of the Funds of the Holy See or of the Peterspence, for the Conservation of the Faith in Rome, and for the Codification of the Canon Law. In the wider sense of the term, the Curia includes not only the departments already mentioned, but also what is officially known as the Pontifical Family. The chief members of this body are the two palatine cardinals -- cardinal datary and the cardinal secretary of State. Formerly the cardinal datary always lived with the pope; the secretary of State, even now, lives in the Vatican Palace and is the pontiff's confidential officer. After these follow the palatine prelates: majordomo, the maestro di camera, the master of the Sacred Palace, and the carnerieri segreti partecipanti (the private almoner, the secretary of Briefs to Princes, the surrogate for ordinary affairs of the Secretariate of State and secretary of the Cipher, the sub-datary, the secretary for Latin Letters, the copyist, the embassy secretary, and the master of the robes), to whom are added, as palatine prelates, the sacristan and the secretary of Ceremonies. Nearly all these prelates live in the Vatican. It would be impossible to refer, here, to each one of them in particular. The history of their offices is the same for each, connected with that of the Apostolic Palace, and with the lives of the popes. (See MAESTRO DI CAMERA DEL PAPA; MAJORDOMO.) The majordomo and maestro di camera are followed in order in the Pontifical Family by the domestic prelates of His Holiness. These are divided into colleges, the first of which is the College of the Patriarchs, Archbishops, and Bishops, Assistants to the Pontifical Throne; the second is the College of Apostolic Prothonotaries, active and supernumerary. After these come the Colleges, respectively, of the Prelate Auditors of the Rota, of the Prelate Clerics of the Apostolic Camera, and of the Domestic Prelates, simply so called. Bishops assistants to the Throne (assistentes solio pontificio) are named by a Brief of the Secretariate of State, and in virtue of their office are members of the Pontifical Chapel (Cappella Pontificia); they wear the cappa magna and wait on the pope, assisting him with the book, and holding the candle (bugia). Moreover, they may wear silk robes -- an exclusive privilege of the Pontifical Family, although many bishops, in ignorance of this rule, act at variance with it. For the College of Apostolic Prothonotaries see PROTHONOTARY APOSTOLIC. For the College of Prelate Auditors of the Rota see ROTA, SACRA ROMANA. Of the clerics of the Apostolic Camera, enough has already been said in the present article. The domestic prelates are appointed as a rule by a Motu Proprio of the pope, occasionally at the petition of their bishops, and they enjoy several privileges, among which are the use of the violet dress, which is that of a bishop (without the cross), the ring, the violet biretta, and the cappa magna. These domestic prelates are appointed for life, and retain their dignity at the death of the pope. After them in the Pontifical Family come the camerieri segreti di spada e cappa partecipanti, all of whom are laymen, the staff and the higher officers of the Pontifical Noble Guard, the supernumerary camerieri segreti or private chamberlains (ecclesiastics), the active and the supernumerary camerieri di spada e cappa (laymen), the camerieri d'onore in abito paonazzo (ecclesiastics), the camerieri d'onore extra Urbem (ecclesiastics), the camerieri d'onore di spada e cappa, active and supernumerary (laymen), the staff and the higher officers of the Swiss Guard and of the Palatine Guard of Honour, the master of pontifical ceremonies, the private chaplains, the honorary private chaplains, the honorary private chaplains extra Urbem, the chierici segreti, the College of Ordinary Pontifical Chaplains. It would be impossible to refer, here, to each of these ranks in particular. It may be said, however, of the supernumerary camerieri segreti that, like the active and the partecipanti camerieri segreli, their office ceases at the death of the pope; while it lasts they have the right to use the violet dress, of a cut slightly differing, however, from that of the prelates; on account of which difference, they are called monsignori di mantellone, while the prelates are called monsignori, di mantelletta. GOMEZ, Tract, de potestate paenitentiariarae (Venice, 1557); LEONI, Praxis ad litteras et bullas majoris Paenitentiarii et offlcii S. Paenitentiaria in quatuor partes distributa, in quibus declarantur singularum formularum clausulae et traditur modus praefatas litteras exequendi (Rome, 1644); CORRADUS, Praxis dispensationum aposiolicarum ex solidissimo Romans curies stylo inconcusse servato excerpta, praxim quoque officii S. Paenitentiaria; Urbis iuxta illius ordinationem novi status complectens (Venice, 1669); SYRUS, Dilucidatio facultatum minorum paenitentiariorum basilicarum Urbis et -praxis executionum ad litteras et rescripta S. paenitentiarice (Rome, 1699); PETRA. Tractatus de paenitentiaria apostolica (Rome, 1717); GIBBINGS, The Tax of the Apostolic Penitentiary (Dublin, 1872); DUPIN DE ST-ANDRÉ, Taxe de la Pénitencerie apostolique d'aprés I'édition publiée à Paris en 1620 (Paris, 1879); DENIFLE, Die älteste Taxrolle d. apostol, Poenitentiarie v. Jahre 1838 in Arch. f. Litt. u. Kirchengesch. d. MA., IV, 201 sqq. (1888); EUBEL, Der Registerband d. Kardinal-Grosspönitentiars Bentevenga in A. f. k KR., LXIV, 3 sqq. (Mainz, 1890); LEA (ed.), A Formulary of the Papal Penitentiary in the Thirteenth Century (Philadelphia, 1892); BATIFFOL, Les prétres pénitentiers remains au Ye siécle, Compte-rendu du Congrés internal, des catholiques à Bruxelles, II (1894), 277 sqq.; LECACHEUX, Un formulaire de la pénitencerie apostolique au temps du cardinal Albornoz (1357-8). in Melanges Arch. Hist. Ecole Franc., Rome. XVIII (1898), 37 sqq.; LANG, Beitrage zur Geschichte der apostol. Poenitenciers in Mitt. d. Instil, f. Oesterr. Geschichtsf., VII, Supplementary Number, 1904; HASKINS, The Sources for the History of the Papal Penitentiary in American Journal of Theol., LIX (1905), 422 sqq.; TARANI A SPALANNIS, Manuale theorico-practicum pro minoribus paenitentiariis (Rome, 1906); GÖLLER, Die paepstliche Poenitentiarie von ihrem Ursprung bis zu ihrer Umgesialtung durch Pius V (Rome, 1907); CHOUET, La sacrée pénitencerie Apostolique (Lyons, 1904). GOMES, Compendium utriusqucae signatures (Paris, 1547); STAPHILAEUS, De litteris gratiae, de signatura gratis et liiteris apostolicis in forma brevis (Paris, 1558); MANDOSIUS, Praxis signatures gratiae (Rome, 1559); MARCHESANI, Commissionum ac rescriptorum utriusque signature S. D. N. Papas praxis (Rome, 1615); DE MATIENZO, Tract, de referendariorum, advocatorum, iudicum officio. requisitis, dignitate et eminentia (Frankfort, 1618); DE FATINELLIS, De referendariorum votantium signature iusiitiae collegia (Rome, 1696); VITALE, Comm. de iure signature iustitiae (Rome, 1756). CASSIODORUS, Super XIV reg. Cancelleriae (Paris, 1545); BARCHIN, Pratica, Cancellariae apostolicae cum stylo et formis in curia romana usitatis (Lyons, 1549); MANDOSIUS, Comm. in regulas Cancellariae lulii III (Venice, 1554); MILLUS, Annoiationes in regulas Gomesii Cancellerae apostolicae (Lyons, 1557); MANDOSIUS, In regulas Cancelleriae apostolicae commentar. (Rome, 1558); MOLINA, Comm. in regulas Cancelleriae apostolicae (Lyons, 1560); GOMES, In Cancelleriae apost. regulas iudiciales (Venice, 1575); REBUFFUS, Acid-it, in reg. Canceller-ifs (Paris, 1579); BLADIUS, Constitut. Pii IV, V et Gregor. XIII cum regulis Cancellerice (1583); GONZALEZ, Ad regulam VIII Cancell. de reservatione mensium (Geneva, 1605); BUTHILLERI, Tract, ad regul. Cancellariae de infirmis resignationibus (Paris, 1612); PELBUS, In regulas Cancellariae (Paris, 1615); A CHOCKIER, Comm. in reg. Cancellariae apostolicae sive in glossemata Alphonsi Soto nuncupati Glossatoris (Cologne, 1619); DE QUESADA, Regulae Cancellariae apostolicae Gregorii XV cum notis et indicibus (Rome, 1621); LOUETIUS, Notae ad comm. Caroli Molinaei in regulas Cancellariae ape apostolicae (Paris, 1656); SPERENGERUS, Roma nova cum regulis Cancellariae apostolicae et de privilegiis clericorum (Frankfort, 1667); CIAMPINI, De abbreviatoribus de parco maiori sive assistent. S. R. E. Vicecancellario in litierarum apostolicarum expeditionibus . . . dissertatio histories (Rome, 1669); LE PELLETIER, Instructions pour les expeditions de la cour de Rome (Paris, 1680); CASTEL PÉRARD, Paraphrase du commeniaire de M. Ch. Du Sfoulin sur les régles de la Chancellerie romaine (Paris, 1685); CIAMPINI, De S. R. E. Vicecancellaria (Rome, 1697); ANON, Compendiaria notitia abbreviatoris de curia (Rome, 1696); OCZENASSEK, Prael. iur. can. seu comm. in regulas Cancellariae Clementis XI (Vienna, 1712); Bovio, La pietà trionfante sulle distrutte grandezze del gentilismo . . . e degli ufficii delta Cancelleria Apostolica e dei Cancellieri della S. R. Chiesa (Rome, 1729); RIGANTI, Commentaria in regulas, constitutiones et ordinationes Cancetlariae apostolicae, opus posthumum (Geneva, 1571); HEDDERICH, Disputatio ad regulam Cancellariae; de non tollendo ius quaesitum in Germania, diss. XVII (Bonn, 1783); ERLER, Der Liber Cancelleriae' apostolicae v. J. 1380 (Leipzig, 1880); V. OTTENTHAL, Die päpstlichen Kanzleiregein von Johann XXII bis Nikolaus V (1888); TANGL, Die päpstlichen Kanzleiordungen von 1200-1500 (Innsbruck, 1894); KEHR, Scrinium und Palatium. Zur Geschichte des 'päpstlichen Kanzleiwessens im 11 Jahrh. in Mitt. des Instil, fur österr. Geschichtsf., suppl. VI; GÖLLER, Mitteilungen und Unlersuchungen über das päpstliche Register-und Kanzleiwessen im 14. Jahrh., besonders unter Johann XXII und Benedict XII in Quellen und Forschungen des Preuss. histor. Instituts in Rom., VI, 272 sqq.; CHIARI. Memoria giuridico-storica sulla Dataria Cancellaria, rev. Camera apostolica, Compenso di Spagna, vacabili e vacabilisti (Rome, 1900); ANON., Die Vacabilia d. päpstl. Kanzlei u. d. Datarie in Arch. f. k. KR., LXXXII (1902), 163-165; VON HOFMANN, Zur Geschichte der päpstl. Kanzlei vornehmlich in der 3. Hälfte des 15. Jahrh. (Berlin, 1904); SCHMITZ-KALLENBERG, Practica Cancellaria! apostolicae seculi xv exeuntis (Münster, 1904); BAUMGARTEN, Aus Kanzlei u. Kammer (Freiburg, 1905); GÖLLER, Die Kommentatoren der päpstlichen Kanzleiregeln von Ende des 15. bis sum Beginn des 17. Jahrhunderts in Arch. f, k. KR., LXXXV (1905), 441 sqq.; LXXXVI (1906). 20 sqq., 259 sqq.; IDEM, Von d. apostol. Kanzlei (Cologne, 1908). AMYDENUS, De officio et jurisdictione Datarii nec non de stylo Dataria; MACANAR, Pedimento sobre abuses de la Dataria (Madrid, 1841); ANON., Die Vacabilia d. päpstl. Kanzlei u. d. Datarie in Arch. f. k. KB, 82, 163 (1902). SESTINI, 11 Maestro di Camera. (Florence, 1623); CATALANUS, De Magistro s. Palatii Apostolici (Rome, 1751); MARINI, Memorie istoriche degli archivi delta S. Sede (Rome, 1825); RASPONI, De Basilica et Patriarchio lateranensi (Rome, 1656); GALLETTI, Del Primicero delta S. Sede Apostolica e di altri ufficiali rnaggiori del Sagro Palagio lateranense (Rome, 1776); GALLBTTI, Del vestarario della S. Romana Chiesa (Rome, 1758); CONTI, Originæ fasti e privilege degli avvocaii concistoriali (Rome, 1898); RENAZI. Notizie storiche degli antichi Vicedomini del Patriarchio lateranense e dei moderni Prefetti del Sagro Palazzo Apostolico ovvero maggiordomi poritefici (Rome, 1787); CANCELLIERI, Notizie sopra l'anello pescatorio (Rome, 1823); MAUBACH, 0. Kardinale u. ihre Poltt. urn d. Mitte d. fill. Jahrh. (Bonn, 1902); SÄGMÜLLER, Geschichte d. Kardinalates (Rome, 1893); SACCHETTI, Privilegia protonotariorum apostolicorum (Cologne, 1689); ANDREUCCI, Tr. de protonotariis apostolicis (Rome, 1742); RIGANTI, De protonotariis apostolicis (Rome, 1751); BUONACCORSI, Antichitá del protono-apostolico partecipante (Faenza, 1751); BRUNET, Le parfait notaire apostolique et procureur des officialités et formules ecclésiastiques (Lyons, 1775); MICKE, De protonotariis apostolicis dissertatio (Breslau, 1866); RENAUD, Des protonotaires apostoliques in Rev. des Sciences ecclés. (1867); TROMBETTA, De juribus et privilegiis praelatorum Romance Curiae (Sorrento, 1906). BENEDETTO OJETTI St. Romanos St. Romanos Surnamed ho melodos and ho theorrhetor, poet of the sixth century. The only authority for the life and date of this greatest of Greek hymn-writers is the account in the Menaion for October; his feast is 1 October. According to this account he was by birth a Syrian, served as deacon in the church at Berytus, and came to Constantinople in the reign of Anastasios. It was in the Church of the Most Holy Theotokos (eis ta Kyrou) that he received the charisma of sacred poetry. "After a religious retreat at Blachernae he returned to his church, and one night in his sleep saw a vision of the Most Holy Theotokos, who gave him a volume of paper, saying, 'Take the paper and eat it'." The saint, in his dream, opened his mouth and swallowed the paper. It was Christmas Day, and immediately he awakened and marvelled and glorified God. Then, mounting the ambo, he began the strains of his he parthenos semeron ton hyperousion tiktei. He wrote also about one thousand kontakia for other feasts before he died. Beyond this passage, there are only two mentions of Romanos's name, one in the eighth-century poet St. Germanos, and once in Suidas (s. v. anaklomenon), who calls him "Romanos the melode". None of the Byzantine writers on hymnology allude to him: his fame was practically extinguished by the newer school of hymn-writers which flourished in the eighth and ninth centuries. Krumbacher has made it fairly certain, by a number of critical arguments, that the emperor named in the Menaion as reigning when Romanos came to the capital is Anastasius I (A.D. 491-518), not Anastasius II (A.D. 713-16); Pitra and Stevenson are of the same opinion. Probably, then, he lived through the reign of Justinian (A.D. 527-65), who was himself a hymn-writer; this would make him contemporary with two other Byzantine melodes, Anastasios and Kyriakos. "In poetic talent, fire of inspiration, depth of feeling, and elevation of language, he far surpasses all the other melodes. The literary history of the future will perhaps acclaim Romanos for the greatest ecclesiastical poet of all ages", says Krumbacher, and all the other critics of Byzantine poetry subscribe to this enthusiastic praise. Some have called him the Christian Pindar. Down till the twelfth century his Christmas hymn was performed by a double choir (from S. Sophia and the Holy Apostles) at the imperial banquet on that feast day. Of most of the others only a few strophes survive. The long hymns (kontakia) consist of twenty-five strophes (troparia), usually of twenty-one verses each, with a refrain. Besides the Christmas hymn we may cite the following titles to exemplify St. Romanos's choice of subjects: "Canticum Paschale", "de Crucis Triumpho", "de Iuda Proditore", "de Petri Negatione", "de Virgine iuxta crucem". Dramatic and pathetic dialogue plays a great part in the structure. The simple sincerity of tone sometimes puts the reader in mind of the Latin medieval hymns, or the earliest Italian religious verse. Romanos, like the other melodes, obeys a purely accentual or rhythmic law; the quantitative scansions are obsolete for those to whom he sings (see BYZANTINE LITERATURE, IV). Editions: Twenty-nine hymns in Pitra, "Analecta Sacra", I, 1876; three more in Pitra, "Sanctus Romanus veterum melodorum princeps" (1888); Krumbacher long ago promised a complete critical edition according to the Patmian codices, but has not yet achieved it. [ Note: St. Romanos is also described in the article, "Saints Romanus" [(8)], Romanos and Romanus being the Greek and Latin forms respectively of the same name.] PITRA, Hymnographie de l'Eglise grecque (Rome, 1867); BOUVY, Poetes et Melodes (Nimes, 1886); KRUMBACHER, Gesch. d. byz. Literatur, Munich, 312-18; IDEM, Studien zu Romanos (Munich, 1899); IDEM, Umarbeitungen bei Romanos (Munich, 1899); JACOBI, Zur Geschichte des grieschischen Kirchenliedes in Briegers Zeitschrift fur Kirchengeschichte (1882), V, 177-250. J.S. PHILLIMORE Consitutio Romanos Pontifices Constitutio Romanos Pontifices The restoration by Pius IX, 29 Sept. 1850, by letters Apostolic "Universalis ecclesiæ" of the hierarchy in England, and the consequent transition to the new order of things, necessarily gave rise to misunderstandings and discussion in various matters of jurisdiction and discipline, particularly between the episcopate and religious orders. Bishops, as was incumbent upon them, strenuously maintained the rights of the hierarchy, while religious superiors were loath to surrender prerogatives previously exercised. The chief points of controversy related to the exemption of regulars from the jurisdiction of bishops; the right of bishops to divide parishes or missions conducted by regulars, and to place secular priests in charge of these newly-created missions; the obligation of regulars engaged in parish work to attend conferences of the clergy and diocesan synods; the force of their appeal from synodal statutes; their liberty to found new houses, colleges and schools, or to convert existing institutions to other purposes; the right of bishops to visit canonically institutions in charge of regulars; and certain financial matters. Individual bishops sought to cope with the situation until finally a proposition of Cardinal Manning, made in an annual meeting of the English hierarchy in 1877, to submit these difficulties to Rome for definite settlement, met with unanimous approval. In July, 1878, the bishops of Scotland formally associated themselves with their English brethren in the controversy. Negotiations were opened with Propaganda, but Cardinal Manning later suggested to Pope Leo XIII the appointment of a special commission to examine the claims of the contestants and to prepare a constitution. Repeated delays ensued, so that it was not until 20 Sept., 1880, that a special commission of nine cardinals chosen to consider the question had its first sitting. Four other sessions followed, and in Jan., 1881, a report was made to the pope. Finally the constitution "Romanos Pontifices", of Leo XIII was issued 8 May of the same year, defining the relations in England and Scotland between bishops and religious. This constitution has been extended to the United States (25 Sept., 1885), to Canada (14 March, 1911), to South America (1 Jan., 1900), to the Philippine Islands (1 Jan., 1910), and quite generally to missionary countries. The provisions of the "Romanos Pontifices" may be grouped into three heads: + the exemption of religious from episcopal jurisdiction; + relations to bishops of religious engaged in parochial duties; + and matters pertaining to temporal goods. The constitution makes clear the following: though regulars according to canon law are subject immediately to the Holy See, bishops are given jurisdiction over small communities. The constitution "Romanos Pontifices" makes a further concession exempting regulars as such, living in parochial residences in small numbers or even alone, almost entirely from the jurisdiction of the ordinary. "We hesitate not to declare", it states, "that regulars dwelling in their own monasteries, are exempt from the jurisdiction of the ordinary, except in cases expressly mentioned in law, and generally speaking in matters pertaining to the cure of souls and the administration of the sacraments." In parochial ministrations, then, regulars are subject in all things to episcopal supervision, visitation, jurisdiction, and correction. If engaged in parochial work, religious are obliged to assist at conferences of the clergy as well as at diocesan synods. "We declare," says the constitution, "that all rectors of missions are bound by their office to attend the conferences of the clergy; and moreover we ordain and command that vicars also and other religious enjoying ordinary missionary faculties, living in residences and small missions, do the same." The Council of Trent prescribes that all having the cure of souls be present at diocesan synods. The constitution says in regard to this question: Let the Council of Trent be observed. Another point of controversy related to appeals from synodal decrees. Regulars are not denied this right. Their appeal from the ordinary's interpretation of synodal statutes in matters pertaining to common law has a devolutive effect only; in matters pertaining to regulars as such, owing to their exemption, an appeal begets a suspensive effect. The bishop's right to divide parishes, even though under the management of regulars, is maintained, providing the formalities prescribed in law be observed. The opinion of the rector of the mission to be divided must be sought; while a bishop is not free to divide a mission in charge of religious without consulting their superior. An appeal, devolutive in character, to the Holy See, should the case require it, is granted from the bishop's decision to divide a parish or mission. The ordinary is free to follow his own judgment in appointing rectors of new missions, even when formed from parishes in charge of regulars. The claim of regulars to preference in these appointments is thus denied. It is unlawful for religious to establish new monasteries, churches, colleges, or schools without the previous consent of the ordinary and of the Apostolic See. Similar permission is required to convert existing institutions to other purposes, except where such change, affecting merely the domestic arrangements or discipline of regulars themselves, is not contrary to the conditions of the foundation. The bishop may exercise the right of canonical visitation in regard to churches and parochial or elementary schools, though they be in charge of regulars. This right does not extend to cemeteries or institutions for the use of religious only; nor to colleges in which religious, according to their rule, devote themselves to the education of youth. The temporal affairs of a parish or mission are determined by a decree of Propaganda, published 19 April, 1969. All goods given to parishes or missions must be accounted for according to diocesan statutes; not, however, donations made to regulars for themselves. It is the duty of the ordinary to see that parochial goods are devoted to the purposes designated by the donors. Inventories (Propaganda, 10 May, 1867) will distinguish parochial belongings from those of regulars. These regulations of former decrees are embodied in "Romanos Pontifices." The constitution may be found in Conc. Plen. Balt. III, pp. 212 sq.; Acta Apos. Sedis, II, pp. 254 sq., where it is officially republished. For the English controversy see SNEAD-COX, Life of Cardinal Vaughan (London, 1910), xiv; TAUNTON, The Law of the Church,, s.v. Regulars. ANDREW B. MEEHAN The Roman Rite The Roman Rite ( Ritus romanus). The Roman Rite is the manner of celebrating the Holy Sacrifice, administering Sacraments, reciting the Divine Office, and performing other ecclesiastical functions (blessings, all kinds of Sacramentals, etc.) as used in the city and Diocese of Rome. The Roman Rite is the most wide-spread in Christendom. That it has advantages possessed by no other -- the most archaic antiquity, unequalled dignity, beauty, and the practical convenience of being comparatively short in its services -- will not be denied by any one who knows it and the other ancient liturgies. But it was not the consideration of these advantages that led to its extensive use; it was the exalted position of the see that used it. The Roman Rite was adopted throughout the West because the local bishops, sometimes kings or emperors, felt that they could not do better than use the rite of the chief bishop of all, at Rome. And this imitation of Roman liturgical practice brought about in the West the application of the principle (long admitted in the East) that rite should follow patriarchate. Apart from his universal primacy, the pope had always been unquestioned Patriarch of the West. It was then the right and normal thing that the West should use his liturgy. The irregular and anomalous incident of liturgical history is not that the Roman Rite has been used, practically exclusively, in the West since about the tenth or eleventh century, but that before that there were other rites in the pope's patriarchate. Not the disappearance but the existence and long toleration of the Gallican and Spanish rites is the difficulty (see RITES). Like all others, the Roman Rite bears clear marks of its local origin. Wherever it may be used, it is still Roman in the local sense, obviously composed for use in Rome. Our Missal marks the Roman stations, contains the Roman saints in the Canon (See CANON OF THE MASS), honours with special solemnity the Roman martyrs and popes. Our feasts are constantly anniversaries of local Roman events, of the dedication of Roman churches (All Saints, St. Michael, S. Maria ad Nives, etc.). The Collect for Sts. Peter and Paul (29 June) supposes that it is said at Rome (the Church which "received the beginnings of her Faith" from these saints is that of Rome), and so on continually. This is quite right and fitting; it agrees with all liturgical history. No rite has ever been composed consciously for general use. In the East there are still stronger examples of the same thing. The Orthodox all over the world use a rite full of local allusions to the city of Constantinople. The Roman Rite evolved out of the (presumed) universal, but quite fluid, rite of the first three centuries during the (liturgically) almost unknown time from the fourth to the sixth. In the sixth we have it fully developed in the Leonine, later in the Gelasian, Sacramentaries. How and exactly when the specifically Roman qualities were formed during that time will, no doubt, always be a matter of conjecture (see LITURGY; MASS, LITURGY OF THE). At first its use was very restrained. It was followed only in the Roman province. North Italy was Gallican, the South, Byzantine, but Africa was always closely akin to Rome liturgically. From the eighth century gradually the Roman usage began its career of conquest in the West. By the twelfth century at latest it was used wherever Latin obtained, having displaced all others except at Milan and in retreating parts of Spain. That has been its position ever since. As the rite of the Latin Church it is used exclusively in the Latin Patriarchate, with three small exceptions at Milan, Toledo, and in the still Byzantine churches of Southern Italy, Sicily, and Corsica. During the Middle Ages it developed into a vast number of derived rites, differing from the pure form only in unimportant details and in exuberant additions. Most of these were abolished by the decree of Pius V in 1570 (see MASS, LITURGY OF THE). Meanwhile, the Roman Rite had itself been affected by, and had received additions from, the Gallican and Spanish uses it displaced. The Roman Rite is now used by every one who is subject to the pope's patriarchal jurisdiction (with the three exceptions noted above); that is, it is used in Western Europe, including Poland, in all countries colonized from Western Europe: America, Australia, etc., by Western (Latin) missionaries all over the world, including the Eastern lands where other Catholic rites also obtain. No one may change his rite without a legal authorization, which is not easily obtained. So the Western priest in Syria, Egypt, and so on uses his own Roman Rite, just as at home. On the same principle Catholics of Eastern rites in Western Europe, America, etc., keep their rites; so that rites now cross each other wherever such people live together. The language of the Roman Rite is Latin everywhere except that in some churches along the Western Adriatic coast it is said in Slavonic and on rare occasions in Greek at Rome (see RITES). In derived forms the Roman Rite is used in some few dioceses (Lyons) and by several religious orders (Benedictines, Carthusians, Carmelites, Dominicans). In these their fundamentally Roman character is expressed by a compound name. They are the "Ritus Romano-Lugdunensis", "Romano-monasticus", and so on. For further details and bibliography see BREVIARY; CANON OF THE MASS; LITURGY; MASS, LITURGY OF THE; RITES. ADRIAN FORTESCUE Epistle To the Romans Epistle to the Romans This subject will be treated under the following heads: I. The Roman Church and St. Paul; II. Character, Contents, and Arrangement of the Epistle; III. Authenticity; IV. Integrity; V. Date and Circumstances of Composition; VI. Historical Importance; VII, Theological Contents: Faith and Works (Paul and James). I. THE ROMAN CHURCH AND ST. PAUL Among the Epistles of the New Testament which bear the name of the Apostle Paul, that written to the Roman Church occupies the first place in the manuscripts which have come down to us, although in very early times the order was probably otherwise. The Epistle is intended to serve as an introduction to a community with which the author, though he has not founded it, desires to form connexions (i, 10- 15; xv, 22-24, 28-29). For years his thoughts have been directed towards Rome (xv, 23). The Church there had not been recently established; but its faith had already become known everywhere (i, 8) and it is represented as a firmly established and comparatively old institution, which Paul regards with reverence, almost with awe. Concerning its foundation, unfortunately, the Epistle to the Romans gives us no information. To interpret this silence as decisive against its foundation by Peter is inadmissible. It cannot indeed be ascertained with complete certainty when Peter first came to Rome; there may have been Christians in the capital before any Apostle set foot there, but it is simply inconceivable that this Church should have attained to such firm faith and such a high standard of religious life without one of the prominent authorities of nascent Christianity having laid its foundation and directed its growth. This Church did not owe its Faith solely to some unknown members of the primitive Christian community who chanced to come to Rome. Its Christianity was, as the Epistle tells us, free from the Law; this conviction Paul certainly shared with the majority of the community, and his wish is simply to deepen this conviction. This condition is entirely incomprehensible if the Roman Church traced its origin only to some Jewish Christian of the community in Jerusalem, for we know how far the fight for freedom was from being ended about a.d. 50. Nor can the foundation of the Roman Church be traced to the Gentile Christian Churches, who named Paul their Apostle; their own establishment was too recent, and Paul would have worded his Epistle otherwise, if the community addressed were even mediately indebted to his apostolate. The complete silence as to St. Peter is most easily explained by supposing that he was then absent from Rome; Paul may well have been aware of this fact, for the community was not entirely foreign to him. An epistle like the present would hardly have been sent while the Prince of the Apostles was in Rome and the reference to the ruler (xii, 8) would then be difficult to explain. Paul probably supposes that during the months between the composition and the arrival of the Epistle, the community would be more or less thrown on its own resources. This does not however indicate a want of organization in the Roman community; such organization existed in every Church founded by Paul, and its existence in Rome can be demonstrated from this very Epistle. The inquiry into the condition of the community is important for the understanding of the Epistle. Complete unanimity concerning the elements forming the community has not yet been attained. Baur and others (especially, at the present day, Theodore Zahn) regard the Roman community as chiefly Jewish Christian, pointing to vi, 15-17; vii, 1-6; viii, 15. But the great majority of exegetes incline to the opposite view, basing their contention, not only on individual texts, but also on the general character of the Epistle. At the very beginning Paul introduces himself as the Apostle of the Gentiles. Assuredly, i, 5, cannot be applied to all mankind, for Paul certainly wished to express something more than that the Romans belonged to the human race; in corroboration of this view we may point to i, 13, where the writer declares that he had long meditated coming to Rome that he might have some fruit there as among the other "Gentiles". He then continues: "To the Greeks and to the barbarians, to the wise and to the unwise, I am a debtor; so (as much as is in me) I am ready to preach the gospel to you also that are at Rome" (I, 14 sq.); he names himself the Apostle of the Gentiles (xi, 13), and cites his call to the apostolate of the Gentiles as the justification for his Epistle and his language (xv, 16-18). These considerations eliminate all doubt as to the extraction of the Roman Christians. The address and application in xi, 13 sqq., likewise presuppose a great majority of Gentile Christians, while vi, 1 sqq., shows an effort to familiarize the Gentile Christians with the dealings of God towards the Jews. The whole character of the composition forces one to the conclusion that the Apostle supposes a Gentile majority in the Christian community, and that in Rome as elsewhere the statement about the fewness of the elect (from among the Jews) finds application (xi, 5-7; cf. xv, 4). However, the Roman community was not without a Jewish Christian element, probably an important section. Such passages as iv, 1 (Abraham, our father according to the flesh; viii, i (I speak to them that know the law); vii, 4; viii, 2, 15, etc., can scarcely be explained otherwise than by supposing the existence of a Jewish Christian section of the community. On the other hand, it must be remembered that Paul was out and out a Jew, and that his whole training accustomed him to adopt the standpoint of the Law–the more so as the revelation of the Old Testament is in the last instance the basis of the New Testament, and Paul regards Christianity as the heir of God's promises, as the true "Israel of God" (Gal., vi, 16). St. Paul often adopts this same standpoint in the Epistle to the Galatians–an Epistle undoubtedly addressed to Christians who are on the point of submitting to circumcision. Even if the Epistle to the Romans repeatedly addresses (e. g., ii, 17 sqq.) Jews, we may deduce nothing from this fact concerning the composition of the community, since Paul is dealing, not with the Jewish Christians, but with the Jews still subject to the Law and not yet freed by the grace of Christ. The Apostle wishes to show the rôle and efficacy of the Law–what it cannot and should not–and what it was meant to effect. II. CHARACTER, CONTENTS, AND ARRANGMENT OF THE EPISTLE A. Character The chief portion of this Epistle to the Romans (i-xi) is evidently a theological discussion. It would however be inaccurate to regard it not as a real letter, but as a literary epistle. It must be considered as a personal communication to a special community, and, like that sent to the Corinthians or the cognate Epistle to the Galatians, must be judged according to the concrete position and the concrete conditions of that community. What the Apostle says, he says with a view to his readers in the Roman community and his own relations to them. Language and style reveal the writer of the Epistle to the Corinthians and the Galatians. Its emphatic agreement with the latter in subject-matter is also unmistakable. The difference in the parties addressed and between the circumstances, however, impresses on either Epistle its distinctive stamp. The Epistle to the Galatians is a polemical work, and is composed in a polemical spirit with the object of averting an imminent evil; the Epistle to the Romans is written in a time of quiet peace, and directed to a Church with which the author desires to enter into closer relations. We thus miss in the latter those details and references to earlier experiences and occurrences, with which the former Epistle is so instinct. Not that Romans is a purely abstract theological treatise; even here Paul, with his whole fiery and vigorous personality, throws himself into his subject, sets before himself his opponent, and argues with him. This characteristic of the Apostle is clearly seen. Hence arise unevenness and harshness in language and expression noticeable in the other Epistles. This does not prevent the Epistle as a whole from revealing an elaborately thought out plan, which often extends to the smallest details in magnificent arrangement and expression. We might recall the exordium, to which, in thought and to some extent in language, the great concluding doxology corresponds, while the two sections of the first part deal quite appropriately with the impressive words on the certainty of salvation and on God's exercise of providence and wisdom (viii, 31-39; xi, 33-36). The immediate external occasion for the composition of the Epistle is given by the author himself; he wishes to announce his arrival to the community and to prepare them for the event. The real object of this comprehensive work, and the necessity for a theological Epistle are not thought out. The supposition that St. Paul desired to give the Romans a proof of his intellectual gifts (i, 11; xv, 29) is excluded by its pettiness. We must therefore conclude that the reason for the Epistle is to be sought in the conditions of the Roman community. The earliest interpreters (Ambrosiaster, Augustine, Theodoret) and a great number of later exegetes see the occasion for the Epistle in the conflict concerning Judaistic ideas, some supposing an antagonism between the Gentile and Jewish Christians (Hug, Delitzsch) and others the existence of some typically Jewish errors or at least of an outspoken anti-Paulinism This view does not accord with the character of the Epistle: of errors and division in the Church the author makes no mention, nor was there any difference of opinion concerning the fundamental conception of Christianity between Paul and the Roman Church. The polemics in the Epistle are directed, not against the Jewish Christians, but against unbelieving Judaism. It is true that there are certain contrasts in the community: we hear of the strong and the weak; of those who have acquired the complete understanding and use of Christian freedom, and who emphasize and exercise it perhaps regardlessly; we hear of others who have not yet attained to the full possession of freedom. These contrasts are as little based on the standpoint of the Law and a false dogmatic outlook as the "weak" of I Corinthians. Paul would otherwise not have treated them with the mild consideration which he employs and demands of the strong (xiv, 5-10; xiv, 15-xv, 7). In judging there was always a danger, and mistakes had occurred (xiv, 13: "Let us not therefore judge one another any more"). According to the nature of the mistake divisions might easily gain a footing; from what direction these were to be expected, is not declared by the Apostle, but the cases of Corinth and Galatia indicate it sufficiently. And even though Paul had no reason to anticipate the gross Jewish errors, it sufficed for him that divisions destroyed the unanimity of the community, rendered his labours more difficult, made co-operation with Rome impossible, and seriously impaired the community itself. He therefore desires to send beforehand this earnest exhortation (xvi, 17 sq.), and does all he can to dispel the misconception that he despised and fought against Israel and the Law. That there was good ground for these fears, he learned from experience in Jerusalem during his last visit (Acts, xxi, 20-1). From this twofold consideration the object of Romans may be determined. The exhortations to charity and unity (xii sqq.) have the same purpose as those addressed to the weak and the strong. In both cases there is the vigorous reference to the single foundation of the faith, the unmerited call to grace, with which man can correspond only by humble and steadfast faith working in charity, and also the most express, though not obtrusive exhortation to complete unity in charity and faith. For Paul these considerations are the best means of securing the confidence of the whole community and its assistance in his future activities. The thoughts which he here expresses are those which ever guide him, and we can easily understand how they must have forced themselves upon his attention when he resolved to seek a new, great field of activity in the West. They correspond to his desire to secure the co-operation of the Roman community, and especially with the state and needs of the Church. They were the best intellectual gifty that the Apostle could offer; thereby he set the Church on the right path, created internal solidity, and shed light on the darkness of the doubts which certainly must have overcast the souls of the contemplative Christians in face of the attitude of incredulity which characterized the Chosen People. B. Contents and Arrangement Introduction and Reason for writing the Epistle arising from the obligations of his calling and plans (i, 1-15): (1) The Theoretic Part (i, 16-xi, 36). Main Proposition: The Gospel, in whose service Paul stands, is the power of God and works justification in every man who believes (i, 16-17). This proposition is discussed and proved (i, 18-viii, 39), and then defended in the light of the history of the Chosen People (ix, 1-xi, 36). (a) The justice of God is acquired only through faith in Christ (i, 18-viii, 39). (i) The proof of the necessity of justifying grace through faith (i, 18-iv, 25): without faith there is no justice, proved from the case of the pagans (i, 18-32) and the Jews (ii, 1-iii, 20); (b) justice is acquired through faith in and redemption by Christ (the Gospel, iii, 21-31). Holy Writ supplies the proof: Abraham's faith (iv, 1-25). (ii) The greatness and blessing of justification through faith (v, 1-viii, 39), reconciliation with God through Christ, and certain hope of eternal salvation (v, 1-11). This is illustrated by contrasting the sin of Adam and its consequences for all mankind, which were not removed by the Law, with the superabundant fruits of redemption merited by Christ (v, 12-21). Conclusion: Redemption by Christ (communicated to the individual through baptism) requires death to sin and life with Christ (vi, 1-23). To accomplish this the Law is ineffectual, for by the death of Christ it has lost its binding power (vii, 1-6), and, although holy and good in itself, it possesses only educative and not sanctifying power, and is thus impotent in man's dire combat against sinful nature (vii, 7-25). In contrast to this impotence, communion with Christ imparts freedom from sin and from death (viii, 1-11), establishes the Divine kinship, and raises mankind above all earthly trouble to the certain hope of an indescribable happiness (viii, 12-39). (b) Defence of the first part from the history of the people of Israel (ix, 1-xi, 36). The consoling certainty of salvation may appear threatened by the rejection or obduracy of Israel. How could God forget His promises and reject the people so favoured? The Apostle must thus explain the providence of God. He begins with a touching survey of God's deeds of love and power towards the Chosen People (ikx, 1-5), proceeding then to prove that God's promise has not failed. For (i) God acts within His right when He grants grace according to His free pleasure, since God's promises did not apply to Israel according to the flesh, as early history shows (Isaac and Ismael, Jacob and Esau) (ix, 1-13); God's word to Moses and His conduct towards Pharao call into requisition this right (ix, 14-17)); God's position (as Creator and Lord) is the basis of this right (ix, 19-24); God's express prophecy announced through the Prophets, the exercise of this right towards Jews and pagans (ix, 24-29); (ii) God's attitude was in a certain sense demanded by the foolish reliance of Israel on its origin and justification in the Law (ix, 30-x,4) and by its refusal of and disobedience to the message of faith announced everywhere among the Jews (x, 5-21); (iii) In this is revealed the wisdom and goodness of God, for: Israel's rejection is not complete; a chosen number have attained to the faith (xi, 1-10); (iv) Israel's unbelief is the salvation of the pagan world, and likewise a solemn exhortation to fidelity in the faith (xi, 11- 22); (v) Israel's rejection is not irrevocable. The people will find mercy and salvation (xi, 23-32). Thence the praise of the wisdom and the inscrutable providence of God (xi, 33-36). (2) The Practical Part (xii, 1-xv, 13).–(a) The general exhortation to the faithful service of God and the avoidance of the spirit of the world (xii, 1-2). (b) Admonition to unity and charity (modest, active charity), peacefulness, and love of enemies (xii, 3-21). (c) Obligations towards superiors: fundamental establishment and practical proof (xiii, 1-7). Conclusion: A second inculcation of the commandment of love (xiii, 8-10) and an incitement to zeal in view of the proximity of salvation (xiii, 11-14). (d) Toleration and forbearance between the strong and the weak (treated with special application to the Roman community) on account of the importance and practical significance of the question; it falls under (b): (i) fundamental criticism of the standpoint of both classes (xiv, 1-12); (ii) practical inferences for both (xiv, 13- xv, 6); (iii) establishment through the example of Christ and the intentions of God (xv, 7-13). Conclusion: Defence of the Epistle: (1) in view of Paul's calling; (2) in view of his intended relations with the community (xv, 22-23); (3) recommendations, greetings (warning), doxology (xvi, 1-27). III. AUTHENTICITY Is the Epistle to the Romans a work of the great Apostle of the Gentiles, St. Paul? Undoubtedly it has the same authorship as the Epistles to the Corinthians and the Epistle to the Galatians; consequently, if the authenticity of these be proved, that of Romans is likewise established. We shall however treat the question quite independently. The external evidence of the authorship of Romans is uncommonly strong. Even though no direct testimony as to the authorship is forthcoming before Marcion and Irenæus, still the oldest writings betray an acquaintance with the Epistle. One might with some degree of probability include the First Epistle of St. Peter in the series of testimonies: concerning the relation between Romans and the Epistle of St. James we shall speak below. Precise information is furnished by Clement of Rome, Ignatius of Antioch, Polycarp, and Justin: Marcion admitted Romans into his canon, and the earliest Gnostics were acquainted with it. The internal evidence is equally convincing. Modern critics (van Manen and others) have indeed asserted that no attempt was ever made to prove its authenticity; they have even gone further, and declared the Epistle an invention of the second century. Evanson (1792) first attempted to maintain this view; he was followed by Br. Bauer (1852, 1877), and later by Loman, Steck, van Manen (1891, 1903), and others. A less negative standpoint was adopted by Pierson-Naber, Michelsen, Völter, etc., who regarded Romans as the result of repeated revisions of genuine Pauline fragments, e. g., that one genuine Epistle, interpolated five times and combined finally with an Epistle to the Ephesians, gave rise to Romans (Völter). These critics find their ground for denying the authenticity of the Epistle in the following considerations: Romans is a theological treatise rather than an epistle; the beginning and conclusion do not correspond; the addresses cannot be determined with certainty; despite a certain unity of thought and style, there are perceptible traces of compilation and discordance, difficult transitions, periods, connexions of ideas, which reveal the work of the reviser; the second part (ix-xii) abandons the subject of the first (justification by faith), and introduces an entirely foreign idea; there is much that cannot be the composition of St. Paul (the texts dealing with the rejection of Israel lead one to the period after the destruction of Jerusalem; the Christians of Rome appear as Pauline Christians; the conception of freedom from the law, of sin and justification, of life in Christ, etc., are signs of a later development); finally there are, according to Van Manen, traces of second-century Gnosticism in the Epistle. We have here a classical example of the arbitrariness of this type of critics. They first declare all the writings of the first and of the early second century forgeries, and, having thus destroyed all the sources, construct a purely subjective picture of the period, and revise the sources accordingly. That the Epistle to the Romans was written at least before the last decades of the first century is established; even by external evidence taken alone; consequently all theories advocating a later origin are thereby exploded. The treatment of a scientific (theological) problem in an epistle can constitute a difficulty only for such as are unacquainted with the literature of the age. Doubts as to the untiy of the Epistle vanish of themselves on a closer examination. The introduction is most closely connected with the theme (i, 4, 5, 8, 12, etc.); the same is true of the conclusion. An analysis of the Epistle reveals incontestably the coherence of the first and second parts; from chapter ix an answer is given to a question which has obtruded itself in the earlier portion. In this fact Chr. Baur sees the important point of the whole Epistle. Besides, the interrelation between the parts finds express mention (ix, 30-32; x, 3-6; xi, 6; xi, 20-23; etc.). The author's attitude towards Israel will be treated below (VI). The rejection of the Chosen People could have become abundantly clear to the author after the uniform experiences of a wide missionary activity extending over more than ten years. The unevennesses and difficulty of the language show at most that the text has not been perfectly preserved. Much becomes clear when we remember the personality of St. Paul and his custom of dictating his Epistles. Were the Epistle a forgery, the expressions concerning the person and views of the author would be inexplicable and completely enigmatic. Who in the second century would have made St. Paul declare that he had not founded the Roman community, that previously he had had no connexion with it, since at a very early date the same Apostle becomes with St. Peter its co-founder? How could a man of the second century have conceived the idea of attributing to St. Paul the intention of paying merely a passing visit to Rome, when (as would have been palpable to every reader of Acts, xxviii, 30-31) the Apostle had worked there for two successive years? The Acts could not have supplied the suggestion, since it merely says: "I must see Rome also" (xix, 21). Of Paul's plan of proceeding thence to Spain, the author of Acts says nothing; in recording the nocturnal apparition of the Lord to St. Paul, mention is made only of his giving testimony at Rome (Acts, xxiii, 11). The arrival at Rome is recorded with the words: "And so we went to [the wished for] Rome" (Acts, xxviii, 14). Acts closes with a reference to Paul's residence and activity in Rome, without even hinting at anything further. Again, it would have occurred to a forger to mention Peter also in a forged Epistle to the Romans, even though it were only in a greeting or a reference to the foundation of the Church. Other arguments could be drawn from the concluding chapters. Whoever studies Romans closely will be convinced that here the true Paul speaks, and will acknowledge that "the authenticity of the Epistle to the Romans can be contested only by those who venture to banish the personality of Paul from the pages of history" (Jülicher). IV. INTEGRITY Apart from individual uncertain texts, which occur also in the other Epistles and call for the attention of the textual investigator, the last two chapters have given rise to some doubts among critics. Not only did Marcion omit xvi, 25-27, but, as Origen-Rufinus express it, "cuncta dissecuit" from xiv, 23. Concerning the interpretation of these words there is indeed no agreement, for while the majority of exegetes see in them the complete rejection of the two concluding chapters, others translate "dissecuit" as "disintegrated", which is more in accordance with the Latin expression. Under Chr. Baur's leadership, the Tübingen School has rejected both chapters; others have inclined to the theory of the disintegration work of Marcion. Against chapter xv no reasonable doubt can be maintained. Verses 1-13 follow as a natural conclusion from ch. xiv. The general extent of the consideration recommended in ch. xiv is in the highest degree Pauline. Furthermore xv, 7-13 are so clearly connected with the theme of the Epistle that they are on this ground also quite beyond suspicion. Though Christ is called the "minister of the circumcision" in xv, 8, this is in entire agreement with all that the Gospels say of Him and His mission, and with what St. Paul himself always declares elsewhere. Thus also, according to the Epistle, salvation is offered first to Israel conformably to Divine Providence (i, 16); and the writer of ix, 3-5, could also write xv, 8. The personal remarks and information (xv, 14-33) are in entire agreement with the opening of the Epistle, both in thought and tone. His travelling plans and his personal uneasiness concerning his reception in Jerusalem are, as already indicated, sure proofs of the genuineness of the verses. The objection to ch. xv has thus found little acceptance; of it "not a sentence may be referred to a forger" (Jülicher). Stronger objections are urged against ch. xvi. In the first place the concluding doxology is not universally recognized as genuine. The MSS. indeed afford some grounds for doubt, although only a negligibly small number of witnesses have with Marcion ignored the whole doxology. The old MSS., in other respects regarded as authoritative, insert it at the end of xiv; some have it after both xiv and xvi. In view of this uncertainty and of some expressions not found elsewhere in the writings of St. Paul (e. g. the only wise God, the scriptures of the prophets), the doxology has been declared a later addition (H. J. Holtzmann, Jülicher, and others), a very unlikely view in the face of the almost unexceptional testimony, especially since the thought is most closely connected with the opening of Romans, without however bvetraying any dependence in its language. The fullness of the expression corresponds completely with the solemnity of the whole Epistle. The high-spirited temperament of the author powerfully shows itself on repeated occasions. The object with which the Apostle writes the Epistle, and the circumstances under which it is written, offer a perfect explanation of both attitude and tone. The addresses, the impending journey to Jerusalem, with its problematic outcome (St. Paul speaks later of his anxiety in connexion therewith–Acts, xx, 22), the acceptance of his propaganda at Rome, on which, according to his own admission, his Apostolic future so much depended–all these were factors which must have combined once more at the conclusion of such an Epistle to issue in these impressively solemn thoughts. In view of this consideration, the removal of the doxology would resemble the extraction of the most precious stone in a jewel-case. The critical references to xvi, 1- 24, of to-day are concerned less with their Pauline origin than with the inclusion in Romans. The doubt entertained regarding them is of a twofold character. In the first place it has been considered difficult to explain how the Apostle had so many personal friends in Rome (which he had not yet visited), as is indicated by the series of greetings in this chapter; one must suppose a real tide of emigration from the Eastern Pauline communities to Rome, and that within the few years which the Apostle had devoted to his missions to the Gentiles. Certain names occasion especial doubt: Epenetus, the "first fruits of Asia", one would not expect to see in Rome; Aquila and Prisca, who according to I Corinthians have assembled about them a household community in Ephesus, are represented as having a little later a similar community in Rome. Further, it is surprising that the Apostle in an Epistle to Rome, should emphasize the services of these friends. But the chief objection is that this last chapter gives the Epistle a new character; it must have been written, not as an introduction, but as a warning to the community. One does not write in so stern and authoritative a tone as that displayed in xvi, 17-20, to an unknown community; and the words "I would" (xvi, 19) are not in keeping with the restraint evinced by St. Paul elsewhere in the Epistle. In consequence of these considerations numerous critics have, with David Schulz (1829), separated all or the greater portion of chapter xvi from the Epistle to the Romans (without however denying the Pauline authorship), and declared it an Epistle to the Ephesians–whether a complete epistle or only a portion of such is not determined. Verses 17-20 are not ascribed by some critics to the Epistle to the Ephesians; other critics are more liberal, and refer ch. ix-xi or xii-xiv to the imaginary Epistle. We agree with the result of criticism in holding as certain that xvi belongs to St. Paul. Not only the language, but also the names render its Pauline origin certain. For the greater part the names are not of those who played any role in the history of primitive Christianity or in legend, so that there was no reason for bringing them into connexion with St. Paul. Certainly the idea could not have occurred to anyone in the second century, not merely to name the unknown Andronicus and Junias as Apostles, but to assign them a prominent position among the Apostles, and to place them on an eminence above St. Paul as having been in Christ before him. These considerations are supplemented by external evidence. Finally, the situation exhibited by historical research is precisely that of the Epistle to the Romans, as is almost unanimously admitted. The "division hypothesis" encounters a great difficulty in the MSS. Deissmann endeavoured to explain the fusion of the two Epistles (Roman and Ephesian) on the supposition of collections of epistles existing among the ancients (duplicate-books of the sender and collections of originals of the receivers). Even if a possible explanation be thus obtained, its application to the present case is hedged in with improbabilities; the assumption of an Epistle consisting merely of greetings is open to grave suspicion, and, if one supposes this chapter to be the remnant of a lost epistle, this hypothesis merely creates fresh problems. While St. Paul's wide circle of friends in Rome at first awakens surprise, it raises no insuperable difficulty. We should not attempt to base our decision on the names alone; the Roman names prove nothing in favor of Rome, and the Greek still less against Rome. Names like Narcissus, Junias, Rufus, especially Aristobulus and Herodian remind one of Rome rather than Asia Minor, although some persons with these names may have settled in the latter place. But what of the "emigration to Rome"? The very critics who find therein a difficulty must be well aware of the great stream of Orientals which flowed to the capital even under Emperor Augustus (Jülicher). Why should not the Christians have followed this movement? For the second century the historical fact is certain; how many Eastern names do we not find in Rome (Polycarp, Justin, Marcion, Tatian, Irenæus, Clement of Alexandria, and others)? Again for years Paul had turned his mind towards Rome (xv, 23; i, 13). Would not his friends have known of this and would he not have discussed it with Aquila and Prisca who were from Rome? Besides, it is highly probable that the emigration was not entirely the result of chance, but took place in accordance with the views and perhaps to some extent at the suggestion of the Apostle; for nothing is more likely than that his friends hurried before him to prepare the way. Three years later indeed he is met by "the brethren" on his arrival in Rome (Acts, xxviii, 15). The long delay was not the fault of St. Paul and had not, by any means, been foreseen by him. The emphasizing of the services of his friends is easy to understand in an Epistle to the Romans; if only a portion of the restless charity and self-sacrificing zeal of the Apostle for the Gentiles becomes known in Rome, his active helpers may feel assured of a kind reception in the great community of Gentile Christians. The exhortation in xvi, 17-20, is indeed delivered in a solemn and almost severe tone, but in the case of St. Paul we are accustomed to sudden and sharp transitions of this kind. One feels that the writer has become suddenly affected with a deep anxiety, which in a moment gets the upper hand. And why should not St. Paul remember the well-known submissiveness of the Roman Church? Still less open to objection is the "I would" (xvi, 19), since the Greek often means in the writings of St. Paul merely "I wish". The position of verse 4 between the greetings is unusual, but would not be more intelligible in an Epistle to the Ephesians than in the Epistle to the Romans. V. DATE AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF COMPOSITION The contents of the Epistle show that the author has acquired a ripe experience in the apostolate. Paul believes his task in the East to be practically finished; he has preached the Faith as far as Illyricum, probably to the boundaries of the province (xv, 18- 24); he is about to bring back to Palestine the alms contributed in Galatia, Achaia, and Macedonia (xv, 25-28; cf. I Cor., xvi, 1- 4; II Cor., viii, 1-9, 15; Acts, xx, 3-4; xxiv, 17). The time of composition is thus exactly determined; the Epistle was written at the end of the third missionary journey, which brought the Apostle back from Ephesus finally to Corinth. The mention of the Christian Phebe of Cenchræ (xvi, 1) and the greeting on the part of his host Caius (xvi, 23) very likely the one whom Paul had baptized (I Cor., i, 14)–conduct us to Corinth, where the Epistle was written shortly before Paul's departure for Macedonia. Its composition at the port of Cenchræ would be possible only on the supposition that the Apostle had made a long stay there; the Epistle is too elaborate and evinces too much intellectual labour for one to suppose that it was written at an intermediate station. The year of composition can only be decided approximately. According to Acts, xxiv, 27, St. Paul's imprisonment in Cæsarea lasted two full years until the removal of the procurator Felix. The year of this change lies between 58 and 61. At the earliest 58, because Felix was already many years in office at the beginning of Paul's imprisonment (Acts, xxiv, 10); Felix scarcely came to Judea before 52, and less than four or five years cannot well be called "many". At the latest 61, although this date is very improbable, as Festus, the successor of Felix, died in 62 after an eventful administration. Accordingly the arrival of St. Paul in Jerusalem and the composition of the Epistle to the Romans, which occurred in the preceding few months, must be referred to the years 56-59, or better 57-58. The chronology of St. Paul's missionary activity does not exclude the suggestion of the years 56-57, since the Apostle began his third missionary journey perhaps as early as 52-53 (Gallio, proconsul of Achaia–Acts, xviii, 12- 17–was, according to an inscription in Delphi, probably in office about 52). VI. HISTORICAL IMPORTANCE The Epistle gives us important information concerning the Roman Church and St. Paul's early relations with it. We may recall the dangers and strained relations and the various groupings of the community referred to in xvi, 5, 14, 15, and perhaps in xvi, 10, 11. That Paul's gaze was turned towards Rome for years, and that Rome was to be merely a stopping place on his way to Spain, we learn only from this Epistle. Did he ever reach Spain? All tradition affords only one useful piece of information on this point: "he went to the extremest west" (Clement of Rome, vi, 7); the Muratorian Fragment, 38 sq., is not sufficiently clear. An interesting conception of the apostolate is contained in the words: "But now having no more place in these countries" (xv, 23). Paul thus limited his task to laying the foundation of the Gospel in large centres, leaving to others the development of the communities. The meaning of the words "unto Illyricum" (xv, 19) will always remain uncertain. Probably the Apostle had at this period not yet crossed the borders of the province. Whether the remark in Titus, iii, 12, concerning a proposed rersidence during the winter in Nicopolis (the Illyrian town is meant), is to be connected with a missionary journey, must remain unsettled. The Epistle is instructive for its revelation of the personal feelings of the Apostle of the Gentiles towards his fellow-Jews. Some have tried to represent these feelings as hard to explain and contradictory. But a true conception of the great Apostle renders every word intelligible. On the one hand he maintains in this Epistle the position of faith and grace as distinct from the Law, and, addressing a people who appealed to their natural lineage and their observance of the Law to establish a supposed right (to salvation), he insists unswervingly on the Divine election to grace. But Paul emphasizes not less firmly that, according to God's word, Israel is first called to salvation (i, 16; ii, 10), explicitly proclaiming the preference shown to it (ii, 1-2; ix, 4-5–the Divine promises, Divine sonship, the Covenant and the Law, and, greatest privilege of all, the origin of the Messias, the true God, in Israel according to the flesh–xv, 8). Paul willingly recognizes the zeal of the people for the things of God, although their zeal is misdirected (ix, 31 sq.; x, 2). Such being his feelings towards the Chosen People, it is not surprising that Paul's heart is filled with bitter grief at the blindness of the Jews, that he besieges God with prayer, that he is guided throughout his life of self-sacrificing apostolic labours by the hope that thereby his brethren may be won for the Faith (ix, 1-2; x, 1; xi, 13-14), that he would be prepared–were it possible–to forego in his own case the happiness of union with Christ, if by such a renunciation he could secure for his brethren a place in the heart of the Saviour. These utterances can offer a stumbling-block only to those who do not understand St. Paul, who cannot fathom the depths of his apostolic charity. If we study closely the character of the Apostle, realize the fervour of his feelings, the warmth of his love and devotion to Christ's work and Person, we shall recognize how spontaneously these feelings flow from such a heart, how natural they are to such a noble, unselfish nature. The mere recognition and confidence Paul won fromn the Gentiles in the course of his apostolate, the more bitter must have been the thought that Israel refused to understand its God, stood aloof peevish and hostile, and in its hatred and blindness even persecuted the Messias in His Church and opposed as far as possible the work of His Apostles. These were the hardest things for love to bear, they explain the abrupt, determined break with and the ruthless warfare against the destructive spirit of unbelief, when Paul sees that he can protect the Church of Christ in no other way. Hence he has no toleration for insistence on the practice of the Law within the Christian fold, since such insistence is in the last analysis the spirit of Judaism, which is incompatible with the spirit of Christ and the Divine election to grace, for such assistance would by practice of the law supplement or set a seal on Faith. But from the same apostolic love springs also the truly practical spirit of consideration which Paul preaches and exercises (I Cor., ix, 20-22), and which he demands from others everywhere, so long as the Gospel is not thereby jeopardized. One can easily understand how such a man can at one moment become inflamed with bitter resentment and holy anger, showing no indulgence when his life's work is threatened, and can later in a peaceful hour forget all, recognizing in the offender only a misguided brother, whose fault arises, not from malice, but from ignorance. In a soul which loves deeply and keenly one might expect the co-existence of such contrasts; they spring from a single root, a powerful, zealous, all-compelling charity–that certainty of St. Paul the Apostle of the Gentiles. VII. THEOLOGICAL CONTENTS: FAITH AND WORKS The theological importance of the Epistle to the Romans has in its treatment of the great fundamental problem of justification; other important questions (e. g., original sin–v, 12-21) are treated in connextion with and from the standpoint of justification. In the Epistle to the Galatians Paul had already defended his teaching against the attacks of the extreme Jewish Christians; in contrast with the Epistle to the Galatians, this to the Romans was not evoked by the excitement of a polemical warfare. The discussion of the question in it is deeper and wider. The fundamental doctrine which Paul proclaims to all desirous of salvation is as follows: In the case of all men the call to the Messianic salvation is absolutely dependent on the free election of God; no merit or ability of the individual, neither inclusion among the descendants of Abraham nor the practice of the Law, gives a title to this grace. God zealously watches over the recognition of this truth; hence the emphasizing of faith (i, 16 sq.; ii, 32, 24-30; iv, 2 sqq., 13-25; v, 1, etc.); hence the stress laid upon the redemptory act of Christ, which benefits us, the enemies of God (ii, 24 sq.; iv, 24 sq.; v, 6-10, 15-21; vii, 25; viii, 29 sqq.); we owe our whole salvation and the inalienable certainty of salvation to the propitiatory and sanctifying power of the Blood of Christ (viii, 35-39). From this standpoint the second part (ix-xi) describes the action of Divine providence, which is more than once revealed under the Old Dispensation, and which alone corresponds with the grandeur and sovereign authority of God. Hence the irresponsive attitude of Israel becomes intelligible; the Jews blocked their own path by considereing themselves entitled to claim the Messianic Kingdom on the grounds of their personal justice. In view of this repugnant spirit, God was compelled to leave Israel to its own resources, until it should stretch out its hand after the merciful love of its Creator; then would the hour of salvation also strike for the People of the Covenant (ix, 30 sqq.; x, 3-21; xi, 32). Securing of Salvation.–To the question how man obtains salvation, St. Paul has but one answer: not by natural powers, not by works of the Law, but by faith and indeed by faith without the works of the Law (iii, 28). At the very beginning of the Epistle Paul refers to the complete failure of natural powers (i, 18-32), and repeatedly returns to this idea but he lays the greatest emphasis on the inadequacy of the Law. From the Jews this statement met with serious opposition. What does the Apostle mean then when he preaches the necessity of faith? Faith is for St. Paul often nothing else than the Gospel, i. e., the whole economy of salvation in Christ (Gal., i, 23; iii, 23, 25, etc.); often it is the teaching of faith, the proclamation of the faith, and the life of faith (Rom., i, 5; xii, 6; xvi, 26; Gal., iii, 2; Acts, vi, 7; Rom., i, 8; II Cor., i, 23; xi, 15; xiii, 5; Acts, xiii, 8; xiv, 21; xvi, 5). That according to all these conceptions salvation comes only by faith without the works of the Law, needs no demonstration. But to what faith was Abraham indebted for his justification? (iv, 3, 9, 13-22; Gal., iii, 6). Abraham had to believe the word of God, that is hold it for certain. In the case of the Christian the same faith is demanded: "to believe that we shall live also together with Christ: knowing that Christ rising again from the dead, dieth now no more" (vi, 8-9); "If thou confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and believe in thy heart that God hath raised him up from the dead, thou shalt be saved" (x, 9). This faith is undeniably belief on the authority of God (dogmatic faith). The same conception of faith underlies all the exhortations to submit ourselves in faith to God; submission presupposes the conviction of faith (i, 5; vi, 16-19; x, 16; xv, 18). The faith described in the Epistle to the Romans, as elsewhere in St. Paul's writings and in the New Testament in general, is furthermore a trusting faith, e. g., in the case of Abraham, whose trust is specially extolled (iv, 17- 21; cf. iii, 3, unbelief and the fidelity of God). So far is this confidence in God's fidelity from excluding dogmatic faith that it is based undeniably on it alone and unconditionally requires it. Without the unswerving acceptance of certain truths (e. g., the Messiahship, the Divinity of Christ, the redemptory character of Christ's death, the Resurrection, etc.), there is for St. Paul, as he never fails to make clear in his Epistles, no Christianity. Therefore, justifying faith comprises dogmatic faith as well as hope. Again, it would never have occurred to St. Paul to conceive baptism as other than necessary for salvation: Romans itself offers the surest guarantee that baptism and faith, viewed of course from different standpoints, are alike necessary for justification (vi, 3 sqq.; Gal., iii, 26 sq.). The turning away from sin is also necessary for justification. Paul cannot proclaim sufficiently the incompatibility of sin and the Divine sonship. If the Christian must avoid sin, those who seek salvation must also turn aside from it. While St. Paul never speaks in his Epistle of penance and contrition, these constitute so self-evident a condition that they do not call for any special mention. Besides, chapters i-iii are only a grand exposition of the truth that sin separates us from God. For the nature of justification it is immaterial whether Paul is displaying before the eyes of the Christian the consequences of sin, or is making sentiments of contrition and a change to a Christian mode of life a necessary preliminary condition for the obtaining of grace. What sentiments he requires, he describes in the words: "For in Jesus Christ, neither circumcision availeth any thing nor uncircumcision; but faith, which worketh by charity" (Gal., v, 6). It is merely a repetition of the sentence when the Apostle, after proclaiming freedom in Christ, seeks to remove the misconception that the condition of Christian freedom might endure anything and become synonymous with liberty to sin (Gal., v, 13-21; cf. Rom., xii, 1 sq.; xiii, 12 sqq.; viii, 12 sqq.; xi, 20 sqq.). We thus see what Paul would have us understand by justifying faith. If he does not always describe it from every standpoint as in the present instance, but designates it as dogmatic or trusting faith, the reason is easily understood. He has no intention of describing all the stages along the road to justification; he is so far from desiring to give a strict definition of its nature, that he wishes merely to indicate the fundamental condition on the part of man. This condition is, from the standpoint of the supernatural character of justification, not so much the feeling of contrition or the performance of penitential works as the trusting acceptance of the promise of God. When a person has once taken this first step, all the rest, if he be consistent, follows of itself. To regard justifying faith as the work or outcome of natural man and to attribute grace to this work, is to misunderstand the Apostle. The free submission which lies in faith prepares the soul for the reception of grace. Provided that the teaching of St. Paul be studied in the context in which it is found in the Epistles to the Romans and the Galatians, it cannot be misunderstood. If, however, Paul in both Epistles forestalls an unjustified practical consequence that might be drawn therefrom, this is a proof of his deep knowledge of mankind, but in no way a limitation of his doctrine. The faith which justifies without the works of the Law and the Christian freedom from the Law continue unimpaired. The possibility of error would be afforded if one were to withdraw the words of the Apostle from their context; even shibboleths for libertinism might be extracted in that case from his teaching. This leads us to the well-known sentence in the Epistle of St. James concerning faith without works (ii, 20, 24). Was this written in premeditated opposition to St. Paul? Paul and James Two questions must be distinguished in our inquiry: (1) Is there an historical connexion between the statements in the Epistles? (2) How are the antitheses to be explained? Are they premeditated or not? (1) The possibility of a direct reference in the Epistle of St. James to St. Paul (this hypothesis alone is tenable) depends on the question of the priority of the Epistle. For scholars (e. g., Neander, Beyschlag, Th. Zahn, Belser, Canerlynck, etc.) who hold that the Epistle of St. James was written before a.d. 50, the question is settled. But the grounds for the assigning of this date to the Epistle are not entirely convincing, since the Epistle fits in better with the conditions of the succeeding decades. An extreme attitude is adopted by many modern critics (e. g., Chr. Baur, Hilgenfeld, H. J. Hultzmann, von Soden, Jülicher), who assign the Epistle to the second century–a scarcely intelligible position in view of the historical conditions. If the Epistle of St. James were composed shortly after the year 60, it might, in view of the lively intercourse among the Christians, have been influenced by the misunderstood views of the teachings of St. Paul, and James may have combated the misused formula of St. Paul. The almost verbal connexion in the passages might thus be accounted for. (2) Does there exist any real opposition between Paul and James? This question is answered in the affirmative in many quarters to-day. Paul, it is asserted, taught justification through faith without works, while James simply denied St. Paul's teaching (Rom., iii, 28), and seeks a different explanation for the chief passage quoted by St. Paul (Gen., xv, 6) concerning the faith of Abraham (Jülicher and others). But does James really treat of justification in the same sense as St. Paul? Their formulation of the question is different from the outset. James speaks of true justice before God, which, he declares, consists not alone in a firm faith, but in a faith supported and enlivened by works (especially of charity). Without works faith is useless and dead (ii, 17, 20). James addresses himself to readers who are already within the fold, but who may not lead a moral life and may appeal in justification of their conduct to the word of faith. To those who adopt this attitude, James can only answer: "But he that hath looked into the perfect law of liberty, and hath continued therein, not becoming a forgetful hearer, but a doer of the work, this man shall be blessed in his deed" (i, 25). Throughout his Epistle James aims at attaining the translation of faith to life and works; in speaking of a faith that worketh by charity (Gal., v, 6), Paul really teaches exactly the same as James. But what of the argument of James and his appeal to Abraham? "Was not Abraham our father justified by works, offering up Isaac his son upon the altar? Seest thou, that faith did co-operate with his works; and by works faith was made perfect? And the scripture was fulfilled, saying: Abraham believed God, and it was reputed to him to justice, and he was called the friend of God" (ii, 21-23). Paul, like James, appealed to the same Abraham–both rightly from their individual standpoints. With entire right could Paul declare that Abraham owed his justice, not to circumcision, but to his faith; with complete right could James appeal to Abraham's act of obedience and assert that faith accompanied it and by it faith was completed. And if James applies to this act the phrase: "It was reputed to him to justice", he is quite entitled to do so, since Abraham's obedience is rewarded with a new and glorious promise of God (Gen., xxii, 16 sqq.). It is clear from the whole passage that James does not use the word "justify", in the sense in which Paul speaks of the first justification, but in the sense of an increasing justification (cf. Rom., ii, 13; Apoc., xxii, 11), as corresponds to the object or the Epistle. Of any contradiction between the Epistle to the Romans and that of St. James, therefore, there can be no question. Finally, there is a difference in the use of the term faith. In the passage in question, James uses the term in a narrow sense. As shown by the reference to the faith of the demons (ii, 19), nothing more is here meant by faith than a firm conviction and undoubting acceptance, which is shared even by the damned, and has therefore in itself no moral value. Such a faith would never have been termed by St. Paul a justifying faith. That throughout the whole course of the Epistle of St. James St. Paul's doctrine of justification is never called into question, and that St. Paul on his side shows nowhere the least opposition to St. James, calls for no further proof. The fundamental conceptions and the whole treatment in the two Epistles exclude all views to the contrary. Consult the Introduction by Jacquier, Cornely, Belser, Kaulen, Th. Zahn, Holtzmann, JÜlicher, Lightfoot, The Structure and Destination of the Epistle to the Romans in Jour. of Philolog., II (1869), reprinted in Biblical Essays (London, 1893-4), 285-374. Commentaries: Origen - Rufinus; Ephraem; Chrysostum; Ambrosiaster; Pelagius; Augustine; Theophylactus; Œ CUMENIUS; Thomas Aquinas; Erasmus; Cajetan; Tolet; Estius; a Lapide; Calmet; Reithmayr; Adalb. Maier (1847); Bisping (2nd ed., Münster, 1860); Mac Evilly (3rd ed., Dublin, 1875); Schaefer (Münster, 1891); Cornely (Paris, 1896). Protestant Commentaries: Luther, Vorlesungen über den Römerbrief 1515-1516, ed. by Ficker (Leipzig, 1908); Melanchthon; Beza; Calvin; Zwingli; Grotius; Bengel; Wettstein; Tholuck (5th ed., 1856); Olshausen (2ND ED., 1840); Fritsche (3 vols., 1836-43); Meyler Weiss (9th ed., Göttingen, 1899, tr. Edinburgh, 187304); Lipsius, Holtzmann, Handkommentar (2nd ed., Freiburg, 1892); JÜlicher (J. Weiss), Die Schriften des N. T., II (2nd ed., Göttingen, 1908); Leitzmann, Handbuch zum N. T., III (Tübingen, 1906); Zahn (Leipzig, 1901); Godet (2nd ed., 1883-90, tr. Edinburgh, 1881); Gifford, Speaker's Commentary (1881), separate (1886); Sanday- Headlam, The International Crit. Commentary (5th ed., Edinburgh, 1905). For further literature see Cornely; Sanday; Weiss. Theological Questions.– Simar, Die Theol. des hl. Paulus (2nd ed., Freiburg, 1883); Prat, La théol. de s. P., I (Paris, 1908); Holtzmann, Lehrbuch d. neutest. Theol., II (Freiburg, 1908); new ed. being published); Weiss, Lehrbuch d. bibl. Theol. d. N. T. (7th ed., Stuttgart, 1903); Feine, Theol. des N. T. (2nd ed., Leipzig, 1911); Bartmann, St. P. u. St. J. über die Rechtfertigung in Bibl. Studien, XI (Freiburg, 1904), i. A. Merk Saints Romanus Sts. Romanus (1) A Roman martyr Romanus is mentioned in the "Liber Pontificalis" (ed. Duchesne, I, 155) with three other ecclesiastics as companions in the martyrdom of St. Lawrence (10 August, 258). There is no reason to doubt that this mention rests upon a genuine ancient tradition. Like St. Lawrence Romanus was buried in the Catacomb of the Cyriaca on the Via Tiburtina. The grave of St. Romanus is explicitly mentioned in the Itineraries of the seventh century (De Rossi, "Roma sotterranea", I, 178-9). In the purely legendary Acts of St. Lawrence, the ostiary Romanus is transformed into a soldier, and an account in accordance with this statement was inserted in the historical martyrologies and in the present Roman Martyrology, which latter places his feast on 9 August (cf. Duchfourcq, "Les Gesta Martyrum romains", I, 201). (2) In 303 or 304, at the beginning of the Diocletian persecution, a deacon called Romanus of Caesarea in Palestine suffered martyrdom at Antioch. Upon the proclamation of Diocletian's edict he strengthened the Christians of Antioch and openly exhorted the weaker brethren, who were willing to offer heathen sacrifices, not to waver in the Faith. He was taken prisoner, was condemned to death by fire, and was bound to the stake; however, as the Emperor Galerius was then in Antioch, Romanus was brought before him. At the emperor's command the tongue of the courageous confessor was cut out. Tortured in various ways in prison he was finally strangled. Eusebius speaks of his martyrdom in "De martyribus Palestin.", c. ii. Prudentius ("Peristephanon", X in "P.L.", LX, 444 sqq.) relates other details and gives Romanus a companion in martyrdom, a Christian by name Barulas. On this account several historians, among them Baronius, consider that there were two martyrs named Romanus at Antioch, though more likely there was but the one whom Eusebius mentions. Prudentius has introduced legendary features into his account, and his connection of the martyrdom of Barulas with that of Romanus is probably arbitrary. The feast of St. Romanus is observed on 18 November [cf. Allard, "Histoire des persécutions", IV, 173 sq.; Quentin, "Les martyrologes historiques" (Paris, 1908), 183-5]. (3) The "Martyrologium Hieronymianum" mentions martyrs of this name at several dates, chiefly in large companies of Christians who suffered martyrdom. No further particulars are known of any of them. (4) A holy priest named Romanus laboured in the district of Blaye, in the present French department of the Gironde, at the end of the fourth century. Gregory of Tours gives an account of him ("De gloria confessorum", c. xlv), and relates that St. Martin of Tours made ready the grave of the dead Romanus. An old life of St. Romanus was published in the "Analecta Bollandiana", V (1866), 178 sqq. The feast of the saint is observed on 24 November. (5) St. Romanus, Abbot of Condat, now St. Claude in the French Jura, b. about 400; d. in 463 or 464. When thirty-five years old he went into the lonely region of Condat to live as a hermit, where after a while his younger brother Lupicinus followed him. A large number of scholars, among whom was St. Eugendus, placed themselves under the direction of the two holy brothers who founded several monasteries: Condat (now Saint-Claude), Lauconne (later Saint-Lupicin, as Lupicinus was buried there), La Balme (later Saint-Romain-de-Roche), where St. Romanus was buried, and Romainmôtier (Romanum monasterium) in the canton of Vaud in Switzerland. Romanus was ordained priest by St. Hilary of Arles in 444, and with Lupicinus he directed these monasteries until his death. His feast is observed on 28 February. Two lives of him are in existence: one by Gregory of Tours in the "Liber vitae patrum" (Mon. Germ. Hist.: Script. Merov., I, 663), and an anonymous "Vita Sanctorum Romani, Lupicini, Eugendi" [ibid., III, 131 sqq.; cf. Benoît, "Histoire de St-Claude", I (Paris, 1890); Besson, "Recherches sur les origines des évêchés de Genève, Lausanne, et Sion" (Fribourg, 1906), 210 sqq.]. (6) St. Romanus, monk in a monastery near Subiaco, Italy, at the beginning of the sixth century. He aided St. Benedict when the latter withdrew into a solitary place and regularly brought Benedict bread to support life (St. Gregory the Great, "Dialogi", II, i). Romanus later (fom 523) represented St. Benedict at Subiaco, and is said to have afterwards gone to Gaul and to have founded a small monastery at Dryes-Fontrouge, where he died about 550 and was venerated as a saint. His feast is observed on 22 May. A St. Romanus, who is venerated as Bishop of Auxerre on 8 October, is probably identical with this Abbot Romanus whose relics were subsequently translated to Auxerre [cf. "Acta SS.", May, V, 153 sqq.; October, III, 396 sqq.; Adlhoch in "Studien und Mitteilungen aus dem Benedictiner- und Cisterzienerorden" (1907), 267 sqq., 501 sqq.; (1908), 103 sqq., 327 sqq., 587 sqq.; Leclerc, "Vie de St Romain, éducateur de St Bénoit" (Paris, 1893)]. (7) St. Romanus, Bishop of Rouen, date of birth unknown; d. about 640. His feast is observed on 23 October. The legend of this saint has little historical value (Acta SS., October, X, 91 sqq.), and there is but little authentic information concerning him [cf. "Analecta Bollandiana" (1904), 337 sq.]. (8) St. Romanus, "the Singer", the most important representative of rhythmic poetry in the Greek Church. According to the Greek "Menaia" he was born in Syria, was ordained deacon at Berytus, then went to Constantinople, where he became one of the clergy at the Blachernen church. The era in which he lived is not certainly ascertained; most probably, however, his residence in Constantinople was from about 515 to 556. His feast is observed on 1 October. Several of his poems were edited by Pitra, "Analecta sacra", I (Paris, 1876), 1-241 [cf. Maas, "Die Chronologie der Hymnen des Romanus" in "Byzantin. Zeitschrift" (1906), 1-44; Bardenhewer, "Patrologie" (3rd ed.), 486]. [ Note: St. Romanus the Singer, described above (8), is identical with St. Romanos the Melodist (q.v.), Romanus and Romanos being the Latin and Greek forms respectively of the same name.] J.P. KIRSCH Pope Romanus Pope Romanus Of this pope very little is known with certainty, not even the date of his birth nor the exact dates of his consecration as pope and of his death. He was born at Gallese near Civita Castellana, and was the son of Constantine. He became cardinal of St. Peter ad Vincula and pope about August, 897. He died four months later. He granted the pallium to Vitalis, Patriarch of Grado, and a privilege for his church; and to the Spanish Bishops of Elna and Gerona, he confirmed the possessions of their sees. His coins bear the name of the Emperor Lambert, and his own monogram with "Scs. Petrus". The contemporary historian Frodoard has three verses about him which argue him a man of virtue. It is possible he was deposed by one of the factions which then distracted Rome, for we read that "he was made a monk", a phrase which, in the language of the times, often denoted deposition. JAFFE, Regesta Pont. Rom., I (Leipzig, 1888), 441; DUCHESNE, Liber Pontificalis, II (Paris, 1892), 230; MANN, Lives of the Popes in the Early Middle Ages, IV (London, 1910), 86 sq. HORACE K. MANN Rome Rome The significance of Rome lies primarily in the fact that it is the city of the pope. The Bishop of Rome, as the successor of St. Peter, is the Vicar of Christ on earth and the visible head of the Catholic Church. Rome is consequently the centre of unity in belief, the source of ecclesiastical jurisdiction and the seat of the supreme authority which can bind by its enactments the faithful throughout the world. The Diocese of Rome is known as the "See of Peter", the "Apostolic See", the "Holy Roman Church" the "Holy See" -- titles which indicate its unique position in Christendom and suggest the origin of its preeminence. Rome, more than any other city, bears witness both to the past splendour of the pagan world and to the triumph of Christianity. It is here that the history of the Church can be traced from the earliest days, from the humble beginnings in the Catacombs to the majestic ritual of St. Peter's. At every turn one comes upon places hallowed by the deaths of the martyrs, the lives of innumerable saints, the memories of wise and holy pontiffs. From Rome the bearers of the Gospel message went out to the peoples of Europe and eventually to the uttermost ends of the earth. To Rome, again, in every age countless pilgrims have thronged from all the nations, and especially from English-speaking countries. With religion the missionaries carried the best elements of ancient culture and civilization which Rome had preserved amid all the vicissitudes of barbaric invasion. To these treasures of antiquity have been added the productions of a nobler art inspired by higher ideals, that have filled Rome with masterpieces in architecture, painting, and sculpture. These appeal indeed to every mind endowed with artistic perception; but their full meaning only the Catholic believer can appreciate, because he alone, in his deepest thought and feeling, is at one with the spirit that pulsates here in the heart of the Christian world. Many details concerning Rome have been set forth in other articles of THE CATHOLIC ENCYCLOPEDIA. For the prerogatives of the papacy the reader is referred to POPE; for the ecclesiastical government of the city and diocese, to CARDINAL VICAR; for liturgical matters, to ROMAN RITE; for education, to ROMAN COLLEGES; for literary development, to ROMAN ACADEMIES; for history, to the biographical articles on the various popes, and the articles CONSTANTINE THE GREAT, CHARLEMAGNE, etc. There is a special article on each of the religious orders, saints, and artists mentioned in this article, while the details of the papal administration, both spiritual and temporal, will be found treated under APOSTOLIC CAMERA; PONTIFICAL AUDIENCES; APOSTOLIC EXAMINERS; HOLY SEE; PAPAL RESCRIPTS; ROMAN CONGREGATIONS; ROMAN CURIA; SACRA ROMANA ROTA; STATES OF THE CHURCH, etc. Of the great Christian monuments of the Eternal City, special articles are devoted to BASILICA OF ST. PETER; TOMB OF ST. PETER; LATERAN BASILICA; VATICAN; CHAIR OF PETER. The present article will be divided: Topography and Existing Conditions; General History of the City; Churches and other Monuments. I. TOPOGRAPHY AND EXISTING CONDITIONS The City of Rome rises on the banks of the Tiber at a distance of from 16 to 19 miles from the mouth of that river, which makes a deep furrow in the plain which extends between the Alban hills, to the south; the hills of Palestrina and Tivoli, and the Sabine hills, to the east: and the Umbrian hills and Monte Tolfa, to the north. The city stands in latitude 41°54' N. and longitude 12°30' E. of Greenwich. It occupies, on the left bank, not only the plain, but also the adjacent heights, namely, portions of the Parioli hills, of the Pincian, the Quirinal, the Viminal, the Esquiline (which are only the extremities of a mountain-mass of tufa extending to the Alban hills), the Capitoline, the Cælian, the Palatine, and the Aventine -- hills which are now isolated. On the right bank is the valley lying beneath Monte Mario the Vatican, and the Janiculan, the last-named of which has now become covered with houses and gardens. The Tiber, traversing the city, forms two sharp bends and an island (S. Bartolomeo), and within the city its banks are protected by the strong and lofty walls which were begun in 1875. The river is crossed by fourteen bridges, one of them being only provisional, while ten have been built since 1870. There is also a railroad drawbridge near St. Paul's. Navigation on the river is practicable only for vessels of light draught, which anchor at Ripa Grande, taking cargoes of oil and other commodities. For the cure of souls, the city is divided into 54 parishes (including 7 in the suburbs), administered partly by secular clergy, partly by regular. The boundaries of the parishes have been radically changed by Pius X, to meet new needs arising out of topographical changes. Each parish has, besides its parish priest, one or two assistant priests, a chief sacristan, and an indeterminate number of chaplains. The parish priests every year elect a chamberlain of the clergy, whose position is purely honorary; every month they assemble for a conference to discuss cases in moral theology and also the practical exigencies of the ministry. In each parish there is a parochial committee for Catholic works; each has its various confraternities, many of which have their own church and oratory. In the vast extent of country outside of Rome, along the main highways, there are chapels for the accommodation of the few settled inhabitants, and the labourers and shepherds who from October to July are engaged in the work of the open country. In former times most of these chapels had priests of their own, who also kept schools; nowadays, through the exertions of the Society for the Religious Aid of the Agro Romano (i. e. the country districts around Rome), priests are taken thither from Rome every Sunday to say Mass, catechize, and preach on the Gospel. The houses of male religious number about 160; of female religious, 205, for the most part devoted to teaching, ministering to the sick in public and private hospitals, managing various houses of retreat etc. Besides the three patriarchal chapters (see below, under "Churches"), there are at Rome eleven collegiate chapters. In the patriarchal basilicas there are confessors for all the principal languages. Some nations have their national churches (Germans, Anima and Campo Santo; French, S. Luigi and S. Claudio; Croats, S. Girolamo dei Schiavoni; Belgians, S. Giuliano; Portuguese, S. Antonio; Spaniards, S. Maria in Monserrato; to all which may be added the churches of the Oriental rites). Moreover, in the churches and chapels of many religious houses, particularly the generalates, as well as in the various national colleges, it is possible for foreigners to fulfil their religious obligations. For English-speaking persons the convents of the Irish Dominicans (S. Clemente) and of the Irish Franciscans (S. Isidoro), the English, Irish, and American Colleges, the new Church of S. Patrizio in the Via Ludovisi, that of S. Giorgio of the English Sisters in the Via S. Sebastianello, and particularly S. Silvestro in Capite (Pallottini) should be mentioned. In these churches, too, there are, regularly, sermons in English on feast-day afternoons, during Lent and Advent, and on other occasions. Sometimes there are sermons in English in other churches also, notice being given beforehand by bills posted outside the churches and by advertisements in the papers. First Communions are mostly made in the parish churches; many parents place their daughters in seclusion during the period of immediate preparation, in some educational institution. There are also two institutions for the preparation of boys for their First Communion, one of them without charge (Ponte Rotto). Christian doctrine is taught both in the day and night schools which are dependent either on the Holy See, or on religious congregations or Catholic associations. For those who attend the public elementary schools, parochial catechism is provided on Sunday and feast-day afternoons. For intermediate and university students suitable schools of religious instruction have been formed, connected with the language schools and the scholastic ripetizioni, so as to attract the young men. The confraternities, altogether 92 in number, are either professional (for members of certain professions or trades), or national, or for some charitable object (e. g., for charity to prisoners; S. Lucia del Gonfalone and others like it, for giving dowries to poor young women of good character; the Confraternità della Morte, for burying those who die in the country districts, and various confraternities for escorting funerals, of which the principal one is that of the Sacconi; that of S. Giovanni Decollato, to assist persons condemned to death), or again they have some purely devotional aim, like the Confraternities of the Blessed Sacrament, of the Christian Doctrine, of the various mysteries of religion, and of certain saints. For ecclesiastical instruction there are in the city, besides the various Italian and foreign colleges, three great ecclesiastical universities: the Gregorian, under the Jesuits; the Schools of the Roman Seminary, at S. Apollinare; the Collegio Angelico of the Dominicans, formerly known as the Minerva. Several religious orders also have schools of their own -- the Benedictines at S. Anselmo, the Franciscans at S. Antonio, the Redemptorists at S. Alfonso, the Calced Carmelites at the College of S. Alberto, the. Capuchina the Minor Conventuals, the Augustinians, and others. (See ROMAN COLLEGES.) For classical studies there are, besides the schools of S. Apollinare, the Collegio Massimo, under the Jesuits, comprising also elementary and technical schools; the Collegio Nazareno (Piarists), the gymnasium and intermediate school of which take rank with those of the Government; the Instituto Angelo Mai (Barnabite). The Brothers of the Christian Schools have a flourishing technical institute (de Merode) with a boarding-house (convitto). There are eight colleges for youths under the direction of ecclesiastics or religious. The Holy See and the Society for the Protection of Catholic Interests also maintain forty-six elementary schools for the people mostly under the care of religious congregations. For the education of girls there are twenty-six institutions directed by Sisters, some of which also receive day-pupils. The orphanages are nine in number, and some of them are connected with technical and industrial schools. The Salesians, too, have a similar institution, and there are two agricultural institutions. Hospices are provided for converts from the Christian sects and for Hebrew neophytes. Thirty other houses of refuge, for infants, orphans, old people, etc., are directed by religious men or women. As the capital of Italy, Rome is the residence of the reigning house, the ministers, the tribunals, and the other civil and military officials of both the national Government and the provincial. For public instruction there are the university, two technical institutes, a commercial high school, five gymnasium-lyceums, eight technical schools, a female institute for the preparation of secondary teachers, a national boarding school, and other lay institutions, besides a military college. There are also several private schools for languages etc. -- the Vaticana, the Nazionale (formed out of the libraries of the Roman College, of the Aracœli Convent and other monastic libraries partially ruined), the Corsiniana (now the School of the Accademia dei Lincei), the Casanatense (see CASANATTA), the Angelica (formerly belonging to the Augustinians), the Vallicellana (Oratorians, founded by Cardinal Baronius), the Militare Centrale, the Chigiana, and others. (For the academies see ACADEMIES, ROMAN.) Foreign nations maintain institutions for artistic, historical, or archæological study (America, Great Britain, Austria-Hungary, Prussia, Holland, Belgium, France). There are three astronomical and meteorological observatories: the Vatican, the Capitol (Campidoglio), and the Roman College (Jesuit), the last-named, situated on the Janiculan, has been suppressed. The museums and galleries worthy of mention are the Vatican (see VATICAN), those of Christian and of profane antiquities at the Lateran (famous for the "Dancing Satyr"; the "Sophocles", one of the finest of portrait statues in existence found at Terracina; the "Neptune", the pagan and Christian sarcophagi with decorations in relief, and the statue of Hippolytus). In the gallery at the Lateran there are paintings by Crivelli, Gozzoli, Lippi, Spagna, Francia, Palmezzano, Sassoferrato, and Seitz. The Capitoline Museum contains Roman prehistoric tombs and household furniture, reliefs from the Arch of Marcus Aurelius, a head of Amalasunta, a half-length figure of the Emperor Commodus, the epitaph of the infant prodigy Quintus Sulpicius Maximus, the Esquiline and the Capitoline Venuses, "Diana of the Ephesians", the Capitoline Wolf (Etruscan work of the fifth century b.c.), Marforius, the Dying Gladiator, busts of the emperors and other famous men of antiquity, and Vespasian's "Lex regia"; the Gallery contains works by Spagna, Tintoretto, Caracci, Caravaggio, Guercino (St. Petronilla, the original of the mosaic in St. Peter's), Guido Reni, Titian, Van Dyke, Domenichino, Paolo Veronese, and other masters. There are important numismatic collections and collections of gold jewelry. The Villa Giulia has a collection of Etruscan terracotta; the Museo Romano, objects recently excavated; the Museo Kircheriano has been enlarged into an ethnographical museum. The Borghese Gallery is in the villa of the same name. The National Gallery, in the Exposition Building (Palazzo dell' Esposizione), is formed out of the Corsini, Sciarra, and Torlonia collections, together with modern acquisitions. There are also various private collections in different parts of the city. The institutions of public charity are all consolidated in the Congregazione di Carità, under the Communal Administration. There are twenty-seven public hospitals, the most important of which are: the Polyclinic, which is destined to absorb all the others; S. Spirito, to which is annexed the lunatic asylum and the foundling hospital; S. Salvatore, a hospital for women, in the Lateran; S. Giacomo; S. Antonio; the Consolazione; two military hospitals. There are also an institute for the blind, two clinics for diseases of the eye, twenty-five asylums for abandoned children, three lying-in hospitals, and numerous private clinics for paying patients. The great public promenades are the Pincian, adjoining the Villa Borghese and now known as the Umberto Primo, where a zoological garden has recently been installed, and the Janiculum. Several private parks or gardens, as the Villa Pamphili, are also accessible to the public every day. The population of Rome in 1901 was 462,783. Of these 5000 were Protestants, 7000 Jews, 8200 of other religions and no religion. In the census now (1910) being made an increase of more than 100,000 is expected. Rome is now the most salubrious of all the large cities of Italy, its mortality for 1907 being 18.8 per thousand, against 19.9 at Milan and 19.6 at Turin. The Press is represented by five agencies: there are 17 daily papers, two of them Catholic ("Osservatore Romano" and "Corriere d'Italia"); 8 periodicals are issued once or oftener in the week (5 catholic, 4 in English -- "Rome", "Roman Herald", "Roman Messenger", "Roman World"); 88 are issued more than once a month (7 Catholic); there are 101 monthlies (19 Catholic); 55 periodicals appear less frequently than once a month. II. GENERAL HISTORY OF THE CITY Arms and implements of the Palæolithic Age, found in the near vicinity of Rome, testify to the presence of man here in those remote times. The most recent excavations have established that as early as the eighth century b.c. or, according to some, several centuries earlier, there was a group of human habitations on the Palatine Hill, a tufaceous ledge rising in the midst of marshy ground near the Tiber. (That river, it may be observed here, was known to the primitive peoples by the name of Rumo, "the River".) Thus is the traditional account of the origin of Rome substantially verified. At the same time, or very little later, a colony of Sabines was formed on the Quirinal, and on the Esquiline an Etruscan colony. Between the Palatine and the Quirinal rose the Capitoline, once covered by two sacred groves, afterwards occupied by the temple of Jupiter and the Rock. Within a small space, therefore, were established the advance guards of three distinct peoples of different characters; the Latins, shepherds; the Sabines, tillers of the soil; the Etruscans, already far advanced in civilization, and therefore in commerce and the industries. How these three villages became a city, with, first, the Latin influence preponderating, then the Sabine, then the Etruscan (the two Tarquins), is all enveloped in the obscurity of the history of the seven kings (753-509 b.c.). The same uncertainty prevails as to the conquests made at the expense of the surrounding peoples. it is unquestionable that all those conquests had to be made afresh after the expulsion of the kings. But the social organization of the new city during this period stands out clearly: There were three original tribes: the Ramnians (Latins), the Titians (Sabines), and the Luceres (Etruscans). Each tribe was divided into ten curiœ, each curia into ten gentes; each gens into ten (or thirty) families. Those who belonged to these, the most ancient, tribes were Patricians, and the chiefs of the three hundred gentes formed the Senate. In the course of time and the wars with surrounding peoples, new inhabitants occupied the remaining hills; thus, under Tullus Hostilius, the Cælian was assigned to the population of the razed Alba Longa (Albano); the Sabines, conquered by Ancus Martius, had the Aventine. Later on, the Viminal was occupied. The new inhabitants formed the Plebeians (Plebs), and their civil rights were less than those of the older citizens. The internal history of Rome down to the Imperial Period is nothing but a struggle of plebeians against patricians for the acquisition of greater civil rights, and these struggles resulted in the civil, political, and juridical organization of Rome. The king was high-priest, judge, leader in war and head of the Government; the Senate and the Comitia of the People were convoked by him at his pleasure, and debated the measures proposed by him. Moreover, the kingly dignity was hereditary. Among the important public works in this earliest period were the drains, or sewers (cloacœ), for draining the marshes around the Palatine, the work of the Etruscan Tarquinius Priscus; the city wall was built by Servius Tullius, who also organized the Plebeians, dividing them into thirty tribes; the Sublician Bridge was constructed to unite the Rome of that time with the Janiculan. During the splendid reign of Tarquinius Superbus, Rome was the mistress of Latium as far as Circeii and Signia. But, returning victorious from Ardea, the king found the gates of the city closed against him. Rome took to itself a republican form of government, with two consuls, who held office for only one year; only in times of difficulty was a dictator elected, to wield unlimited power. In the expulsion of Tarquinius Superbus some historians have seen a revolt of the Latin element against Etruscan domination. Besides wars and treaties with the Latins and other peoples, the principal events, down to the burning of Rome by the Gauls, were the institution of the tribunes of the people (tribuni plebis), the establishment of the laws of the Twelve Tables, and the destruction of Veii. In 390 the Romans were defeated by the Gauls near the River Allia; a few days later the city was taken and set on fire, and after the Gauls had departed it was rebuilt without plan or rule. Cumillus, the dictator, reorganized the army and, after long resistance to the change, at last consented that one of the consuls should be a plebeian. Southern Etruria became subject to Rome, with the capture of Nepi and Sutri in 386. The Appian Way and Aqueduct were constructed at this period. Very soon it was possible to think of conquering the whole peninsula. The principal stages of this conquest are formed by the three wars against the Samnites (victory of Suesaula 343); the victory of Bovianum, 304; those over the Etruscans and Umbrians, in 310 and 308; lastly the victory of Sentinum, in 295, over the combined Samnites, Etruscans, and Gauls. The Tarentine (282-272) and the First and Second Punic Wars (264-201) determined the conquest of the rest of Italy, with the adjacent islands, as well as the first invasion of Spain. Soon after this, the Kingdom of Macedonia (Cynoscephalæ, 197; Pydna, 168) and Greece (capture of Corinth, 146) were subdued, while the war against Antiochus of Syria (192-89) and against the Galatians (189) brought Roman supremacy into Asia, In 146 Carthage was destroyed, and Africa reduced to subjection; between 149 and 133 the conquest of Spain was completed. Everywhere Roman colonies sprang up. With conquest, the luxurious vices of the conquered peoples also came to Rome, and thus the contrast between patricians and plebeians was accentuated. To champion the cause of the plebeians there arose the brothers Tiberius and Calus Gracchus. The Servile Wars (132-171) and the Jugurthine War (111-105) revealed the utter corruption of Roman society. Marius and Sulla, both of whom had won glory in foreign wars, rallied to them the two opposing parties, Democratic and Aristocratic, respectively. Sulla firmly established his dictatorship with the victory of the Colline Gate (83), reorganized the administration, and enacted some good laws to arrest the moral decay of the city. But the times were ripe for the oligarchy, which was to lead in the natural course of events to the monarchy. In the year 60, Cæsar, Pompey, and Crassus formed the first Triumvirate. While Cæsar conquered Gaul (58-50), and Crassus waged an unsuccessful war against the Parthians (54-53), Pompey succeeded in gaining supreme control of the capital. The war between Pompey to whom the nobles adhered, and Cæsar, who had the democracy with him, was inevitable. The battle of Pharsalia (48) decided the issue; in 45 Cæsar was already thinking of establishing monarchical government; his assassination (44) could do no more than delay the movement towards monarchy. Another triumvirate was soon formed by Antony, Lepidus, and Octavian; Antony and Octavian disagreed, and at Actium (32) the issue was decided in Octavian's favour. Roman power had meanwhile been consolidated and extended in Spain, in Gaul, and even as far as Pannonia, in Pontus, in Palestine, and in Egypt. Henceforward Roman history is no longer the history of the City of Rome, although it was only under Caracalla (a.d. 211) that Roman citizenship was accorded to all free subjects of the empire. In the midst of these political vicissitudes the city was growing and being beautified with temples and other buildings, public and private. On the Campus Martius and beyond the Tiber, at the foot of the Janiculan, new and populous quarters sprang up with theatres (those of Pompey and of Marcellus) and circuses (the Maximus and the Flaminius, 221 b.c.). The centre of political life was the Forum, which had been the market before the centre of buying and selling was transferred, in 388, to the Campus Martius (Forum Holitorium), leaving the old Forum Romanum to the business of the State. Here were the temples of Concord (366), Saturn (497), the Dî Consentes, Castor and Pollux (484), the Basilica Æmilia (179), the Basilica Julia (45), the Curia Hostilia (S. Adriano), the Rostra, etc. Scarcely had the empire been consolidated when Augustus turned his attention to the embellishment of Rome, and succeeding emperors followed his example: brick-built Rome became marble Rome. After the sixth decade b.c. many Hebrews had settled at Rome, in the Trastevere quarter and that of the Porta Capena, and soon they became a financial power. They were incessantly making proselytes, especially among the women of the upper classes. The names of thirteen synagogues are known as existing (though not all at the same time) at Rome during the Imperial Period. Thus was the way prepared for the Gospel, whereby Rome, already mistress of the world, was to be given a new sublimer and more lasting, title to that dominion -- the dominion over the souls of all mankind. Even on the Day of Pentecost, "Roman strangers" (advenœ Romani, Acts, ii, 10) were present at Jerusalem, and they surely must have carried the good news to their fellow-citizens at Rome. Ancient tradition assigns to the year 42 the first coming of St. Peter to Rome, though, according to the pseudo-Clementine Epistles, St. Barnabas was the first to preach the Gospel in the Eternal City. Under Claudius (c. a.d. 50), the name of Christ had become such an occasion of discord among the Hebrews of Rome that the emperor drove them all out of the city, though they were not long in returning. About ten years later Paul also arrived, a prisoner, and exercised a vigorous apostolate during his sojourn. The Christians were numerous at that time, even at the imperial Court. The burning of the city -- by order of Nero, who wished to effect a thorough renovation -- was the pretext for the first official persecution of the Christian name. Moreover, it was very natural that persecution, which had been occasional, should in course of time have become general and systematic; hence it is unnecessary to transfer the date of the Apostles' martyrdom from the year 67, assigned by tradition, to the year 64 (see PETER, SAINT; PAUL, SAINT). Domitian's reign took its victims both from among the opponents of absolutism and from the Christians; among them some who were of very exalted rank -- Titus Flavius Clemens, Acilius Glabrio (Cemetery of Priscilla), and Flavia Domitilla, a relative of the emperor. It must have been then, too, that St. John, according to a very ancient legend (Tertullian), was brought to Rome. The reign of Trajan and Adrian was the culminating point of the arts at Rome. The Roman martyrdoms attributed to this period are, with the exception of St. Ignatius's, somewhat doubtful. At the same time the heads of various Gnostic sects settled at Rome, notably Valentinus, Cerdon, and Marcion; but it does not appear that they had any great following. Under Antoninus, Marcus Aurelius, and Commodus, several Roman martyrs are known -- Pope St. Telesphorus, Sts. Lucius, Ptolemæus, Justin and companions, and the Senator Apollonius. Under Commodus, thanks to Martia, his morganatic wife, the condition of the Christians improved. At the same time the schools of Rhodon, St. Justin, and others flourished. But three new heresies from the East brought serious trouble to the internal peace of the Church: that of Theodotus, the shoemaker of Byzantium; that of Noetus brought in by one Epigonus; and Montanism. In the struggle against these heresies, particularly the last-named, the priest Hippolytus, a disciple of St. Irenæus, bore a distinguished part but he, in his turn, incurred the censures of Popes Zephyrinus and Callistus and became the leader of a schismatical party. But the controversies between Hippolytus and Callistus were not confined to theological questions, but also bore upon discipline, the pope thinking proper to introduce certain restrictions. Another sect transplanted to Rome at this period was that of the Elcesaites. The persecution of Septimius Severus does not appear to have been very acute at Rome, where, before this time, many persons of rank -- even of the imperial household -- had been Christians. The long period of tranquillity, hardly interrupted by Maximinus (235-38), fostered the growth of Roman church organization; so much so that, under Cornelius, after the first fury of the Decian persecution, the city numbered about 50,000 Christians. The last-named persecution produced many Roman martyrs -- Pope St. Fabian among the first -- and many apostates, and the problem of reconciling the latter resulted in the schism of Novatian. The persecution of Valerian, too, fell first upon the Church of Rome. Under Aurelian (271-76), the menace of an invasion of the Germans who had already advanced as far as Pesaro compelled the emperor to restore and extend the walls of Rome. The persecution of Diocletian also had its victims in the city, although there are no trustworthy records of them; it did not last long, however, in the West. Maxentius went so far as to restore to the Christians their cemeteries and other landed property, and, if we are to believe Eusebius, ended by showing them favour, as a means of winning popularity. At this period several pretentious buildings were erected -- baths, a circus, a basilica, etc. In the fourth and fifth centuries the city began to be embellished with Christian buildings, and the moribund art of antiquity thus received a new accession of vitality. Of the heresies of this period, Arianism alone disturbed the religious peace for a brief space; even Pelagianiam failed to take root. The conflict between triumphant Christianity and dying Paganism was more bitter. Symmachus, Prætextatus, and Nicomachus were the most zealous and most powerful defenders of the ancient religion. At Milan, St. Ambrose kept watch. By the end of the fourth century the deserted temples were becoming filled with cobwebs; pontiffs and vestals were demanding baptism. The statues of the gods served as public ornaments; precious objects were seldom plundered, and until the year 526 not one temple was converted to the uses of Christian worship. In, 402 the necessity once more arose of fortifying Rome. The capital of the world, which had never beheld a hostile army since the days of Hannibal, in 408 withstood the double siege of Alaric. But the Senate, mainly at the instigation of a pagan minority, treated with Alaric, deposed Honorius, and enthroned a new emperor Attalus. Two years later, Alaric returned, succeeded in taking the city, and sacked it. It is false, however, that the destruction of Rome began then. Under Alaric, as in the Gothic war of the sixth century, only so much was destroyed as military exigencies rendered inevitable. The intervention of St. Leo the Great saved the Eternal City from the fury of Attila, but could not prevent the Vandals, in 456, from sacking it without mercy for fifteen days: statues, gold, silver, bronze, brass -- whether the property of the State, or of the Church, or of private persons -- were taken and shipped to Carthage. Rome still called itself the capital of the empire, but since the second century it had seen the emperors only at rare and fleeting moments; even the kings of Italy preferred Ravenna as a residence. Theodoric, nevertheless, made provision for the outward magnificence of the city, preserving its monuments so far as was possible. Pope St. Agapetus and the learned Cassiodorus entertained the idea of creating at Rome a school of advanced Scripture studies, on the model of that which flourished at Edessa, but the Gothic invasion made shipwreck of this design. In that Titanic war Rome stood five sieges. In 536 Belisarius took it without striking a blow. Next year Vitiges besieged it, cutting the aqueducts, plundering the outlying villas, and even penetrating into the catacombs; the city would have been taken had not the garrison of Hadrian's tomb defended themselves with fragments of the statues of heroes and gods which they found in that monument. Soon after the departure of Pope Vigilius from Rome (November, 545), King Totila invested it and captured a fleet bearing supplies sent by Vigilius, who by that time had passed over to Sicily. In December, 546, the city was captured, through the treachery of the Isaurian soldiery, and once more sacked. Totila, obliged to set out for the south, forced the whole population of Rome to leave the city, so that it was left uninhabited; but they returned with Belisarius in 547. Two years later, another Isaurian treachery made Totila once more master of the city, which then for the last time saw the games of the circus. After the battle of Taginæ (552), Rome opened its gates to Narces and became Byzantine. The ancient Senate and the Roman nobility were extinct. There was a breathing-space of sixteen years, and then the Lombards drew near to Rome, pillaging and destroying the neighbouring regions. St. Gregory the Great has described the lamentable condition of the city; the same saint did his best to remedy matters. The seventh century was disastrously marked by a violent assault on the Lateran made by Mauricius, the chartularius of the Exarch of Ravenna (640), by the exile of Pope St. Martin (653), and by the visit of the Emperor Constans I (663). The imprisonment of St. Sergius, which had been ordered by Justinian II, was prevented by the native troops of the Exarchate. In the eighth century the Lombards, with Liutprand, were seized with the old idea of occupying all Italy, and Rome in particular. The popes, from Gregory II on, saved the city and Italy from Lombard domination by the power of their threats, until they were finally rescued by the aid of Pepin, when Rome and the peninsula came under Frankish domination. Provision was made for the material well-being of the city by repairs on the walls and the aqueducts, and by the establishment of agricultural colonies (domus cultœ) for the cultivation of the wide domains surrounding the city. But in Rome itself there were various factions -- favouring either the Franks or the Lombards, or, later on, Frankish or Nationalist -- and these factions often caused tumults, as, in particular, on the death of Paul I (767) and at the beginning of Leo III's pontificate (795). With the coronation of Charlemagne (799) Rome became finally detached from the Empire of the East. Though the pope was master of Rome, the power of the Sword was wielded by the imperial missi, and this arrangement came to be more clearly defined by the Constitution of Lothair (824). Thus the government was divided. In the ninth century the pope had to defend Rome and Central Italy against the Saracens. Gregoriopolis, the Leonine City, placed outside the walls for the defence of the Basilica of St. Peter, and sacked in 846, and Joannipolis, for the defence of St. Paul's were built by Gregory IV, Leo IV, and John VIII. The latter two and John X also gained splendid victories over these barbarians. The decline of the Carlovingian dynasty was not without its effect upon the papacy and upon Rome, which became a mere lordship of the great feudal families, especially those of Theodora and Marozia. When Hugh of Provence wished to marry Marozia, so as to become master of Rome, his son Alberic rebelled against him and was elected their chief by the Romans, with the title of Patrician (Patricius) and Consul. The temporal power of the pope might then have come to an end, had not John, Alberic's son, reunited the two powers. But John's life and his conduct of the government necessitated the intervention of the Emperor Otto I (963), who instituted the office of prœfectus urbis, to represent the imperial authority. (This office became hereditary in the Vico family.) Order did not reign for long: Crescentius, leader of the anti-papal party, deposed and murdered popes. It was only for a few brief intervals that Otto II (980) and Otto III (996-998-1002) were able to re-establish the imperial and pontifical authority. At the beginning of the eleventh century three popes of the family of the counts of Tusculum immediately succeeded each other, and the last of the three, Benedict IX, led a life so scandalous as made it necessary for Henry III to intervene (1046). The schism of Honorius II and the struggle between Gregory VII and Henry IV exasperated party passions at Rome, and conspicuous in the struggle was another Crescentius, a member of the Imperialist Party. Robert Guiscard, called to the rescue by Gregory VII, sacked the city and burned a great part of it, with immense destruction of monuments and documents. The struggle was revived under Henry V, and Rome was repeatedly besieged by the imperial troops. Then followed the schism of Pier Leone (Anacletus II), which had hardly been ended, in 1143, when Girolamo di Pierleone, counselled by Arnold of Brescia, made Rome into a republic, modelled after the Lombard communes, under the rule of fifty-six senators. In vain did Lucius II attack the Capitol, attempting to drive out the usurpers. The commune was in opposition no less to the imperial than to the papal authority. At first the popes thought to lean on the emperors, and thus Adrian IV induced Barbarossa to burn Arnold alive (1155). Still, just as in the preceding century, every coronation of an emperor was accompanied by quarrels and fights between the Romans and the imperial soldiery. In 1188 a modus vivendi was established between the commune and Clement III, the people recognizing the pope's sovereignty and conceding to him the right of coinage, the senators and military captains being obliged to swear fealty to him. But the friction did not cease. Innocent III (1203) was obliged to flee from Rome, but, on the other hand, the friendly disposition of the mercantile middle class facilitated his return and secured to him some influence in the affairs of the communes, in which he obtained the appointment of a chief of the Senate, known as "the senator" (1207). The Senate, therefore, was reduced to the status of the Communal Council of Rome; the senator was the syndic, or mayor, and remained so until 1870. In the conflicts between the popes, on the one hand, and, on the other Frederick II and his heirs, the Senate was mostly Imperialist, cherishing some sort of desire for the ancient independence; at times, however, it was divided against itself (as in 1262, for Richard, brother of the King of England, against Manfred, King of Naples). In 1263 Charles of Anjou, returning from the conquest of Naples, caused himself to be elected senator for life;. but Urban IV obliged him to be content with a term of ten years. Nicholas III forbade that any foreign prince should be elected senator, and in 1278 he himself held the office. The election was always to be subject to the pope's approval. However, these laws soon fell into desuetude. The absence of the popes from Rome had the most disastrous results for the city: anarchy prevailed; the powerful families of Colonna, Savelli, Orsini, Anguillara, and others lorded it with no one to gainsay them; the pope's vicars were either stupid or weak; the monuments crumbled of themselves or were destroyed; sheep and cows were penned in the Lateran Basilica; no new buildings arose, except the innumerable towers, or keeps, of which Brancaleone degli Andalò, the senator (1252-56) caused more than a hundred to be pulled down; the revival of art, so promising in the thirteenth century was abruptly cut off. The mad enterprise of Cola di Rieuzo only added to the general confusion. The population was reduced to about 17,000. The Schism of the West, with the wars of King Ladislaus (1408 and 1460, siege and sack of Rome), kept the city from benefiting by the popes' return as quickly as it should. Noteworthy, however, is the understanding between Boniface IX and the Senate as to their respective rights (1393). This pope and Innocent VII also made provision for the restoration of the city. With Martin V the renascence of Rome began. Eugene IV again was driven out by the Romans, and Nicholas V had to punish the conspiracy of Stefano Porcari; but the patronage of letters by the popes and the new spirit of humanism obliterated the memory of these longings for independence. Rome became the city of the arts and of letters, of luxury and of dissoluteness. The population, too, changed in character and dialect, which had before more nearly approached the Neapolitan, but now showed the influence of immigration from Tuscany, Umbria, and the Marches. The sack of 1527 was a judgment, and a salutary warning to begin that reformation of manners to which the Brothers of the Oratory of Divine Love (the nucleus of the Theatine Order) and, later, the Jesuits and St. Philip Neri devoted themselves. In the war between Paul IV and Philip II (1556), the Colonna for the last time displayed their insubordination to the Pontifical Government. Until 1799 Rome was at peace under the popes, who vied with the cardinals in embellishing the city with churches, fountains, obelisks, palaces, statues, and paintings. Unfortunately, this work of restoration was accompanied by the destruction of ancient and, still more, medieval monuments. An attempt was also made to improve the ground plan of Rome by straightening and widening the streets (Sixths IV, Sixtus V -- the Corso, the Ripetta, the Babuino, Giulia, Paola, Sistina, and other streets). The artists who have successively left their imprint on the City are Bramante, Michelangelo, Vignola, Giacomo della Porta, Fontana, Maderna, Bernini, Borromini, and, in the eighteenth century, Fuga. The most important popular risings of this period were those against Urban VIII, on account of the mischief done by the Barberini and against Cardinal Cascia, after the death of Benedict XIII. The pontificate of Pius VI, illustrious for its works of public utility, ended with the proclamation of the Republic of Rome (10 February, 1798) and the pope's exile. Pius VII was able to return, but after 1806 there was a French Government at Rome side by side with the papal, and in 1809 the city was incorporated in the empire. General Miollis, indeed, deserved well of Rome for the public works he caused to be executed (the Pincian), and the archæological excavations, which were vigorously and systematically continued in the succeeding pontificates, especially that of Pius IX. Of the works of art carried away to Paris only a part were restored after the Congress of Vienna. But the Revolutionary germ still remained planted at Rome, even though it gave no signs of activity either in 1820 or in 1830 and 1831. A few political murders were the only indication of the fire that smouldered beneath the ashes. The election of Pius IX, hailed as the Liberal pontiff, electrified all Rome. The pope saw his power slipping away; the assassination of Pellegrino Rossi and the riots before the Quirinal (25 November, 1848) counselled his flight to Gaeta. The Triumvirate was formed and, on 6 February, 1849, convoked the Constituent Assembly, which declared the papal power abolished. The mob abandoned itself to the massacre of defenceless priests, and the wrecking of churches and palaces. Oudinot's French troops restored the papal power (6 August, 1849), the pope retaining a few French regiments. Secret plotting went on, though at Rome none dared attempt anything (the Fausti trial). Only in 1867, when Garibaldi, the victor at Monterotondo, defeated at Mentana, invaded the Papal States, was the revolt prepared that was to have burst while Enrico Cairoi was trying to enter the city; but the coup de main failed; the stores of arms and ammunition were discovered; the only serious occurrence was the explosion of a mine, which destroyed the Serristori Barracks in the Borgo. Not until 20 September, 1870, was Rome taken from the popes and made the actual capital of the Kingdom of Italy. III. CHURCHES AND OTHER MONUMENTS The "Annuario Ecclesiastico" enumerates 358 public churches and oratories in Rome and its suburbs. Besides, there are the chapels of the seminaries, colleges, monasteries, and other institutions. Since 1870 many churches have been destroyed, but many new ones have arisen in the new quarters. The principal patriarchal basilicas are St. Peter's (the Vatican Basilica), St. John Lateran (the Basilica of Constantine), and St. Mary Major (the Liberian Basilica). The Liberian Basilica dates from the fourth century, when it was called the Basilica Sicinini; in the fifth century, under Sixtus III, it was adorned with interesting mosaics of Biblical subjects; Eugene III added the portico, when the mosaics of the apse and the façade were restored and, to some extent, altered. On the two sides are two chapels with cupolas: that of Sixtus V, containing the altar of the Blessed Sacrament and the tombs of Sixtus V and St. Pius V; the other, that of Paul V, with the Madonna of St. Luke, which existed as early as the sixth century. Benedict XIV caused it to be restored by Fuga (1743), who designed the façade which now almost shuts out the view of the mosaics. Beneath the high altar, the baldacchino of which is supported by four porphyry columns, are the relics of St. Matthew and of the Holy Crib (hence the name, S. Maria ad prœsepe). Here are buried St. Jerome, Nicholas IV, Clement VIII, IX, and X, and Paul V. (See also SAINT PAUL-OUTSIDE-THE-WALLS.) Among the lesser basilicas is S. Croce in Gerusalemme (Basilica Sessoriana), founded, it is said, by St. Helena in the place called the Sessorium, restored by Lucius II (1144) and by Benedict XIV (1743). Here, in the tribune, is the fresco of Pinturicchio representing the Finding of the Cross, and here are preserved the relics of the Cross of Jesus Christ, the Title, one of the Thorns, the finger of St. Thomas, etc. The church is served by Cistercians, whose convent, however, has been converted into barracks. St. Lawrence-Outside-the-Walls, another minor basilica, which stands in the Cemetery of S. Ciriaco, where the saint was buried, was built under Constantine and, next to St. Peter's, was the most frequented sanctuary in Rome at the end of the fourth century (see Prudentius's description). Pelagius II (578), Honorius III, and Pius IX made thorough repairs in this basilica, the last-named adding frescoes by Fracassini, representing the martyrdom of St. Lawrence. The frescoes of the atrium date from the thirteenth century. The high altar stands beneath a raised ambo, behind which is the simple tomb of Pius IX. The mosaics of the triumphal arch date from the time of Pelagius II. Near this basilica is the Cemetery of Rome, constructed in 1837, and surpassed by few in Italy for the sumptuousness of its monuments. Both the church and the cemetery are served by Capuchina. St. Sebastian-Outside-the-Walls, near the cemetery ad catacumbas (see CATACOMBS), built in the fourth or fifth century and altered in 1612, contains Giorgini's statue of the saint. The churches so far named are the "Seven Churches" usually visited by pilgrims and residents to gain the large indulgences attached to them. S. Agnese fuori le Mura, near the catacombs of the same name, was built, by Constantine, decorated by Pope Symmachus with mosaics, in which that pope's portrait appears, and restored by Honorius II (portrait), by Cardinal Giuliano della Rovere (1479), and by Pius IX. It is served by Canons Regular of St. John Lateran. In one of the adjacent buildings Pius IX, in 1856, fell with the flooring of a room, but without suffering any injury. Not far off is S. Costanza, the mausoleum of Constantine's daughter, which was made into a church in 1256. S. Giorgio in Velabro, Cardinal Newman's diaconal title, takes its name from the ancient Velabrum, where it stands, and dates from the fourth century; it has a fine tabernacle, but the church is much damaged by damp. S. Lorenzo in Damaso, built by Pope Damasus (370), was, in the time of Bramante, enclosed in the palace of the Cancelleria; it contains modern frescoes and the tombs of Annibale Caro and Pellegrino Rossi. S. Maria ad Martyres (the Pantheon) is a grandiose circular building with a portico. It was built in 25 b.c. by Marcus Agrippa and has often been restored; in 662 Constantine II caused the bronze which covered its dome to be taken away; it contains the tombs of Raphael, Cardinal Consalvi and Kings Victor Emmanuel II and Humbert I. S. Maria in Cosmedin, which stands on the foundations of a temple of Hercules and a granary, dates from the sixth century at latest; it was a diaconate and the seat of the Greek colony, and was restored by Adrian I, Nicholas I, and Cardinal Albani (1718), and at last was remodelled in its original form. It has a noteworthy ambo and tabernacle (c. 130), and its campanile, with seven intercolumnars, is the most graceful in Rome. This was the title of Reginald Cardinal Pole. S. Maria in Trastevere, the title of Cardinal Gibbons, Archbishop of Baltimore, dates from St. Callistus or, more probably, from St. Julius I, and was restored by Eugene III by Nicholas V, and by Pius IX, to the last-named of whom are due the mosaics of the façade, the antique columns, and the rich baroque ceiling. The mosaics of the tribune are of the twelfth century, the others are by Cavallini (1291). It contains the tombs of Stanislaus Hosius and other cardinals. The four basilicas enumerated above have collegiate chapters. S. Agostino was built (1479-83) by Cardinal d'Estoutevile, with Giacomo di Pietrasanta for architect. On the high altar, by Bernini, is the Madonna of St. Luke, brought from Constantinople. Its chapel of St. Augustine contains a picture by Guercino; in its chapel of the Blessed Sacrament is the tomb of St. Monica; its altar of St. Peter has a relief by Cotignola, and below one of the pilasters is Raphael's Isaiss. In the basement of this church is the Madonna del Parto, the work of Jacopo Tatto, one of the most highly venerated images in Rome. The adjoining convent, once the residence of the general of the Augustinians, is now the Ministry of Marine; but the Angelica Library, founded (1605) by Cardinal Angelo Rocca, an Augustinian, is still there. S. Alfonso, built in 1855 for the Redemptorists, who have their generalate there, has fine pictures by von Rhoden. Its high altar possesses a Byzantine image of unknown origin, called the Madonna del Perpetuo Soccorso. S. Ambrogio della Massima, in the paternal mansion of St. Ambrose, belongs to the Cassinese Benedictines. S. Andrea della Valle (Theatines), notable for the severe majesty of its lines, was built by Carlo Maderna in 1591; it contains the chapel of the Strozzi, the tombs of Pius II, of Nicolò della Guardía, and, opposite, of Pius III, and the frescoes of Domenichino, his most perfect work, as well as other very modern frescoes. In this church, on every feast of the Epiphany, solemn Mass is celebrated in every rite subject to Rome, and there are sermons in the various European languages -- a festival instituted by Ven. Vincent Gallotta. S. Andrea de Quirinale belongs to the Jesuits, who have their novitiate here, in which the cell of St. Stanislaus Kostka is still to be seen. S. Andrea delle Fratte, belonging to the Minims, was, in the Middle Ages, the national church of the Scots; it received its present form (a cupola and a fanciful Campanile) from the architects Guerra and Borromini in the seventeenth century and has two angels by Bernini. Before the Lady altar of this church took place the conversion of Venerable Marie Alphonse Ratisbonne. S. Angelo in Pescheria, built in the eighth century and restored in 1584, is occupied by the Clerics Regular Minor, who were transferred to it from S. Lorenzo in Lucina. S. Anselmo, on the Aventine, is a Romanesque building (1900), annexed to the international college of the Benedictines, and is the residence of the abbot primate of their order. Santi Apostoli, adjoining the generalate of the Minor Conventuals, dates from the fifth century; it was restored by Martin V, with frescoes by Melozzo da Forli, remodelled in 1702 by Francesco Fontana, and contains the tombs of Cardinals Riario and Bessarion. The convent is occupied by the headquarters of a military division. S. Bartolomeo all' Isola, Friars Minor, stands on the site of the ancient temple of Æsculapius and was built by Otto III, in 1001, in honour of St. Adalbert. The relics of St. Bartholomew were brought thither from Beneventum, those of St. Paulinus of Nola being given in exchange. The church has been several times restored. S. Bernardo alle Terme, Cistercians, is a round church built in 1598, its foundations being laid in the calidarium of the baths (Italian terme) of Diocletian. S. Bonaventura, on the Palatine, Friars Minor, contains the tomb of St. Leonard of Port Maurice. S. Camillo, a very modern church, is the residence of the Camilline Attendants of the Sick, and has a hospital connected with it. S. Carlo (Carlino) of the Spanish Trinitarians belongs to the Borromini. S. Carlo ai Catinari, Barnabites, formerly dedicated to St. Biagius, was put into its present shape by Rosati in 1612, with frescoes and framed pictures by Domenichino, Pietro da Cortona, Guido Reni, and Andrea Sacchi. Its convent is occupied by a section of the Ministry of War. S. Carlo al Corso, the church of the Lombards, was built by the Lunghi for the canonization of St. Charles Borromeo, on the site of a little church dedicated to S. Niccolo del Tufo. The decorations of the cupola are by Pietro da Cortona; there is a picture by Maratta and a statue of Judith by Le Brun. The Rosminians have officiated in this church for some years past. S. Claudio dei Borgognoni is served by the Congregation of the Most Holy Sacrament; it has Exposition all the year around. S. Clemente, the church of the Irish Dominicans (1643), and titular church of William Cardinal O'Connell, Archbishop of Boston, existed as early as the fourth century, dedicated to St. Clement, pope and martyr. It is characterized by the two ambos which project about half way down the nave and an atrium which is also the courtyard of the convent which stands in front of the basilica. The ambos date from John VIII (872); the altar and tabernacle, from Paschal II. The church was destroyed in the conflagration kindled by Robert Guiscard (1084); its rebuilding was begun immediately, but the plan was adopted of raising somewhat the pavement of the old church, which was filled in with debris; the new church was also less spacious. At this period the mosaics of the apse were executed. In the chapel of st. Catherine are some frescoes attributed to Masaccio (1428); in the chapel of the Blessed Sacrament, the tombs of Cardinals Brusati and Roverella; in that of St. Cyril, who is buried in the basilica, modern frescoes. In 1858 the excavation of the old basilica was begun, through the efforts of the Dominican prior, Mulhooly. The frescoes, seventh to eleventh century, are important; in them may be distinguished the first indications of a new birth of Christian art, and particularly interesting are those relating to Sts. Cyril and Methodius. The original basilica was raised upon the remains of a still earlier building, in which, moreover, there was a spelœum, or grotto, of Mithras; it is probable that this building was St. Clement's paternal home. Santissima Concenzione, Capuchins, near the Piazza Barberini, was built by the Capuchin Cardinal Barberini, twin brother of Urban VIII (1624). Bl. Crispin of Viterbo is buried here. The church is noted for a St. Michael by Guido Reni, a St. Francis by Domenichino, a St. Felix of Cantalico by Turchi, and other pictures by Sacchi and Pietro da Cortona. Beneath the church is the ossarium of the friars. Sts. Cosmas and Damian, Franciscan Tertiaries, is made up of two ancient buildings, the temples of Romulus, son of Maxentius, and of the Sacra Urbs, which were given to the Church by Theodoric and converted into a basilica by Felix IV (528), to whom are due the mosaics of the apse and the arch, retouched in the ninth and sixteenth centuries. Urban VIII caused its pavement to be raised ten feet. In the crypt are the tomb of Felix II and some objects belonging to the old church. St. Crisogono, Trinitarians, dates at least as far back as the fifth century, and was restored by Cardinal Scipione Borghese (1623). It has a fine tabernacle and, in the apse, mosaics by Cavillini (1290). Excavations have recently been made under this church, which is associated with English history as having been the titular church of Cardinal Langton. S. Cuore al Castro Pretorio, Salesians, a fine church built in 1887 by Vespegniani, is due to the zeal of Don Bosco. Connected with it is a boarding-school of arts and industries. S. Francesca Romana (S. Maria Nova), Olivetans, was erected by Leo IV in place of S. Maria Antiqua, which was in danger of being injured by the ruins of the Palatine, on a portion of the ruined temple of Venus and Rome, where once stood a chapel commemorating the fall of Simon Magus. It was restored by Honorius III and under Paul V. In the apse are mosaics of 1161; in the confession, the tomb of St. Frances of Rome (1440). There is a group by Meli, also the tombs of Gregory XI (1574), Cardinal Vulcani, and Francesco Rido. S. Francesco a Ripa, the provincialate of the Friars Minor (1229), has pictures by the Cavaliere d'Arpino and by Sabiati (Annunciation), and the tomb of Lodovico Albertoni, one of Bernini's best works. S. Francesco di Paola belongs to the Minims, the convent being now occupied by a technical institute. The Gesù, connected with the professed house and general's residence of the Jesuits, is the work of Vignola (1568-73), completed by Giacomo della Porta, through the munificence of Cardinal Alessandro Farnese. It became the model of the style known as "Jesuit". Its altar of St. Ignatius, who is buried there, has a silver statue of the saint which is ordinarily covered by a picture painted by the Jesuit Pozzo; the globe and four columns are of lapis lazuli Opposite is the altar of St. Francis Xavier, where an arm of that saint is preserved, and a picture by Maratta. The ceiling is painted by Gaulli with the Triumph of the Name of Jesus. The Madonna della Strada is venerated in one of the chapels. In this church are the tombs of Cardinal Bellarmine and Ven. Giuseppe Maria Pignatelli. Gesù e Maria, Calced Augustinians, with its magnificent high altar, is in the Corso. S. Gioacchino, Redemptorists, was erected for the sacerdotal jubilee of Leo XIII, its side chapels being subscribed for by the various nations. S. Giovanni Calibita, on the Island of S. Bartolomeo, belongs to the Fatebenefratelli, who have a hospital. SS. Giovanni e Paolo, on the Cælian, Passionists, was built by Pammachius in the house of these two saints, who were officials in the palace of Constantia, daughter of Constantine, and were slain by order of Julian. In 1154 the church was enlarged and adorned with frescoes, some of which are preserved in the chapel of the Blessed Sacrament. The chapel of St. Paul of the Cross is modern. Under the church are still to be seen thirteen interstices of the house of the saints with other saints. This was the titular church of Edward Cardinal Howard, afterwards Cardinal-Bishop of Frascati (died 1892). S. Gregorio al Celio, Camadolese, was built by Gregory II in the paternal home of St. Gregory the Great, and was modernized by Soria (1633) and Ferravi (1734). It contains an altar of the saint, with his stone bed and his marble chair, and there is an ancient image of the Madonna. In the monks' garden there are also three chapels; those of St. Silvia, mother of St. Gregory, with her statue by Cordieri and frescoes by Guido Reni, of St. Andrew, decorated by Reni and Domenichino, and of St. Barbara, with a statue of St. Gregory by Cordieri. The title of this church was borne successively by Henry Edward Cardinal Manning and Herbert Cardinal Vaughan, Archbishops of Westminster. S. Ignazio, Jesuits, was built in 1626 by Cardinal Ludovisi, under the direction of the Jesuit Grassi. The frescoes of the vault, representing the apotheosis of St. Ignatius, were painted by the Jesuit lay brother Pozzo, whose are also some of the pictures on the altars. Sts. Aloysius Gonzaga and John Berchmans, buried here, have splendid altars; in the adjoining Roman College (now the Ginnasio-Liceo and National Library) there are still other chapels with souvenirs of these two saints. On the highest point of the façade Father Secchi caused to be erected a pole with a ball which, by a mechanical contrivance, drops precisely at noon every day. S. Isidoro belongs to the Irish Franciscans. In the adjoining convent the famous Luke Wadding wrote his history of the Franciscan Order. S. Marcello, Servites, is believed to be built over the stable in which Pope St. Marcellus was compelled to serve. It was restored in 1519 by order of Giuliano de' Medici (Clement VII), completed in 1708 by Carlo Fontana, and contains paintings by Pierin del Vaga and Federico Zuccaro. It was the titular church of Thomas Cardinal Weld (see WELD, FAMILY OF). S. Maria in Ara Cœli, on the Capitol, once the general's residence of the Franciscans (beginning from 1250), is (1911) the titular church of Cardinal Falconio. It stands on the site of the ancient citadel of Rome and the temple of Juno Moneta, and is approached by a flight of 124 steps. The façade is still of brick, and the church contains antique columns and capitals; in the Buffalini chapel are frescoes (Life of St. Bernardino) by Pinturicchio, and on the high altar is a Madonna attributed to st. Luke, where was formerly the Madonna of Foligno. To the left a small building, known as the Cappella Santa di Sant' Elena (Holy Chapel of St. Helena), marks the spot where, according to a legend winch can be traced to the ninth century, the Emperor Augustus saw the Blessed Virgin upon an altar of heaven (Lat. ara cœli). To this legend something was contributed by Virgil's fourth eclogue, in which he speaks of the "nova progenies" descending from heaven, and which was interpreted in Christian antiquity as a prophecy of the coming of Christ (thus Constantine in the sermon "Ad sanctorum cœtum"). In the sacristy is venerated the "Santo Bambino", a little figure of olive wood from the Mount of Olives (sixteenth century) for which the Romans have a great devotion. The sepulchral monuments of this church are numerous and important, including those of Cardinal Louis d'Albert, with figures of St. Michael and St. Francis; Michelangelo Marchese di Saluzzo, by Dosio; Pietro de' Vincenti, by Sansovino; Honorius IV and others of the Savelli family in the Savelli chapel, which dates from the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries; Cardinal Matthew of Acquasparta; Catherine, Queen of Bosnia (1478). The Crib, built every year in the second chapel on the left, is famous; at Christmas and Epiphany children recite dialogues and little discourses near it. S. Maria in Traspontina, in the Borgo, Calced Carmelites, was erected by Sixtus IV on the site of a chapel that had been built there, in 1099, to drive away the demons which haunted the ashes of Nero. The architect was Meo del Caprina; Bramante and Bernini modified the building. It is one of the most beautiful monuments of the Renaissance, its cupola being the first of its kind built in Rome. It contains paintings by Pinturicchio -- the Adoration of the Shepherds, all the paintings of the Lady Chapel and the chapel of St. Augustine, the frescoes of the vault, etc. Raphael designed the mosaics of the Chigi chapel, and there are paintings by Caracci, Caravaggio and Sebastiano del Piombo (the Birth of the Blessed Virgin). The sepulchral monuments are costly including those of Giovanni della Rovere, Cardinal Costa, Cardinal Podocatharo, Cardinal Girolamo Basso, by Sansovino, and Cardinal Sforza, by the same sculptor, Agostino Chigi, in the Chigi chapel after suggestions, and decorated, by Raphael, and Cardinal Pallavicino. The painted windows, the most beautiful in Rome, are by Guillaume de Marcilot (1509). S. Maria del Priorato, Knights of Malta, on the Aventine, was built in 939, when Alberic II gave his palace to St. Odo of Cluny. The present form of the church, however, is due to Piranesi (1765). Some of the tombs of the grand masters of the Order of Malta -- Caraffa, Caracciolo, and others -- are interesting. The adjoining residence commands a splendid panorama. S. Maria del Rosario, on Monte Mario, belongs to the Dominicans. S. Maria della Scala, Discalced Carmelites, built by Francesco da Volterra, is so called from an image of the Madonna found under the stairs of a neighbouring house, and contains paintings by Saraceni and Gerhard Honthorst. In the adjoining convent, a great part of which is occupied by the Guardie di Pubblica Sicurezza, the friars have a pharmacy where they make the "Acqua della Scala". S. Maria della Vittoria, Carmelites, was erected by Paul V in memory of the victory of the Imperialists over the Protestants at Prague (1623), and contains pictures by Domenichino, Guercino, and Serra (1884), also a famous group by Bernini, of St. Teresa transfixed by an angel, and Turkish standards captured at the siege of Vienna (1683). S. Maria in Aquiro, the ancient diaconate titulus Equitii, was restored in 1590. It was formerly an asylum for the destitute; Clement VIII gave it to the Somaschi Brothers, who still have an orphanage there under the supervision of the municipality. S. Maria in Campitelli was built in 1665 to receive the image of S. Maria in Portica (now S. Galla) in thanksgiving for Rome's deliverance from the plague (1658). It contains a picture of St. Anne, by Luca Giordano, and the tomb of Cardinal Pacca. It is served by the Clerics Regular of the Mother of God. S. Maria in Vallicella (the Chiesa Nuova, or "New Church"), Oratorians of St. Philip Neri, is associated with the spiritual renewal of the City by the labours of St. Philip, who founded it. The frescoes of the vaulting and of the cupola are by Pietro da Cortona, the three pictures of the high altar by Rubens, and others by Scipione Gaetano, Cavaliere d'Arpino Maratta, Guido Reni (St. Philip), Ronocelli, and Baroccio. The chapel of the saint is rich in votive offerings; in the adjoining house, until now almost entirely occupied by the Assize Court, is his cell, with relics and souvenirs of him. The library (Vallicelliana) now belongs to the State. S. Maria in Via, Servites is a fine church of the late Renaissance (1549). S. Maria Maddalena, Servants of the Sick (formerly their generalate), is now occupied by the elementary communal schools. Here the cell of St. Camillus of Lellis is preserved, with the crucifix which encouraged him to found his order. S. Maria Sopra Minerva, the only authentic Gothic church in Rome, belongs to the Dominicans, who had their general staff and their higher schools in the adjoining convent, now the Ministry of Instruction, as well as the Casanatense Library, now in the hands of the State. This was the titular church of the Cardinal of Norfolk (see HOWARD, THOMAS PHILIP), Cardinal McCloskey, Archbishop of New York, and Cardinal Taschereau, Archbishop of Quebec (see MCCLOSKEY JOHN; TASCHEREAU, ELZÉAR ALEXANDRE); its title is now (1911) held by Cardinal Farley, Archbishop of New York. The church stands on the ruins of a temple of Minerva, one of those built by Pompey. In the eighth century there was a Greek monastery here. In 1280 Fra Sisto and Fra Ristoro, Dominicans, began the new church by order of Nicholas III, and with the aid of the Caetani, Savelli, and Orsini. It was completed in 1453. The pillars of the nave are clustered columns; the side chapels are in Renaissance or baroque style. Beneath the high altar rests the body of St. Catherine of Siena. The chapel of the Annunziata has a confraternity, founded by Cardinal Torquemada, which every year distributes dowries to 400 poor young women, and there is a picture by Antoniazzo Romano dealing with the subject. The Caraffa family chapel of St. Thomas contains frescoes by Filippo Lippi (1487-93); that of St. Dominic, pictures by Maratta; of the Rosary, by Venusti. There are also paintings by Baronio and others. The statue of the Risen Christ is by Michelangelo. Here also are the tombs of Giovanni Alberini (1490), Urlan VII, by Buonvicino, the Aldobrandini family by Giacomo della Porta, Paul IV, by Sigorio and Casignola, Gulielmus Durandus, by Giovanni di Cosma (1296), Cardinal Domenico Capranica (1458), Clement VII and Leo X, by Baccio Bandienelli, Blessed Angelico, of Fiesole, with an epitaph by Nicholas V, and Cardinal Schönberg (1537). S. Martino ai Monti, Carmelites, probably dates from the time of Constantine, when the priest Equitius built an oratory on his own land. Symmachus rebuilt it, dedicating it to St. Silvester and St. Martin of Tours, and then again to St. Martin, Pope. In 1559 it was given to the Carmelites, who in 1650 remodelled it. It is notable for its landscapes by Poussin. Under the more modern church is the old church of St. Silvester, with remains of mosaics, frescoes, etc. Our Lady of the Sacred Heart of Jesus (formerly S. Giacomo degli Spagnuoli), in the Piazza Navona, belongs to the Missionaries of the Sacred Heart, who have an apostolic school there. S. Onofrio on the Janiculum, Hieronymites, was built in 1439 by the de Cupis family and Nicolò da Forca Palena. The frescoes of the portico are by Domenichino, three scenes from the life of St. Jerome; within are frescoes by Baldassarre Peruzzi, and the tombs of Cardinal Mezzofanti and the poet Tasso, who died in the convent, where his cell contains a small museum of objects that belonged to him. S. Pancrazio fuori le Mura was built by Pope Symmachus (c. 504) near the Cœmeterium Calepodii; in 1849 it was wrecked by the Garibaldians; the government caused it to be freshly decorated. Near S. Pancrazio degli Scolopii is the generalate of the Piarists (Scolopii). S. Paolo alle Tre Fontane belongs to the Trappists, who have put the surrounding land under cultivation. The abbey contains three churches. The oldest, SS. Vincenzo e Anastasio, founded by Honorius I, came into the hands of Greek monks; Innocent II restored and assigned it, with the abbey, to the Cistercians. There is a fine cloister adjacent to this church, the earliest example of its kind. S. Maria Scala Cœli, ninth century, was rebuilt in 1590 by Giacomo della Porta, and contains a mosaic by Francesco Zucca. S. Paolo alle Tre Fontana was built by the same Giacomo della Porta (1599) on the three springs which appeared, as the legend says, on the three places successively touched by the head of St. Paul, who was beheaded here. The springs, however, existed before St. Paul's martyrdom as the Aquæ Salviæ, and in 1869 some ancient mosaic pavements were dug up here. S. Pietro in Montorio, Friars Minor, was in earlier days known as S. Maria in Castro Aureo, and had connected with it a monastery which passed into the hands of various orders until, in 1472, it was given to the Franciscans for the training of subjects for the foreign missions. Ferdinand the Catholic had the church and convent rebuilt, and they were dedicated to St. Peter, following a belief which had gained acceptance owing to a somewhat unfortunate conjecture hazarded by Maffeo Vegio, and which is even yet keenly debated. The rose-window of the façade is very fine and there are frescoes and other paintings by Sebastiano del Piombo (the Flagellation), Vasari, Daniele da Volterra, Baluren. (the Entombment), and others; Raphael's Transfiguration is on the high altar, and there is a beautiful balustrade. Here, too, are the tombs of Cardinals Fabiano and Antonio del Monte (Ammannati), and of Giuliano, Archbishop, of Ragusa (Dosio). In the courtyard of the convent, on the spot where St. Peter is supposed by some to have been crucified, stands Bramante's tempietto the most graceful work of that genius. A splendid view of Rome may be had from the piazza in front of the church. It was the titular church of Paul Cardinal Cullen Archbishop of Dublin. S. Pietro in Vincoli, Canons Regular of St. John Lateran, existed as the titulus Apostolorum as early as 431. Sixtus III made alterations in the church with funds given him by the Empress Eudoxia, who also presented the Jerusalem chain of St. Peter together with his Roman chain. These relics had been venerated here long before Sixtus III, but the title, a vinculis S. Petri, occurs for the first time only in 530. Filings from the chains were given as relics -- like those taken to Spoleto by Bishop Achilles in 419. The chains themselves are kept in a precious reliquary attributed to Pollaiulo. The church was restored by Sixtus IV and Julius II. Its twenty monolithic columns are antique, and it contains pictures by Guercino and Domenichino (The Deliverance of St. Peter) a mosaic (St. Sebastian) of about the year 680, and the tombs of Julius II, with the celebrated statue of Moses, and of Cardinal Nicholas of Cusa, with a portrait in relief. In the adjoining monastery the scuola di applicazione of the Engineers is established. S. Prassede, Vallombrosans, was built by Paschal II (822) at some distance from the older S. Prassede which, then in ruins, was restored by Nicholas V and St. Charles Borromeo. Its twenty-two antique columns are still standing, and there are interesting mosaics of the ninth century (the chapel of St. Zeno and the apse) and the thirteenth century (the crypt). In the crypt are antique sarcophagi with the relics of Sts. Praxedes, Pudentiana, and others, and Paschal caused the bones of 2300 (?) martyrs, brought by him from the catacombs, to be laid in an enclosed cemetery. There are pictures by Giulio Romano, Federico Zuccaro, and the Cavaliere d'Arpino. Santi Quaranta in Trastevere belongs to the Spanish Franciscans. Santi Quattro Coronati, Capuchins, was the Titulus Æmilianœ as early as the fourth century, and is dedicated to four soldiers (cornicularii) who were martyred on the Via Labicana, with whom were afterwards associated five martyrs, stonecutters of Pannonia. Honorius built a vast basilica, which, however, Paschal II reduced to the proportions of what had been the nave. There are remains of the older basilica in the two atria and, in the church, frescoes by Giovanni Manozzi and a ciborium by Capponi (1493). Annexed to this church is the chapel of the Corporation of Stonecutters, with pictures of the thirteenth century. The Augustinian Sisters have a refuge for young women adjoining the church. S. Sabina all' Aventino, Dominicans, built under Clement I by the Illyrian priest Petrus (424), is remarkable for a half-door decorated with wood-carving of the fifth century, while its columns of Parian marble were taken from the temple of Diana on the Aventine. In the apse and above the door are mosaics, and the picture by Sassoferrato (the Madonna of the Rosary) is famous. In the adjoining convent, formerly the Savelli palace, are shown the cells of St. Dominic and St. Pius V. S. Salvatore della Scala Santa, Passionists, contains, according to the legend, the stairs of Pilate's prætorium, which were bathed with the Blood of Christ, but of which there is no mention earlier than 845. By these stairs, which were restored by Nicholas III and by Cosmas II, pilgrims ascend on their knees (ginocchioni) to the Cappella Sancta Sanctorum, in which the most famous relics of the pontifical palace of the Lateran are preserved (see SCALA SANCTA). There is a ninth-century mosaic picture and a very ancient picture of the Saviour, on cedarwood, believed to have been made not by human hands. S. Silvestro in Capite, Pallottini (see PIOUS SOCIETY OF MISSIONS), built by Paul I (761) in his paternal home, was given to some Greek monks and subsequently passed into the possession of various orders. It was restored by Domenico de Rossi in 1681, and has a high altar by Rinaldo. This is, in a sense, the national church of the English Catholics. Its monastery has now become the Postal Department. S. Stefano degli Abissini, Trinitarians, with an interesting doorway, was erected by St. Leo the Great, and was one of the churches surrounding the Basilica of St. Peter's. S. Stefano del Cacco, Sylvestrines, was erected by Honorius I (630) on the ruins of the temple of Isis, of which it contains twelve columns. S. Teresa, with the generalate of the Discalced Carmelites, in the Lombard style, is one of the recently erected churches (1900). Santissima Trinità in the Via Condotti, Dominicans of the Philippines Province, was erected in the sixteenth century, and has fine pictures on its altars. Santissima Trinità in the Via della Missione belongs to the Lazarists, who have a house of retreat for the clergy there. S. Venanzio, Minor Conventuals, is at the foot of the Capitol. Santi Vincenzo ed Atanasio, in the Piazza di Trevi, ministers of the sick, was built by Cardinal Mazarin (1650). Here are kept the urns containing the viscera of deceased popes. Other notable churches are the following: S. Agata dei Goti, or in Suburra, built in 460 for the Arians (Goths and other Germans), by Ricimerus, who caused a mosaic to be made there (destroyed in 1633), and who was buried there. In 591 St. Gregory the Great dedicated it to Catholic worship, and it is connected with the Irish College. In it is the tomb of John Lascaris, the famous Greek humanist (1535). S. Agnese al Circo Agonale stands on a part of the site of Domitian's stadium, where St. Agnes was exposed to shame (the vaults of the church), and where she was put to death. The older church is not mentioned in any records earlier than the ninth century; the present one, in baroque style, is the work of Carlo Rinaldi (1652); its turrets are by Borromini. On the high altar is a tabernacle of 1123; there is an antique statue transformed into a St. Sebastian by Paolo Campi and a monument of Innocent X. S. Alessio sull' Aventino was originally dedicated to the Roman martyr Boniface. S. Anastasia, at the foot of the Palatine, built in the fourth century and modernized in 1721, contains the tomb of Cardinal Angelo Mai. Here is preserved a chalice which was probably used by St. Jerome. S. Appollinare, the church of the Roman Seminary, formerly of the German College, was restored by Benedict XIV and contains a picture of the school of Perugino. S. Balbina, on the Aventine, consecrated by St. Gregory the Great, has a house of correction for boys adjoining it. It was the titular church of Cardinal Kemp, Archbishop of Canterbury (see KEMP, JOHN). S. Benedetto in Piscinula (Trastevere) stands on the site of the mansion of the Anicii, St. Benedict's family, and contains a picture of the saint. S. Caterina dei Funari, on the ruins of the Circus Flaminius, was begun in 1549. Its façade is by Giacomo della Porta, and it contains pictures by Caracci, Federico Zuccari, and others. Connected with it is a refuge for penitent women founded by St. Ignatius. S. Cecilia, a very ancient church, stands on the site of that saint's house. Paschal I, admonished by a vision, restored it and transferred the body of the saint thither from the Catacombs (821). Cardinal Rampolla had its ancient character partly restored. In the apse are some mosaics dating from Paschal. The tabernacle of the high altar is by Arnolfo di Cambio (1283); there are some ancient frescoes and some by Pietro Cavallini; in the confession is a recumbent statue of the saint by Maderno, showing her as she was found when the sarcophagus was opened in 1599; also the tomb of the English cardinal, Adam of Hertford (died 1398). It was the titular church of Cardinal Wolsey. S. Cesareo, on the Appian Way, erroneously identified with S. Cesareo in Palatio (which has recently been discovered on the Palatine), is older than the days of St. Gregory the Great, and has an interesting ambo of the thirteenth century and mosaics of about the year 1600. S. Cosimato in Trastevere, built in the ninth century and completely transformed under Sixtus IV, is notable for paintings by Pinturicchio and a tabernacle taken from S. Maria del Popolo. In the adjoining monastery, originally Benedictine and then Clarissan (1234), is a fine cloister with coupled columns (twelfth century). This monastery is now used as a home for old women. Santi Domenicho e Sisto, Dominican Sisters, thirteenth century, was restored in 1640, with a fine façade. S. Eligio dei Ferrari contains a fine picture by Sermoneta; S. Eusebio, frescoes by Mengs. S. Eustacchio is an ancient diaconate and possesses the relics of the saint. S. Giacomo in Augusta, in the Corso, is connected with the hospital for incurables (1338). S. Giovanni dei Fiorentini is the work of Sansovino (1521) and contains a picture by Salvator Rosa. S. Girolamo dei Shiavoni was built by Sixtus IV for the Dalmatians, Croatians, and Albanians who had fled from the Turks; Sixtus V restored it; it contains fine frescoes by Gagliardi (1852). S. Giuseppe a Capo le Case with its paintings by Andrea Sacchi (St. Teresa) and Domenichino (St. Joseph), has a convent of the Carmelite Sisters which is now used as a museum of the industrial arts. S. Giuseppe dei Falegnami is built upon the ancient Tullian Dungeon, where, according to tradition, St. Peter was imprisoned. S. Lorenzo in Lucina preserves the gridiron on which St. Lawrence suffered martyrdom. It is believed that here was the house of the matron, Lucina, so often mentioned in the Acts of Roman martyrs; this house was transformed by Sixtus III into a basilica which was repeatedly restored. It has a fine campanile, a picture by Guido Reni (The Crucifixion), and the tomb of Poussin. S. Lorenzo in Miranda was built over the temple of Faustina (141) in the Forum. In S. Lorenzo in Fonte, it is believed, was the saint's prison. S. Marco, enclosed within the Palazzo di Venezia, is attributed to the pope of that name (336). The Rogation procession (25 April), instituted by St. Leo. the Great, used to set out from this church. It was restored in the ninth century, in the fifteenth century, and by Cardinal Quirini in 1727. In the tribune are mosaics of the time of Gregory IV; there are also pictures by Palma il Giovane and Melozzo da Forli; two ciboria, in the sacristy, one of the twelfth century, the other by Mino da Fiesole; the tombs of Pesaro, by Canova, and of Cardinal Gregorio Barbarigo. S. Maria degli Angeli was built by Michelangelo at the command of Pius IV, within the baths of Diocletian. The church was given to the Carthusians. Here are to be seen many of the original designs for the mosaics now in St. Peter's; also Houdon's famous statue of St. Bruno, and the tombs of Pius IV and Cardinal Serbelloni. The adjoining monastery now contains the Museo Nazionale delle Terme. S. Maria della Pace, the titular church of Michael Cardinal Logue, Archbishop of Armagh, commemorates the peace concluded in 1482 between the pope, Florence, Milan, and Naples. It was built for Sixtus IV by Pietro da Cortona, who added a beautiful semicircular portico in front. In the Chigi chapel are the famous Sibyls of Raphael; there are also frescoes by Peruzzi. The adjoining monastery (Canons Regular of the Lateran) contains a courtyard by Bramante and the chapel of the St. Paul's Association of the Clergy of Rome. S. Maria in Campo Marzio belongs to the Benedictine Sisters. S. Maria di Loreto, an octagonal church with a cupola, is the work of Antonio da Sangallo il Giovane (1507), and has a statue of St. Susanna by Duquesnoy. The Churches of S. Maria de' Miracoli and S. Maria di Monte Santo were built in 1662 by Cardinal Gastaldo, and form the termination of three streets -- the Ripetta, the Corso Umberto and the Babuino -- which lead from the Piazza del Popolo. S. Maria dell' Orto (1489) is the fruit-vendors' church. S. Maria in Trivio, in the Piazza di Trevi, has a beautiful façade of the fifteenth century. S. Maria in Lata, a very ancient diaconate, stood near the Arch of Diocletian, but was destroyed rn 1485; its present subterranean form is due to Pietro da Cortona. Here, according to the legend, St. Paul and St. Mark were imprisoned, and here are the remains of the Sœpta Julia and of the ancient basilica, with some frescoes. Santi Martina e Luca, in the Forum, occupies the site of the Secretarium Senatus; it existed before the seventh century and contained the body of St. Martina the Roman martyr; in 1640 the new church was built above the old by Pietro da Cortona (who made a statue of St. Martina), and was dedicated to St. Luke, being the church of the Academy of St. Luke. Santi Nereo e Achilleo, on the Appian Way, a very ancient church, contains mosaics of the time of Leo III and an ambo of the thirteenth century. S. Nicola in Carcere stands on the ruins of the three temples of Pietas, Juno Sospita, and Spes. Santissimo Nome di Maria, in Trajan's Forum, was built to commemorate the deliverance of Vienna from the Turks (1683). One Church of SS. Pietro e Marcellino stands in the Via Merulana; the other is outside the walls, on the Labicana, near the mausoleum of St. Helena. S. Prisca, on the Aventine, occupies the site of the temple of Diana Aventina. The legend has it that Priscilla, the wife of Aquila, mentioned in the Acts of the Apostles as entertaining St. Peter, lived here. S. Pudenziana, again, is associated with memories of St. Peter: it was the mansion of the senator, Pudens, whose daughters, Pudentiana and Praxedes, gave it to St. Pius I, and from that time it became a church. Since the time of Siricius (384) it has had the form of a basilica, and its apse has been adorned with the most beautiful mosaics in Rome. It was restored in 1598, and a cupola was added with frescoes by Roncalli. At the altar of St. Peter is venerated the wooden table which St. Peter used for the celebration of the Eucharist. There is a marble group of Christ giving the keys to St. Peter, by Giacomo della Porta. The title of S. Pudenziana was borne by Nicholas Cardinal Wiseman, first Archbishop of Westminster. S. Saba, on the Aventine, existed in the time of St. Gregory, whose mother retired to a spot near by. To her were dedicated some ancient frescoes recently brought to light. That it was even then the abode of monks is indicated by the name cella and by an ancient burial-place of an earlier date (c. 649). Here a community of Greek monks was installed until the ninth century. After that it passed to the Benedictines, and then to the German College, which still possesses it. S. Salvatore in Lauro, the church of the Sodality of the Piceni, earlier than the thirteenth century, was restored in 1450 and in 1591. It has a fine cloister and the tombs of Maddalena Orsini and of Eugene IV (transferred hither from St. Peter's), the work of Isaia da Pisa. S. Sisto Vecchio, earlier than the sixth century, has a fine campanile and frescoes of the fifteenth century. Here was the first house of the Dominicans in Rome. The title was borne by Cardinal Langham, Archbishop of Canterbury (see LANGHAM, SIMON). S. Spirito in Sassia is so called because in this quarter (the Borgo) an Anglo-Saxon colony led by King Ina, was established, with a church called S. Maria in Saxia. In 1201 Innocent III built a hospital and foundling institute which was entrusted to the Hospitallers of the Holy Ghost. Sixtus IV removed the hospital, and Paul III had the present church built by Antonio da Sangallo il Giovane (1544); but the campanile dates from Callistus III. The residence of the superior (Palazzo del Commendatore dello Spedale) is adjacent to the church, but about half of it has been pulled down for the construction of the Victor Emmanuel Bridge. S. Stefano Rotondo, built by Pope Simplicius on the foundations of an ancient building consisting of three, concentric circles divided by two rings of twenty columns in all, is decorated with frescoes by Pomarancio and Tempesta. It was the titular church of Cardinal Beaton, Archbishop of St. Andrews (see BEATON, DAVID), and now belongs to the German College. S. Susanna, dedicated to the Roman martyr of that name, dates back to the fourth century. In its restoration by Maderno (1600) the mosaics of 796 perished, and it was decorated with frescoes by Croce. It was the titular church of Cardinal Moran, Archbishop of Sydney. S. Teodoro, at the foot of the Palatine, also stands on a circular structurer an ancient diaconate. It has a mosaic of the time of Adrian I. Santissima Trinità dei Monti is said to have been built through the munificence of Charles VIII of France. Its great flight of stairs, leading from the Piazza di Spagna, was built by order of Louis XIV. It contains fine pictures of the school of Perugino, also by Raphael, Pierin del Vaga, Veit, Daniele da Volterra (Taking down from the Cross). The church belongs to the Ladies of the Sacred Heart who have an institution (1827) in the chapel of which is venerated the Ter Admirabilis (Thrice Admirable) Madonna. Of the churches outside the City special mention should be made of the sanctuary of the Madonna del Divino Amore (of the Divine Love) on the Via Ardeatina, near an old castle of the Orsini, which is visited by a great concourse of people ou Whit-Monday. National Churches S. Antonio (Portuguese); S. Luigi (French-1496); S. Maria dell' Anima (German), with a hospice for pilgrims founded in 1399; the present church was built in 1500; pictures by Saraceni, Seitz, and Giulio Romano (high altar); tombs of Adrian VI and Duke Charles Frederick of Cleves by Lucas Holstenius (see ROMAN COLLEGES); S. Maria della Pietà, with the German Burial Ground, dating from the time of Charlemagne; S. Maria di Monserrato (Spanish). Also the churches of various cities -- Florence, Naples, Siena, Venice, Bergamo, Bologna, the Marches -- of Italy. -- Churches of the Oriental rites. -- Besides the churches of the various colleges (see ROMAN COLLEGES), the following should be mentioned: the Armenian Church of St. Mary of Egypt, occupying the site of the ancient temple of Fortuna Virilis; the Græco-Melchite Basilian Church of S. Maria in Domnica (mosaics of the eighth century); S. Lorenzo ai Monti, for Græco-Ruthenian Uniats. Moreover there are eight Protestant churches intended for propaganda work, each having one or two halls, known as --sale cristiane, connected with it while five others are principally for the benefit of foreigners, and the Germans have decided to build one more. The Orthodox Russians, too, have a church, where the Bishop of Kronstadt officiates. The Hebrews have a large new synagogue and an oratory, besides a school of religious learning and various benevolent organizations. Non-religious Buildings The Palace of the Cancelleria, by Bramante; the Curia of Innocent X now occupied by the Italian Parliament; the Quirinal Palace, the king's residence, built by Gregory XIII and enlarged by Paul V and Pius VI, where the popes formerly resided, and the conclaves were held; the Palazzo di Giustizia, built by Calderari entirely of travertine; the Bank of Italy (Koch) and the Palazzo Buoncompagni, the residence of the queen-mother; the Palazzo Braschi (offices of the Ministry of Internal Affairs), Palazzi Capitolini (Michelangelo), Palazzo del Consulta (Ministry of Foreign Affairs), Villa Medici (French Academy), Palazzo Venezia (Austrian Embassy), built by Paul II, Palazzo Corsini (Accademia dei Lincei), Palazzo Farnese (Michelangelo), now the property of France and occupied by the French Embassy. Among the private palaces are the Altieri (Clement X), Barberini (Bernini), Borghese (Paul V), Caetani (Ammannati), Pamfili, Esedra, Giraud (Bramante -- now belonging to the Torlonia family), Massimo, Odescalchi, Farnesina (Sangallo), and Ruspoli. The chief private villas are the Doria Pamfili and the Massimo (frescoes by Overbeck). Of all the public monuments we need mention only that recently inaugurated to the memory of Victor Emmanuel II at the back of the Capitoline Hill, consisting of a gilded equestrian statue, with a semicircular colonnade behind it. The principal fountains are: the Acqua Paola, on the Janiculum (Paul V); the Piazza S. Pietro fountain, the Tartarughe (Raphael), the Fontana del Tritone (Bernini), and, most magnificent of all, the Trevi (Clement XII, Nicolà Salvi). Principal ancient Edifices and Monuments The Flavian Amphitheatre, or Colosseum, begun by Vespasian. Much of its material, particularly on the south side, has been pilfered, this destructive practice having been effectively stopped only in the eighteenth century. The Arch of Constantine was erected in 312 to commemorate the victory over Maxentius, the decorations being, in part, taken from the Arch of Trajan. That of Marcus Aurelius, on the Flaminian Way (Corso), was removed by Alexander VII; its decorations are preserved in the Capitol. That of Septimius Severus (203) is richly decorated with statues and bas-reliefs; that of Titus, commemorating his victory over the Jews, has the celebrated bas-relief representing objects taken from the Temple of Jerusalem; that of Drusus (Trajan?) is near the Porta S. Sebasstiano. The Arch of Dolabella (a.d. 10) is surmounted by three conduits taken from a branch of the Aqua Claudia. The Arch of Gallienus dates from a.d. 262. The secular basilicas are the Æmilian, or Fulvian (167 b.c.), the Julian (54 b.c.), the Basilica of Constantine (a.d. 306-10), and the Ulpian, on the Forum of Trajan, with which a library was once connected. For Christian catacombs see CATACOMBS, ROMAN. The most important catacombs of the Hebrews are those of Vigna Randanini, on the Appian Way. The Circuses are: that of Domitien, now the Piazza Navona; the Flaminian (the Palazzo Mattei); the Circus Maximus, the oldest of all, erected in the Murcian Valley, between the Palatine and the Aventine, where, even in the days of Romulus, races and other public amusements used to be held (as on the occasion of the Rape of the Sabines); that of Nero, near St. Peter's, where the Apostle was martyred; that of Maxentius outside the city, near the Via Appia. Trajan's Column on the forum of the same name, with a spiral design of the emperor's warlike exploits, is 100 Roman feet (about 97 English feet) in height, erected by the senate and people a.d. 113. That of Marcus Aurelius, with reliefs showing the wars with the Marcomanni, Quadi, Sarmati, etc. (172-75), is interesting for its representation of the miraculous rainfall which, as early as Tertullian's time, was attributed to the prayers of the Christian soldiers. This column bears a bronze statue of St. Paul, as Trajan's is crowned with a statue of St. Peter (Sixtus V, 1589). That of Phocas was erected in 608 by the exarch Smaragdus. The Roman Forum was originally the swampy valley between the Palatine, Capitoline, and Esquiline, which became a market and a meeting-place for the transaction of public business. Soon it was surrounded with shops and public buildings -- basilicas, the Curia Hostilia, the Rostra, or platform for public speakers, and various temples. Other forums were those of Augustus, of Peace, of Nero, the Julian, and Trajan's, in the same neighbourhood. The Mausoleum of Augustus, between the Corso and the Via Ripetta, is now a concert hall. The Mausoleum of Hadrian (Castle of S. Angelo) was used as a fortress by Goths and Romans as early as the sixth century; in the tenth and following centuries it often served as a prison, voluntary or compulsory, for the popes; Boniface IX, Alexander VI, and Urban VIII were the popes who did most to restore and transform it. The Tomb of Cæcilia Metella, on the Via Appia, still fairly well preserved, was a stronghold of the Caetani in the Middle Ages, and from them passed to the Savelli and the Colonna. The Pyramid of Caius Cæstius (time of Augustus) is more than 120 feet in height. The tomb of Eurysaces, outside the Porta Maggiore, has interesting bas-reliefs showing the various operations of baking bread. That of the Scipios, near the Gate of St. Sebastian, was discovered in 1780, with the sarcophagus of Scipio Barbatus, consul in 298 which is now in the Vatican Museum. The Appian Way was lined with numbers of sepulchral monuments; among these mention may be made here of the columbaria, or grottoes where a family or an association was wont to deposit in niches the cinerary urns of its members. The most important of these are in the Vigna Codini and near S. Giovanni in Oleo. With Septimius Severus a new architectural period was inaugurated, which was continued by Heliogabalus and Alexander Severus. The house of Augustus, that of Tiberius, the hippodrome, the library, the house of Livia, the pœdagogium, or quarters of the imperial pages (where the celebrated drawing of a certain Alexamenos adoring a crucified ass was discovered) -- all these are still clearly distinguishable. There were also a temple of the Great Mother (205 b.c.), one of Jupiter Victor (295 b.c.-commemorating the victory of Sentinum), and one of Apollo, surrounded by a great portico in the enclosure of which now stands the Church of S. Sebastiano in Palladio. In the substructures of the palace of Caligula was discovered some years ago the ancient basilica of S. Maria Antiqua, probably dating from the fourth century, in which frescoes of the eighth and ninth centuries (including a portrait of Pope St. Zacharias, then living) were found. It is evident at certain points, where the paintings have been broken, that two other layers of painting lie beneath. Other temples are those of Concordia, three columns of which are still standing in the Roman Forum, built in 388 b.c. for the peace between the Patricians and the Plebeians, and in which the Senate often assembled; of the Deus Rediculus, outside the city, near the Appian Way, on the spot where Hannibal, alarmed by a vision, resolved to retire without besieging Rome; of Castor and Pollux, built in 484 b.c. to cornmemorate the victory of Lake Regillus, over the Latins, and restored in 117 (three columns remaining); of Faustina and Antoninus (S. Lorenzo in Miranda); of Fortuna Virilis (second century B. C.; now the Church of St. Mary of Egypt); of Julius Cæsar, erected by Augustus in the Forum, on the spot where Cæsar's body was burned; of Jupiter Capitolinus, now the German Embassy; of Mars Ultor (the Avenger) erected in the Forum of Augustus to fulfil his vow made at the battle of Philippi, where he avenged the assassination of Cæsar; of Minerva Medica, which is, indeed, rather a nymphæum, or reservoir for distributing the water supply; of Neptune, with its stone piazza, now the Exchange; of Peace, built by Vespasian after his victory over the Jews; of Romulus (the son of Maxentius) which now, like Sacræ Urbis temple (of the Holy City), forms part of Santi Cosmo e Damiano; of Saturn, in the Forum. The two temples of Venus and Rome have their apses touching each other, and were surrounded by a common peristyle, a plan designed by the Emperor Hadrian himself; to the temple of Vesta, below the Palatine, is annexed the house of the Vestals; the small round temple of the Mater Matuba, in the Forum Boarium, has been commonly called Vesta's. Characteristic of Rome are the lofty brick towers generally square with few windows, winch may still be seen here and there throughout the city. They were built, for the most part, in the twelfth and thirteenth centuries, and are monuments of the discord between the most powerful families of Rome. The most important of them are: the Torre Anguillara in Trastevere, adjoining the palace of the Anguillara family, reconstructed and used as a medieval museum; the two Capocci towers, in the Via Giovanni Lanza; that of the Conti, once the largest and strongest, built by Riccardo, brother of Innocent III; that of the Scimmia, or of the Frangipani, near S. Antonio dei Portoghesi surmounted by a statue of the Madonna; the Torre Millina, in the Via dell' Anima; the Torre Sanguigna. The Torre delle Milizie has been erroneously called "Nero's Tower", that emperor being supposed to have watched from it the burning of Rome; it was built, however, under Innocent III, by his sons Piero and Alessio, partisans of the senator Pandolfo, who opposed the pope's brother Riccardo. Guida Commerciale di Roma e Provincia (annual); Monografia della città di Roma (publ. of the Italian Ministry of Agriculture, Rome, 1881). History. -- MOMMSEN, tr. DICKSON, The History of Rome (London, 1886); DYER, A History of the City of Rome (London, 1865); GREGOROVIUS, History of the City of Rome in the Middle Ages (London, 1894-1902); GRISAR, Geschichte Roms und der Päpste im Mittelalter (Freiburg im Br., 1901); REUMONT, Gesch. Roms im Mittelalter (Stuttgart, 1905); ADINOLFI, Roma nell' età di mezzo (Rome, 1881); TOMMASSETTI, La Campagna di Roma 1879-1910; EHRLE, Roma prime di Sisto V (Rome, 1908); POMPILI-OLIVIERI, Il Senato Romano (1143-1870) (Rome, 1886); CALVI, Bibliografia di Roma nel Medio Evo (476-1499) (Rome, 1906); Appendix (more complete) (1908). Monuments, Antiquities, etc. -- CHANDLERY, Pilgrim Walks in Rome (St. Louis and London, 1905); CRAWFORD, Ave, Roma Immortalis (London, 1905); DE WAAL, Roma Sacra (Munich, 1905); STETTINER, Roma nei suoi monumenti (Rome, 1911); ANGELI, Roma, in Italia Artistica, XXXVII, XL (Bergamo, 1908); PETERSEN, Das alte Rom (Leipzig, s. d.); STEINMANN, Rom in der Renaissance (Leipzig, 1902); LANCIANI, Pagan and Christian Rome (Boston, 1893); IDEM, Ancient Rome (New York, 1889); IDEM, Forum e Palatino; BOISSIER, Promenades archéologiques (Paris, 1881); RICHTER, Topographie der Stadt Rom (Nordlinger, 1889); NIBBY, Roma e suoi dintorni (Rome, 1829); HELBIG, Guide to the Public Collections of Classical Antiquities in Rome (Leipzig, 1895-96); ARMELLINI, Le chiese di Roma (Rome, 1891); ANGELI, Le chiese di Roma (milan, 1906). Archæological Reviews. -- Bulletino d'Arch. Crist. (1863-): Nuovo Bulletino d'Arch. crist. (1895-); Bulletino della Comissione arch. comunale di Roma (1873-); Archivo della Società Romano di Storia Patria (Rome, 1877-); Notizie degli scavi di antichità (Rome, 1876-); Ann. Ecclesiastico (Rome, 1911). U. BENIGNI. University of Rome University of Rome The University of Rome must be distinguished from the "Studium Generale apud Curiam", established by Innocent IV in 1244-5 at Lyons for the convenience of the members of the pontifical Court and of the persons who flocked from all over the world to tho Holy See. The Studium comprised the faculties of theology and of canon and civil law. Clerics and priests could not only attend the lectures in the latter branch, but were allowed to teach it, despite the prohibition of Honorius III. The Studium accompanied the popes on all their journeys and was thus transferred to Avignon. In accordance with the Decree of the Council of Vienne, the Studium Curiæ was the first, owing to the generosity of John XXII, to establish chairs of Arabic, Hebrew and Chaldaic; there was, moreover, a professor of Armenian. At Avignon professorships of medicine were also instituted. During the Schism both the popes at Avignon and those at Rome had a Studium Generale; but in the former theology alone was taught. In the fifteenth century the Studium Generale was abolished in favour of the University of Rome. Previously King Charles of Anjou, out of gratitude for his election as senator of Rome, had decided, 14 October, 1265, to erect a Studium Generale "tam utriusque juris quam artium" (of civil and canon law and of arts), but his plan was not carried into execution. The real founder of the University of Rome was Boniface VIII (Bull "In supremæ" of 20 April, 1303), who established it in order that Rome, the recipient of so many Divine favours, might become the fruitful mother of science. The chief source of revenue of the university was the tribute which Tivoli and Rispampano paid the City of Rome. It is worthy of note that a school of law already existed in Rome in the thirteenth century. The transference of the papal Court to Avignon did not at first injure the Studium Generale. John XXII took a deep interest in it, but limited the granting of degrees to the two faculties of law. The Vicar of Rome was to preside at the examinations; to obtain a degree the Candidate had to study six years (five for canon law) and profess the same for two years. There exist documents from the year 1369 showing that degrees were then granted. But later, in the days of anarchy that overtook the city, the Studium gradually decayed. In 1363 the statutes were reformed; among other changes, provision was made for obtaining foreign professors, who would be independent of the various factions in the city. In 1370, however, or a little later, the Studium was entirely closed. Towards the end of the century the Roman Commune tried to restore the university by offering very large salaries to the professors. Innocent VII in 1406 gave it new statutes and arranged with Manuel Chrysoloras to accept the chair of Greek literature. But the death of Innocent and the subsequent political and ecclesiastical troubles frustrated this plan. The real restorer of the university was Eugene IV (10 October 1431). He drew up regulations for the liberty and immunity of the professors and students, and increased the revenues by adding to them the duties imposed oa wines imported from abroad. For the purpose of government, four reformatores, Roman citizens, were appointed to assist the rector. The position of chancellor was given to the cardinal-camerlengo. The university was located near the Church of Sant' Eustachio, where it had first been established. The first college for poor students was the Collegium Capranica (1458 see ROMAN COLLEGES); but the later plan of establishing another was not realized. The Studium of law soon flourished; but the theological faculty, on account of the competition of the Studium Curiæ, was not so successful. Under Nicholas V the classical studies developed rapidly owing to the labours of Lorenzo Valla, Poggio Bracciolini, Bruni, Francesco Filelfo, Pomponio Leto, and the Greeks, Lascaris, Chalcocondylas, and Musuros. But the process against the Academia Romana under Paul II reacted on the university. Sixtus IV intended to suppress it and reduced the salaries of the professors. Bettor days returned with Alexander VI, who began the present building of the Sapienza, which was remodelled in the seventeenth century. It seems, however, that it was Leo X who suppressed the Studium Curiæ in favour of the University of Rome. In 1514 the latter had 88 professors: 4 of theology, 11 of canon law, 20 of civil law, 15 of medicine, the remainder teaching philosophy, mathematics, rhetoric, grammar, and botany. Lectures were given even on feast days. The number of students was very small, being frequently less than the number of professors. The blame is to be laid on the latter, whose other official and professional duties interfered with their lectures. Leo X established in the Campidoglio a chair of Roman history, the lectures to be open to the public; the first to fill the position was Evangelista Maddaleni Capodiferro. Leo also granted a new constitution to the university, obliged the professors to hold a "circle" with the students after their lectures, forbade them to exercise any other profession, and imposed a penalty for lectures omitted. He appointed three cardinals protectors of the university. As a result of the occurrences of 1527, the university remained closed during the entire pontificate of Clement VII. Paul III immediately after his accession reopened it, obtaining distinguished professors, such as Lainez, S.J., for theology, Faber, S.J., for Scripture, Copernicus for astronomy, and Accorambono for medicine. It is from this date that the university assumed the name of the Sapienza (a name used previously elsewhere, as at Perugia). In 1539 the professors numbered 24; 2 of theology, 8 of canon and civil law, 5 of medicine (one teaching anatomy and one botany), 5 of philosophy, 3 of Latin, and 1 of Greek literature. Julius III entrusted the administration to a congregation of cardinals. Pius V enlarged the botanical garden of medical herbs previously established near the Vatican by Nicholas V, and allowed the bodies of condemned infidels to be used for the purposes of anatomical study. He also established chairs of Hebrew and mathematics. A mineralogical museum (the "Metalloteca" which was after abandoned) was founded in the Vatican. Under Gregory XIII adjunct chairs with salary attached were established for the young doctors of Rome, who might later become ordinary professors. In that and the following centuries the professors of theology were generally the procurators general of the various religious orders. Sixtus V granted 22,000 scudi to extinguish the debt encumbering the university. He gave to the college of consistorial advocates the exclusive right of electing the rector who, until then, had been elected by the professors and the students, and he instituted a congregation of cardinals, "Pro Universitate Studii Romani". At the end of the sixteenth century the university began to decline, especially in the faculties of theology, philosophy, and literature. This was due in part to the formidable concurrence of the Jesuits in their Collegio Romano, where the flower of the intellect of the Society was engaged in teaching. Moreover, Plato was the favoured master in the Sapienza, while Aristotle was more generally followed elsewhere. Among the distinguished professors in this century besides those already mentioned were Tommaso de Vio, O.P., later the celebrated Cardinal Gaetano; Domenico Jacovazzi; Felice Peretti (Sixtus V); Marco Antonio Muret, professor of law and elegant Latinist; Bartolomeo Eustacchio, the famous anatomist. In the seventeenth century the decline was rapid. Many of the professors had the privilege of lecturing only when they pleased; most of them were foreigners. The medical school alone continued to prosper owing to the labours of Cesalpino and Lancisi. The Academia dei Lincei promoted the study of the natural sciences and was honoured by Benedettino Castelli, the disciple and friend of Galilei, and Andrea Argoli; later Vito Giordani the mathematician attracted many students. Only two jurisconsults of note are found during this century, Farinacci and Gravina. Giuseppe Carpani brought the students together at his home to familiarize them with the practice of law. The most important event of the century occurred in 1660, under Alexander VII (1655-67), when the university buildings begun by Alexander VI (1492-1503) were completed. Alexander VII established moreover the university library (the Alexandrine Library) by obtaining from the Clerks Regular Minors of Urbania, whom he compensated by giving them permanently the chair of ethics, the printed books from the library of the Dukes of Urbino. In addition he founded six new chairs, among which was that of controversial church history, first filled by the Portuguese Francesco Macedo. Innocent XI erected a fine anatomical hall. The most celebrated and relatively speaking most frequented schools were those of the Oriental languages. Under Innocent XII a move was made to suppress the university and assign the buildings to the Piarists for the free education of young boys. Fortunately the plan was not only not executed but resulted in a radical reform and the introduction (1700) of a new regime which benefited in particular the faculty of law. Clement XI purchased (1703) with his private funds some fields on the Janiculum, where he established a botanical garden, which soon became the most celebrated in Europe through the labours of the brothers Trionfetti. Benedict XIV, who had been a professor and rector of the university (1706-19), promulgated in 1744 new regulations concerning especially the vacations, the order of examinations, and the selection of professors, which was to be by competitive examination, whereas from the time of Innocent XII they were ordinarily appointed by the pope. Another Edict (1748) dealt with the rights and duties of the professors and established chairs of chemistry, botany, and experimental physics. The following chairs were then in existence: 6 of jurisprudence; 6 of medicine; 15 of arts (including theology). In 1778 the sciences were divided into five classes: theology, 5 chairs; jurisprudence, 6; medicine, 9; philosophy and arts, 5; languages (Latin, Greek, Arabic, Hebrew, Syriac). But a rector of that time deplored the inertia of the professors and the laziness of the students. Pius VII (1804) founded the mineralogical and natural history museum, and in 1806 a chair of veterinary science. From 1809 till 1813 the French system was in force. Leo XIII in 1824 established the Congregation of Studies, and gave it control of the universities in the pontifical state. Many professors at Rome as at Bologna had to resign their chairs on account of their political opinions, which resulted in the university failing to keep pace with the universities in other states, for instance, the chairs of public and commercial law were not founded till 1848; and that of political economy still later. Among the distinguished professors of the eighteenth century were the jurists, Fagnano, Renazzi (also the historian of the university), Petrocchi; the professors of medicine, Baglivi Tozzi, Pascoli; the mathematician, Quartaroni; the Syrian scholar, Assemani; and Menzini and Fontanini the littérateurs; in the nineteenth century the Abbate Tortolini and Chelini, mathematicians. In 1870 there were 6 professors of theology, 8 of law, 2 of notarial art, 13 of medicine, 4 of pharmacy, 11 of surgery, 3 of veterinary science, 15 of philosophy and mathematics, 8 of Italian and classical philology, and 4 of Oriental languages. Under the new Government all the professors who refused to take the oath of allegiance were dismissed, among those refusing being the entire theological staff. These alone then formed the pontifical university, which came to an end in 1876. The university is now under the control of the Italian Government and is called the Royal University. Its present state is as follows: philosophy and letters, chairs ordinary, 23, extraordinary, 3; tutors, 13; physics and mathematics, chairs ordinary, 23, extraordinary, 7; tutors, 16; law, chairs ordinary, 16; tutors, 8; medicine, chairs ordinary, 20, extraordinary, 2; tutors, 15; philosophy and letters, professors, 33; docents, 33; physics and mathematics, professors, 34 (with 4 assistants); docents, 41; law professors, 17; docents, 36; medicine, professors, 35; docents, 98. Annexed to the university are schools of philosophy, literature, and natural science, archæology, medieval and modern art, Oriental languages, pharmacy, and applied engineering. There are also institutes of pedagogy, chemistry, physics, mineralogy, zoology, botany, anatomy, anthropology, geology, physiology, the astronomical observatory of the Campidoglio, many medical institutes and clinics, and finally the Alexandrine library. The number of students in 1909-10 was 3686. Owing to the growth of the university after 1870, the building of the Sapienza was insufficient, consequently the schools of physical and natural sciences had to be located elsewhere. See the Annuario della Reale Università degli studi di Roma (1870-71 to 1909-10) RENAZZI, Storia dell' Università degli Studi di Roma (Rome, 1803-6); CARAFA, De Gymnasio Romano eiusque professoribus ab Urbe condita (Rome, 1751); DENIFLE, Die Universitäten des Mittelalters, I (Berlin, 1885); Relazione e notizie intorno alla Regia Università di Roma (Rome, 1873). U. BENIGNI. Juan Romero Juan Romero Missionary and Indian linguist, b. in the village of Machena, Andalusia, Spain, 1559; d. at Santiago, Chile, 31 March, 1630. He entered the Society of Jesus in 1580, was assigned to the South American mission in 1588, and arrived in Peru in January, 1590, to take up his work among the Indians. From 1593 to 1598 he was superior of the missions of Tucuman, the missionary centre for the wild tribes of what is now northern Argentina. After a term as procurator in Rome, he returned to South America in 1610 and was successively superior of the Jesuit college at Buenos Aires, rector of the colleges of Santiago del Estero, Argentina, and Santiago, Chile, and first vice-provincial of Chile. In his long service of nearly forty years as active or directing missionary Father Romero acquired a more or less fluent knowledge of several Indian languages, particularly of the Guarani (q.v.) of Paraguay, on which he was an authority. He was also the author of numerous letters and shorter papers and of an important manuscript work, "De Praedestinatione." SOMMERVOGEL, Bibliotheque de la C. de J., pt. I (Brussels and Paris, 1896), bibliogr. vii; sketch in LOZANO, Historia de la Compania de Jesus de la Provincia del Paraguay (2 vols., Madrid, 1754-5). JAMES MOONEY St. Romuald St. Romuald Born at Ravenna, probably about 950; died at Val-di-Castro, 19 June, 1027. St. Peter Damian, his first biographer, and almost all the Camaldolese writers assert that St. Romuald's age at his death was one hundred and twenty, and that therefore he was born about 907. This is disputed by most modern writers. Such a date not only results in a series of improbabilities with regard to events in the saint's life, but is also irreconcilable with known dates, and probably was determined from some mistaken inference by St. Peter Damian. In his youth Romuald indulged in the usual thoughtless and even vicious life of the tenth-century noble, yet felt greatly drawn to the eremetical life. At the age of twenty, struck with horror because his father had killed an enemy in a duel, he fled to the Abbey of San Apollinare-in-Classe and after some hesitation entered religion. San Apollinare had recently been reformed by St. Maieul of Cluny, but still was not strict enough in its observance to satisfy Romuald. His injudicious correction of the less zealous aroused such enmity against him that he applied for, and was readily granted, permission to retire to Venice, where he placed himself under the direction of a hermit named Marinus and lived a life of extraordinary severity. About 978, Pietro Orseolo I, Doge of Venice, who had obtained his office by acquiescence in the murder of his predecessor, began to suffer remorse for his crime. On the advice of Guarinus, Abbot of San Miguel-de-Cuxa, in Catalonia, and of Marinus and Romuald, he abandoned his office and relations, and fled to Cuxa, where he took the habit of St. Benedict, while Romuald and Marinus erected a hermitage close to the monastery. For five years the saint lived a life of great austerity, gathering round him a band of disciples. Then, hearing that his father, Sergius, who had become a monk, was tormented with doubts as to his vocation, he returned in haste to Italy, subjected Sergius to severe discipline, and so resolved his doubts. For the next thirty years St. Romuald seems to have wandered about Italy, founding many monasteries and hermitages. For some time he made Pereum his favourite resting place. In 1005 he went to Val-di- Castro for about two years, and left it, prophesying that he would return to die there alone and unaided. Again he wandered about Italy; then attempted to go to Hungary, but was prevented by persistent illness. In 1012 he appeared at Vallombrosa, whence he moved into the Diocese of Arezzo. Here, according to the legend, a certain Maldolus, who had seen a vision of monks in white garments ascending into Heaven, gave him some land, afterwards known as the Campus Maldoli, or Camaldoli. St. Romuald built on this land five cells for hermits, which, with the monastery at Fontebuono, built two years later, became the famous mother-house of the Camaldolese Order (q.v.). In 1013 he retired to Monte-Sitria. In 1021 he went to Bifolco. Five years later he returned to Val-di-Castro where he died, as he had prophesied, alone in his cell. Many miracles were wrought at his tomb, over which an altar was allowed to be erected in 1032. In 1466 his body was found still incorrupt; it was translated to Fabriano in 1481. In 1595 Clement VII fixed his feast on 7 Feb., the day of the translation of his relics, and extended its celebration to the whole Church. He is represented in art pointing to a ladder on which are monks ascending to Heaven. [ Note: By the Apostolic Constitution Calendarium Romanum, promulgated in 1969, the feast of St. Romuald was assigned, as an "Optional Memorial," to 19 June, the day of his death.] Acta SS., Feb., II (Venice, 1735), 101-46; CASTANIZA, Historia de S. Romvaldo (Madrid, 1597); COLLINA, Vita di S. Romualdo (Bologna, 1748); GRANDO, Dissertationes Camaldulenses (Lucca, 1707), II, 1-144; III, 1-160; MABILLON, Acta SS. O.S.B., saec. VI, par. I (Venice, 1733), 246-78; MITTARELLI AND COSTADONI, Annales Camaldulenses, I (Venice, 1755); St. Peter Damian in P.L., CXLIV (Paris, 1867), 953-1008; TRICHAUD, Vie de Saint Romuald (Amiens, 1879); WAITZ in PERTZ, Mon. Germ. Hist.: Script., IV (Hanover, 1841), 846-7. LESLIE A. ST. L. TOKE Romulus Augustulus Romulus Augustulus Deposed in the year 476, the last emperor of the Western Roman Empire. His reign was purely nominal. After the murder Valentinian III (455) the Theodosian dynasty was extinct in Western Europe and the Suevian Ricimer, a grandson of Wallia, a king of the West Goths, governed the Western Empire for sixteen years as its real ruler. Like Stilicho and Aetius he raised five shadowy emperors to the throne and then deposed them, partly in agreement with the Eastern Empire. After his death in 472 his nephew Gundobad succeeded. At Ravenna Gundobad appointed the soldier Glycerius as emperor, but Leo, the Eastern Roman Emperor, chose Julius Nepos, a relative of Empress Verina, who had succeeded his uncle Marcellinus as Governor of Dalmatia. Nepos advanced with the fleet to Ravenna and forced Glycerius to become Bishop of Salona. Leo's successor, Zeno the Isaurian, withdrew the fleet which Nepos had had, and thus the latter was forced to depend upon his own resources, while the turmoil in Rome and Gaul constantly increased. Nepos appointed Orestes "magister militum" and made him a patrician. Orestes had been minister of Attila, after whose death he had come to Rome. Nepos commissioned Orestes to advance into Gaul to restore order with the troops still available. Orestes however prevailed upon the mercenaries to march against Ravenna instead of going to Gaul. Nepos fled to Dalmatia while Orestes entered Ravenna on 28 August, 475. Orestes allowed two months to pass without appointing a new emperor, and the troops growing impatient proclaimed his son. On account of the boy's youth (he was only thirteen years old) he was called Augustulus, the little emperor. The administration was carried on cautiously and shrewdly by Orestes. He obtained the recognition of his son by the emperor of the Eastern Empire, made treaties for the protection of Italy with the German princes in Africa, Gaul, and Spain, and thus gained a few years of peace for the country. However, the German warriors in his army, who had driven out the Emperor Nepos in the belief that they would receive grants of land, now demanded a third of the territory of Italy, according to the custom existing in the Roman army. When Orestes refused the troops mutinied under the leadership of the Skyrian Odoacer. Orestes advanced against them, but was obliged to fall back on Pavia, which city was stormed by Odoacer; Orestes was taken prisoner and beheaded at Piacenza in 476. Odoacer was proclaimed king by his troops and marched against Ravenna where Romulus waited in fear. Odoacer spared his life, gave him a year's income, and sent him with his relatives to Cape Misenum opposite Baia. Odoacer now reigned as first King of Italy, while three deposed emperors dragged out inglorious and powerless lives: Romulus Augustulus in private life on his estate in Campania, Glycerius as Bishop of Salona, and Julius Nepos as commander in Dalmatia. The Roman Empire of the West had ceased, and the conception of imperial power was henceforth exclusively connected with the person of the Eastern emperor. NITZSCH, Deutsche Gesch., I, VON RANKE, Weltgeschichte, IV, PFEILSCHIFTER, Theodorich der Grosse in Weltgesch. in Karakterbildern (Mainz, 1910). KARL HOEBER St. Ronan St. Ronan There are twelve Irish saints bearing the name of Ronan commemorated in the "Martyrology of Donegal"; of these the most celebrated are: St. Ronan of Ulster, brother of St. Carnech, and grandson of Loarn, d. 11 January, 535; St. Ronan, son of Berach, a disciple of the great St. Fechin of Fore. He became first Abbot of Drumshallon, and d. 18 November, 665. St. Ronan Fionn is honoured as patron of Lan Ronan (Kelminiog) in Iveagh. His feast is celebrated on 22 May, both in Ireland and Scotland. St. Ronan of Iona is explicitly referred to by St. Bede as one of the protagonists of the Roman custom of celebrating Easter as against the Irish tradition, and he had a warm controversy on the subject with his countryman St. Finan, Bishop of Lindisfarne, 660. This controversy was ended at the Synod of Whitby, in 664, when St. Ronan's views were upheld. St. Ronan of Lismore was a distinguished successor of St. Carthage, and several Munster churches were built in his honour. His feast is celebrated on 9 February 763. Another saint of this name is best known by the ruined church of Kilronan, Co. Roscommon, where Turlogh O'Carolan and Bishop O'Rourke are buried. W.H. GRATTAN-FLOOD Pierre de Ronsard Pierre de Ronsard French poet, b. 2 (or 11) Sept., 1524, at the Château de la Poissonniere, near Vendôme; d. 27 Dec., 1585, at the priory of Saint-Cosme-en l'Isle, near Tours. He was first educated at home by a private tutor, and at the age of nine was sent to the College of Navarre, in Paris. Having left the college before graduating he was appointed page to the Duke of Orléans, son of Francis I, and soon afterwards to James V, King of Scotland. After a sojourn of three years in Scotland and England, during which he became thoroughly proficient in the English language, he traveled in Germany, Piedmont, and other countries. In 1541, being afflicted with an incurable deafness, he retired from public life and for seven years devoted his entire time to study. He studied Greek under the famous scholar Dorat, at the Collège de Coqueret. His ambition was to find new p a t h s for French poetry, and he was soon recognized as the "Prince of Poets ", a title he merited by his "Odes" (1550), "Amours de Cassandre", etc. He was a great favorite with Charles IX; Elizabeth, Queen of England, sent him a diamond; Mary Stuart found relief in her imprisonment in reading his poems; the City of Toulouse presented him with a solid silver Minerva; and the literary men of that time acknowledged him as their leader. His last ten years were saddened by ill-health. He retired to Croix-Val-en-Vendômois, in the forest of Gastine, and then to the priory of Saint-Cosme-en l'Isle, where-he died. The works of Ronsard are numerous and their chronology is very intricate. In twenty-four years (1560-84) six editions of his works were published, and the number of occasional pieces is almost incalculable. The following are the most important: "Les Amours de Cassandre" (2 books of sonnets, Paris, 1550), "Odes" (5 books, Paris, 1551-1552), "Le bocage royal" (Paris, 1554), "Les Hymnes" (2 books, Paris, 1556), "Poèmes" (2 books, Paris, 1560-73), "Discours sur les misères du temps" (1560), "La Franciade" (Paris, 1572). His influence and his reforms were far-reaching. He enriched the French vocabulary with a multitude of words borrowed not only from Greek and Latin, but from the old romance dialects as well as from the technical languages of trades, sports, and sciences. His many rules concerning verse-making were as influential as numerous. He invented a large variety of metres, adopted the regular intertwining of masculine and feminine rhymes, proscribed the hiatus, and introduced harmony in French verse. He was perhaps the greatest French lyrical poet prior to the nineteenth century. His themes are as varied as their forms, simple and sublime, ironical and tender, solemn and familiar. BINET, La vie de Pierre de Ronsard (Paris, 1586), re-edited, with notes and commentaries by LAUMONIER (Paris,1910); BRUNETIERE, Hist. de la litt. class., I (Paris, 1908); LAUMONIER, L'aeuvre de Ronsard (Paris, 1910), which work contains a full and complete bibliography. LOUIS N. DELAMARRE Rood Rood (Anglo-Saxon Rod, or Rode, "cross"), a term, often used to signify the True Cross itself, which, with the prefix Holy, occurs as the dedication of some churches -- e.g. Holyrood Abbey, in Scotland. But more generally it means a large crucifix, with statues of Our Lady and St. John, usually placed over the entrance to the choir in medieval churches. These roods were frequently very large, so as to be seen from all parts of the church, and were placed either on a gallery, or screen, or on a beam spanning the chancel arch. Roods are also occasionally found sculptured outside churches, as at Sherborne and Romsey, and on churchyard and wayside crosses. As to the antiquity of the rood in the church, there is no certain evidence. The silver crucifix set up in the middle of St. Peter's at Rome by Leo III, in 795, is sometimes claimed as an early example, but there is nothing to prove that this was a rood in the medieval sense. By the thirteenth or fourteenth century, however, the great rood or crucifix had become a common feature in almost every church of Western Christendom, and the addition of the figures of Sts. Mary and John, in allusion to John, xix, 25, came in about the fifteenth. Numerous examples still remain, both in England and elsewhere. They were usually of wood, richly carved, painted or gilded, with foliated or crocketed sides, and with the arms of the cross terminating either in fleurs-de-lys or in emblazoned medallions of the symbols of the four evangelists. Rood-lights were kept burning before the rood in medieval times, consisting either of a wick and oil in a cresset, or rood- bowl, or of a taper on a pricket in the centre of a mortar of brass, lattern, or copper. During the whole of Lent, except at the procession of Palm Sunday, the Rood was covered with a veil (rood-cloth), which in England was either violet or black, and often was marked with a white cross. When the rood was exceptionally large or heavy, its weight was sometimes taken partly by wrought-iron rood-chains depending from the chancel arch, which were generally of elaborate design; the staples to which they were fixed may still be seen in some churches from which the rood itself has been removed -- e.g. at Cullompton, England. The rood, however, striking and prominent as it was intended to be, was often eclipsed by the rood-screen over which it was placed. The precise origin of the screen and its connection with the rood is somewhat obscure, and apparently varied in different churches. The custom of screening off the altar is very ancient, and emphasizing, as it did, the air of mystery surrounding the place of sacrifice, was possibly a survival of Judaism; but the placing of a screen, more or less solid, between the chancel and nave -- i.e. between clergy and people -- must have originated from practical rather than from symbolic reasons, and was probably an attempt to secure privacy and comfort for those engaged in the work of the choir, more especially at times when there was no congregation present. This was certainly the case with the heavy closed screens, usually of stone, in the large conventual and collegiate churches, where the long night offices would have been impossible in winter without some such protection. Over such screens was a loft or gallery (rood-loft), which, according to some authorities, was used for the reading of the Epistle or Gospel, certain lections, the pastorals of bishops, the Acts of councils, and other like purposes. The episcopal benediction was also sometimes pronounced, and penitents absolved, from the loft, and in some churches of France the paschal candle stood there. The Blessed Sacrament was exposed on the loft in Lyons cathedral and, according to De Moleon, similarly also at Rouen in the eighteenth century. The loft likewise frequently provided convenient accommodation for the organs and singers. In large monastic churches it was called the pulpitum and was separate from the rood-screen supporting the rood, the latter being placed westward of the pulpitum; but in secular cathedrals and parish churches there does not seem to have been usually a separate rood-screen, the rood, in such cases, being either on or over the pulpitum itself. In France the rood-loft was called the jube, which seems to imply that it was used liturgically for the reading of lessons and the like. A gallery or loft corresponding to the medieval jube was not unknown in the early Church, but there is no satisfactory evidence to show that it was surmounted by a rood. Thiers, taking Sens cathedral as his example, suggests that the loft began merely as a sort of bridge connecting the two ambos on either side of the chancel arch, and that it was gradually made more spacious as it proved useful for other purposes. This could only have been so, however, in the smaller churches where there was no pulpitum, unless perhaps it was itself the origin of the pulpitum. In smaller parish churches it seems probable that the loft was originally only a convenience for reaching the rood-lights, and that its obvious suitability for other uses caused its enlargement and elaboration. Nothing, however, can be stated with absolute certainty. Many of these medieval screens, both with and without lofts, remain to the present day, in spite of the iconoclasm of the Reformation period. Notable screens that may be mentioned as typical examples are at Cawston, Ranworth, Southwold, Dunster, and Staverton in England; at Troyes, Albi, St-Fiacre-le-Faouet, and St-Etienne-du-Mont, Paris, in France; at Louvain and Dixmude in Beligium; at Lubeck in Germany. Some are constructed of stone, and some of the later ones of metal-work, but they are mostly of wood and usually consist of close panelling below -- often decorated with painted figures of saints -- and open screenwork above, supporting tracery and richly carved cornices and crestings. In England they were generally lavishly coloured and gilded. In some instances they extend across the aisles of the church as well. In England, also, the rood frequently stood not on or near the screen and loft, but on a separate transverse beam called the rood-beam, which was similarly carved and gilded. There were sometimes other beams also, besides that supporting the rood, like those at St. David's, between the choir and sanctuary, and Lincoln beyond the high altar, on which stood lights and reliquaries. Corbels, or stone brackets in English churches -- e.g., Worcester cathedral - often indicate the position of the rood-beam before its removal in the sixteenth century. Leading up to the rood-loft were the rood-stairs, many of which still remain even where the loft itself has been destroyed. In England these stairs were generally enclosed in the wall separating chancel from nave, but in other countries they often constituted an architectural feature with elaborate tracery, as at Rouen (since destroyed), Strasburg, St-Etienne-du-Mont, and La Madeleine at Troyes. In churches where there were both pulpitum and rood- screen the latter usually had two doors, and between them was placed, on the western side, the rood-altar, which, in monastic churches, often served as the parish altar, the parishioners being accommodated in the nave. This was the case in almost all the monastic cathedrals and greater abbeys of England, and the altar, being immediately under the great rood, was dedicated to the Holy Cross, except at Durham, where it was called the Jesus altar, and at St. Albans, where the dedication was to St. Cuthbert. The latter still remains in situ as the parish altar. In Munster cathedral and at Lubeck, in the hospital church, there were three altars, with the two doors of the screen between them. In smaller churches, with no separate pulpitum, but only a rood-screen with a central doorway, there was usually an altar on either side of the door, but it is doubtful whether these can strictly be termed rood-altars. It seems probable that in some cases the rood-altar was on the loft itself, instead of beneath -- e.g., at Litchfield, Lyons, and St- Maurice, Vienne. In some old lofts drains have been found which may possibly be the remains of the piscinas for such altars. The daily parish Mass said at the altar on or under the rood-screen, was called the rood Mass, though occasionally this term is used to signify merely the Mass of one or other of the feasts of the Holy Cross. A few other terms used in connection with the rood may here be briefly explained. The rood-arch was the arch separating chancel from nave, under which the rood and rood-screen were usually situated. A rood-door was either the central door of a rood- screen or one of the two doors on either side of the rood-altar. Rood-gallery was another term for rood-loft. The rood-gap was the space under the chancel arch, partially occupied by the rood. The rood-saints were the figures of Sts. Mary and John on either side of the rood; rood-steps, the steps leading up from the nave into the chancel, under or immediately before the rood-screen. Rood-steeple, or rood-tower, was a name sometimes given to the central tower of a church at the intersection of nave and chancel with the transepts, as at Durham, Notre-Dame, Paris, and Lincoln. At the last-named place the name has since been corrupted into "Broad Tower." G. CYPRIAN ALSTON Johann Philipp Roothaan Johann Philipp Roothaan Twenty-first General of the Society of Jesus, b. at Amsterdam, 23 November, 1785; d. at Rome, 8 May, 1853. Originally Protestant, the Roothaan family emigrated from Frankfort to Amsterdam, where it became Catholic. Johann Philipp, the youngest of three brothers, was on account of his special talent destined for study, and, before he was sixteen, graduated from the gymnasium of his native town. Thence passing to the athenaeum illustre (high school), he continued for four years his classical studies under the celebrated Professor Jakob van Lennep with the greatest success. Confronted with the necessity of choosing his vocation, he determined to join the Society of Jesus, which still survived in White Russia and had been officially recognized hy Pius VII. In 1804 he set out for the novitiate in Dunaburg; the descriptions of his month's journey thither are very interesting. On the conclusion of his novitiate, he was, on account of his great knowledge of the classics, appointed teacher at the Jesuit gymnasium at Dunaburg (1806-9), and completely satisfied the expectations of his superiors. He had already mastered Polish; as a native of Holland, he naturally spoke also French, while the two classical languages and Hebrew were among his favorite studies. He subsequently began the higher study of philosophy and theology at Polotsk, and in 1812 was ordained priest. The following four years were spent as professor of rhetoric at Pusza -- this was the stormy era of the Franco-Russian War. The joyous incident of the restoration of the Society of Jesus by Pius VII also belongs to this period (1814). The other four years which preceded the banishment of the Jesuits from Russia (1820) were passed by Roothaan partly as teacher and partly in pastoral duties in Orsa. During this interval he took the final solemn vows, and could thus enter courageously on his journey into exile. This journey lasted three months, and ended in Brieg (Canton of Wallis, Switzerland). Here he again taught rhetoric for three years, besides taking zealous part in popular missions. He thrice accompanied, on his tour of visitation, the provincial of the vice-province of Switzerland, to which also belonged the Jesuit houses in Germany, Belgium, and Holland, and learned the conditions from personal examination. He was able, after a seventeen years' absence, to revisit his kindred at Amsterdam. Roothaan's subsequent appointment to the rectorship of the newly-founded college at Turin brought him to his real life's task. On the death of A. Fortis, General of the Society of Jesus, Roothaan was named his successor. His labors as General were most fruitful in every domain for the newly-restored order. His first care was for the preservation and strengthening of the internal spirit of the Society. To this object he devoted nine of his eleven general letters. Of still greater fundamental importance than these valuable encyclicals were his labors on the new edition of the Exercises of St. Ignatius according to the original text; this edition he provided with an introduction and explanatory notes. The enlightened and renewed use of this precious work is his chief service, which alone must have rendered his name immortal in the Society. He also displayed great zeal in raising the standard of studies; having himself enjoyed such a splendid classical -education, he was able to appreciate the value of the classics for a mental training. After careful investigation and counsel, he published in 1832 the Revised Order of Studies, excellently adapted to the conditions of the time. Having thus provided for their spiritual and intellectual armor, he was also able to open up the richest fields for the activity of his brethren in the Society, namely the home and foreign missions. During his administration, the order increased twofold in the number of its members (5000) and in its apostolic activity, although it had meanwhile to suffer banishment and persecution in many places, especially in the year of revolution, 1848. The General himself had to quit Rome for two years. On his return his health was broken, his strength began to fail, and fits of weakness announced his approaching end. The characteristics of Roothaan are well expressed in the words which he himself declared the principle of his administration: "fortiter et suaviter". The same idea is expressed in the words of his biographer: "Impetuous by nature, he governed all passions by the exercise of Christian self-denial, so that a most measured moderation in all things forms his distinctive characteristic." THYM, Levenschets Van P. Joannes Philippus Roothaan, General der Societeit van Jesus (Amsterdam, 1885), German tr. MARTIN (Ravensburg, 1898); TERWECOREN, Esquisse historique sur le T.R.P. Roothaan (Brussels, 1857). N. SCHEID William Roper William Roper Biographer of St. Thomas More, born 1496; died 4 January, 1578. Both his father and mother belonged to distinguished legal families. He was educated at one of the English universities, and received his father's office of clerk of the pleas in the Court of King's Bench. He held this post till shortly before his death. When he was about twenty-three he seems to have been taken into Sir Thomas More's household, and he married Margaret, Sir Thomas's eldest daughter, in 1521. Erasmus who saw much of the More family describes him as a young man "who is wealthy, of excellent and modest character and not unacquainted with literature". He became fascinated, however, by the Lutheran doctrine of justification by faith, and professed his heresy so openly as to be summoned before Wolsey. Sir Thomas frequently reasoned with his son-in-law: "Meg", he said to his daughter, "I have borne a long time with thy husband; I have reasoned and argued with him in these points of religion, and still given to him my poor fatherly counsel, but I perceive none of all this able to call him home; and therefore, Meg, I will no longer dispute with him, but will clean give him over and get me to God and pray for him". To these prayers Roper attributed his return to the Faith; henceforth he was an ardent Catholic. He sat in four of Mary's parliaments, twice as member for Rochester and twice as member for Canterbury. His Catholicism got him into difficulties with the Government under Elizabeth and he was summoned before the Council in 1568; in the following year he was bound over to be of good behaviour and to appear before the Council when summoned. He does not seem to have been troubled further. His reminiscences of Sir Thomas More were written in the time of Queen Mary nearly twenty years after the events with which they deal, but his relations with his father-in-law had been so close and the impressions he received in that delightful household so vivid, that these rather disjointed notes form a most attractive biography. Roper's "Life" was not printed till 1626, but it was used by the earlier biographers of More, and is the chief authority for his personal history. F.F. URQUHART Rorate Coeli Rorate Coeli (Vulgate, text), the opening words of Isaiah 45:8. The text is used frequently both at Mass and in the Divine Office during Advent, as it gives exquisite poetical expression to the longings of Patriarchs and Prophets, and symbolically of the Church, for the coming of the Messias. Throughout Advent it occurs daily as the versicle and response at Vespers. For this purpose the verse is divided into the versicle, "Rorate coeli desuper et nubes pluant justum" (Drop down dew, ye heavens, from above, and let the clouds rain the just), and the response: "Aperiatur terra et germinet salvatorem" (Let the earth be opened and send forth a Saviour"). The text is also used: (a) as the Introit for the Fourth Sunday in Advent, for Wednesday in Ember Week, for the feast of the Expectation of the Blessed Virgin, and for votive Masses of the Blessed Virgin during Advent; (b) as a versicle in the first responsory of Tuesday in the first week of Advent; (c) as the first antiphon at Lauds for the Tuesday preceding Christmas and the second antiphon at Matins of the Expectation of the Blessed Virgin; (d) in the second responsory for Friday of the third week of Advent and in the fifth responsory in Matins of the Expectation of the Blessed Virgin. In the "Book of Hymns" (Edinburgh, 1910), p. 4, W. Rooke-Ley translates the text in connection with the O Antiphons (q.v.): Mystic dew from heaven Unto earth is given: Break, O earth, a Saviour yield -- Fairest flower of the field". The exquisite Introit plain-song may be found in in the various editions of the Vatican Graduale and the Solesmes "Liber Usualis", 1908, p. 125. Under the heading, "Prayer of the Churches of France during Advent", Dom Guéranger (Liturgical Year, Advent tr., Dublin, 1870, pp. 155-6) gives it as an antiphon to each of a series of prayers ("Ne irascaris ", "Peccavimus", "Vide Domine", "Consolamini") expressive of penitence, expectation, comfort, and furnishes the Latin text and an English rendering of the Prayer. The Latin text and a different English rendering are also given in the Baltimore "Manual of Prayers" (pp. 603-4). A plain-song setting of the "Prayer", or series of prayers, is given in the Solesmes "Manual of Gregorian Chant" (Rome-Tournai, 1903, 313-5) in plain-song notation, and in a slightly simpler form in modern notation in the "Roman Hymnal" (New York, 1884, pp. 140-3), as also in "Les principaux chants liturgiques" (Paris, 1875, pp. 111-2) and 'IRecueil d'anciens et de nouveaux cantiques notés" (Paris, l886, pp. 218-9). H.T. HENRY Salvatore Rosa Salvatore Rosa (Also spelled SALVATOR; otherwise known as RENNELLA, or ARENELLA, from the place of his birth). Neapolitan artist, born at Renella, a little village near Naples, 1615; died at Rome 15 March, 1673. He was the son of poor parents; his father, Vita Antonio, was trained as an architect; his mother, Giulia Greca Rosa, belonged to one of the Greek families of Sicily. The boy was intended first of all for the Church, and by the assistance of a relative of his mother's was sent to a college in Naples to be trained, but his excitable and impulsive nature started all kinds of difficulties, and he had to leave before his education was completed. His mother had come of a family of painters, and a Sicilian uncle had early in his life given him some lessons in drawing, while his sister's husband was an artist who had been trained by Spagnoletto, therefore there were divers reasons why the young lad should take up painting. He threw his whole heart into his work, but succeeded so poorly that presently he left home, joined a band of robbers who infested the southern part of Italy, and wandered about with them, meanwhile making all kinds of sketches, which were eventually very useful in his larger pictures. His father died when Salvatore was seventeen; the income for the family ceased, and young Rosa as its head, was regarded as its sole support. He again took to painting and worked exceedingly hard, exposing his pictures for sale in the street, and in that way by a fortunate accident, came under the attention of Lanfranco, and through him got to know Falcone. Both of these artists were of the greatest possible assistance to him. His progress, however, was exceedingly slow, and the members of his family took almost everything that he earned for their own support; meantime he was laid up almost periodically with a malignant fever, the seeds of which had been sown in his journeys with the robbers. In 1634, he came to Rome, but fell very ill, and had to return again to Naples more dead than alive. After a little while, however, he went back to Rome, and there gained a loan in Cardinal Brancaccio, who gave him various commissions both in the Eternal City and in Viterbo. In some of these works he was assisted by a fellow pupil named Mercuri. From this point he began to make progress, but presently discovered that he had a genius for composing witty poems, sparkling and epigrammatic, having gained for him a sudden reputation in Rome; this he turned to good account; then suddenly dropping his poetic work as quickly as he had taken it up, turned again to his favourite profession of painting. He worked very hard, and was a painter of considerable power, and of marked personality. His pictures as a rule are distinguished by gloom and mystery, rich colouring, magnificent shadows, and broad, free, easy work, nervous and emotional. There is a general air of melancholy over almost all his works, and they appear to have been turned out at top speed, but there is an impressiveness about his pictures which can never be mistaken. For a while they were regarded far too highly at a time when the Academic School was the only one in repute; they then passed under a cloud when the Primitives came into their own, but now their genius is again asserting itself, and the landscapes of Rosa with their marvellous draughtsmanship and extraordinary, melancholy magnificence are being appreciated by persons able to understand the merits of a poetic interpretation. The last few years of the artist's life were passed between Naples and Rome, with one temporary visit to Florence, where he remained three or four years. It was in Rome that he died; but the best part of his life was passed in his native town, where he was held in high repute, and regarded as one of its glories. His works are to be found in almost all the galleries of Europe, notably in the Pitti, the National Gallery of London, the Hermitage, the galleries of Dulwich and Edinburgh, and in almost every important palace in Rome. He was a skilful etcher, leaving behind him some thirty-five or forty well-etched plates, and was a very powerful draughtsman in black and sanguine. Many of his pictures are signed by his conjoined initials arranged in at least a dozen different ways, and always skilfully combined. GEORGE CHARLES WILLIAMSON St. Rosalia St. Rosalia Hermitess, greatly venerated at Palermo and in the whole of Sicily of which she in patroness. Her feast is celebrated on 4 September. A special feast of the translation of her relics is kept in Sicily 15 June. There is no account of her before Valerius Rossi (about 1590), though churches were dedicated in her honour in 1237. Her Vita (Acta SS., 11 Sept., 278) which, according to the Bollandist J. Stilting, is compiled from local traditions, paintings, and inscriptions, says: She was the daughter of Sinibald, Lord of Quisquina and of Rosa, descended from the family of Charlemagne; in youthful days she left home and hid herself in a cave near Bivona and later in another of Monte Pellegrino near Palermo, in which she died and was buried. In 1624 her remains were discovered and brought to the Cathedral of Palermo. Urban VIII put her name into the Roman Martyrology. Whether before her retirement she belonged to a religious community, is not known. The Basilians, in their Martyrology, claim her as a member. She is often represented as a Basilian nun with a Greek cross in her hand. Many of her pictures may be found in the Acta SS. FRANCIS MERSHMAN The Rosary The Rosary I. IN THE WESTERN CHURCH "The Rosary", says the Roman Breviary, "is a certain form of prayer wherein we say fifteen decades or tens of Hail Marys with an Our Father between each ten, while at each of these fifteen decades we recall successively in pious meditation one of the mysteries of our Redemption." The same lesson for the Feast of the Holy Rosary informs us that when the Albigensian heresy was devastating the country of Toulouse, St. Dominic earnestly besought the help of Our Lady and was instructed by her, so tradition asserts, to preach the Rosary among the people as an antidote to heresy and sin. From that time forward this manner of prayer was "most wonderfully published abroad and developed [promulgari augerique coepit] by St. Dominic whom different Supreme Pontiffs have in various past ages of their apostolic letters declared to be the institutor and author of the same devotion." That many popes have so spoken is undoubtedly true, and amongst the rest we have a series of encyclicals, beginning in 1883, issued by Pope Leo XIII, which, while commending this devotion to the faithful in the most earnest terms, assumes the institution of the Rosary by St. Dominic to be a fact historically established. Of the remarkable fruits of this devotion and of the extraordinary favours which have been granted to the world, as is piously believed, through this means, something will be said under the headings Feast of the rosary and Confraternities of the rosary. We will confine ourselves here to the controverted question of its history, a matter which both in the middle of the eighteenth century and again in recent years has attracted much attention. Let us begin with certain facts which will not be contested. It is tolerably obvious that whenever any prayer has to be repeated a large number of times recourse is likely to be had to some mechanical apparatus less troublesome than counting upon the fingers. In almost all countries, then, we meet with something in the nature of prayer-counters or rosary beads. Even in ancient Nineveh a sculpture has been found thus described by Lavard in his "Monuments" (I, plate 7): "Two winged females standing before the sacred tree in the attitude of prayer; they lift the extended right hand and hold in the left a garland or rosary." However this may be, it is certain that among the Mohammedans the Tasbih or bead-string, consisting of 33, 66, or 99 beads, and used for counting devotionally the names of Allah, has been in use for many centuries. Marco Polo, visiting the King of Malabar in the thirteenth century, found to his surprise that that monarch employed a rosary of 104 (? 108) precious stones to count his prayers. St. Francis Xavier and his companions were equally astonished to see that rosaries were universally familiar to the Buddhists of Japan. Among the monks of the Greek Church we hear of the kombologion, or komboschoinion, a cord with a hundred knots used to count genuflexions and signs of the cross. Similarly, beside the mummy of a Christian ascetic, Thaias, of the fourth century, recently disinterred at Antinöe in Egypt, was found a sort of cribbage-board with holes, which has generally been thought to be an apparatus for counting prayers, of which Palladius and other ancient authorities have left us an account. A certain Paul the Hermit, in the fourth century, had imposed upon himself the task of repeating three hundred prayers, according to a set form, every day. To do this, he gathered up three hundred pebbles and threw one away as each prayer was finished (Palladius, Hist. Laus., xx; Butler, II, 63). It is probable that other ascetics who also numbered their prayers by hundreds adopted some similar expedient. (Cf. "Vita S. Godrici", cviii.) Indeed when we find a papal privilege addressed to the monks of St. Apollinaris in Classe requiring them, in gratitude for the pope's benefactions, to say Kyrie eleison three hundred times twice a day (see the privilege of Hadrian I, A.D. 782, in Jaffe-Löwenfeld, n. 2437), one would infer that some counting apparatus must almost necessarily have been used for the purpose. But there were other prayers to be counted more nearly connected with the Rosary than Kyrie eleisons. At an early date among the monastic orders the practice had established itself not only of offering Masses, but of saying vocal prayers as a suffrage for their deceased brethren. For this purpose the private recitation of the 150 psalms, or of 50 psalms, the third part, was constantly enjoined. Already in A. D. 800 we learn from the compact between St. Gall and Reichenau ("Mon. Germ. Hist.: Confrat.", Piper, 140) that for each deceased brother all the priests should say one Mass and also fifty psalms. A charter in Kemble (Cod. Dipl., I, 290) prescribes that each monk is to sing two fifties (twa fiftig) for the souls of certain benefactors, while each priest is to sing two Masses and each deacon to read two Passions. But as time went on, and the conversi, or lay brothers, most of them quite illiterate, became distinct from the choir monks, it was felt that they also should be required to substitute some simple form of prayer in place of the psalms to which their more educated brethren were bound by rule. Thus we read in the "Ancient Customs of Cluny", collected by Udalrio in 1096, that when the death of any brother at a distance was announced, every priest was to offer Mass, and every non-priest was either to say fifty psalms or to repeat fifty times the Paternoster ("quicunque sacerdos est cantet missam pro eo, et qui non est sacerdos quinquaginta psalmos aut toties orationem dominicam", P. L., CXLIX, 776). Similarly among the Knights Templar, whose rule dates from about 1128, the knights who could not attend choir were required to say the Lord's Prayer 57 times in all and on the death of any of the brethren they had to say the Pater Noster a hundred times a day for a week. To count these accurately there is every reason to believe that already in the eleventh and twelfth centuries a practice had come in of using pebbles, berries, or discs of bone threaded on a string. It is in any case certain that the Countess Godiva of Coventry (c. 1075) left by will to the statue of Our Lady in a certain monastery "the circlet of precious stones which she had threaded on a cord in order that by fingering them one after another she might count her prayers exactly" (Malmesbury, "Gesta Pont.", Rolls Series 311). Another example seems to occur in the case of St. Rosalia (A. D. 1160), in whose tomb similar strings of beads were discovered. Even more important is the fact that such strings of beads were known throughout the Middle Ages -- and in some Continental tongues are known to this day -- as "Paternosters". The evidence for this is overwhelming and comes from every part of Europe. Already in the thirteenth century the manufacturers of these articles, who were know as "paternosterers", almost everywhere formed a recognized craft guild of considerable importance. The "Livre des métiers" of Stephen Boyleau, for example, supplies full information regarding the four guilds of patenôtriers in Paris in the year 1268, while Paternoster Row in London still preserves the memory of the street in which their English craft-fellows congregated. Now the obvious inference is that an appliance which was persistently called a "Paternoster", or in Latin fila de paternoster, numeralia de paternoster, and so on, had, at least originally, been designed for counting Our Fathers. This inference, drawn out and illustrated with much learning by Father T. Esser, O.P., in 1897, becomes a practical certainty when we remember that it was only in the middle of the twelfth century that the Hail Mary came at all generally into use as a formula of devotion. It is morally impossible that Lady Godiva's circlet of jewels could have been intended to count Ave Marias. Hence there can be no doubt that the strings of prayerbeads were called "paternosters" because for a long time they were principally employed to number repetitions of the Lord's Prayer. When, however, the Hail Mary came into use, it appears that from the first the consciousness that it was in its own nature a salutation rather than a prayer induced a fashion of repeating it many times in succession, accompanied by genuflexions or some other external act of reverence. Just as happens nowadays in the firing of salutes, or in the applause given to a public performer, or in the rounds of cheers evoked among school-boys by an arrival or departure, so also then the honour paid by such salutations was measured by numbers and continuance. Further, since the recitation of the Psalms divided into fifties was, as innumerable documents attest, the favourite form of devotion for religious and learned persons, so those who were simple or much occupied loved, by the repetition of fifty, a hundred, or a hundred and fifty were salutations of Our Lady, to feel that they were imitating the practice of God's more exalted servants. In any case it is certain that in the course of the twelfth century and before the birth of St. Dominic, the practice of reciting 50 or 150 Ave Marias had become generally familiar. The most conclusive evidence of this is furnished by the "Mary-legends", or stories of Our Lady, which obtained wide circulation at this epoch. The story of Eulalia, in particular, according to which a client of the Blessed Virgin who had been wont to say a hundred and fifty Aves was bidden by her to say only fifty, but more slowly, has been shown by Mussafia (Marien-legenden, Pts I, ii) to be unquestionably of early date. Not less conclusive is the account given of St. Albert (d. 1140) by his contemporary biographer, who tells us: "A hundred times a day he bent his knees, and fifty times he prostrated himself raising his body again by his fingers and toes, while he repeated at every genuflexion: 'Hail Mary, full of grace, the Lord is with thee, blessed art thou amongst women and blessed is the fruit of thy womb'." This was the whole of the Hail Mary as then said, and the fact of all the words being set down rather implies that the formula had not yet become universally familiar. Not less remarkable is the account of a similar devotional exercise occurring in the Corpus Christi manuscripts of the Ancren Riwle. This text, declared by Kölbing to have been written in the middle of the twelfth century (Englische Studien, 1885, P. 116), can in any case be hardly later than 1200. The passage in question gives directions how fifty Aves are to be said divided into sets of ten, with prostrations and other marks of reverence. (See The Month, July, 1903.) When we find such an exercise recommended to a little group of anchorites in a corner of England, twenty years before any Dominican foundation was made in this country, it seems difficult to resist the conclusion that the custom of reciting fifty or a hundred and fifty Aves had grown familiar, independently of, and earlier than, the preaching of St. Dominic. On the other hand, the practice of meditating on certain definite mysteries, which has been rightly described as the very essence of the Rosary devotion, seems to have only arisen long after the date of St. Dominic's death. It is difficult to prove a negative, but Father T. Esser, O.P., has shown (in the periodical "Der Katholik", of Mainz, Oct., Nov., Dec., 1897) that the introduction of this meditation during the recitation of the Aves was rightly attributed to a certain Carthusian, Dominic the Prussian. It is in any case certain that at the close of the fifteenth century the utmost possible variety of methods of meditating prevailed, and that the fifteen mysteries now generally accepted were not uniformly adhered to even by the Dominicans themselves. (See Schmitz, "Rosenkranzgebet", p. 74; Esser in "Der Katholik for 1904-6.) To sum up, we have positive evidence that both the invention of the beads as a counting apparatus and also the practice of repeating a hundred and fifty Aves cannot be due to St. Dominic, because they are both notably older than his time. Further, we are assured that the meditating upon the mysteries was not introduced until two hundred years after his death. What then, we are compelled to ask, is there left of which St. Dominic may be called the author? These positive reasons for distrusting the current tradition might in a measure be ignored as archaeological refinements, if there were any satisfactory evidence to show that St. Dominic had identified himself with the pre-existing Rosary and become its apostle. But here we are met with absolute silence. Of the eight or nine early Lives of the saint, not one makes the faintest allusion to the Rosary. The witnesses who gave evidence in the cause of his canonization are equally reticent. In the great collection of documents accumulated by Fathers Balme and Lelaidier, O.P., in their "Cartulaire de St. Dominique" the question is studiously ignored. The early constitutions of the different provinces of the order have been examined, and many of them printed, but no one has found any reference to this devotion. We possess hundreds, even thousands, of manuscripts containing devotional treatises, sermons, chronicles, Saints' lives, etc., written by the Friars Preachers between 1220 and 1450; but no single verifiable passage has yet been produced which speaks of the Rosary as instituted by St. Dominic or which even makes much of the devotion as one specially dear to his children. The charters and other deeds of the Dominican convents for men and women, as M. Jean Guiraud points out with emphasis in his edition of the Cartulaire of La Prouille (I, cccxxviii), are equally silent. Neither do we find any suggestion of a connection between St. Dominic and the Rosary in the paintings and sculptures of these two and a half centuries. Even the tomb of St. Dominic at Bologna and the numberless frescoes by Fra Angelico representing the brethren of his order ignore the Rosary completely. Impressed by this conspiracy of silence, the Bollandists, on trying to trace to its source the origin of the current tradition, found that all the clues converged upon one point, the preaching of the Dominican Alan de Rupe about the years 1470-75. He it undoubtedly was who first suggested the idea that the devotion of "Our Lady's Psalter" (a hundred and fifty Hail Marys) was instituted or revived by St. Dominic. Alan was a very earnest and devout man, but, as the highest authorities admit, he was full of delusions, and based his revelations on the imaginary testimony of writers that never existed (see Quétif and Echard, "Scriptores O.P.", 1, 849). His preaching, however, was attended with much success. The Rosary Confraternities, organized by him and his colleagues at Douai, Cologne, and elsewhere had great vogue, and led to the printing of many books, all more or less impregnated with the ideas of Alan. Indulgences were granted for the good work that was thus being done and the documents conceding these indulgences accepted and repeated, as was natural in that uncritical age, the historical data which had been inspired by Alan's writings and which were submitted according to the usual practice by the promoters of the confraternities themselves. It was in this way that the tradition of Dominican authorship grew up. The first Bulls speak of this authorship with some reserve: "Prout in historiis legitur" says Leo X in the earliest of all. "Pastoris aeterni" 1520; but many of the later popes were less guarded. Two considerations strongly support the view of the Rosary tradition just expounded. The first is the gradual surrender of almost every notable piece that has at one time or another been relied upon to vindicate the supposed claims of St. Dominic. Touron and Alban Butler appealed to the Memoirs of a certain Luminosi de Aposa who professed to have heard St. Dominic preach at Bologna, but these Memoirs have long ago been proved to a forgery. Danzas, Von Löe and others attached much importance to a fresco at Muret; but the fresco is not now in existence, and there is good reason for believing that the rosary once seen in that fresco was painted in at a later date ("The Month" Feb. 1901, p. 179). Mamachi, Esser, Walsh, and Von Löe and others quote some alleged contemporary verses about Dominic in connection with a crown of roses; the original manuscript has disappeared, and it is certain that the writers named have printed Dominicus where Benoist, the only person who has seen the manuscript, read Dominus. The famous will of Anthony Sers, which professed to leave a bequest to the Confraternity of the Rosary at Palencia in 1221, was put forward as a conclusive piece of testimony by Mamachi; but it is now admitted by Dominican authorities to be a forgery ("The Irish Rosary, Jan., 1901, p. 92). Similarly, a supposed reference to the subject by Thomas à Kempis in the "Chronicle of Mount St. Agnes" is a pure blunder ("The Month", Feb., 1901, p. 187). With this may be noted the change in tone observable of late in authoritative works of reference. In the "Kirchliches Handlexikon" of Munich and in the last edition of Herder's "Konversationslexikon" no attempt is made to defend the tradition which connects St. Dominic personally with the origin of the Rosary. Another consideration which cannot be developed is the multitude of conflicting legends concerning the origin of this devotion of "Our Lady's Psalter" which prevailed down to the end of the fifteenth century, as well as the early diversity of practice in the manner of its recitation. These facts agree ill with the supposition that it took its rise in a definite revelation and was jealously watched over from the beginning by one of the most learned and influential of the religious orders. No doubt can exist that the immense diffusion of the Rosary and its confraternities in modern times and the vast influence it has exercised for good are mainly due to the labours and the prayers of the sons of St. Dominic, but the historical evidence serves plainly to show that their interest in the subject was only awakened in the last years of the fifteenth century. That the Rosary is pre-eminently the prayer of the people adapted alike for the use of simple and learned is proved not only by the long series of papal utterances by which it has been commended to the faithful but by the daily experience of all who are familiar with it. The objection so often made against its "vain repetitions" is felt by none but those who have failed to realize how entirely the spirit of the exercise lies in the meditation upon the fundamental mysteries of our faith. To the initiated the words of the angelical salutation form only a sort of half-conscious accompaniment, a bourdon which we may liken to the "Holy, Holy, Holy" of the heavenly choirs and surely not in itself meaningless. Neither can it be necessary to urge that the freest criticism of the historical origin of the devotion, which involves no point of doctrine, is compatible with a full appreciation of the devotional treasures which this pious exercise brings within the reach of all. As regards the origin of the name, the word rosarius means a garland or bouquet of roses, and it was not unfrequently used in a figurative sense -- e.g. as the title of a book, to denote an anthology or collection of extracts. An early legend which after travelling all over Europe penetrated even to Abyssinia connected this name with a story of Our Lady, who was seen to take rosebuds from the lips of a young monk when he was reciting Hail Marys and to weave them into a garland which she placed upon her head. A German metrical version of this story is still extant dating from the thirteenth century. The name "Our Lady's Psalter" can also be traced back to the same period. Corona or chaplet suggests the same idea as rosarium. The old English name found in Chaucer and elsewhere was a "pair of beads", in which the word bead originally meant prayers. II. IN THE GREEK CHURCH, CATHOLIC AND SCHISMATIC The custom of reciting prayers upon a string with knots or beads thereon at regular intervals has come down from the early days of Christianity, and is still practised in the Eastern as well as in the Western Church. It seems to have originated among the early monks and hermits who used a piece of heavy cord with knots tied at intervals upon which they recited their shorter prayers. This form of rosary is still used among the monks in the various Greek Churches, although archimandrites and bishops use a very ornamental form of rosary with costly beads. The rosary is conferred upon the Greek monk as a part of his investiture with the mandyas or full monastic habit, as the second step in the monastic life, and is called his "spiritual sword". This Oriental form of rosary is known in the Hellenic Greek Church as kombologion (chaplet), or komboschoinion (string of knots or beads), in the Russian Church as vervitza (string), chotki (chaplet), or liestovka (ladder), and in the Rumanian Church as matanie (reverence). The first use of the rosary in any general way was among the monks of the Orient. Our everyday name of "beads" for it is simply the Old Saxon word bede (a prayer) which has been transferred to the instrument used in reciting the prayer, while the word rosary is an equally modern term. The intercourse of the Western peoples of the Latin Rite with those of the Eastern Rite at the beginning of the Crusades caused the practice of saying prayers upon knots or beads to become widely diffused among the monastic houses of the Latin Church, although the practice had been observed in some instances before that date. On the other hand, the recitation of the Rosary, as practised in the West, has not become general in the Eastern Churches; there it has still retained its original form as a monastic exercise of devotion, and is but little known or used among the laity, while even the secular clergy seldom use it in their devotions. Bishops, however, retain the rosary, as indicating that they have risen from the monastic state, even though they are in the world governing their dioceses. The rosary used in the present Greek Orthodox Church -- whether in Russia or in the East -- is quite different in form from that used in the Latin Church. The use of the prayer-knots or prayer-beads originated from the fact that monks, according to the rule of St. Basil, the only monastic rule known to the Greek Rite, were enjoined by their founder to pray without ceasing" (I Thess., v, 17; Luke, 1), and as most of the early monks were laymen, engaged often in various forms of work and in many cases without sufficient education to read the prescribed lessons, psalms, and prayers of the daily office, the rosary was used by them as a means of continually reciting their prayers. At the beginning and at the end of each prayer said by the monk upon each knot or bead he makes the "great reverence" (he megale metanoia), bending down to the ground, so that the recitation of the rosary is often known as a metania. The rosary used among the Greeks of Greece, Turkey, and the East usually consists of one hundred beads without any distinction of great or little ones, while the Old Slavic, or Russian, rosary, generally consists of 103 beads, separated in irregular sections by four large beads, so that the first large bead is followed by 17 small ones, the second large bead by 33 small ones, the third by 40 small ones, and the fourth by 12 small ones, with an additional one added at the end. The two ends of a Russian rosary are often bound together for a short distance, so that the lines of beads run parallel (hence the name ladder used for the rosary), and they finish with a three-cornered ornament often adorned with a tassel or other finial, corresponding to the cross or medal used in a Latin rosary. The use of the Greek rosary is prescribed in Rule 87 of the "Nomocanon", which reads: "The rosary should have one hundred [the Russian rule says 103] beads; and upon each bead the prescribed prayer should be recited." The usual form of this prayer prescribed for the rosary runs as follows: "O Lord Jesus Christ, Son and Word of the living God, through the intercessions of thy immaculate Mother [tes panachrantou sou Metros] and of all thy Saints, have mercy and save us. If, however, the rosary be said as a penitential exercise, the prayer then is: O Lord Jesus Christ, Son of God, have mercy on me a sinner. The Russian rosary is divided by the four large beads so as to represent the different parts of the canonical Office which the recitation of the rosary replaces, while the four large beads themselves represent the four Evangelists. In the monasteries of Mount Athos, where the severest rule is observed, from eighty to a hundred rosaries are said daily by each monk. In Russian monasteries the rosary is usually said five times a day, while in the recitation of it the "great reverences" are reduced to ten, the remainder being simply sixty "little reverences" (bowing of the head no further than the waist) and sixty recitations of the penitential form of the prescribed prayer. Among the Greek Uniats rosary is but little used by the laity. The Basilian monks make use of it in the Eastern style just described and in many cases use it in the Roman fashion in some monasteries. The more active life prescribed for them in following the example of Latin monks leaves less time for the recitation of the rosary according to the Eastern form, whilst the reading and recitation of the Office during the canonical Hours fulfils the original monastic obligation and so does not require the rosary. Latterly the Melchites and the Italo-Greeks have in many places adopted among their laity a form of to the one used among the laity of the Roman Rite, but its use is far from general. The Ruthenian and Rumanian Greek Catholics do not use it among the laity, but reserve it chiefly for the monastic clergy, although lately in some parts of Galicia its lay use has been occasionally introduced and is regarded as a latinizing practice. It may be said that among the Greeks in general the use of the rosary is regarded as a religious exercise peculiar to the monastic life; and wherever among Greek Uniats its lay use has been introduced, it is an imitation of the Roman practice. On this account it has never been popularized among the laity of the peoples, who remain strongly attached to their venerable Eastern Rite. HERBERT THURSTON ANDREW J. SHIPMAN Breviary Hymns of the Rosary Breviary Hymns of the Rosary The proper office granted by Leo XIII (5 August, 1888) to the feast contains four hymns which, because of the pontiff's great devotion to the Rosary and his skilful work in classical Latin verse, were thought by some critics to be the compositions of the Holy Father himself. They have been traced, however, to the Dominican Office published in 1834 (see Chevalier, "Repertorium Hymnologicum", under the four titles of the hymns) and were afterwards granted to the Dioceses of Segovia and Venice (1841 and 1848). Their author was a pious client of Mary, Eustace Sirena. Exclusive of the common doxology (Jesu tibi sit gloria, etc.) each hymn contains five four-lined stanzas of classical dimeter iambics. In the hymn for First Vespers (Coelestis aulae nuntium) the Five Joyful Mysteries are celebrated, a single stanza being given to a mystery. In the same manner the hymn for Matins (In monte olivis consito) deals with the Five Sorrowful Mysteries and that for Lauds (Jam morte victor obruta) with the Five Glorious Mysteries. The hymn for Second Vespers (Te gestientem gaudiis) maintains the symmetrical form by devoting three stanzas to a recapitulation of the three sets of myteries (Joyful, Sorrowful, Glorious), prefacing them with a stanza which sums up all three and devoting a fifth to a poetical invitation to weave a crown of flowers from the "rosary" for the Mother of fair love. The compression of a single mystery" into a single stanza may be illustrated by the first stanza of the first hymn, devoted to the First Joyful Mystery: Coelestis aulae nuntius, Arcana pandens Numinis, Plenam salutat gratia Dei Parentem Virginem. "The envoy of the Heavenly Court, Sent to unfold God's secret plan, The Virgin hails as full of grace, And Mother of the God made Man" (Bagshawe). The first (or prefatory) stanza of the fourth hymn sums up the three sets of mysteries: Te gestientem gaudiis, Te sauciam doloribus, Te jugi amictam gloria, O Virgo Mater, pangimus. The still greater compression of five mysteries within a single stanza may be illustrated by the second stanza of this hymn: Ave, redundans gaudio Dum concipis, dum visitas, Et edis, offers, invenis, Mater beata, Filium. "Hail, filled with joy in head and mind, Conceiving, visiting, or when Thou didst bring forth, offer, and find Thy Child amidst the learned men." Archbishop Bagshawe translates the hymns in his "Breviary Hymns and Missal Sequences" (London, s. d., pp. 114-18). As in the illustration quoted from one of these, the stanza contains (in all the hymns) only two rhymes, the author's aim being "as much as possible to keep to the sense of the original, neither adding to this, nor taking from it" (preface). The other illustration of a fully-rhymed stanza is taken from another version of the four hymns (Henry in the "Rosary Magazine", Oct 1891). Translations into French verse are given by Albin, "La Poésie du Bréviaire with slight comment, pp. 345-56. H.T. HENRY Confraternity of the Holy Rosary Confraternity of the Holy Rosary In accordance with the conclusion of the article ROSARY no sufficient evidence is forthcoming to establish the existence of any Rosary Confraternity before the last quarter of the fifteenth century. Dominican guilds or fraternities there were, but we cannot assume without proof that they were connected with the Rosary. We know, however, that through the preaching of Alan de Rupe such associations began to be erected shortly before 1475; that established at Cologne in 1474 by Father James Sprenger is especially famous. People from all parts of the world desired to be enrolled in it. A casual English example occurs in the Plumpton Correspondence (Camden Society, p. 50), where a priest in London writes in 1486 to his patron in Yorkshire: "I send a paper of the Rosary of our Ladye of Coleyn and I have registered your name with both my Ladis names, as the paper expresses, and ye be acopled as brether and sisters." Even at that time the entry of the name of each associate on the register was an indispensable condition of membership, and so it remains to this day. It was undoubtedly to this and similar confraternities, which by degrees began to be erected in many other places under Dominican supervision, that the great vogue of the Rosary as well as the acceptance of a more uniform system in its recitation of the Rosary was mainly due. The recitation of the Rosary is alone prescribed for the members -- at present they undertake to recite the fifteen mysteries at least once in each week -- but even this does not in any way bind under sin. The organization of these confraternities is entirely in the hands of the Dominican and no new confraternity can be anywhere given without the sanction of the general. It is to the members of the Rosary confraternities that the principal indulgences have been granted, and there can be no need to lay stress upon the special advantages which the confraternity offers by the union of prayer and devotional exercises as well as the participation of merits in this which is probably the largest organization of the kind within the Catholic church. Moreover, in the "patent of erection", which is issued for each new confraternity by the General of the Dominicans, a clause is added granting to all members enrolled therein "a participation in all the good works which by the grace of God are performed throughout the world by the brethren and sisters of the said [Dominican] Order." An important Apostolic Constitution on the Rosary Confraternity, which may be regarded as a sort of new charter, was issued by Leo XIII on 2 October, 1898. The Perpetual Rosary is an organization for securing the continuous recitation of the Rosary by day and night among a number of associates who perform their allotted share at stated times. This is a development of the Rosary Confraternity, and dates from the seventeenth century. The "Living Rosary" was began in 1826, an is independent of the confraternity; it consists in a number of circles of fifteen members who each agree to recite a single decade every day and who thus complete the whole Rosary between them. HERBERT THURSTON Feast of the Holy Rosary Feast of the Holy Rosary Apart from the signal defeat of the Albigensian heretics at the battle of Muret in 1213 which legend has attributed to the recitation of the Rosary by St. Dominic, it is believed that Heaven has on many occasions rewarded the faith of those who had recourse to this devotion in times of special danger. More particularly, the naval victory of Lepanto gained by Don John of Austria over the Turkish fleet on the first Sunday of October in 1571 responded wonderfully to the processions made at Rome on that same day by the members of the Rosary confraternity. St. Pius V thereupon ordered that a commemoration of the Rosary should be made upon that day, and at the request of the Dominican Order Gregory XIII in 1573 allowed this feast to be kept in all churches which possessed an altar dedicated to the Holy Rosary. In 1671 the observance of this festival was extended by Clement X to the whole of Spain, and somewhat later Clement XI after the important victory over the Turks gained by Prince Eugene on 6 August, 1716 (the feast of our Lady of the Snows), at Peterwardein in Hungary, commanded the feast of the Rosary to be celebrated by the universal Church. A set of "proper" lessons in the second nocturn were conceded by Benedict XIII. Leo XIII has since raised the feast to the rank of a double of the second class and has added to the Litany of Loreto the invocation "Queen of the Most Holy Rosary". On this feast, in every church in which the Roman confraternity has been duly erected, a plenary indulgence toties quoties is granted upon certain conditions to all who visit therein the Rosary chapel or statue of Our Lady. This has been called the "Portiuncula" of the Rosary. HERBERT THURSTON Alberico de Rosate Alberico de Rosate (Or ROSCIATE). Jurist, date of birth unknown; died in 1354. He was bom in the village of Rosate (Rosciate) in the district of Bergamo, and was of humble parentage. He studied law at Padua where he gained the degree of Doctor, without, however, becoming a teacher. He passed his life at Bergamo where he was a lawyer and took part in various public affairs. He was employed in particular by Galeazzo Visconti of Milan, and after Galeazzo's death by Lucchino Visconti and Lucchino's brother John, Bishop of Novara. In 1340 he was commissioned by the bishop to go as his envoy in important matters to Pope Benedict XII at Avignon. In his later years Rosate devoted himself especially to scientific literary labours. The last certain report concerning his life belongs to the year 1350, when he went with his sons to Rome to attend the jubilee. His writings won him a high reputation, especially among practical jurists. Special mention should be made of his commentaries on the "Digests" and the "Codex", which were often printed later, as at Lyons (1517, 1545-48); the "Opus Statutorum" (Como 1477; Milan, 1511); and the "Dictionarium", a collection of maxims of law as well as a dictionary, which was often reprinted. J.P. KIRSCH Roscelin Roscelin Roscelin, a monk of Compiègne, was teaching as early as 1087. He had contact with Lanfranc, St. Anselm, and Ivo of Chartres. Brought before a council at Soissons (1093), where he was accused of Tritheism, he denied the doctrines attributed to him, but this was done through fear of excommunication, for later he returned to his early theories. He was successively in England, at Rome, and finally returned to France. Of his writings there exists only a letter addressed to Abelard. Hauréau brings forward his name in connection with a text: "Sententia de universalibus secundum magistrum R." ("Notices et extr. de quelques manuscr. lat.", V, Paris, 1892, 224) but this is a conjecture. On the other hand we have as evidences of his doctrine texts of St. Anselm, Abelard, John of Salisbury, and an anonymous epigram. His share in the history of ideas and especially the value of his Nominalism have been exaggerated, his celebrity being far more due to his theological Tritheism. This article will study him from both points of view. I. ROSCELIN'S NOMINALISM, OR "SENTENTIA VOCUM" According to Otto of Freisingen Roscelin "primus nostris temporibus sententiam vocum instituit" ("Gesta Frederici imp". in "Mon. Germ. Hist.: Script., XX, 376), but the chronicler of the "Historia Francia" (cf. Bouquet, "Rec. des hist. des Gaules et de la France", XII, Paris, 1781, 3, b, c) mentions before him a "magister Johannes", whose personality is much discussed and who has not yet been definitively identified. What constitutes the sententia vocum"? To judge of it we have besides the texts mentioned above which bear directly on Roscelin an exposition of the treatise "De generibus et speciebus (thirteenth cent.), wrongly attributed to Abelard by Victor Cousin. The "sententia vocum" was one of the anti-Realist solutions of the problem of universals accepted by the early Middle Ages. Resuming Porphyry s alternative (mox de generibus et speciebus illud quidem sive subsistent sive in nudis intellectibus posita sint) the first medieval philosophers regarded genera and species (substance, corporetiy, animality, humanity) either as things or as having no existence (see NOMINALISM), and applying to this alternative a terminology of Boethius, they derived thence either res (things) or voces (words). To the Nominalists universals were voces, which means: (1) above all that universals are not "res", that is that only the individual exists: nam cum habeat eorum sententia nihil esse praeter individuum . . ." (De gener. et spec., 524). Nominalism was essentially anti-Realist. (2) that universals are merely words, "flatus vocis", e.g., the word "homo", divisible into syllables, consonants, and vowels. "Fuit autem, nemini magistri nostri Roscellini tam insana sententia ut nullam rem partibus constare vellet, sed sicut solis vocibus species, ita et partes ascridebat (Abelard, "Liber divisionum, ed. Cousin, 471). "Alius ergo consistit in vocibus, licet haec opinio cum Roscelino suo fere omnino evanuerit (John of Salisbury, Metalog., II, 17). The universal is reduced to an emission of sound (flatus vocis), in conformity with Boethius s definition: Nihil enim aliud est prolatio (vocis) quam aeris plectro linguae percussio . Roscelin's universal corresponds to what is now called the "universale in voce" in opposition to "universale in re" and "universale in intellectu". But this theory of Roscelin's had no connection with the abstract concept of genus and species. He did not touch on this question. It is certain that he did not deny the existence or possibility of these concepts, and he was therefore not a nominalist in the fashion of Taine or in the sense in which Nominalism is at present understood. That is why, in reference to the modern sense of the word, we have called it a pseudo-Nominalism. John of Salisbury, speaking of "nominalis secta" (Metalog., II, 10) gives it quite another meaning. So Roscelin's rudimentary, even childish, solution does not compromise the value of universal concepts and may called a stage in the development of moderate Realism. Roscelin was also taken to task by St. Anselm and Abelard for the less clear idea which he gave of the whole and of composite substance. According to St. Anselm he maintained that colour does not exist independently of the horse which serves as its support and that the wisdom of the soul is not outside of the soul which is wise (De fide trinit., 2). He denies to the whole, such as house, man, real existence of its parts. The word alone had parts, "ita divinam paginam pervertit, ut eo loco quo Dominus partem piscis assi comedisse partem hujus vocis, quae est piscis assi, non partem rei intelligere cogatur (Cousin, P. Abaelardi opera, II. 151). Roscelin was not without his supporters; among them was his contemporary Raimbert of Lille, and what the monk Hériman relates of his doctrine agrees with the statements of the master of Compiègne. Universal substances, says Hériman, are but a breath, which means eos de sapientium numero merito esse exsufflandos". He merely comments on the saying of Anselm characterized by the same jesting tone: a spiritualium quaestionum disputatione sunt exsufflandi" (P. L., 256a), and says that to understand the windy loquacity of Raimbert of Lille one has but to breathe into his hand (manuque ori admota exsufflans "Mon. Germ. Hist.", XIV, 275). II. TRITHEISM OF ROSCELIN Roscelin considered the three Divine Persons as three independent beings, like three angels; if usage permitted, he added, it might truly be said that there are three Gods. Otherwise, he continued, God the Father and God the Holy Ghost would have become incarnate with God the Son. To retain the appearance of dogma he admitted that the three Divine Persons had but one will and power [Audio . . . quod Roscelinus clericus dicit in tres personas esse tres res ab invicem separatas, sicut sunt tres angeli, ita tamen ut una sit voluntas et potestas aut Patrem et Spiritum sanctum esse incarnatum; et tres deos vere posse dici si usus admitteret (letter of St. Anselm to Foulques)]. This characteristic Tritheism, which St. Anselm and Abelard agreed in refuting even after its author's conversion, seems an indisputable application of Roscelin's anti-Realism. He argues that if the three Divine Persons form but one God all three have become incarnate, which is inadmissible. There are therefore three Divine substances, three Gods, as there are three angels, because each substance constitutes an individual, which is the fundamental assertion of anti-Realism. The ideas of the theologian are closely linked with those of the philosopher. M. DE WULF Roscommon Roscommon Capital of County Roscommon, Ireland; owes origin and name to a monastery founded by St. Coman in the first half of the eighth century on a "ros" or wooded point amidst marshes. Ware and his copiers make Coman author of a monastic rule observed throughout three-fourths of Connaught; but this statement is wrongly deduced from annalistic records of the collection of dues by St. Coman's successors, under the title of "Lex Comani", from the Teora Connachta, tribes occupying a portion of the province. The records indicate, indeed, that with support from the King of Connaught St. Coman's foundation had some pre-eminence, if not jurisdiction. He himself may have been, as Colgan believed, a bishop; some of his earliest successors certainly were. Whilst the tribal system prevailed the bishops at Rosecommon, as pastors over the patrimonial territory of the provincial king, would hold in the Church a position analogous to his in the state, and through this analogy would be the "high" or "noble bishops of the Connaughtmen". Roscommon became a seat of learning as well as of authority, and had scholars and scribes celebrated in the national annals. From the middle of the tenth century, if not earlier, it was closely united with Clonmacnoise and shared with that great school the fame of Cormac O'Cillene and Tighernach O'Braoin, the annalist. It shared also in the prosperity of the Connaught kings, after they had risen to the monarchy of Ireland. Toirdhealbhach O'Conchubhair's son, Maol-Iosa, was Abbot of Roscommon, and he himself was a liberal benefactor; he bestowed on the monastery a piece of the true cross brought him from Rome in 1123, and had it enshrined in the famous Bachal Buidhe, lately named the Cross of Cong, a masterpiece of design and workmanship, now one of the greatest treasures in the collection of the Royal Irish Academy, Dublin. When the Irish monasteries exchanged their primitive rules for those of the great orders of the Church, the monks at Roscommon became Augustinian canons, but remained till the latter part of the fifteenth century an Irish community under native superiors despite the Norman castle built within their fields in 1268 and the policy of ousting the Irish from their monasteries. During the great Western Schism, Thomas Macheugan (Mac Aodhagain) whom the antipope Clement VII made prior of this house, came from Avignon as Clement's agent, and convening the prelates, clergy, and laity of Connaught at Roscommon, secured the adhesion of all except the Bishop of Elphin, who did not attend, and the Bishop of Killala, who sent his archdeacon to uphold the right of Urban VI. When the O'Conors made terms with Queen Elizabeth, the abbey and its possessions were attached to the constableship of Roscommon Castle, and subsequently granted to Sir Nicholas Malbie; even the site is searcely traceable. The Dominican friary that was situated at Roscommon was founded in the year 1253 by Fedhlimidh O'Conchubhair, King of Connaught, and consecrated to the Blessed Virgin in 1257; in 1265 the founder ended his stormy life within its walls, and was buried there. His monument, still extant represents him recumbent in long robes of peace and wearing a royal crown. In subsequent centuries this church was the chosen burial-place of several of his and other princely families. After the confiscation this friary, like the house of Augustinian Canons, was first attached to the constableship of Roscommon and then granted to Malbie; but the friars lingered around the spot. Under Cromwell several of them, amongst whom O'Heyne mentions Donald O'Neaghten, Edmund O'Bern, Raymund MacEochaidh, and Bernard O'Kelly, were put to death. Afterwards they obtained a small house and land and assembled a community numbering sixteen in 1791, but it died out in 1844. Of the original buildings only ruins of the church remain. The Franciscans also had a convent at Roscommon for a brief period; founded in 1269, it was burned down in 1270, and on account of the founder's death never rebuilt. ARCHDALL, Monasticon Hibernicum (Dublin, 1786); LANIGAN, Eccles. Hist. of Ireland (Dublin, 1829); WARE, De Scriptoribus Hiberniae, (Dublin, 1639); USSHER, Britannicarum Ecclesiarum Antiquitates in Works (Dublin, 1847); O'HEYNE, Irish Dominicans ed. COLEMAN (Dundalk, 1902); De BURGO, Hibernia Domincana (Cologne, 1762); WELD, Statistical Survey of Co. Roscommon (Dublin, 1832). CHARLES MCNEILL Rosea Rosea A titular see. The official catalogue of the Roman Curia mentioned formerly a titular see of Rosea in Syria. The title is borne at present by Mgr Félix Jourdan de la Passardière, of the Oratory of France, who lives in Paris. The name Rosea being only a corruption of Rhosus was replaced by the latter in 1884 (see Rhosus). S. PÉTRIDÈS Roseau Roseau (ROSENSIS). Diocese; suffragan of Port of Spain, Trinidad, B.W.I. The different islands of the Carribean Sea, which constitute the Diocese of Roseau, belonged to the Vicariate Apostolic of Port of Spain up to 1850, when Pius IX by Brief of 30 April, 1850, erected the Diocese of Roseau, with the episcopal see at Roseau, the capital of Dominica. The Very Reverend Father Michael Monaghan was elected first bishop of the new diocese and consecrated 16 February, 1851. He died in St. Thomas, 14 August, 1855, and was succeeded in 1856 by Rev. Father Michael Vesque, who died 10 August, 1859. The third bishop was René Marie Charles Poirier, C.J.M., who governed the diocese from 1859 to 1878. Next came Bishop Michael Naughten from 1880 till 4 July, 1900. The present occupant is Philip Schelfhaut, C.SS.R., b. at St. Nicholas, Belgium, 27 September, 1850, ordained priest 18 October, 1878, and consecrated bishop, 16 March, 1902. The diocese comprises the Islands of Dominica, B.W.I., with 30,000 Catholics, 12 parishes 18 priests, 16 churches, and 4 chapels; Montserrat, B.W.I., with 600 Catholics, 1 parish, 1 priest, 1 church; Antigua, B.W.I., with 400 Catholics, 1 parish, 1 priest, 1 church; St. Kitts, B.W.I., with 1500 Catholics, 1 parish, 2 priests, 1 church, 2 chapels; St Croix, D.W.I., with 4100 Catholics, 2 parishes, 4 priests, 2 churches, 1 chapel; St. Thomas, D.W.I. with 3000 Catholics, 1 parish, 3 priests, 1 church, I chapel. The total Protestant population of the diocese is about 100,000. In the smaller British Islands of Nevis, Anguilla, Barbuda, Sombrero, and in the Virgin Islands, Tostola, Anegada, and Virgin Gorda, as also in the Danish Island of St. John, the Catholic Church has so few adherents that no priest has ever been resident there. With the exception of two parishes, which are served by secular priests, the whole diocese is under the care of the Redemptorist Fathers of the Belgian province, and the Fathers of Mary Immaculate (Chavagne en Paillers, France). There are also 14 Redemptorist Brothers on the mission. In Roseau, the Religious of the Faithful Virgin devote themselves to the education of the girls of both the lower and higher classes, while the Ladies of the Union of the Sacred Hearts conduct a high school for girls in St. Thomas. In Dominica nearly all the schools are in the hands of the local Government; however, religious instruction is given by the priests during school hours. In the other Islands, with the exception of Antigua, parochial schools are attached to the mission. Ecclesiastical Bulletin of Roseau (Roseau, 1908-9), MSS. J. MORIS William Starke Rosecrans William Starke Rosecrans Born at Kingston Ohio, U. S. A., 6 Sept., 1819; died near Redondo California, 11 March, 1898. The family came originally from Holland and settled in Pennsylvania moving thence to Ohio. His mother was a daughter of Samuel Hopkins, a soldier of the Revolution and one of the signers of the Declaration of Independence. He graduated at the U. S. Military Academy, West Point, in July 1842, and after a brief service in the engineer corps returned to the Academy as a professor, remaining there until 1847. It was during this period that he became a Catholic. In 1854 he resigned from the army, but at the breaking out of the Civil War he was made a colonel of volunteers and, in June, 1861, a brigadier-general of regulars. During the succeeding years he held various important commands in West Virginia, Mississippi, and Tennessee, until 19 and 20 Sept., 1863, when he was defeated by Gen. Bragg, at the battle of Chickamauga. Then after a short period of service in the department of Missouri he was relieved of all command. Up to this he had been uniformly successful as a good fighter and military strategist. At the close of the war he resigned from the army and, in 1868, served as U. S. Minister to Mexico, where from 1869 to 1881 he devoted himself to railroad and industrial enterprises. He was elected to Congress as a Democrat, in 1880, and again in 1882. From 1885 to 1893 he was registrar of the U. S. Treasury. In 1889 Congress restored him to the rank and pay of a brigadier general of the regular army on the retired list. His brother, Sylvester Harden Rosecrans, first Bishop of Columbus, was also a convert. Born at Homer, Ohio 5 Feb., 1827, he was sent to Kenyon College, the leading Episcopalian institution of the state. While there in 1845 he received a letter from his brother William, then a professor at West Point, announcing his conversion to the Catholic Faith. It so impressed him that he also sought instruction and became a Catholic. He then went to St. John's College, Fordham, New York, graduating there in 1846. Electing to study for the priesthood he was sent by the Bishop of Cincinnati as a student to the College of Propaganda, Rome, where he was ordained priest in 1852. Returning to Cincinnati he officiated at St. Thomas's church, and was a professor in the diocesan seminary. In 1859 a college was opened in connection with the seminary and he was made its president. In 1862 he was consecrated titular Bishop of Pompeiopolis and Auxiliary of Cincinnati. When the Diocese of Columbus was created, 3 March, 1868, he was transferred to that see as its first bishop and died there 21 October, 1878 (see DIOCESE OF COLUMBUS). During his residence in Cincinnati he was a frequent editorial contributor to the "Catholic Telegraph". CULLUM, Biog. Register of the Officers and Graduates, U. S. Military Academy (Boston, 1891); HOUCK, A Hist. of Catholicity in Northern Ohio (Cleveland, 1902); Am. Cath. Hist. Researches (Philadelphia, July, 1896); The Catholic Telegraph (Cincinnati), files; HOWE, Historical Collections of Ohio (Cincinnati, 1900); BICKHORN, Rosecrans' Campaign with the Fourteenth Armory Corps (Cincinnati, 1863); CLARKE, Lives of the Deceased Bishops of Cath. Ch. U. S., III (New York, 1888); The Catholic Directory, files. THOMAS F. MEEHAN St. Roseline St. Roseline (Rossolina.) Born at Château of Arcs in eastern Provence, 1263; d. 17 January, 1329. Having overcome her father's opposition Roseline became a Carthusian nun at Bertaud in the Alps of Dauphiné. Her "consecration" took place in 1288, and about 1330 she succeeded her aunt, Blessed Jeanne or Diane de Villeneuve, as Prioress of Celle-Robaud in the Diocese of Fréjus near her home. In 1320 her brother Hélion, Grand Master (1319-46) of the Knights of St. John, restored the monastery, and in 1323 and 1328 John XXII, formerly Bishop of Fréjus, increased its revenue, granting indulgences for the anniversary of the dedication of the church. Roseline obtained leave to resign her office before her death. Many visions together with extraordinary austerities and great power over demons are ascribed to her. Her feast is given in the Acta SS. on 11 June, the day of the first translation of her remains in 1334 by her brother Elzear, Bishop of Digne; but by the Carthusian Order it is celebrated in 16 October. There has always been a local cultus and this was confirmed for the Diocese of Fréjus by a Decree of 1851, for the Carthusian Order in 1857. The saint is usually represented with a reliquary containing two eyes, recalling the fact that her eyes were removed and preserved apart. This relic was still extant at Arcs in 1882. There is no ancient life of the saint, but that given in the Acta SS., 2 June, 489 sq., was constructed by Papebroch from ancient documents. RAYMOND WEBSTER Rosenau Rosenau (Hungarian ROZSNYÓ; Latin ROSNAVIENSIS). Diocese in Hungary, suffragan of Eger, established by Maria Theresa, in 1775-76. In 1636 Cardinal Peter Pázmány proposed to establish a distinct see for this part of Hungary, where the Catholic Faith was almost dead. Pázmány's death intervened, and nothing was done until Maria Theresa took up the plan. In 1776 John Galgóczy was appointed first Bishop of Rosenau, but died before taking charge. His successor, Count Anthony Révay (1776-80), caused the church to be restored and the high altar to be renovated. Of his successors may be mentioned: John Scitovszky (1827-38), later Bishop of Funfkirchen and Archbishop of Gran; Ethelbert Bartakovics (1845-50), later archbishop of Eger. Since 1905 the see is governed by Louis Balás. The diocese is divided into 3 archdeaconries and has 2 abbeys and 3 provostships. The chapter consists of 6 active members and 6 titular canons. The parishes number 99, and there are 154 secular, 28 regular, priests; 3 monasteries; 34 nunneries; 190,000 Catholics; 10,165 Greek Uniats; 97,071 Lutherans; 44,609 Calvinists; 11,220 Jews. The seminary was established in 1814. A katolikus Magyarorszag (Catholic Hungary) (Budapest, 1902), in Hungarian; Schematismus (1910). A. ALDASY St. Rose of Lima St. Rose of Lima Virgin, patroness of America, born at Lima, Peru 20 April, 1586; died there 30 August, 1617. At her confirmation in 1597, she took the name of Rose, because, when an infant, her face had been seen transformed by a mystical rose. As a child she was remarkable for a great reverence, and pronounced love, for all things relating to God. This so took possession of her that thenceforth her life was given up to prayer and mortification. She had an intense devotion to the Infant Jesus and His Blessed Mother, before whose altar she spent hours. She was scrupulously obedient and of untiring industry, making rapid progress by earnest attention to her parents' instruction, to her studies, and to her domestic work, especially with her needle. After reading of St. Catherine she determined to take that saint as her model. She began by fasting three times a week, adding secret severe penances, and when her vanity was assailed, cutting off her beautiful hair, wearing coarse clothing, and roughening her hands with toil. All this time she had to struggle against the objections of her friends, the ridicule of her family, and the censure of her parents. Many hours were spent before the Blessed Sacrament, which she received daily. Finally she determined to take a vow of virginity, and inspired by supernatural love, adopted extraordinary means to fulfill it. At the outset she had to combat the opposition of her parents, who wished her to marry. For ten years the struggle continued before she won, by patience and prayer, their consent to continue her mission. At the same time great temptations assailed her purity, faith, and constance, causing her excruciating agony of mind and desolation of spirit, urging her to more frequent mortifications; but daily, also, Our Lord manifested Himself, fortifying her with the knowledge of His presence and consoling her mind with evidence of His Divine love. Fasting daily was soon followed by perpetual abstinence from meat, and that, in turn, by use of only the coarsest food and just sufficient to support life. Her days were filled with acts of charity and industry, her exquisite lace and embroidery helping to support her home, while her nights were devoted to prayer and penance. When her work permitted, she retired to a little grotto which she had built, with her brother's aid, in their small garden, and there passed her nights in solitude and prayer. Overcoming the opposition of her parents, and with the consent of her confessor, she was allowed later to become practically a recluse in this cell, save for her visits to the Blessed Sacrament. In her twentieth year she received the habit of St. Dominic. Thereafter she redoubled the severity and variety of her penances to a heroic degree, wearing constantly a metal spiked crown, concealed by roses, and an iron chain about her waist. Days passed without food, save a draught of gall mixed with bitter herbs. When she could no longer stand, she sought repose on a bed constructed by herself, of broken glass, stone, potsherds, and thorns. She admitted that the thought of lying down on it made her tremble with dread. Fourteen years this martyrdom of her body continued without relaxation, but not without consolation. Our Lord revealed Himself to her frequently, flooding her soul with such inexpressible peace and joy as to leave her in ecstasy four hours. At these times she offered to Him all her mortifications and penances in expiation for offences against His Divine Majesty, for the idolatry of her country, for the conversion of sinners, and for the souls in Purgatory. Many miracles followed her death. She was beatified by Clement IX, in 1667, and canonized in 1671 by Clement X, the first American to be so honoured. Her feast is celebrated 30 August. She is represented wearing a crown of roses. Hansen, Vita Mirabilis (1664), Spanish tr. by PARRA. EDW. L. AYMÉ St. Rose of Viterbo St. Rose of Viterbo Virgin, born at Viterbo, 1235; died 6 March, 1252. The chronology of her life must always remain uncertain, as the Acts of her canonization, the chief historical sources, record no dates. Those given above are accepted by the best authorities. Born of poor and pious parents, Rose was remarkable for holiness and for her miraculous powers from her earliest years. When but three years old, she raised to life her maternal aunt. At the age of seven, she had already lived the life of a recluse, devoting herself to penances. Her health succumbed, but she was miraculously cured by the Blessed Virgin, who ordered her to enroll herself in the Third Order of St. Francis, and to preach penance to Viterbo, at that time (1247) held by Frederick II of Germany and a prey to political strife and heresy. Her mission seems to have extended for about two years, and such was her success that the prefect of the city decided to banish her. The imperial power was seriously threatened. Accordingly, Rose and her parents were expelled from Viterbo in January, 1250, and took refuge in Sorriano. On 5 December, 1250, Rose foretold the speedy death of the emperor, a prophecy realized on 13 December. Soon afterwards she went to Vitorchiano, whose inhabitants had been perverted by a famous sorceress. Rose secured the conversion of all, even of the sorceress, by standing unscathed for three hours in the flames of a burning pyre, a miracle as striking as it is well attested. With the restoration of the papal power in Viterbo (1251) Rose returned. She wished to enter the monastery of St. Mary of the Roses, but was refused because of her poverty. She humbly submitted, foretelling her admission to the monastery after her death. The remainder of her life was spent in the cell in her father's house, where she died. The process of her canonization was opened in that year by Innocent IV, but was not definitively undertaken until 1457. Her feast is celebrated on 4 September, when her body, still incorrupt, is carried in procession through Viterbo. Bullar. Franc., 1, 640; Acta Proc. Canonizationis, ann. 1456 in Acta SS., IV Sept.; WADDING, Annales Min. (Rome, 1731), II, 423; III, 280; ANDREUCCI, Notizie criticoistoriche di S. Rosa, Verg. Viterbese (Rome, 1750); BRIGANTI, S. Rosa ed il suo secolo (Venice, 1889); LEON, Lives of the Saints of the Three Orders of S. Francis (Taunton, England, 1886). The best modern life is that by DE KERVAL, Ste Rose, sa vie et son temps (Vanves, 1896); PIZZI, Storia della Città di Viterbo (Rome, 1887). GREGORY CLEARY Rosicrucians Rosicrucians The original appelation of the alleged members of the occult-cabalistic-theosophic "Rosicrucian Brotherhood", described in the pamphlet "Fama Fraternitatis R.C." (Rosae crucis), which was circulated in MS. As early as 1610 and first appeared in print in 1614 at Cassel. To the first two additions were prefixed the tract "Allgemeine und Generalreforation der ganzen weiten Welt", a translation of Fr. Boccalini's "Dei Ragguagli di Parnasso", 1612. Beginning with the fourth edition in 1615, the third Rosicrucian rudiment, "Confessio der Fraternitat", was added to the "Fama". According to these, the Rosicrucian brotherhood was founded in 1408 by a German nobleman, Christian Rosenkreuz (1378-1484), a former monk, who while travelling through Damascus, Jerusalem and Fez had been initiated into Arabian learning (magic), and who considered an antipapal Christianity, tinged with theosophy, his ideal of a religion. Concerned above all else that their names should appear in the Book of Life, the brothers were to consider the making of gold as unimportant-although for the true philosophers (Occultists) this was an easy matter and a parergon. They must apply themselves zealously and in the deepest secrecy to the study of Nature in her hidden forces, and to making their discoveries and inventions known to the order and profitable to the needs of humanity. And to further the object of the said order they must assemble annually at the "Edifice of the Holy Spirit", the secret head-quarters of the order, cure the sick gratuitously, and whilst each one procured himself a successor they must provide for the continuance of their order. Free from illness and pain, these "Invisibles", as they were called in the vernacular, were supposed to be yearning for the time when the church should be "purified". For two hundred years, while the world never had the least suspicion of their existence, the brotherhood transmitted by these means the wisdom of "Father" Rosenkreuz, one hundred and twenty years after the latter's burial, until about 1604 they finally became known. The "Fama", which effected this, invited "all of the scholars and rulers of Europe" openly to favour the cause, and eventually to sue for entrance into the fraternity, to which, nevertheless, only chosen souls would be admitted. The morbid propensity of the age for esoterism, magic, and confederacies caused the "Fama" to raise a feverish excitement in men's minds, expressed in a flood of writings for and against the brotherhood, and in passionate efforts to win admission to the order, or at least to discover who were its members. All of these endeavours, even by scholars of real repute like Descartes and Leibniz, were without results. From the manifestly fabulous and impossible "History" of the brotherhood, it was apparent that it depended upon a "mystification". This mystification was directly explained by an investigation by the author, who appears unquestionable to have been the Lutheran theologian of Würtemberg, John Valentin Andrea (1586-1654). According to his own admission, Andrea composed in 1602 or 1603 the Rosicrucian book, "Chymische Hochzeit Christiani Rosenkreuz 1459", which appeared in 1616. This book, called by Andrea himself a youthful literary trifle in which he intended to ridicule the mania of the times for occult marvels (Life, p. 10), bears the closest intrinsic relation to the "Fama", which, in the light of this, is undoubtedly a later work of Andreä's or at least of one of the circle of friends inspired by him. Alchemistic occultism is mocked at in these works and in the "General-Reformation", the follies of the then untimely reformers of the world are openly ridiculed. The fantastic form of the tracts is borrowed from contemporary romances of knighthood and travel. The "Rosy Cross" was chosen for the symbol of the order because, first, the rose and cross were ancient symbols of occultism and, secondly, occur in the family arms of Andrea. It recalls Luther's motto: "Des Christen Hertz auf Rosen geht, wenn's mitten unter'm Kreuze steht" (Hossback, 121). As a result of his satirically meant but seriously accepted works, which soon gave rise to occult humbuggery (opposed by him) in new Rosicrucian raiment, Andrea openly renounced Rosicrucianism and frequently referred to it as a ridiculous comedy and folly. In spite of this, the Rosicrucian fraud, which served in many ways as a model for the anti-Masonic Taxil-Schwindel, has continued effective until the present day. In the seventeenth century Michael Maier and Robert Fludd were its champions. Psuedo-Rosicrucian societies arose, falsely claiming descent from the genuine fraternity of the "Fama". After 1750 occult Rosicrucianism was propagated by Freemasonry, where it led to endless extravagant manifestations (St. Germain, Cagliostro, Schropfer, Wollner etc.). In the system of high degrees in "Scottish" Freemasonry, especially in the Rosendruez degree, the Rosicrucian symbols are still retained with a Masonic interpretation. Finally, since about 1866 there have existed in England and Scotland (London, Newcastle, York, Glasgow) and in the United States (Boston, Philadelphia) "colleges" of a Masonic Rosicrucian society, whose members claim to be direct descendants of the brotherhood founded in 1408. Only Master Masons are eligible for membership. According to the definition of the president of the London branch (Supreme Magus), Brother Dr. Wm. Wynn Westcott, M.B., P.Z., it is "the aim of the Society to afford mutual aid and encouragement in working out the great problems of life and in searching out the secrets of nature; to facilitate the study of philosophy founded upon the Kabbalah and the doctrines of Hermes Trismegistus, which was inculcated by the original Fratres Roseae Crucis of Germany, A.D. 1450; and to investigate the meaning and symbolism of all that now remains of the wisdom, art, and literature of the ancient world". The view which has been lately revived, especially by Katsch and Pike, that Rosicrucianism definitely or even perceptibly cooperated in the foundation of modern Freemasonry in 1717, is contradicted by well-known historical facts. ARNOLD, "Unparteiische Kirchen u. Ketzerhistorie", II (Frankfort, 1699), 640 sq.; HERDER, "Samtl. Werke" (Berlin, 1888), XV, 82 sq.; XVI, 596 sq.; BUHLE, "ursprung u. d. vornehmsten Schicksale der Rosenkreuzer u Freimaurer" (Gottingen, 1804); NIKOLAI, Einige Bemerkungen uber den Ursprung u. d. Gesach. D. Rosendreuzer u. Freimaurer" (Berlin, 1806); HOSSBACH, JU. W. "Andrea u. sein zeitalter" (Berlin, 1819); GUHRAUER, "Zeitschr. F. hist. Theol. (1852), 298 sq.; SIERKE, "Schwarmer u. Schwinder zu Ende d. 18 Jahrh. " (Leipzig, 1874); KOPP, "Die Alchemie", II (Heidelberg, 1886); WAITE, "The real History of the Rosicrucians" (London, 1887), needs revision; KATSCH, "Die Entstehung u. d. wahre Endzweck d. Freimaurerei" (Berlin, 1897); HEFELE [RAICH] in "Kirchenlex.", s.v. "Rosendreuzer"; HERMELINK in "Realencyk." F. prot. Theol., s.v. "Rosenkreuzer"; "Allg. Handbuch d. Freimaurerei", II (3rd ed., 1900), 259-63; BEGMANN, "Monatshefte d. Comenius-Gesellschaft" (Berlin), V (1896), 212 sq.,; VI (1897), 204 sq.; VIII (1899), 145 sq.; "Zirkelkorrespondenz" (Berlin, 1896), 212; "Vorgessch. U. Anfange d. Freimaurerei in England", I (1909), II (1910), 16, 384; GOULD, Hist of Freemasonry", II (London, 1884), 60 sq.; "Concise Hist. Of Freemasonry" (London, 1903), 61-93; "Ars Quatuor Coronatorum", transactions (London), I (1888), 28, 54; V (1892), 67; VI (1893), 202 sq.,; VII (1894), 36 sq., 83; VIII (1895), 46; "The Theosophist" (Madras, 1886), VII, 451 sq., VIII, IX, X; "Rosicrucian Society of England: rules and Ordinances" (London, 1881); revised 1882); Transacations, etc" (1879-91); "The Rosicrucian: A Quarterly Record" (1868-79); KLOSS, "Bibliog. D. Freimaurerei, etc." (Frandfort, 1844), 174-201, gives 274 works on the subject; GARDNER, "Bibliotheca Rosicruciana": I, catalogue (London, privately printed, 1903), gives a list of 604 works on the subject. HERMANN GRUBER August Roskovanyi August Roskoványi Bishop of Neutra in Hungary, doctor of philosophy and theology, b. at Szenna in the County of Ung, Hungary, 7 December, 1807; d. 24 February, 1892. He took his gymnasial course in the college of the Piarists at Kis-Szeben from 1817-22, studied philosophy at Eger, 1822-24, theology in the seminary for priests at Pesth, and completed his training at the Augustineum at Vienna. After his ordination to the priesthood in 1831 he was for a short time engaged in pastoral duties, then went to the seminary at Eger as prefect of studies, became vice-rector of the seminary, and in 1841 rector. In 1836 he was made a cathedral canon of Eger, in 1839 received the Abbey of Saár, in 1847 became auxiliary bishop, in 1850 capitular vicar, in 1851 Bishop of Waitzen, and in 1859 Bishop of Neutra. Roskoványi was also made a Roman count, prelate, and assistant at the papal throne. His charity is shown by the foundations he established, valued at several hundred thousand gulden. He was distinguished as an ecclesiastical writer. Among his works, all of which are in Latin, should be mentioned: "De primatu Romani Pontificis ejusque juribus" (Augsburg, 1839; 2nd ed., Agram, 1841); "De matrimoniis mixtis" (5 vols., Fünfkirchen, 1842; Pesth, 1854, 1870 1); "De matrimoniis in ecclesia catholica" (2 vols., Augsburg, 1837-40); "Monumenta catholica pro independentia potestatis ecclesiasticae ab imperio civili" (14 vols. Funfkirchen, 1847; Pesth, 1856, 1865, 1870-71); "Coelibatus et breviarium, duo gravissima clericorum officia", etc. (7 vols., Pesth, 1867, 1875); "Romanus Pontifex tamquam primas ecclesiae", etc. (16 vols., Neutra and Comaromii, 1867, 1878); "Beata Virgo Maria in suo conceptu immaculata" (12 vols., Budapest, 1873-4; Neutra 1877). VAGNER, Adatok a nyitrai varosi plebaniak tortenetehez (Neutra, 1902), written in Hungarian; also in Hungarian, SZINNYEI, Magyar Irok, XI, giving a complete list of Roskoványi's works and a full bibliography. A. ALDASY Rosmini and Rosminianism Rosmini and Rosminianism Antonio Rosmini Serbati, philosopher, and founder of the Institute of Charity, born 24 March, 1797, at Rovereto, Austrian Tyrol; died 1 July, 1855, at Stresa, Italy; was educated at home until his twentieth year, and, after a three years' course at the University of Padua, returned to Rovereto to prepare for Holy orders. He was ordained priest at Chioggia, 21 April, 1821, and in 1822 received at Padua the Doctorate in Theology and Canon Law. In 1823 he went to Rome with Mgr. Pyrker, Patriarch of Venice, met Consalvi and other prominent men, and was encouraged by Pius VII to undertake the reform of philosophy. The next three years (1823-26) he spent in philosophical pursuits at Rovereto, devoting himself especially to the study of St. Thomas. He had already adopted as principles of conduct: + never to assume external works of charity on his own initiative, but, until summoned by some positive outward manifestation of God's will, to busy himself with his own sanctification, a thing always pleasing in the Divine sight (principle of passivity); + at any clear sign from God, to assume with alacrity any external work of charity, without, so far as concerned his higher will personal preferences or repugnances (principle of indifference). On these maxims he based the rules of the Institute of Charity which, at the instance of Maddalena, Marchioness of Canossa, and of John Loewenbruck, a zealous priest from German Lorraine, he founded in 1828 at Monte Calvario near Domodossola. In 1828 he again went to Rome, where he was encouraged by Leo XII and later by Pius VIII to pursue his philosophical studies and consolidate his institute. During this visit he published his "Maxims of Christian Perfection" and his "Nuovo saggio sull' origine delle idee" (1829; tr. "Origin of Ideas", London, 1883-84). In the autumn of 1830 he inaugurated the observance of the rule at Calvario, and from 1834 to 1835 had charge of a parish at Rovereto. About this time the pope made over to Rosmini several missions tendered him in England by the vicars Apostolic, as also the Abbey of S. Michele della Chiusa in Piedmont. Later foundations followed at Stresa and Domodossola. The Constitutions of the institute were presented to Gregory XVI and, after some discussion regarding the form of the vow of religious poverty, were formally approved 20 December, 1838. On 25 March, 1839, the vows of the institute were taken by twenty Fathers in Italy and by six in England (Spetisbury and Prior Park). The Letters Apostolic ("In sublimi", 20 Sept., 1839) formally recorded the approval of the institute and its rule, and appointed Rosmini provost general for life. The institute then spread rapidly in England and Italy, and requests for foundations came from various countries. The publication of Rosmini's "Trattato della coscienza morale" (Milan, 1839) led to a sharp controversy. Against Rosmini were writers like Melia, Passaglia, Rozaven, Antonio Ballerini, all members of the Society of Jesus, in which Rozaven held the office of assistant to the general. On the defensive, along with Rosmini, were L. Eastaldi, Pestalozza, Pagamini. For fifteen years the wordy war was protracted, with a truce from 1843 to 1846, due to an injunction of Gregory XVI enjoining perpetual silence on both sides. Pius IX, who succeeded Gregory in 1846, showed himself favourable to the institute, and various new foundations in England attested its vitality. In 1848 Rosmini published (Milan) his "Costituzione secondo la giustizia sociale" and "Cinque piaghe della chiesa"; the latter against Josephism, especially in the matter of Austrian episcopal appointments in Northern Italy. In August of the same year, he was sent to Rome by King Charles Albert of Piedmont to enlist the pope on the side of Italy as against Austria. Pius IX appointed him one of the consultors to deliberate on the definability of the doctrine of the Immaculate Conception, and at the outbreak of the revolution asked Rosmini to share his exile at Gaeta. Antonelli's influence, however, prevailed and Rosmini left Gaeta, 19 June, 1849. His works, "Costitunone" and "Cinque piaghe", were condemned in August, a sentence which he unhesitatingly accepted. A further attack was made on him in the "Postille" and the "Lettere di un prete Bolognese" (1848). Pius IX (1850) referred the "Postille" to the Congregation of the Index, which rejected it as false. In view of other charges the pope ordered an examination of all Rosmini's works. The decision, rendered 3 July, 1854, was that all the works be dismissed (esse dimittenda), that the investigation implied nothing disparaging to the author, to the institute founded by him, or to his exceptional services to the Church, and that to prevent any renewal and dissemination of charges and strife, silence was for the third time imposed on both parties. Within a year after this decision Rosmini died. His body reposes in the Church of the Santissimo Crocifisso built by him at Stresa. (See ROSMINIANS.) THE ROSMINIAN SYSTEM According to Rosmini, philosophy is "the science of the ultimate reasons or grounds of human knowledge". The philosopher at the outset must answer the questions: What is knowledge? What is thought? Can we be certain of what we know? Rosmini's answer is given in his ideology and logic. Intellect, he holds, is essentially different from sense; thought is objective, sensation is subjective. The term of the intellectual act is seen in such a way that the seer, at the moment, is conscious neither of himself nor of any relation with himself as seeing. The primal and essential act of human intelligence, thus terminating in its object, is intuition — an attitude rather than an activity, in which the mind pronounces no judgment on what is known, but merely receives the communication of the intelligible object. All our concepts, when analyzed, reveal being (somethingness) as their essential constituent; or, conversely, human concepts are nothing but determinations more or less complex of the simple and elementary notion of being. This fundamental idea is indeterminate and general, conveying to the intellect no knowledge of particular things, but simply manifesting itself as the essence of being. Our abstraction does not produce it, but merely discovers it already present in thought. Being, as it appears within man's experience, has two modes, each governed by its own conditions and laws, each with well-defined attributes, diverse, but not contradictory. Manifesting itself to the mind as the intelligible object, not exerting any stimulus upon the intellect, but simply illuminating it, this is being in its ideal mode. As it acts or is acted upon in feeling, modifying the human subject in sensation, constituting the sentient principle in action and passion, this is being in its real mode. The former is essentially objective, simple, and one — universal, necessary, immutable, eternal; the latter is subjective and, in our world, contingent, particular, temporal, manifold, and almost infinitely varied in aspect. Ideal being is not God, but we may call it, says Rosmini, an appurtenance of God, and even Divine, for its characteristics are not those of created finite things, and its ultimate source must be in God. If thought had in it no element transcending the contingent and finite, all knowledge of the absolute and infinite would be inexplicable, and truth, uncertain and variable, would exist only in name. To explain our knowledge of particular real entities, Rosmini says that our knowledge of realities reduces itself to a judgment whereby we predicate existence of what is felt by us. Real entities act upon man's senses, and he immediately recognizes them as particular activities of that essence of being already manifested under another mode in intuition. Because of its simplicity, the human ego, or subject-principle, is constrained to bring together and collate its feeling and its knowledge of being, and thus it perceives being energizing in the production of feeling. This act of the human subject whereby it cognizes real entities, Rosmini calls reason. By sense we are introduced to realities, but we could not know them as beings unless we already possessed the idea of being. This is given to our mind prior to all perception or individual cognition; it is not acquired by any act of thought, but is implanted in us by the Creator from the beginning of our existence: it is innate, and constitutes for us the light of reason. Furthermore, it is the very form of the human intelligence, a form not multiple, but one — not subjective, but objective — i. e., not a quality or attitude or component of the human subject, but distinct from it and superior to it, existing in an absolute mode and called the form of the mind because, in manifesting itself to man, it draws forth and creates, so to speak, the act of his intelligence. Logic, says Rosmini, is "the science of the art of reasoning". The scope of reasoning is certainty, i. e., a firm persuasion conformable to truth. The truth of a thing is, in last analysis, its being, and since being is the form of the human intellect, it follows that a criterion of truth and certainty lies at the base of all thought and reasoning. The principles which govern reflection and argument are founded on the primitive intuition of being. "Being is the object of thought"; this is the principle of cognition, and it is antecedent to the principle of contradiction. Error is found, not in the idea of being, which is without any determination, nor in the principles of reasoning, which simply express the essential object of the mind in the form of a proposition without adding anything foreign, but in reflection, and hence in the will, which usually initiates reflection. Logic shows us how to use reflection so as to attain truth and avoid error. The Sciences of Perception are psychology and cosmology. The subject of psychology is the ego in its primal condition, i. e., stripped of its acquired relations and developments. The soul is felt by and through itself; it is essentially a principle of feeling. "The human soul is an intellective and sensitive subject or principle, having by nature the intuition of being and a feeling whose term is extended, besides certain activities consequent upon intelligence and sensitivity." This "extended term" is twofold: space, which, simple and immovable, underlies all sense phenomena as the idea of being underlies the phenomena of thought; and body, a limited extended force which the sentient principle passively receives and thereby acquires individuation. It is a favourite doctrine of Rosmini that the extended can exist only in synthesis with a simple, immaterial principle. Considered apart from this principle, the material corporeal term lacks the unity and coherence necessary for existence and permanence. Our own body, the "subjective body", is felt directly as the proper term of the human sentient principle and is the seat of corporeal feelings. Other (external) bodies, since they modify not the soul, but the bodily term in connexion with the soul, are felt by an extra-subjective perception. We feel our own bodies as we feel external bodies, through vision, touch etc.; but we also feel them immediately with a fundamental feeling, always identical and substantial, in which no distinct limits, figure, or relation of parts can be assigned. Shape, hardness, colour etc., belong to the extra-subjective world. But the body is not merely felt by the soul; it is also intellectually perceived by the soul in a primordial and immanent judgment, whereby being is applied to it (the body) in the way above described. In this perception is found the true nexus intimately uniting soul and body. The body is the felt-understood term of the human principle which in this intellective synthesis performs its first act as a rational soul and exerts a real physical influence on its bodily term. Hence Rosmini's definition of life as "the incessant production of all those extra-subjective phenomena which precede, accompany, and follow parallel with the corporeal and material feeling (subjective)". Every time that by generation an animated organism is produced, perfectly constituted according to the human type, the vivifying, sentient principle rises to the vision of the intelligible object, ideal being. This happens in virtue of a primordial law, established by God in the creative act. There is, however, no chronological passing from sentience to intelligence, as if one could assign an instant in which the human soul was purely sentient and another following in which it had become rational. All is consummated in a single point of time. The soul's immortality is deduced from its nature as an intellective principle having for its object-term the eternal and necessary idea of being. This is independent of space and time, and the act of intuition continues even after the bodily term has been dissolved by death, and the soul's immanent perception of its body has been for a period destroyed. Cosmology, which considers the ordered universe, the nature of contingent real being and its cause, is not a complete science in itself; it must be treated in connexion with the sciences of reasoning in which reflection, testing the observations of intuition and perception, discovers new truths and arrives at the existence of beings beyond the reach of intuition and perception. The Sciences of Reasoning are ontological and deontological. The former comprise ontology and natural theology. Ontology treats of being in all its extent as known to man, viz., ideal being, the necessary object of the intellect; real being, i.e., subjective force and feeling; moral being, the relation between real and ideal — a special act of recognition and adherence on the part of the subject harmonizing it with the object. Light, life, love; intellect, sense, will — these are the forms under which the essence of being manifests itself in man's world; they are also the foundation of the categories. Natural theology treats of the Absolute Being, God. The existence of God is known, not through perception or direct intuition, but through reasoning. Ideal being is being under only one of its forms and therefore incomplete; in the real world we meet only partial realizations of being. Comparing in reflection the products of our perception with the essence of being manifested in intuition, we see that they do not exhaust the possibilities of that essence; yet this must find its full realization in some way far transcending our experience; it cannot, in that fulness, be finite and imperfect as are the things of this world. This knowledge of the Absolute Being Rosmini calls negative-ideal; it tells us not so much what God is as what God is not. Definite proofs of God's existence are furnished by being in its essence and in each of its forms. The essence of being is eternal, necessary, infinite; but these attributes it would not possess if it did not subsist identical under the other two forms of reality and morality, complete and perfect. Where it exists under all these forms, it is being in every way infinite and absolute, i. e., God. Again, the ideal form that creates intelligence is an eternal object and hence demands an eternal subject with infinite wisdom — God. The real form of being is contingent, and it therefore postulates a First Cause in whose essence subsistence is included. Finally, the binding force of the moral law is eternal, necessary, absolute, and its ultimate sanction must be found in an Absolute Being in whom the essence of holiness subsists. Thus man naturally does not perceive God; his knowledge of God is but of a negative kind. In the supernatural order of grace, the real communication of God to man, a new light super-added to that of reason brings man into conjunction with God's own reality, which reveals itself to him in an incipient and obscure manner, yet acts upon the soul with positive efficacy. Thus the Christian becomes a new creature, consors divinœ naturœ. The deontological sciences treat of the perfections of beings and the ways in which these perfections may be acquired, produced, or lost. Amongst them, ethics, the science of virtue, is prominent (see "Compendio di Etica", Rome, 1907). Each moral act contains three elements: the law, the subject's free will, and the relation (agreement or disagreement) between law and will. Man is not a law unto himself; the moral imperative must come from a higher source, from the necessary and universal object of the understanding Being, manifested to the mind, has an order of its own, and the various entities we know though it occupy different places in the scale of excellence. We cognize them by an act of intellect; we recognize them by a practical act of our will, adhering to the good we see in them with an intensity determined by the moral exigence of the object. The idea of an entity, therefore, as the medium which reveals its excellence, clothes itself with the authority of law; and as all ideas are but determinations of the idea of being, the first of laws and the first principle of obligation is: "Follow the light of reason", or "Recognize being". Besides the testimony of consciousness and the consent of mankind, the proofs for free-will, i. e., the power of choice between objective good (duty) and subjective good (pleasure, self-interest), are closely bound up with Rosmini's theory of man and the soul. Man is stimulated by sensation and his subjective modifications; at the same time he is illumined by the light of being eternal and absolute whence he can draw strength to overcome the allurements of sense and unite himself to the absolute good. In reference to the third element Rosmini used a distinction which led to sharp controversy. By peccatum (sin) he means the sinful condition of the will in its antagonism to objective good; by culpa (sin as fault), the same condition considered relatively to its cause, free will. Ordinarily, peccatum is also culpa, and every sin is traceable to a free agent. But, in abnormal circumstances, there may be peccatum where there is not, at the moment, culpa. The acts of an acquired sinful habit, when performed without advertence or deliberation, are contrary to law, though at the moment the will is not responsible. They are culpœ and imputable, but to complete the imputability one must link them with the first free wicked acts whence the habit resulted. Original sin is a true sin yet not a culpa, not imputable to the person in whom it is found as to its free cause. The responsible cause is to be sought in the free will of Adam, whose sin was both peccatum and culpa. Rosmini wrote voluminously in defence of the traditional Catholic doctrine of original sin. Conscience he defines as "a speculative judgment on the morality of the practical judgment"; and since morality, he points out, belongs to an order of reflection anterior to the conscience, there may exist in man moral or immoral conditions apart from conscience — a doctrine which he also applied to original sin and to certain states of virtue and vice. Regarding probabilism, he distinguishes, in the question of the doubtful law, what is intrinsically evil from what is evil only on account of some extrinsic cause, for example, prohibition by positive law, and lays down the rule: "If there is a doubt respecting the existence of the positive law, and the doubt cannot be resolved, the law is not binding; but if there is a doubt in a matter pertaining to the natural law and relating to an evil inherent in action, the risk of the evil must be avoided." This theory provoked controversy, but Rosmini maintained that it accorded substantially with the teaching of St. Alphonsus Ligouri. The science of rational right arises from the protection which the moral law affords to the useful good. The classification of the goods and rights which we possess in our relations with our fellow-men, is based on freedom and property. Freedom is the power, which each one has, to use all his faculties and resources so long as he does not encroach on the rights of others. Property is the union of goods with the human personality by a triple bond, physical, intellectual, and moral. The moral bond guards the other two, for the moral law forbids one man to wrest from another what he has united to himself by affection and intelligence. The subject of right may be either the individual man or man in society. Concerning the three societies necessary for the full development of the human race, Rosmini speculates at length in his "Filosofia del diritto" (Milan, 1841-43). Rosmini applied his philosophical principles to education in "Della educazione cristiana" (Milan, 1856) and especially, "Del principio supremo della metodica" (Turin, 1857; tr. by Grey, "The Ruling Principle of Method Applied to Education", Boston, 1893). His basic idea is that education must follow the natural order of development. The mind of the child must be led from the general to the particular. The natural and necessary order of all human thoughts is expressed in the law: "A thought is that which becomes the matter, or provides the matter of another thought." The whole sum of thoughts which can occur to the human mind is classified in divers orders of which Rosmini enumerates five. To the first order belong thoughts whose matter is not taken from antecedent thoughts; each of the successive orders is characterized by its matter being taken from the order immediately preceding it. The ruling principle of method is: Present to the mind of the child (and this applies to man in general), first, the objects which belong to the first order of cognitions, then those which belong to the second order, and so on, taking care never to lead the child to a cognition of the second order without having ascertained that his mind has grasped those of the first order relative to it, and the same with regard to the cognitions of the third, fourth, and other higher orders. In applying this principle to the different orders, Rosmini explains the cognitions proper to each, the corresponding activities, the instruction which they require, the moral and religious education which the child should receive. Both in his general theory of adapting education to the needs of the growing mind and in the importance he attached to instinct, feeling, and play, Rosmini anticipated much that is now regarded as fundamental in education. "The child", he says, "at every age must act." To regulate the different kinds of activity, and to make each kind reasonable, is really to educate. It is in the kindergarten system of Fröbel, the contemporary of Rosmini, that these principles are most fully worked out. The most important of Rosmini's posthumous works, the "Teosofia" (ontology and natural theology), was published in five volumes (Turin, 1859-64; Intra, 1864-74). In 1876 some Catholic newspapers and periodicals in Italy, interpreting the "Dimittantur" decree of 1854, declared that Rosmini's works were open both to criticism and to censure. The Rosminian school on the contrary maintained that, while the decree gave no positive approval, it at least guaranteed that the books examined contained nothing worthy of censure and could therefore be safely read, and their conclusions accepted by Catholics. This view seemed to be confirmed by the Master of the Sacred Palace, who, in a letter to the "Osservatore Romano" (16 June, 1876), reminded the editor of the silence enjoined on both parties and stated that no theological censure could be inflicted. A month later, the "Osservatore Cattolico" of Milan, as ordered by the Prefect of the Congregation of the Index, acknowledged its interpretation to be erroneous. After the death of Pius IX, the controversy was renewed. An answer of the Index was given (21 June, 1880) that " dimittantur signifies only this — a work dismissed is not prohibited" — and another (5 Dec., 1881) that a work dismissed is not to be held as free from every error against faith and morals and may be criticized both philosophically and theologically without incurring the note of temerity. Both answers were taken by the adversaries of Rosmini's doctrines to justify new censures, while the Rosminian writers contended that these answers in no degree rendered untenable the position they had always occupied. On 14 Dec., 1887, a decree of the Inquisition condemned forty propositions taken from the works of Rosmini. The decree, published 7 March, 1888, lays special stress on the posthumous works which, it says, developed and explained doctrines contained in germ in the earlier books; but the propositions condemned have no theological nota attached. About one-half of the propositions refer to Rosmini's ontology and natural theology; the remainder, to his teachings on the soul, the Trinity, the Eucharist, the supernatural order and the beatific vision (Denzinger, "Enchir.", 1891 sq.). Some of the propositions were clearly taught in the works examined in 1854; others repeated what Rosmini had said over and over again in the principal books published during his lifetime. The superior general of the Institute of Charity enjoined obedience and submission on the members. Leo XIII in a letter to the Archbishop of Milan (1 June, 1889) plainly stated that he approved and confirmed the decree. Cardinal Mazella discussed the propositions exhaustively in "Rosminianarum propositionum trutina theologica" (Rome, 1892). This brought out a reply from an erudite layman, Prof. Giuseppe Morando, under the title "Esame critico delle 40 proposizioni Rosminiane" (Milan, 1905). Besides the works already mentioned, Rosmini wrote a large number of treatises the more important of which are: "Il Rinnovamento della Filosofia in Italia" (Milan, 1836); "Psicologia", (Novara, 1843; Turin, 1887; tr., London, 1884-88); "Logica", (Turin, 1853; Intra, 1868); "La Filosofia della Morale" (Milan, 1831);" L'Antropologia in servizio della Scienza Morale" (Milan, 1838); "Antropologia sopranaturale" (Casale, 1884); "Teodicea" (Milan, 1845); "Filosofia della Politica" (Milan, 1858); "La societa e il suo fine" (Milan, 1839); "V. Gioberti e il Panteismo" (Milan, 1847); "Introduzione alla Filosofia" (Casale, 1850); "Introd. al Vangelo secondo S. Giovanni" (Turin, 1882). Rosmini: ANON., La Vita di Antonio Rosmini (Turin, 1897), the standard life, written by a priest of the Institute of Charity; ANON., Piccola Vita di Antonio Rosmini (Casale, 1897); Della Missione a Roma di Antonio Rosmini-Serbati, negli Anni 1848-49 (Turin, 1881); Epistolario completo di Antonio Rosmini-Serbati (Casale, Turin, 1887-94); PAOLI, Memorie della vita di Antonio Rosmini-Serbati (Turin, 1880-84); Antonio Rosmini e la sua prosapia (Rovereto, 1880); Life of Antonio Rosmini-Serbati, ed. LOCKHART (London, 1886); The Life of Antonio Rosmini-Serbati, tr. from the Italian of PAGANI (London, 1907). DAVIDSON, Rosmini's Philosophical System (London, 1882) contains a copious bibliography of the works of Rosmini and his school. Rosminian School: BURONI, Dell' Essere e del Conoscere, studii su Parmenide Platone e Rosmini (Turin, 1878); FERRE, Degli Universali secondo la Teoria Rosminiana (Casale, 1880-86); PESTALOZZA, Le Dottrine di A. Rosmini difese (Milan, 1851; Lodi, 1853); PETRI, A. Rosmini e i Neo-Scolastici (Rome, 1878); BILLIA, Quaranta Proposizioni attribuite ad A. Rosmini (Milan, 1889); Per Ant. Rosmini nel primo centenario della nascita (Milan, 1897); MORANDO, Il Rosminianismo e l'Enciclica Pascendi, and Apparenti Contraddizioni di S. Tommaso, reprinted from the Rivista Rosminiana (1908); MANZONI, Il Dialogo sull' Invenzione (Milan, 1879); CALZA AND PEREZ, Esposizione della Filosofia di A. Rosmini (Intra, 1878); CASARA, La Luce dell' occhio corporeo e quella dell' Intelletto (Parabiago, 1879). Periodicals: La Sapienza (Turin, 1879-86) (ed. PAPA); La Rivista Rosminiana (Voghera, 1905) (ed. MORANDO). Opposing Schools: Postille (s. d.); Alcune Affermazioni del Sig. A. Rosmini prete roveretano con un saggio di riflessioni scritte da Eusebio Cristiano (s. d.); Principi della scuola Rosminiana esposti in Lettere Famigliari da un Prete Bolognese (Milan, 1850); GIOBERTI, Degli Errori Filosofici di A. Rosmini (Capologo, 1846); CORNOLDI, Il Rosminianismo sintesi dell' Ontologismo e del Panteismo (Rome, 1881); LIBERATORE, Degli Universali (Rome, 1881-83), tr. DERING,. On Universals (Leamington, 1889); MAZZELLA, Rosminianarum propositionum trutina theologica (Rome, 1892); ZIGLIARA, Il Dimittatur e la spiegazione datane dalla S. Congregazione dell' Indice. Independent: SHELDON, The Teachings of A. Rosmini, in Papers of the American Society of Church History 1897, VIII; DYROFF, Rosmini, in the series Kultur und Katholizismus (Munich 1906); ORESTANO, Rosmini, in the series Biblioteca Pedagogica (Rome, 1908); PALHORIÈS, Rosmini, in the series Les Grands Philosophes (Paris, 1908). GEORGE CORMACK D. HICKEY Rosminians Rosminians The Institute of Charity, or, officially, Societas a charitate nuncupata, is a religious congregation founded by Antonio Rosmini, first organized in 1828, formally approved by the Holy See in 1838, and taking its name from "charity" as the fullness of Christian virtue. In English-speaking lands its members are commonly called Fathers of Charity, but in Italy, Rosminians. Foundation of the Institute The founder of this society was, strictly speaking, Rosmini alone. Nevertheless there existed in the age into which he was born many very potent directive elements which gave a bent to his thoughts and supplied an opportunity for their embodiment in some organization. His life was in the immediate wake of the French Revolution, and doubtless it was by the many tendencies and movements, some of them remote enough, which culminated in that upheaval, that he was gradually and unconsciously led to consider the intellectual and moral inheritance of Christendom as a whole, not in blind protest and reaction merely, but with impartial contemplation of new ideas as well as of old. The one side of truth was to be corrected by its counterpart, and secondary things which had usurped a primacy were to resume their just order. Rosmini not only saw the Church's enemies roused to new vigour of attack, but also a growing danger among many who still remained within the Church of a practical denial or at least a belittling of the supernatural in man. There was ill-regulated activity and impatience of ancient tradition, and by reaction from this in other quarters there was an equally ill-timed and fatal passiveness. The world was too wrong, it seemed, ever to be set right; and nothing it could say was worthy of being even heeded. This was a spirit that shut itself up in the past and anathematized all fresh thought. The Church was to renounce either tradition or development, in either case abandoning her Divine Guide. On such a basis there could easily be set up a spirit which looked on the whole Church as a party, and furthered her cause with partisan eagerness, or else substituted for the great end of the Church's good the petty end of the good of some society or persons within her. It tended to replace Catholicism by clericalism. But Rosmini judged these domestic ills no less than the relentless attacks from without to be traceable to one deeply-seated cause, namely, that men were relaxing their grip on the fundamental and general truths. What was becoming blurred was God's own part in the world: first His creative part; then the Divine nature of that moral good which in some sort stands before the human mind as truth itself; and again the Divine action of grace, causing truth and good to be felt in the depths of the soul as having not only infinite rightness and bindingness but also supreme driving-power. The crying need then was for a clearer recognition of God's place in nature, in the soul, and in the Church, and hence for the re-establishment of Christian first principles as a slow, indeed, but the only radical, cure of the evils of the day. Antonio Rosmini, an Italian from Rovereto, was ordained in 1821. He was already organizing his life on principles of order, an order which puts God's prompting first and man's instant and swift action second. His two life-principles, written down at this time for his own guidance, and forming the true harmony of humility with confidence and passiveness with activity, were: first, to apply himself to the amendment of his faults and the purifying of his soul without seeking other occupations or undertakings on his neighbour's behalf, since of himself he was powerless to do anyone real service; and, second, not to refuse offices of charity when Divine Providence offered them, but in fulfilling them to maintain perfect indifference and do the offered work as zealously as he would any other. The formulating of this rule and the putting of it into practice by living retired in prayer and study constituted the first step towards founding the Institute of Charity; the second was this: the Venerable Marchioness di Canossa, foundress of a society of Daughters of Charity for poor friendless girls, had long desired a like institution for boys, and no sooner was Rosmini a priest than she began to urge him to establish one. On 10 December, 1825, he wrote to her that in accordance with his rules of life he could not altogether refuse her request if God were to provide means, but that even then he could form such a society only on the basis of the two aforesaid principles. The rough sketch of the Priests of Charity written on this date is really only the first brief form of what was approved by Rome more than twelve years later. But he took no practical measures. He still waited for God's signs. Led to Milan in February, 1826, for a charitable work and better convenience for study, he received there a powerful stimulus in June, 1827, by meeting the Abbé Loewenbruck. This zealous and impetuous priest introduced himself abruptly enough with the words: "I am thinking of a society directed to a reform of the clergy, and you must help me to carry this into effect." Rosmini answered by confessing his own aspirations and laying down the principles on which alone he would build. They conferred further, sought and received more light, and at last agreed to spend the next year's Lent together in fasting and prayer in an almost ruinous house on Monte Calvario above Domodossola, a town near the Italian end of the Simplon Pass. Here on 20 February, 1828, Rosmini began his great work, but alone, as Loewenbruck did not present himself again to cooperate in the labour. Lent was passed by Rosmini in practising austerities and writing the constitutions of the institute. Still, this was no more than a plan. For forming a religious society a number of like-minded men are needed. Rosmini sought none, encouraged none. Two or three who knew his thoughts joined him; their very principles made them at once into a community practising many of the religious virtues. These principles urged him to betake himself forthwith to the Holy See and lay his society before it. He arrived at Rome in November, 1828, but would not do anything there to further his cause. Pius VIII, who was elected pope in the following March, called him to an audience a few weeks after. "If you think", said the Pope, "of beginning with something small, and leaving all the rest to God, we gladly approve; not so if you thought of starting on a large scale." Rosmini answered that he had always proposed a very humble beginning. His was no extraordinary vocation, he said, like that of St. Ignatius, but quite ordinary. In the autumn of 1830 he gave the institute something of its regular form; and all the community began to pass through their stages of religious training. Such was the state of affairs when on 2 February, 1831, Rosmini's friend and protector at Rome, Cardinal Cappellari, was chosen pope and took the name of Gregory XVI. The new pope became from the outset the foster-father of the institute, and Rosmini shunned all initiative more than ever. An unsolicited papal Brief came forth in March, calling the new society by its name and rejoicing in its progress under the approval of the bishops. Special spiritual graces were granted by a later Brief, and in 1835 the pope made known his wish that, since solemn episcopal approval had been given the society in the Dioceses of Novara and Trent, Rosmini should no longer delay, but submit the constitutions of the society to the formal examination of the Holy See. It was not, however, till March, 1837, that these were at length submitted, with a short letter in which Rosmini petitioned the pope to approve and confirm them and to grant to the institute the privileges of regulars, adding only that these seemed necessary to the well-being of a society which was intended for the service of the universal Church. The matter was entrusted to the Congregation of Bishops and Regulars, which declared, on 16 June, its general commendation of the society, but also its judgment that it was as yet too young to be approved as a regular order, and its hesitation on one or two points in the constitutions, notably on the form of poverty. They therefore deferred the approbation. Rosmini satisfied Cardinal Castracane, the promoter of the cause, on these heads; but before proposing a new examination the promoter is accustomed to hear some other consultor; and to this end Zecchinelli, a Jesuit, was admitted by Castracane to write his opinion. It was unfavourable, principally concerning the matter of poverty; and his party further procured the appointment of a new consultor, a Servite, whose hostile vote was launched almost on the eve of the session in which a decision was to be taken. This action drove Castracane to appeal to the pope that the meeting might be postponed, and the pope intervened at once with such effect that the last vote was set aside and other consultors deputed instead. On 20 December, 1838, the congregation met and gave its final sentence that the society and its rule deserved the formal approbation of the Holy See, and that the institute should have the status of a religious congregation, with the usual privileges. The pope immediately ratified this decision. On the following 25 March the vows were first made, by twenty in Italy and five in England. Five of these then went to Rome and on 22 August, in the Catacombs of St. Sebastian made the fourth vow of special obedience to the pope. Apostolic letters embodying Rosmini's own summary of the constitutions were issued on 20 September, naming Rosmini as the first provost-general of the institute for life. Spirit and Organization The end which the Institute of Charity sets before its members is perfect charity. Love of God is plenitudo legis, because it extends of its very nature to all intelligent creatures who are in God's image. No special manner of life is added in this rule as an obligatory proximate end; hence for a vocation to it nothing is required but a true and constant desire to love justice most. It is a universal vocation. It embraces all vocations, not indeed by taking all charitable works whatsoever as its province; rather it does not take one, but it refuses none. The field then is vast, but only with a negative vastness. Hœc est voluntas Dei, sanctificatio vestra. But by focusing the will on that one point the best way is opened to everything else. Thus the first or elective state of the Rosminian is just the unum necessarium, the contemplative life; not inactivity, not sluggishness, but prayer and labour and study and the learning of some mechanical or liberal art, that so he may be ready for any call and not become a burden to others. It is a time for accumulating experience and strength, and those who avail themselves of it apply themselves to their duties, awaiting the time when they will go forth to answer the call of zeal. If no such call comes, it matters little, for in the elective state all their end is achieved. If the call does come, the elective is laid aside for the assumed state, this being accepted not of choice at all, but only because of God's will clearly manifested. By what methods does the institute discern this will? Apart from extraordinary inward motions of the Holy Ghost, the common way is that of outward events, which give sure tokens of God's will to those who use the light of faith. The principal events, as the institute views it, which make known God's call to charitable work are: (1) a petition made by a neighbour in need; (2) a request by someone else on his behalf; (3) his needs themselves when they come before us. Among simultaneous requests there is a choice. The pope's come first, a bishop's next; ceteris paribus, earlier petitions are accepted rather than later. But in general whenever a neighbour, in the universal Christian meaning of that word, seeks the help of the institute, it has to be given, unless one of the following conditions be wanting: that the desired work be no hindrance to the fulfilment of duties already undertaken, that the whole labour which such addition involves be not beyond the brethren's strength, and that the institute have at its disposal members sufficient in both number and endowment for its rightful discharge. Again, charity which is one in essence, is threefold in exercise, and according as good things regard the bodily and sentient life or the intellectual or the moral, the charity which bestows them is divided in the institute into temporal, intellectual, and spiritual. The temporal is the lowest and gives the lowest kind of good. Inconceivably far above it stands that which seeks to increase the life of the understanding by the knowledge of truth; and above both there is the spiritual charity which tends to make men good and happy by loving the known truth. Hence we see that the topmost point of the institute's activity is the cure of souls. Its whole theory leads to the religious and the pastoral life wedded together, as the crowning achievement of charity. The blending of the two types in the rule consists in this, that the brethren have to choose and prefer a private state in the Church. They are of the ecclesia discens. The restless disposition which indirectly seeks honours or powers would be treason to their whole spirit. Passive in privacy till public work summons them, they must then be all courage, confidence, perseverance, and work. There are three classes of persons who more or less strictly belong to the Institute of Charity. The first is of those who, led by a desire to keep the Evangelical law perfectly, take on themselves the discipline of the society and bind themselves by vows. The second is of Christians who desire perfection, but are so bound by earlier engagements that they cannot make these vows, yet desire as far as possible to co-operate with the society, and these are "adopted children". The third is of "ascribed members", good Christians who do not aspire to the life of the counsels, yet according to their condition desire also to co-operate. But since only the religious are of the substance of the society, it is of their formation and regulation alone that we will here add a few words. The institute neither solicits nor insinuates vocations, but leaves the initiative to Divine Providence, being from its fundamental principles just as perfect when small and hidden as if it was large and famous. Of the care used in examining and instructing the postulant and in implanting firm roots of piety and charity in the novices and in trying his vocation in many ways we need not here give detailed notice. After two years of noviceship his first profession is made, obedience being understood to comprehend the acceptance of any grade that superiors may assign. He thus becomes an "approved scholastic", who is not, however, definitively incorporated with the institute until he has fitted himself by study or other preparation for taking the coadjutor's vows. Coadjutors, spiritual or temporal, add the further promise of not seeking any dignity either within the society or outside and of not accepting and not refusing the spontaneous offer of it except under obedience. They are divided moreover into internal coadjutors if living in houses of the institute, and external if elsewhere, the latter state being from the universality of charity quite in harmony with the rule. From among the internal spiritual coadjutors presbyters are chosen, and these take a fourth vow of special obedience to the sovereign pontiff. Thus the body of the society consists of presbyters and coadjutors, but it is the presbyters who give life and movement to the rest and to whom the more universal works of charity are committed. Vows in the institute are life-long, and ordinarily, though not necessarily, simple. Its form of poverty permits the retention of bare ownership in the eye of the civil law, but each member must be ready to surrender even that at the call of obedience, and none may keep or administer or use one farthing at his own will. Strenuous opposition was offered in Rome to this form of religious poverty, which was declared by one party to be merely affective, no effective. Rosmini answered by indicating the conditions just named and also the nature of property itself; that it is a complexus of rights, that rights are relations, and are divisible; that they may be relative to the State or to the Church; and that a religious keeps property relatively to the State only, and not absolutely. It is absolute ownership, not relative, that offends Evangelical poverty. The founder's sagacity in leaving property under the legal dominion of individuals has been abundantly illustrated since his time; the spiritual gains of the occasions thus given for continually renewed acts of sacrifice are no less obvious. The true facts of the rule are that board, lodging, and clothing are to be those of poor men, and that all, even superiors, do much of their own servile work. Chastity next, considered as a vow, is understood in the sense of the subdeacon's obligation. The virtue of obedience is regarded as a director of charity and, therefore, as quite universal; as a vow, however, though its field is still unrestricted, it comes more seldom into play. The institute is governed by a provost-general elected for life by certain presbyters according to a minutely prescribed form. He has full powers except for a few exceptional cases. It is he who admits to the various grades in the society and who appoints all the superiors. The institute is divided into provinces, and each province, at least in theory, into dioceses, and each diocese into parishes; and there may be rectories besides for more particular works of charity. Having in view only the fullness of Christian law, it has followed as nearly as possible the organization of the Christian Church. Being ordered to charity, the institute chooses a way of living that will not sunder the brethren too far from other men. No habit and no special bodily mortification is prescribed them, but in lieu of further austerities they embrace the lasting hardness of their chosen lot. Not the hedge of a multitude of regulations, but a strong conviction of lofty principles is to make men such as the institute desires. The institute as such holds no property and takes no kind of civil action. From the State it does not seek exemptions, but only common right. If guarantees of association were refused it, it could still live privately and contemplatively, and attain its whole end. Its members remain citizens, with a citizen's interest and duties. Towards the Church it has this chief relation, that it lives for her, not for itself, insists on not confounding the interests of one religious society with those of Christendom, and is so constructed as to be altogether ancillary to the Christian episcopate. Any exclusive esprit de corps is banned throughout the rule and is quite contrary to its spirit; for "the one groundwork of the institute," said its founder, "is the Providence of God the Father, and to lay another would be to destroy it." Instead of seeking its own aggrandizement, its tendency is to render the union of all Catholics more intimate and sensible, to make them feel their own greatness, and that they are stronger than the world and are follow-workers with Providence in putting all things under Christ. History and Activities The institute is too young to have much history yet. As was to be expected from its principles, it has progressed but slowly. Its chief houses in Italy are Monte Calvario, which has long been both a novitiate and house of theological study; the college founded in 1839 for young boys at Stresa, and the large college for older ones at Domodossola built in 1873 and taking the place of a school handed over to the institute by Count Mellerio in 1837. Rosmini founded a house at Trent in 1830 at the bishop's invitation; but Austrian dislike of Italian influences brought it to an end in 1835. The same spirit drove the institute from Rovereto in 1835 and from Verona in 1849. The charge of the Sanctuary of S. Michele della Chiusa, an ancient abbey on a steep mountain-peak near Turin, was accepted in 1835 at the King of Sardinia's desire, and remains of deceased members of his house were transferred thither. This sanctuary is still kept, but the king's plan of a house of retreat was left unexecuted by his Government. A good number of elementary schools are conducted by the institute in various parts of northern Italy, and in 1906 it accepted the charge of the Church of S. Charles in the Corso at Rome. Noteworthy also are Rosmini's plans of an English college of missionaries for different parts of the British Empire, with a special training for work in India; his college of elementary masters in the institute, still flourishing, and his project of a medical college towards which Prince d'Aremberg offered a large sum. An orphanage, founded with this money at Sainghin, near Lille, was closed in 1903 through the hostility of the French Government. The founding of the English province is inseparably linked with the name of Luigi Gentili. This cultured and ardent young Roman threw himself wholeheartedly into religious life in 1831, and from the first felt greatly drawn towards England. Ambrose de Lisle was already inviting him to work in Leicestershire, and Bishop Baines, Vicar Apostolic of the Western District, had offered him a post at Prior Park. To this college he was sent by Rosmini in 1835 with two companions to teach both lay and church students. He became rector there the next year, but the entrance of two of the bishop's clergy, Furlong and Hutton, into the institute brought the engagement to an abrupt close in 1839. Invited next to the Midland district, the fathers taught for a while at old Oscott, and in 1841 was opened the mission of Loughborough, which has since remained in the institute's hands. Many converts were made and some missions founded in the neighbourhood, and in 1843 the first public mission ever preached in England was given by Gentili and Furlong. In the same year at Ratcliffe, near Leicester, were laid the foundations of a novitiate designed by Pugin, but in 1846 the present college for boys of the middle class was opened there. The mission of Newport, Monmouthshire, was undertaken in 1847, that of Rugby in 1850 and Cardiff (of which only two churches are now retained by the institute) in 1854. The fathers were all this time giving zealous aid towards dissipating that excessive fear of outward devotion which English Catholics had inherited from times of persecution. Rosmini's warm interest in England had led him to send thither some of the most capable and apostolic men he had, Pagani (this J. B. Pagani, author of "The Science of the Saints" and "Anima Divota", is to be distinguished from the Italian provincial of the same name, author of a "Life of Rosmini", and other Rosminian works), Gentili, Rinolfi, Ceroni, Cavalli, Gastaldi, Bertetti, Caccia, Signini; and the mission of Gentili and Furlong, and also of Rinolfi and Lockhart, in many parts of the British Isles produced a deep and lasting effect. Gentili died of fever in Dublin, in 1848, while preaching a mission in a fever-stricken district. Of Lockhart it should be added that in 1854 he began the mission of Kingsland in North London, and here he worked for twenty years. The Church of St. Etheldreda, formerly chapel of the London palace of the bishops of Ely, and a fine specimen of thirteenth-century Gothic, was restored by the institute to Catholic worship in 1876, and Lockhart became its first rector. Other houses under the charge of the English province are the reformatory called St. William's School at Market Weighton, Yorkshire, and two Irish industrial schools, one at Upton near Cork, and, one towards which Count Moore gave land and money, at Clonmel. The latest mission established by the institute is that of Bexhill-on-Sea. The Rugby house, which had from 1850 the English novitiate, became in 1886 a juniorate, or preparatory school for novices. The present novitiate stands in wooded grounds at Wadhurst, Sussex, and a house for Irish novices has been opened at Omeath on the shores of Carlingford Lough in the Archdiocese of Armagh. In America Fr. Joseph Costa, after working singlehanded in various parts of Illinois, gathered the first community of the institute about him at Galesburg in that state. Here they have St. Joseph's Church, which existed before; and in addition they have built Corpus Christi Church (1887) and College (1896) as well as St. Joseph's Academy, directed by Sisters of Providence, and in 1906 St. Mary's schools. The provost-generals, since Rosmini's death have been Pagani, who succeeded in 1855, Bertetti (1860), Cappa (1874), Lanzoni (1877), and Bernardino Balsari in 1901. Other names deserving mention are Vincenzo de Vit, known principally for two works of vast labour and research, the "Lexicon totius Latinitatis", a new and greatly enlarged edition of Forcellini, and the "Onomasticon", a dictionary of proper names; Giuseppe Calza, noteworthy as a philosopher; Paolo Perez, formerly professor at Padua, and master of a singularly delicate Italian style; Gastaldi, afterwards Archbishop of Turin; Cardozo-Ayres, Bishop of Pernambuco, who died at Rome during the Vatican Council, and whose incorrupt body has lately been transported with great veneration to his see; and two English priests, Richard Richardson, organizer of the holy war against intemperance, and enroller in it of 70,000 names; and Joseph Hirst, member of the Royal Archæological Institute. (See ROSMINI AND ROSMINIANISM, GENTILI, LOCKHART, SISTERS OF PROVIDENCE.) ROSMINI, Maxims of Christian Perfection (London, 1888); IDEM, Letters (London, 1901); LOCKART, Life of Rosmini (London, 1886); PAGANI, Life of Rosmini (London, 1907); Missions in Ireland (Dublin, 1855); Vita di Rosmini da un sacerdote dell' Instituto (Turin, 1897). W. H. POLLARD. Ross Ross (ROSSENSIS). Diocese in Ireland. This see was founded by St. Fachtna, and the place-name was variously known as Roscairbre and Rosailithir (Ross of the pilgrims). St. Fachtna founded the School of Ross as well as the see; and his death occurred about 590, on 14 August, on which day his feast is celebrated. The succession of bishops was uninterrupted till after the Reformation period. King John in 1207 granted the cantred of Rosailithir to David Roche, regardless of the claims of the native chief, the O'Driscoll, but the episcopal manors were left undisturbed. In 1306, the value of the bishop's mensa was 26 marks, while the cathedral was valued at 3 marks; and the tribal revenue of the see was but 45 pounds sterling. The number of parishes was 29, divided into 3 divisions; and there was a Cistercian abbey, Carrigilihy (de fonte vivo); also a Benedictine Priory at St. Mary's, Ross. The Franciscans acquired a foundation at Sherkin Island from the O'Driscolls in 1460. Owing to various causes the see was not in a flourishing condition in the fourteenth century, and the Wars of the Roses contributed to the unfortunate state of affairs which prevailed in the second half of the fifteenth century. Blessed Thady MacCarthy was appointed Bishop in 1482, but was forcibly deprived of his see in 1488. However he was translated to the united Sees of Cork and Cloyne in 1490; was again a victim of political intrigues, and died a glorious confessor at Ivrea in 1492, being beatified in l895. In 1517 the revenue of the diocese was but 60 marks. At that date the chapter was complete with 12 canons and 4 vicars, and there were 27 parishes, including three around Berehaven. Thomas O'Herlihy assisted at the Council of Trent, and ruled from 1562 till his death on 11 March, 1580. It was not until 1581 that Queen Elizabeth ventured to appoint a Protestant prelate under whom, in 1584, the Sees of Cork and Cloyne were annexed to Ross. However, in the Catholic arrangement Ross continued independent, and Owen MacEgan died a confessor in January, 1602-3. In 1625 the bishop (de Torres) was a Spaniard, who ruled his diocese through a vicar-general. In 1647 the nave and tower of the cathedral were levelled by the Puritans; and the bishop (MacEgan) was basely hanged by Lord Broghill, on 10 April, 1650. At length, in 1693, Bishop Sleyne of Cork was given Ross in commendam, and the see continued under his successors till 1748, when it was united to Cloyne under Bishop O'Brien. From 1748 Ross was administered by the Bishops of Cloyne, but it regained its autonomy under Bishop Crotty, and in 1857 Bishop O'Hea was consecrated to Ross. During the episcopate of Dr. O'Hea (the Catholic population was then 65,000) the episcopal see was transferred to Skibbereen, and the diocese was materially improved under his fostering care. His successor, William Fitzgerald (1877-97) also labored zealously. The present bishop, the Most Rev. Denis Kelly, was born near Nenagh, Co. Tipperary, in 1852, and was educated at Ennis and Paris. He was appointed president of the Killaloe Diocesan College in 1890, and was consecrated 9 May, 1897. Bishop Kelly has acted on several Royal commissions, and has recently (1911) been named one of the two commissioners for the projected Home Rule finance. In 1901 the Catholic population was 46,694, and there were eleven parishes—two of which were mensal—served by 28 priests. The latest returns give the number of churches as 22, and there are three Convents of Mercy, respectively, at Skibbereen, Clonakilty, and Rosscarbery. There is no chapter, but there are two vicars forane. Calendar of Papal Registers (9 Vols., London, 1893-1911); BRADY, Records of Cork, Cloyne, and Ross (Dublin, 1864); IDEM, Episcopal Succession (Rome, 1876); ARCHDALL, Monasticon Hibernicum (Dublin, 1873); SMITH, Cork (new ed., Cork, 1893); Irish Catholic Directory (1911). W.H. GRATTAN-FLOOD School of Ross School of Ross The School of Ross—now called Ross-Carbery, but formerly Ross-Ailithir from the large number of monks and students who flocked to its halls from all over Europe—was founded by St. Fachtna, who is generally regarded as the same who founded the Diocese of Kilfenora, for the feast in both cases is kept on 14 August; and in both the saint's descent is traced to the princely race of Corca Laighde. Fachtna was born at a place called Tulachteann, and died at the early age of forty-six, in what year we cannot say, but probably late in the sixth century, and is buried in his own cathedral church at Ross. Like many other great Irish saints, he received his first lessons in piety from St. Ita of Killeedy, the Brigid of Munster, from whose care he passed, according to some writers, to St. Finnbar's seminary at Loch Eirce, near Cork. He founded the monastery Molana, on the little island of Dririnis in the Blackwater, not far from the town of Youghal. Returning to his native territory, he set about a more important foundation on a rocky promontory situated in the midst of woods and green fields between two lovely bays. This was the monastic School of Ross, called in the "Life of St. Mochoemoc", magnum studium scholarium, for it quickly became famous for its study of Sacred Scripture, and the attention given to all the branches of a liberal education. One of the assistant teachers was St. Brendan the Navigator, whom Fachtna had known and loved as a companion when under the care of St. Ita. An old document quoted by Usher represents Brendan as being at Ross in 540. While engaged in teaching here, St. Fachtna was stricken with total blindness. On appealing to God in his distress, he was directed by an angel to make application to Nessa, the sister of St. Ita, who was about to become the mother of St. Mochoemoc. Fachtna did as he was directed and his sight was miraculously restored. Fachtna, it is generally thought by the best authorities, received episcopal orders, and became the first Bishop of Ross. He is sometimes called Facundus, in allusion to his eloquence, to which, as well as to his sanctity, unmistakable testimony is borne by St. Cuimin of Connor. Cuimin describes him as "the generous and steadfast, who loved to address assembled crowds and never spoke aught that was base and displeasing to God". His immediate successor in the School of Ross was St. Conall, and we read also of a St. Finchad, a former schoolmate at Loch Eirce. Both were probably tribesmen of his own, for we are told that he was succeeded by twenty-seven bishops of his own tribe, whose names unfortunately have not been preserved. Under several ninth-century dates we find in the Four Masters reference to the abbots of the School of Ross; and under date 840 we are told that the institution was ravaged by the Danes. Once only in the two centuries that followed is there mention of a bishop, Neachtan MacNeachtain whose death is set down under date 1085. In all other references to Ross the word airchinnect is used, as if showing that the government of the school had fallen into the hands of laymen, who no doubt employed ecclesiastics to perform the spiritual duties and functions. Nevertheless the School must have continued to flourish, for we read under date 866—according to the "Chronicon Scotorum", 868—of the death of Feargus who is described as a celebrated scribe and anchorite of Ross-Ailithir. But more remarkable evidence still of the extent and variety of the literary work done at Ross is furnished by the geographical poem in the Irish language still extant, composed by MacCosse or Ferlegind, a lecturer at this school, and used no doubt as a text-book in the different classes. When we. take into account the period at which MacCosse lived, his geographical treatise may fairly be thought one of the most accurate and interesting of its kind that has ever yet been written. Of the later history of the School we have but few details, but mention of the native spoiler is not missing in them. In 1127, according to the "Chronicon Scotorum", one Toirdhealbach O Conor sailed to Ross-Ailithir and laid waste the land of Desmond. He was followed by the Anglo-Normans under FitzStephen, who towards the close of the century completed the devastation. All record of this ancient seat of learning is then lost. COLGAN, Acta SS.; O'HANLON, Lives of the Irish Saints, 14 August; OLDEN in Proceedings of Royal Irish Academy (Jan.1884); HEALY Ireland's Ancient Schools and Scholars (5th ed.). JOHN HEALY Rossano Rossano (ROSSANENSIS). Archdiocese in Calabria, province of Cosenza, Southern Italy. The city is situated on an eminence not far from the Gulf of Taranto. It was the ancient Roscianum, a Roman colony, and was ravaged by Totile. The Saracens failed to conquer it. In 982 Otto II captured it temporarily from the Byzantines, who had made it the capital of their possessions in Southern Italy. It preserved its Greek character long after its conquest by the Normans. In the cathedral there is an ancient image of the "Madonna acheropita" (i.e. the "Madonna not made by hands"). Rossano was the birthplace of John VII, the antipope John VII (Philagathus), St. Nilus,—founder of the Abbey of Grottaferrata, and St. Bartholomew, another abbot of that monastery. The first known bishop of this see is Valerianus, Bishop of the "Ecclesia Rosana" in the Roman Council of 680. Cappelletti, however, names a certain Saturninus as first bishop. In the tenth century, or perhaps earlier, the Greek Rite was introduced at Rossano, and continued until the sixteenth century, although two attempts were made to introduce the Latin Rite—once in 1092, and again by Bishop Matteo de' Saraceni in 1460. Priests of the Latin Rite, however, were often appointed bishops. The Greek Rite was maintained especially by the seven Basilian monasteries in the diocese, the most famous of which was S. Maria in Patiro. In 1571 the Greek Rite was abandoned in the cathedral, and half a century afterwards throughout the city. It is still observed in a few villages inhabited by Albanians. Noteworthy bishops were: Vincenzo Pimpinella (1525), nuncio in Germany; Giovanni Battista Castagna (1553), afterwards Urban VII; Lucio Sanseverino, founder of the seminary; Pier Antonio Spinelli (1628) and Jacopo Carafa (1646), both of whom restored and embellished the cathedral. The archdiocese is without suffragans. It includes the ancient Diocese of Turio (Thurii), a city which arose after the destruction of Sybaris; five of its bishops are known, the first being Giovanni (501) and the last Guglielmo (1170). Rossano has 39 parishes, 70,000 Catholics, 140 secular priests, 4 houses of nuns, and 3 schools for girls. For the famous "purple Codex Rossanensis", discovered in 1879 in the cathedral sacristy, see Batiffol (below). This Greek parchment manuscript of St. Matthew (to xvi, 14) and St. Mark is the oldest pictorial Gospel known, and is accorded by scholars various dates from the end of the fifth to the eighth or ninth century; it is probably of Alexandrine origin (ed. Gebhardt and Harnack, 1880; A. Muñoz, Rome, 1907). CAPPELLETTI, Le Chieze d'Italia, XXI; DE ROSIS, Cenno storico della citta di Rossano (Naples, 1839); RENDE, Cronistoria dei Monastero di S. Maria in Patiro (Naples, 1747); BATIFFOL L'abbaye de Rossano (Paris, 1891); GAY, Les dioceses de Calabre a l'epoque byzantine (Macon, 1900). For the Codex Rossanensis, as above, see KRAUS. Gesch. christl. Kunst (Freiburg, 1896-7); KONDAKOFF, Hist. de l'art byzantin, I (Paris, 1886), 114 sqq. U. BENIGNI Cosimo Rosselli Cosimo Rosselli (LORENZO DI FILIPPO). Italian fresco painter, b. at Florence, 1439; d. there in 1507. The master-works of this skilful artist are the four panels in the Sistine Chapel which he painted for Sixtus IV as a part of the decoration in that building. Vasari tells us that they pleased the pope more than the similar panels by Ghirlandajo, Signorelli, Perugino, and Botticelli by reason of the glory of blue and gold which distinguished them, but is not existent now. The panels are skilfully composed, marked by clever draughtsmanship, and harmonious in their colour scheme, but vastly inferior to the other panels in the same chapel. One is, therefore, more easily able to understand Vasari's comment upon them, because there must have been some reason to account for Rosselli being given so many panels. His reputation rests more securely on his close friendship with Benozzo Gozzoli and on the fact that amongst his pupils were Fra Bartolommeo and Piero di Cosimo. Amongst his other works are three frescoes at Berlin, a very important one from Fiesole in the National Gallery, a fine example in Paris, and several at Florence, including one in the Academy, and others in various churches. BRYAN, Dict. of Painters and Engravers, V (London, 1904), s.v. GEORGE CHARLES WILLIAMSON Bernardo de Rossi Bernardo de Rossi (DE RUBEIS, GIOVANNI FRANCESCO BERNARDO MARIA). Theologian and historian; b. at Cividale del Friuli, 8 Jan., 1687; d. at Venice, 2 Feb., 1775. He made his religious profession with the Dominicans at Conegliano, 1704, after which he studied at Florence and Venice. He taught at Venice for fifteen years, and was twice general vicar of his province. In 1722 he was theologian to a Venetian embassy to Louis XV and remained in Paris five months. He resigned his chair in 1730 and devoted the remainder of his life to literary activity. His sanctity and learning won for him a wide reputation, and his correspondence with the great men of his time fills nine volumes. His works, written in elegant Latin, show a vast erudition and a mind at once critical and profound. Amongst his dogmatic writings must be mentioned the masterly work "De Peccato Originali" (Venice, 1757). He is famous especially for his new edition of the works of St. Thomas with a commentary (Venice, 1745-60, 24 vols.). He was also the author of thirty-two excellent dissertations on the life and writings of the Angelic Doctor, which have been placed in the first volume of the Leonine Edition of St. Thomas's works. De Rossi also ranks high as a writer on historical, patristic, and liturgical subjects. Besides his numerous works which are published, he left thirty volumes in manuscript. HURTER, Nomenclator, s. v. J.A. MCHUGH Pellegrino Rossi Pellegrino Rossi Publicist, diplomat, economist, and statesman, b. at Carrara, Italy, 13 July, 1787; assassinated at Rome, 15 November, 1848. He studied at the Universities of Pavia and Bologna, in which latter city he practiced law with great success. In 1874 he obtained the chair of criminal law ad civil procedure. Rossi being an advocate of Italian unity and independence, and a member of the Carbonari, Joachim Murat, King of Naples, who then aspired to the sovereignty of the entire peninsula, appointed him commissioner general of the provinces lying between the Po and the Tronto; but on Murat's defeat at Tolentino, Rossi was forced to fly to France, whence, after Waterloo, he betook himself to Geneva. At Geneva he began a private course of Roman law which gained him a chair in the university of that city, notwithstanding the fact that he was a Catholic. Having married a Protestant Genevese lady, he was elected to the Cantonal Council of Geneva, where he played a prominent role in the compilation of the laws on mortgages, civil marriage, and court procedure. In 1832 he presented to the Swiss Federal Diet a plan of a constitution (called the Patto Rossi) based on that of 1803, which was approved by the Diet, but rejected by the communes. Notwithstanding his political activity he continued his deep study of law. Between 1819 and 1821, with the collaboration of Sismondi and Bello, he published the "Annales de legislation et d'économie politique", which in a short time gained him a world-wide reputation. With Guizot he established the doctrinaire school, the juridical principles of which did not differ fundamentally from those of the eighteenth century. In 1829 he published his "Traité de droit pénal", an authoritative work of the time. The hostility caused by his projected constitution led him, in 1833, to seek the chair of political economy in the College de France, and although the Academie des Sciences Morales had presented another candidate, Rossi was successful. In the beginning he met with some opposition, which, however, he overcame, chiefly through the influence of Guizot, minister of Louis Philippe, who knew that Rossi shared his political and juridical views. In 1834 he taught constitutional law in the university; nor did he fail to gain further honours and distinctions, being elected a member of the Academie des Sciences Morales (1836) and mad a peer of France (1839) and an officer of the Legion of Honour (1841). In 1845 he withdrew from the professorial chair to embrace a diplomatic career. He was sent to Rome to negotiate the suppression of the Jesuits, at first only as an envoy extraordinary, later as an ambassador, with the title of Count. On the fall of Louis Philippe he withdrew into private life, watching the development of the Revolution in the first years of the pontificate of Pius IX. He believed that the age demanded a regime of liberty, but that it should be granted gradually. The pope, who knew his opinions on this subject, appointed him minister of justice in the Fabbri ministry, on the fall of which Rossi was invited to draw up a programme. His intention was to re-establish the papal authority, together with a form of constitutional government, but above all to restore public order. Such a programme was as displeasing to the Conservative Party, who distrusted the prevailing views, as to the advanced Republicans, who hated Rossi as the representative of the constitutional monarchy. Like Pius IX, he favoured the Italian league, but wished to preserve the independence of each state. This programme, and the energy which Rossi exhibited against the disturbers of public order, caused him to be sentenced to death by the secret societies. On 15 November, 1848, Rossi was on his way to the Legislative Assembly (in the Palazzo della Cancelleria) to explain his programme; hardly had he seated himself in his carriage, when an assassin stabbed him in the neck with a dagger. He expired almost immediately. Pius IX, on hearing the tidings, exclaimed: "Count Rossi has died a martyr of duty." The assassination was for the secret societies the signal to spread the flames of the revolution which drove Pius IX into exile and established the Roman Republic. The most important of Rossi's writings is his "Cours d'économie politique", a classic work, based on the theories of Smith, Say, Malthus, and Ricardo. Like these authors, he favoured freedom of trade, labour, and manufacture; and in general, not clearly foreseeing the difficulties of economic life, he wished to solve them by the free plan of individual force and intelligence rather than by legislation. But he recognized the great economic utility of associations. A characteristic note of his scientific speculations is his fondness for considering social phenomena from a mathematical point of view, so that he was called the geometrician of economy. This made him attach great importance to statistics. In politics he is the father of the principle of non-intervention, and published an essay on the subject. A most distinguished representative of the middle-class Liberal doctrinaires of a policy too advanced for the supporters of the Holy Alliance, and too backward for the generation that was being prepared by Cavour. Garnier, Notice sur la vie et les travaux de M. Rossi)Paris, 1849); Reybau, Economistes modernes (Paris, 1862); Processi dell' assassinio del conte P. Rossi (Rome, 1854) in Hist. pol. Blatter, XXVI, 109 sqq.; Civilta Catt., 2nd series, VIII; D'Ideville, Le comte Pellegrino Rossi (Paris, 1887). U. BENIGNI Gioacchino Antonio Rossini Gioacchino Antonio Rossini Born 29 February, 1792, at Pesaro in the Romagna; died 13 November, 1868, at Passy, near Paris. He was twice married: in 1822 to Isabella Colbrand; in 1847 to Olympe Pélissier, who survived him, but he had no children. Rossini was not only the chief operatic composer of his time, but also a great innovator. Lesueur, in 1824, the greatest composer of the French school, said that "his ardent genius had opened a new road and marked a new epoch in musical art". In the opera seria for long recitatives he substituted more singing; in the opera buffa he inaugurated a new comedy style. He introduced many new instruments into the Italian orchestras. To him belongs the preghiera for a whole body of voices, as first introduced in "Mosè". He had a good baritone voice, and was an excellent pianist. In 1804 he had lessons in singing and pianoforte playing at Bologna. Two years later he acted as musical director to a traveling company, but soon returned to Bologna to study composition at the Lyceum. His first successes were at Venice and Milan. In 1813 he wrote "Tancredi", the first of his operas which, with "L'Italiana in Algeri", became celebrated throughout Europe. In 1816 and 1817 he composed for the Teatro Valle at Rome his happiest, if not his greatest work, "The Barber of Seville" and "Cenerentola". Meanwhile he had begun his career at the San Carlo in Naples, and wrote for this important opera-house in 1818 "Mosè", in 1819 "La Donna del Lago". In 1823 came "Semiramide", written for Venice, his last work in Italy; it was his thirty-fourth opera. In 1824 he spent the season in London, and at the first concert he himself sang the solo. The same year he undertook in Paris the direction, first of the Italian Opera, and then of the Académie. He wrote for Paris in 1829 "William Tell", his last and finest opera. Then followed the comparatively inactive period of his life, in which he ceased to write for the stage, but still produced in 1832 his well known "Stabat", in 1847 his "Stanzas" to Pius IX, in 1864 a "Messe Solennelle". In 1836 he went to live with his father at Bologna; but from 1855 till his death he was again in France. Edwards, The Life Of Rossini (London, 1869); Silvestri, Della Vita e delle opere di G. Rossini (Milan, 1874); Azevedo, Rossini, sa vie et ses oeuvres (Paris, 1864); Oettinger, Joachim Rossini (Lepizig, 1852). A. WALTER Sebastian von Rostock Sebastian von Rostock Bishop of Breslau, b. at Grottkau, Silesia, 24 Aug. 1607; d. at Breslau, 9 June, 1671. He studied classics at Neisse and from 1627 to 1633, philosophy and theology at Olmutz. After his ordination to the priesthood in 1633 he was assigned to pastoral duty at Neisse, and was distinguished for his courage and oratorical talent. When the Swedes captured the city in 1642, Rostock was taken prisoner and deported to Stettin. After his release he was ennobled by the emperor, but remained pastor of Neisse until his transfer in 1649 to the cathedral of Breslau. Henceforth he played a prominent part in the administration of the diocese, and in 1653 was appointed vicar-general. It was largely through his efforts that the right of reformation (jus reformandi), granted the emperor by the peace of Westphalia, was effectively exercised in the territory of Breslau, so that 656 Catholic churches which had been seized by the Protestants were restored to their former owners. Considerable difficulty was experienced in providing suitable priests for these numerous churches, and in infusing new religious life into an almost completely-ruined diocese. But Rostock consecrated his life to the task, in spite of the additional difficulty from the almost uninterrupted absence from their diocese of the three bishops under whom he served. In 1664 he was himself elected bishop, and shortly after the civil administration of the district was also placed in his hands. He continued with greater independence in work of Catholic reorganization, endeavoured to suppress the power of the Protestants over affairs of the Catholic Church and to neutralize the anti-Catholic influence of Protestant teachers. He succumbed to an attack of apoplexy, superinduced by an imperial decree which suspended a decision that had been previously granted and which was favourable to Catholic interests. Jungnitz, Sebastian von Rostock (Breslau, 1891). N.A. WEBER University of Rostock University of Rostock Located in Mecklenburg-Schwerin, founded in the year 1419 through the united efforts of Dukes John IV and Albert V, and on 13 February of the same year granted a Bull of foundation by Pope Martin V. At first the university included only the three secular faculties; in 1432 a theological faculty was added with the approval of Eugenius IV. The Bishop of Schwerin was appointed chancellor of the university; his present successors are the Grand Dukes of Mecklenburg. The majority of the professors came from Erfurt, among them the first rector, Petrus Stenbeke. The city of Rostock endowed the university most generously with lands, as did the Bishop of Schwerin, who presented his house at Rostock as a residence. At a later date it received contributions from Hamburg and Lubeck. In 1427 it obtained from Martin V a unique privilege, allowing the rector in conjunction with several doctors to bestow a degree if the chancellor refused without a valid reason to grant it. When Rostock was placed under the bann of the empire and the Church on account of outbreaks among the citizens, the university moved to Greifswald (Easter, 1437). In 1443 it returned to Rostock, but when the dukes wished to raise one of the churches of the city to a cathedral-church in order to give the professors the canonries as benefices, the town opposed the procedure and there developed what is known as the cathedral feud. The university migrated temporarily in the summer of 1487 to Wismar and then to Lubeck. It fell into complete decay after the beginning of the Reformation in (1523) when the university revenues were lost and matriculations ceased. When an effort was made later to reorganize the university a dispute arose between the city of Rostock and the dukes of Mecklenburg as to the administration and supervision of the school. In 1563 the agreement called the "Formula concordiae", was made between the contending parties, which granted nearly equal rights to both. The university now enjoyed an era of prosperity. In 1758 Duke Frederick desired the appointment of a rigidly orthodox professor, but the theological faculty opposed him; whereupon the duke obtained an imperial patent for the founding of a university at Butzow which was opened in 1760. The two universities proving too expensive for the country, the school at Butzow was closed and united with Rostock in 1789. In 1829 the town council renounced its right of co-patronage. During the second half of the nineteenth century the University began steadily to develop and gain, so that in 1911 it had about 800 students. Krabbe, Die Universitdat Rostock im XV. und XVI. Jarhundrert (Rockstock, 1854); Hofmeister, Die Matrikel der Universitdat Rostock (1899). KARL HOEBER Sacra Romana Rota Sacra Romana Rota In the Constitution "Sapienti Consilio" (29 June, 1908), II, 2, Pins X re-established the Sacra Romana Rota, one of the three tribunals instituted by that Constitution. To it are assigned all contentious cases that must come before the Holy See and require a judicial investigation with proof, except the so-called major cases. The Rota therefore tries in the first instance the cases, including criminal cases, which the pope, either motu proprio or at the request of the contesting parties, calls up for his own judgment and commits to the Rota; it decides these cases even in the second and third instance. Moreover, it is the court of appeal for cases already tried judicially in the episcopal tribunals of first instance. Finally, it decides in the last instance cases tried by any inferior tribunal of second or further instance, as the cause has not then become res judicata. In addition to major cases, episcopal decisions which are given without judicial procedure are excluded from its authority, being under the jurisdiction of other congregations. The Rota is composed of the auditors, ranking as prelates, appointed by the pope; they must be priests who have obtained a doctorate in theology and canon law. When they reach the age of seventy their office ceases ipso facto, but they retain the title of "emeritus auditor". These form a college of which the oldest among them is dean. Each auditor chooses an assistant, who must be a doctor of canon law, and whose selection must be approved by the pope. Other officers are a promotor of justice, corresponding to the pubblico ministero in modern Italian civil courts, and, for cases relating to matrimony, religious profession and sacred ordination, a defender of the bond (defensor vinculi), who may have a substitute. These officers are appointed by the pope on the recommendation of the College of Auditors. There are also notaries (at present three in number) selected by the College of Auditors after a concursus, to draw up acts, etc. The auditors give their decision either through three of their number or in pleno; but sometimes the pope may in a particular case ordain otherwise. A case may also be submitted to the Rota not for a decision but for an opinion. The auditor who prepares the report is called the ponente or relator. An appeal may be made from one judicial commission to another. The contestants may plead personally or, as more ordinarily happens, may employ a procurator or advocate, whose selection must be confirmed. The complaint and the defence must be in writing or printed, and copies distributed among the judges, the assistants, the promotor, and others concerned. The written defence may be elucidated orally in presence of the judges. The auditors decide by a majority of votes. The sentence must contain not only the conclusion arrived at, but the reasons therefor. HISTORY The many and various ecclesiastical cases which were referred to the Holy See from every quarter of the Christian world were, till near the end of the twelfth century, discussed and decided by the pope, as a rule, in the Consistory, which from the presence of many bishops became like a council. From the end of the twelfth century, however, owing to the increasing number of these cases and to the more detailed and complicated procedure, the popes appointed for each case either a cardinal or one of their chaplains, and sometimes a bishop, to arrange for the suit, hear the evidence of the litigants (hence the term auditor), and then make a report to thc pope, who would give his decision personally or in a Consistory. Sometimes, too, the auditor was empowered to decide, but his judgment had to be confirmed by the pope. In the latter half of the thirteenth century we find the auditors as a class distinct from the chaplains, with the title of "Sacri palatii causarurn generales auditores". This innovation was made by Innocent IV, who entrusted to them cases relating to benefices (which had increased owing to the many expectative reservations granted by this pope) and other minor ones, while he employed the cardinals in the other cases. Gradually the various cases were almost always entrusted to them for decision, subject to the approval of the sovereign pontiff. The auditors consequently did not as yet constitute a tribunal with definitive jurisdiction, but only a college from which the pope selected at pleasure judges for the cases he chose to entrust to them. Nicholas III and Martin IV temporarily appointed auditors general for civil suits in the papal dominions; Nicholas IV (1288) appointed them permanently for the various provinces of the pontifical states. Clement V (1307) instituted an auditor general with two others in the second instance for ecclesiastical beneficiary suits, and in 1309 an auditor general for contentious ecclesiastical cases, the litigant having the choice of going before the pope himself or the auditor general. Thus arose an autonomous tribunal, but one in concurrence with the pope. From the year 1323 we have the first document of a transaction adjudicated collegialiter, and in a definitive way by that, tribunal; John XXII, by the Bull "Ratio Juris" (1331), laid down certain rules for it; but its sphere of competency was not marked out, so through all the fourteenth century the causes were referred in a special way to the pope. Sixtus IV fixed the number of auditors at twelve. Other popes, like Martin V ("Romani pontificis", 1422; "Statuta et ordinationes", 1414), Innocent VIII ("Finem litibus", 1487), Pius IV ("In throno justitiae", 1561), Paul V ("Universi agri", 1611), determined their competency more definitely. Civil appeals in the papal dominions were also entrusted to the tribunals of the auditors of the sacred palace, probably after the end of the Western Schism; but criminal eases were always excluded. With the institution of the Roman congregations the jurisdiction of the Rota in ecclesiastical matters was greatly curtailed, and it became, generally speaking, a civil tribunal, enjoying a world-wide reputation. CHARACTER The civil character of the Rota was confirmed by the legislation of Gregory XVI, and mixed suits and purely ecclesiastical suits concerning economical matters, if the subject matter did not amount to over 500 scudi, were assigned to it. Leo XIII entrusted to the auditors part of the process of beatification and canonization, as well as the canonical suits of those employed in the Apostolic Palace. Formerly the auditors had many privileges. France, Austria, Spain, Venice, and Milan each had the right of proposing one of their subjects as an auditor. Austria still has the privilege, at present the auditors being two in number. From 1774 there has been a tribunal of the Rota at Madrid, the president of which is the Nuncio. The origin of the name Rota is uncertain and has been a matter of discussion; it occurs first in 1336. U. BENIGNI Heinrich Roth Heinrich Roth Missionary in India and Sanskrit scholar, b. of illustrious parentage at Augsburg, 18 December, 1620; d. at Agra, 20 June, 1668. He became a Jesuit in 1639; was assigned to the Ethiopian mission (Piccolomini, "Instruction pro P. Hen. Roth, Ingolstadio, ad missionem Aethiopicam profecturo", in Huonder, "Deutsche jesuitenmissionare im 17. und 18. Jahr.", Freiburg, 1899, 213), and arrived at Goa by the land route, via Ispahan. He laboured first on the Island of Salsette off Goa, where from time to time he acted as Portuguese interpreter. He was sent on an embassy to one of the native princes, and finally reached the empire of the Great Mogul, where, as rector of the residence at Agra, he was involved in the persecution under Shah Jahán. Here the French explorer, Francis Bernier, learned to know and appreciate him as one eminently versed in expert knowledge of the philosophy of religions in India ("Travels in Hindustan", new ed., Calcutta, 1904, p. 109 sqq.). In 1662 Roth revisited Europe by the land route via Kabul to obtain new recruits for the mission, and returned to Agra in 1664. Roth shares with the Jesuit, Hanxleden, the fame of being among Europeans the pioneer Sanskrit scholar, and of having compiled the first Sanskrit grammar (Wiener, Zeitschr. für die Kunde des Morgenlandes, XV, 1901, pp. 303-320). "During his stay in Agra, he succeeded in persuading some Brahmins to teach him Sanskrit and, after six years of diligent study, he obtained complete mastery of this difficult tongue. He was the author of the interesting description of the Sanskrit alphabet, published by Athanasius Kircher in his "China illustrata" (Max Müller, "Lectures on the Science of Language", London, 1866, p. 277. Roth's works, most of which were published by his learned friend, Athanasius Kircher, S.J., are: "Relatio rerum notabilium Regni Mogor in Asia", which contains the first information concerning Kabul which had reached Europe (Straubing, 1665, Aschaffenburg, 1668); "Iter ex Agra Mogorum in Europam ex relatione PP. Joh. Gruberi et H. Roth" in Kircher, "China illustrata" (Amsterdam, 1667), pp. 91 sqq.; "Itinerarium St. Thomae Apost. ex Judaea in Indiam", and "Dogmata varia fabulossissima Brachmanorum", ib., 156-162; "Exactissimum opus totius grammaticae Brachmanicae cujus et rudimenta is [Roth] primus Europae communicavit" in "Romani Collegii S.J. musaeum" (Amsterdam, 1678), p. 65; a letter (Rome, 1664) in "Welt-Bott", I (Augsburg, 1726), 35 manuscript-letters and relations in Royal Library, Brussels, Nos. 6828-29, fol. 415. HOSTEN, Jesuit Missionaries in Northern India, 1580-1803 (Calcutta, 1906), 30 sqq.; BALFOUR, Encycl. of India (London, 1885), s. v.; BENFEY, Gesch. der Sprachwissenschaft (Munich, 1869), 335; V. SCHLEGEL, Sprache u. Weisheit der Indier (Heidelberg, 1808), p. xi. ANTHONY HUONDER David Rothe David Rothe Bishop of Ossory (Ireland), b. at Kilkenny in 1573, of a distinguished family; d. 20 April, 1650. Having studied at the Irish College, Douai, and at the University of Salamanca, where he graduated doctor in civil and canon law, he was ordained in 1600, and proceeded to Rome. From 1601 to 1609 he was professor of theology and secretary to Archbishop Lombard, and on 15 June, 1609, was appointed Vice-Primate of Armagh. He arrived in Ireland in 1610, having been made prothonotary Apostolic, and held a synod for the Ulster Province at Drogheda, in February, 1614, and a second synod in 1618. Though appointed Bishop of Ossory on 10 October, 1618, he had, owing to the severity of the penal laws, to seek consecration in Paris, where he was consecrated early in 1620; he returned to Ireland in the winter of 1621. As early as 1616, Dr. Rothe had published the first part of his famous "Analecta" and the completed work was issued at Cologne (1617-19); a new edition was brought out by Cardinal Moran in 1884. In 1620 he published "Brigida Thaumaturga", at Paris, followed by "Hiberniae sive Antiquioris Scotiae" in 1621 at Antwerp, and "Hibernia Resurgens" at Paris, in the same year. Other works of his except some few fragments have long since disappeared. In 1624 Bishop Rothe presided over a synod at Kilkenny, and he labored zealously for religion and country during a trying period. He joined the Confederates in 1642, and welcomed the papal nuncio, Rinuccini, to Kilkenny, on 14 November, 1645. Unfortunately, three years later, he refused to acknowledge the validity of the censures issued by Rinuccini, believing that the Supreme Council were acting in the best interests of the country. Although seriously ill in 1649, he continued to minister to the plague-stricken citizens of Kilkenny. He was compelled by the Cromwellians to leave his episcopal city 28 March, 1650, but, being robbed on the way, he was permitted to return. His remains were interred in St. Mary's Church, but there is a cenotaph to his memory in St. Canice's Cathedral. LYNCH, De praesulibus Hiberniae (1672); WARE, De praesulibus Hiberniae (Dublin, 1665); MEEHAN, Franciscan Monasteries (Dublin, 1872); MORAN, Spicilegium 0ssoriense (Dublin, 1874-84); CARRIGAN, History of Ossory (Dublin 1905); Report on Franciscan MSS. in Hist. MSS. Com. (Dublin, 1906). W.H. GRATTAN-FLOOD Rottenburg Rottenburg (ROTTENBURGENSIS). Diocese; suffragan of the ecclesiastical Province of the Upper Rhine. It embraces the Kingdom of Wurtemberg, three parishes in the Grand Duchy of Baden, and one parish in the Prussian territory of Hohenzollern-Sigmaringen. The diocese is divided into 29 deaneries, and in 1911 contained 698 parishes, 19 Pfarrkuratien (incorporated churches with an independent care of souls), 164 chaplaincies, and 155 other pastoral charges; 1084 active and 75 pensioned secular clergy; and 728,000 Catholics. The cathedral chapter, which enjoys the right of electing the bishops, consists of a cathedral dean and vicar-general, six capitulars, and six cathedral prebendaries. The bishop, cathedral dean, and the six capitulars constitute also the ordinariate; the legal adviser of the ordinariate is the syndicus, a lay official who is likewise director of the chancellery of the ordinariate, consisting of six members. The rights of the State circa sacra are entrusted to a royal Catholic church council, which is composed of a director, two clerical, and several lay members. The diocesan institutions are: the priests' seminary at Rottenburg, with a regent, viceregent, and a Repetent, or private tutor; the theological college "Wilhelmsstift" at Tübingen with a director and 7 Repetenten, supported by the State, and placed under the supervision of the bishop and church council; the gymnasial boarding-schools at Ehingen and Rottweil, also maintained by the State: the diocesan boys' seminaries at Rottenburg and Mergentheim. Theological students are trained partly in the "Wilhelmsstift" and partly in the theological faculty of University of Tübingen, which has four ordinary and three extraordinary clerical professors. The "Theologische Quartalschrift", the oldest theological periodical in Germany, is published by the professors of the theological faculty. Priests also act as instructors in the private boarding schools at Ehingen, Ellwangen, and Rottweil, which are under the patronage of the bishop, as well as in the twenty-four State intermediate schools (Gymnasien, Realschulen, Lateinschulen etc.). Despite every effort on the part of the Catholics, the male religious orders have not yet been readmitted into the Kingdom of Wurtemberg. In 1910 the following orders and congregations of women had establishments in the diocese: the Congregation of the Third Order of St. Francis, who have a mother-house at Bonlanden, a boarding school, and two branches (116 sisters); the Sisters of St. Francis from Heiligenbronn, with a mother-house and two branches (188 sisters), who conduct an institute for the rescue, education, and boarding of poor neglected girls, an institute for boys, and a children's home; the School Sisters of Our Blessed Lady, with a mother-house at Ravensburg and one branch (79 sisters); the Sisters of the Third Order of St. Francis, from Reute, who have 103 nursing establishments, schools for manual work, and schools for children (783 sisters); the School Sisters of the Order of St. Francis, who have a mother-house at Siessen and 30 branches (373 sisters), and conduct several high schools for girls, and numerous public schools and schools for manual work; the Sisters of Mercy of St. Vincent de Paul, who have a mother-house at Untermarchtal and 127 branches (1245 sisters), and, besides nursing the sick, conduct schools for children, and schools for manual training, homes for working women, boarding schools, and rescue institutions; the Sisters of the Holy Cross, from Strasburg, Alsace, who have one establishment with 13 sisters. There are also in the diocese 11 ecclesiastical boarding schools for poor children and one royal orphanage under religious direction. Of the numerous Catholic churches notable from the artistic standpoint may be mentioned: the Cathedral of St. Martin at Rottenburg, a three-naved Gothic basilica, which was completely renovated after the fire of 1644 (a new cathedral is being planned by the present bishop); the late roman Church of St. John at Gmund (thirteenth century); the Gothic parish church of Gmund (1351-1410); the church of the former Benedictine Monastery of Ellwangen, the largest Romanesque church in the country (1124); the parish church of Weingarten; the "Sankt Petersdom Württembergs", erected in the Baroque style by the Benedictines (1738-53); the Gothic Church of Our Lady, Stuttgart (1879). Of the churches which were formerly Catholic, but which now are Protestant, the most important is the Gothic cathedral at Ulm (1377-1494), which has the highest church tower in the world (over 528 feet). Much frequented places of pilgrimage are Weingarten, Weggental, near Rottenburg; Reute, with the grave of Blessed Elizabeth Bona; the Schönberg, near Ellwangen, the Dreifaltigkeitsberg, near Spaichingen. Concerning the erection and beginnings of the diocese, see PROVINCE OF THE UPPER RHINE; concerning its further history and the relations between the Catholic Church and the State, see WÜRTEMBERG. It will be sufficient here to give a list of the bishops: Johann Baptist von Keller (1828-45), the first bishop; Joseph von Lipp (1848-69); Karl Joseph von Hefele (1869-93); Wilhelm von Reiser (1893-98); Franz Xaver von Linsenmann, d. 21 Sept., 1898, before his consecration; Paul Wilhelm von Keppler (elected 11 Nov., 1898; consecrated 18 Jan., 1899). Die kathol, Kirchengesetze fur das Bistum Rottenburg, ed. LANG (Rottenburg, 1836); GOLTHER, Der Staat u. die kathol. Kirche im Konigreich Wurttemberg (Stuttgart, 1874); cf. therewith RUMELIN, Reden und Aufsatze, new series (Freiburg, 1881), 205-77; RUCKGABER, Die Diozese Rottenburg u. ihre Anklager (Tübingen 1869); Die kathol. Kirche unserer Zeit, II (Munich, 1900), 97-102; NEHER, Die kathol. u. evangel. Geistlichen Wurttembergs, 1813-1901 (Ravensburg, 1904); Personalkatalog des Bistums Rottenb. (Rottenburg, 1910); Diozesanarchiv von Schwaben (Stuttgart, 1882); concerning the churches see KEPPLER, Wurttembergs kirchl. Kunstaltertumer (Rottenburg, 1888); Das Konigreich Wurttemberg, ed. by the NATIONAL OFFICE OF STATISTICS, 4 vols., 2nd ed. (Stuttgart, 1904-7); Kunst und Altertumsdenkmale im Konigreich Wurttemberg (Esslingen, up to 1909), 60 parts. JOSEPH LINS Rotuli Rotuli Rotuli, i.e. rolls — in which a long narrow strip of papyrus or parchment, written on one side, was wound like a blind about its staff — formed the earliest kind of "volume" (volumen from volvere, to roll up) of which we have knowledge. Many such rolls have been recovered in their primitive form from the excavations at Herculancum and elsewhere. In the fourth and fifth centuries, however, these rolls began to give place to books bound as we know them now, i.e. a number of written leaves were laid flat one on top of the other and attached together by their corresponding edges. This was a gain in convenience, but for certain purposes rolls were still. retained. To this latter class belonged certain legal records (from which is still. derived the title of the judicial functionary known as the "Master of the Rolls"), also the manuscripts used for the chanting of the Exultet, and especially the documents employed in sending round the names of the deceased belonging to monasteries and other associations which were banded together to pray mutually for each other's dead. These "mortuary rolls" (in French "rouleaux des morts") were called in Latin "rotuli". They consisted of strips of parchment, sometimes of prodigious length, at the head of which was entered the notification of the death of a particular person deceased or sometimes of a group of such persons. The roll was then carried by a special messenger ("gerulus", "rotularius", "rollifer", "tomiger", "breviator", were some of the various titles given him) from monastery to monastery, and at each an entry was made upon the roll attesting the fact that the notice had been received and that the requisite suffrages would be said. By degrees a custom grew up in many places of making these entries in verse with complimentary amplifications often occupying many lines. It will be readily understood that these records, some of which are still in existence, preserving as they do specimens of ornate verse composition by a representative scholar of each monastery or institution, and engrossed on the roll by some skillful penman in each community, afford valuable materials both for the study of palaeography and also for a comparative judgment of the standard of scholarship prevalent in these different centres of learning. The use of these mortuary rolls flourished most in the eleventh, twelfth, and thirteenth centuries. Some are of prodigious size. That of the Abbess Matilda of Caen, the daughter of William the Conqueror, was seventy two feet long and eight or ten inches wide, but this no doubt was altogether exceptional. DELISLE:, Rouleaux des morts du IX au XV siecle (Paris, 1866); IDEM in Bibl. de l'ecole des Chartes, series II, vol. III; Sur l'usage de prier pour les morts; THURSTON, A Mediaeval Mortuary-card in The Month (London, Dec., 1896); NICHOLS in Mem. Archaeolog. Institute (Norwich, 1847); MOLINIER, Obituaires francais au moyen-age (Paris, 1886); EBNER, Gebetsverbruderungen (Freiburg, 1891); WATTENBACH, Schriftwesen im Mittelalter (3rd ed., Leipzig), 150-74. HERBERT THURSTON Archdiocese of Rouen Archdiocese of Rouen (ROTHOMAGENSIS) Revived by the Concordat of 1802 with the Sees of Bayeux, Evreux, and Séez as suffragans: it also includes the Department of the Seine Inferieure. The Archdiocese of Rouen was curtailed in 1802 by giving the Archdeanery of Pontoise to the Diocese of Versailles; the Deaneries of Pont Audemer and Bourgtheroulde, and a part of the Deanery of Périer, to the Diocese of Evreux; several parishes of the Deanery of Aumale were annexed to the Diocese of Beauvais. The Archbishop of Rouen bears the title of Primate of Normandy. Rouen, chief city of the Secunda Provincia Lugdunensis under Constantine, and later of Neustria, has been since 912 the capital of Normandy and residence of the dukes. The episcopal catalogues of the ninth and tenth centuries and the "Liber Eburneus" of the cathedral of Rouen, which extends to 1068, indicate St. Mellon as first Bishop of Rouen; the "Liber Niger" of St. Ouen which comes down to 1079 and the episcopal lists dating from the twelfth century mention the episcopate of a certain Nicasius (Nicaise) as antedating that of St. Mellon. The legend of this Nicaise, based on Hilduin, makes him and his two companions, Quirinus and Scubiculus, disciples of St. Denis who came from Rome to Normandy but suffered martyrdom at their arrival on the banks of the river Epte. It was under the episcopate of William (Bonne Ame) the Good (1079-1110) that the name of Nicaise was placed at the head of the episcopal lists of Rouen. A number of saints were the successors of St. Mellon; according to the chronology of the Abbé Sauvage they were: St. Avitianus (about 314); St. Severus; St. Victricius, born about 330, a soldier in the beginning of his career and as such a confessor of the Faith under Julian the Apostate; made Bishop of Rouen about 380 and died, according to his biographer, Abbé Vacandard, before 409; famous for his friendship with St. Paulinus of Nola and St. Martin, also for going in 396 to England where he worked zealously for the conversion of the English people; his treatise "De Laude Sanctorum" is a strong plea in favour of the devotion to relics; Innocent I commissioned him in 404 to make known in Gaul the "Liber Regularum", which contains urgent instructions for ecclesiastical celibacy, for the respect due to the hierarchy, and Roman supremacy; St. Innocent; St. Evodius (about 430); St. Goldardus (490-525), brother of St. Medardus, one of the assistants at the baptism and coronation of Clovis; St. Flavius; St. Pretextatus (550-586), exiled in 577 by order of King Chilperic, was reinstated in the diocese in 584, and stabbed before the altar in 586 by order of Fredegonde; St. Romanus (631-641) former chancellor of Clotaire II; legend relates how he delivered the environs of Rouen from a monster called Gargouille, having had him captured by a liberated prisoner in commemoration of St. Romain in the Middle Ages the Archbishops of Rouen were granted the right to set a prisoner free on the day that the reliquary of the saint was carried in procession; St. Ouen (Audoennus) (641-684), previous to his appointment as bishop, was chancellor of Dagobert, and wrote a life of St. Eloy (Eligius); his episcopate was distinguished by the foundation of the monasteries of Fontenelle, Jumièges, and Fécamp, by the unceasing efforts he made to exterminate all traces of paganism in his dioceses, and by the arbitration effected through his influence between Austrasia and Neustria; his fame as a miracle-worker was great in the Middle Ages; St. Ansbert (684-92 or 93) chancellor of Clotaire III, and afterwards confined for political reasons by Pepin of Heristal in the Abbey of Hautmont; recently there was found in the library of Carlsruhe a curious little poem of the seventh century written by him on St. Ouen; this poem came originally from the Abbey of Reichenau; St. Hugh (722-30) was a monk of Jumièges before being made bishop; he subsequently combined the Sees of Rouen, Paris and Bayeux, also the abbeys of Jumiegès and Fontenelle; St. Remi (755-772), brother of King Pepin, was also archbishop of Rouen. Guntbaldus who had played a certain part in the restoration of Louis the Pious, having become Bishop of Rouen, was commissioned in 846 by Sergius II to settle a dispute between Ebbo and Hincmar, and died in 849. The name of a certain St. Leo who suffered martyrdom at Bayonne sometimes appears incorrectly on the lists of archbishops of Rouen at the end of the ninth century and should be struck off. Among the more famous archbishops of Rouen were: Archbishop Franco (911-19), who baptized the Northman chief Rollo; St. Maurille (1055-67), who reformed his clergy and fought the heresy of Berengarius; John of Bayeux (1069-79), whose book on ecclesiastical services regulated religious devotions in Normandy; William I (Bonne Ame) (1071-1119), first a Benedictine and allowed St. Anselm to leave the Abbey of Bec to occupy the See of Canterbury; Hugh of Amiens (1130-74), author of numerous theological works; under his episcopate Rouen was honoured in May, 1131, by a visit from Innocent II, the only pope who ever entered Normandy; Gautier de Coutances called the Magnificent (1184-1207) the favourite companion of Richard the Lion Hearted; Eudes II Rigaud (1247-1274), one of the most eminent statesmen of the day; he accompanied St. Louis on his Tunis crusade and left a diary of his pastoral visitations which has the most important bearing on the ecclesiastical history of the province; Gilles Aycelin (1311-18), Chancellor of France; Pierre Roger (1330-39) became Pope Clement VI; Peter de la Foret (1352-56) was at first Bishop of Paris and became a cardinal in 1356 as Chancellor of France he was one of the most faithful adherents of the dauphin, afterwards Charles V. During the Hundred Years War the English occupied Rouen from 1417-1449; the Duke of Bedford at his own request was formally made a member of the Chapter of Rouen in 1430. The English rule, so severe for the people, increased the privileges of the clergy but dealt rigorously with such ecclesiastics as were thought rebellious; especially with Archbishop Louis de Harcourt who was deprived in 1421 of his possessions for refusing to pay homage to Henry V. The following should be added to the list of archbishops: John of la Rochetaillée (1423-29), cardinal in 1426; Louis of Luxembourg (1436-42), cardinal in 1439, was the sworn agent in France of Henry VI, King of England; William of Estouteville (1453-83), cardinal in 1437 and commissioned by Nicholas V in 1453 to mediate between France and England, and to obtain from Charles VII certain modifications of the Pragmatic Sanction; Robert of Croismare (1483-93) and Cardinal Georges d'Amboise (1493-1510), both of whom played an important part in the Renaissance movement; the two Cardinals Charles of Bourbon (1550-90 and 1590-94), the first of whom was at one time a candidate for the throne of France; François, Cardinal de Joyeuse (1604-15) who negotiated peace in the name of Henry IV between Paul V and the Republic of Venice; the two François de Harlay (1615-51) and (1651-71); John Nicholas Colbert (1691-1707), son of the minister; Nicholas de Saulx Tavannes (1733-59), cardinal in 1756; Dominic de la Rochefoucauld (1759-1800), cardinal in 1778, president of the clergy at the States General, emigrated after 10 August, 1792, and died in exile at Münster; Etienne Hubert de Cambacérès (1802-18) brother of the archchancellor of Napoleon, cardinal in 1803; Prince de Croy (1823-44), chief almoner of France under the Restoration, and cardinal in 1825; Henry de Bonnechose (1858-83), cardinal in 1863; Léon Thomas (1884-94), cardinal in 1893; William Sourrieu (1894-99), cardinal in 1897. It is not known exactly whether Rouen became a metropolitan at the time of St. Victricius or under Bishop Grimo, who in 744 received the pallium from Pope Zachary; in the Middle Ages it exercised metropolitan rights over Evreux, Avranches, Seez, Bayeux, Lisieux, and Coutances. It seems that in the seventh century Lillebonne (Juliobona) was for a short time the see of a bishop suffragan of Rouen. The Archbishop of Rouen assumed at an early date the title of Primate of Normandy and Neustria, to indicate the entire independence of his metropolitan see which was directly subject to the Holy See. In vain did Gebuin, Archbishop of Lyons, obtain from Gregory VII two Bulls in 1070 which recognized his primacy over Rouen; they remained unexecuted as well as a similar Bull of Celestine II given in 1144. On 12 November, 1455, Cardinal Dominic Capranica, papal delegate, recognized the independence of the Church of Rouen by giving a definite decision, confirmed in 1457 and 1458 by two Bulls of Callistus III. The Archdeacon of Rouen was known as the "grand archidiacre de la chrétienté". The Chapter, in virtue of a Bull from Gregory XI in 1371, was completely exempt from the archbishop's jurisdiction both spiritual and temporal. Nicholas Oresme (died 1382) was head master of the College of Navarre and Bishop of Lisieux; he translated Aristotle and was dean of the Church of Rouen; the famous Peter d'Ailly and the historian Thomas Basin, later Bishop of Lisieux belonged to the Chapter of Rouen. St. Remy, Bishop of Rouen, was after Chrodigang, Bishop of Metz, the principal initiator in the reform which under Pepin replaced the Gallican with the Roman liturgy. In 1729 the cathedral of Rouen accepted the breviary of Urbain Robinet, vicar-general of Rouen, who revised the liturgy in a Gallican sense. Later Cardinal Bonnechose insisted on the use of the Roman liturgy in the diocese. The Chapter of Rouen preserved the custom until the Revolution of chanting the Office by heart; it was forbidden even to bring a book into the choir. The faculty of Catholic theology of Rouen was founded in 1808 and organized in 1809; it was however suppressed in 1885. No town of France has produced such marvels of religious architecture as Rouen. The oldest part of the Cathedral, which has survived all fires, is the belfry of St. Romanus's tower, which dates from about 1160; the construction of the nave began about 1200; the Calende portal, so called from an imaginary animal, and the portals of the libraries, famous for the richness of their ornamentation, were finished in the first quarter of the fourteenth century. The Butter Tower (la Tour de Beurre), so called because it was built with the alms derived from the Lenten dispensations, dates from the end of the fifteenth and the beginning of the sixteenth century, and is one of the most famous edifices in the flamboyant style. The ninety-six choir stalls were carved in the fifteenth century under the direction of Philippot Viart and represent in their workmanship all the professions of the period. There are three celebrated tombs preserved in the cathedral; one, whether correctly or not, is said to be the tomb of Archbishop Maurille, and dates from the twelfth and thirteenth centuries; that of the two cardinals d'Amboise dates from 1520 to 1525 and on it is the statue of George d'Amboise, the work of Jean Goujon; that of Louis de Brézé, attributed in part to Jean Goujon, was executed from 1535 to 1544 at the expense of Diane de Poitiers, widow of Louis de Brézé. The present Church of St. Ouen, where a small Roman apse is still preserved and some bases of Roman pillars dating from the eleventh century, is one of the rare examples that exists in France of a large and beautiful church of the fourteenth century, almost complete, and one of the most delicate pieces of architecture extant. The Church of St. Maclou dates from the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries; the folding doors are attributed to Jean Goujon. On one side of the church is a monument unique in its way, the aitre st. Maclou. The word aitre is derived from Atrium. L'aitre St. Maclou, the old cemetery of the parish, is a large rectangular space surrounded by porticoes built in 1526-40, and shows the Renaissance style in all its purity. A Dance of Death (Danse Macabre) sculptured on its columns was unfortunately badly defaced by the Huguenots. The Palace of Justice in Rouen is one of the most celebrated buildings belonging to the end of the Gothic period. Among the twelve Benedictine abbeys for men which the Diocese of Rouen possessed under the old regime must be mentioned, besides Fontenelle and Jumièges, the Benedictine Abbey of St. Ouen de Rouen, founded in 548, where a school of theology flourished which was recognized by Gregory IX in 1238; and the Abbey of Fécamp, dedicated to the Trinity in 658 by St. Waningus (Vaning), Governor of Neustria and Count of the Palace under Clovis II. This was first occupied by nuns under the direction of St. Hildemarche, was ruined by the Normans in 841, and reopened for priests by Richard, first Duke of Normandy, who had the present beautiful church dedicated in 990. St. William (1001-28) was the first Abbot of Fécamp; he had among his successors the future Pope Clement VI and Jean Casimir, King of Poland, who, after abdicating his throne, became Abbot of Fécamp in 1669. The Abbey of St. George de Boscherville was founded in 1060 by Raoul de Tancarville, chamberlain of William the Conqueror. The abbey of Tréport was founded in 1056-59 by Robert, Count d'Eu, companion of William the Conqueror. During the religious wars the Calvinists committed great ravages in Rouen; having become masters of the city 16 April, 1562, they devastated St. Ouen, made a pyre in the centre of the church with the stalls and fragments of the superb screen, and then burnt the body of St. Ouen and other relics of the basilica. Rouen was retaken 26 October, 1562, by François de Guise and Antoine de Bourbon; the majority of Charles IX was proclaimed there in 1563. Rouen, which had declared for the League, was ineffectually besieged by Henry IV from December, 1591, to April, 1592, and only surrendered in 1594 to the new Bourbon king. In the eleventh century an association of distinguished men was founded at Rouen in honour of the Immaculate Conception. Its chief or president was called "prince". In 1486 Pierre Daré, lieutenant-general of the bailiwick of Rouen, was "prince" and converted the association into a literary society which awarded a prize for the best poems written on the Immaculate Conception. Every stanza of the poems, according to a special rule, must end with the same verse as the first; this repeated verse, which they called "palinodie", gave the name of "Palinod" to the confraternity. Malherbe took the prize in 1555; Pierre Corneille competed in 1633, but does not seem to have been crowned; Jacqueline Pascal received the prize in 1640; Thomas Corneille in 1641. The three-volume Bible, finished at the end of the twelfth century for the Chapter of Rouen, is one of the finest specimens of calligraphy of the Middle Ages. A copy of the "Chroniques de Normandie", made at Rouen about 1450 for the aldermen and given to Colbert in 1682 for the royal library, is illustrated with ten miniatures which are among the most beautiful productions of the fifteenth century., The finest copy extant of the "Chroniques de Monstrelet" was made at Rouen and contains drawings of the greatest importance for the history of the fifteenth century. The manuscripts, written in the sixteenth century by order of Cardinal George d'Amboise, who brought back with him the most beautiful manuscripts from the royal library of Naples, compare favourably with those of the best Italian masters. Besides those already mentioned, many saints are connected with the history of the Diocese of Rouen or are the objects there of special devotion: St. Severus (sixth century) who perhaps was the Bishop of Avranches and whose relics are preserved at the cathedral of Rouen; St. Austreberta, Benedictine abbess (seventh century); St. Sidonius, of Irish origin (seventh century); the hermit St. Clair, of Vexin, martyr of the ninth century; St. Lawrence O'Toole, Archbishop of Dublin, died at Eu in the diocese 1180; Blessed Joan of Arc was imprisoned at Rouen in the tower constructed in 1206 by King Philip Augustus, and was burned in the old market place 31 May, 1431, after her so-called abjuration at the cemetery of St. Ouen; St. John Baptist de la Salle, who established the first novitiate of the Brothers of the Christian Schools at St. Yon near Rouen in 1705 and died at Rouen in 1719. The saints given to the diocese by Fontenelle and Jumièges must also be mentioned. The saints of Fontenelle are: the founder, St. Wandrille (Wandregesilus) (570-667); the abbots St. Bain (about 729), St. Wando (742-756); St. Gerbold (died 806); St. Ansegisus (823-833), who compiled the capitularies or statutes of Charlemagne and Louis the Pious; St. Gerard (1008-31); and the monks St, Gond (died about 690); St. Erembert, who became, about 657, Bishop of Toulouse; St. Wulfram, Archbishop of Sens and apostle of the Frisians (died in 720); St. Agatho; St. Désiré; St. Sindoard; St. Condé (second half of the seventh century); St. Erbland or Hermeland, who died in 715 after founding the monastery of Hindre (Indret) in the Diocese of Nantes; St. Erinhard (died 739); St. Hardouin (died 811). The saints of Jumièges are: the founder, St. Philcert (675); St. Aicadre (died 687), and St. Gontard (1072-95). The distinguished natives of the diocese should also be mentioned: the two Corneille brothers; the philosopher, Fontenelle (1657-1757); the Jesuit, Brumoy (1688-1742), famous for his translations of Greek plays; the Jesuit, Gabriel Daniel (1649-1728), whose three-volume "History of France", published in 1713, is considered the first reliable and complete history of France; Cavelier de la Salle (1640-87), explorer of the Valley of the Mississippi; the Protestant theologian, Samuel Bochart (1599-1677), a famous Oriental scholar; the numerous Protestant family of Basnage, the most distinguished member of which, Jacques Basnage (1653-1723), is well known as a historian and diplomat; the liberal publicist, Armand Carrel (1800-36); Boildieu, the composer (1775-1834) and pupil of the cathedral music school of Rouen. The principal pilgrimages of the archdiocese are: Our Lady of Salvation (Notre Dame de Salut), near Fécamp, which dates from the eleventh century; Our Lady of Good Help (Notre Dame de Bon Secours) at Blosseville, a pilgrimage which existed in the thirteenth century; Our Lady of the Waves (Notre Dame des Flots) at St. Adresse, near the harbour of Havre, is a chapel built in the fourteenth century. Before the Law of 1901 directed against the religious orders, there were in the Diocese of Rouen, Benedictines, Jesuits, Dominicans, Franciscans, Picpusiens, Fathers of the Holy Ghost and of the Sacred Heart of Mary, and Brothers of the Christian Schools. Some religious orders for women originated in the diocese, of which the most important are the Sisters of Providence, a teaching order founded in Rouen in 1666 by the Minim Barré and the priest Antoine de Lahaye, and the Sisters of the Sacred Heart, hospitaliers and teachers, founded at Ernemont in 1698 by Archbishop Colbert. The religious owned in the Diocese of Rouen at the end of the nineteenth century 6 infant asylums, 43 infant schools, 1 asylum for deaf-mutes, 5 orphanages for boys, 1 orphanage for children of both sexes, 28 girls' orphanages, 3 schools of apprenticeship, 7 societies for preservation, 1 house of correction, 38 hospitals, 1 dispensary, 26 houses of religious who care for the sick in their homes, 4 houses of convalescence, 2 homes for incurables, 1 asylum for the blind. In 1910 the Diocese of Rouen had 863,879 inhabitants, 5 archdeaconeries, 45 deaneries, 16 first-class parishes, 47 second-class parishes, 599 succursal parishes, 53 curacies and about 800 priests. Gallia Christ. (nova) (1759), XI, 1-121, instr. 58; FISQUET. La France pontificale (Rouen, Paris, 1866); DUCHESNE, Fastes épiscopaux, II, 200-11; SAUVAGE, Elenchi episcoporum Rotomagensium in Anal. Boll. VIII (1889); FALLUE, Histoire politique et religieuse de l'église métropolitaine et du diocèse 4e Rouen (Rouen, 1850); VACANDARD, St Victrice évêque de Rouen (Paris, 1903); IDEM, Vie de St Ouen, évêque de Rouen (Paris, 1902); CHÉRUEL, Histoire de Rouen sous la domination anglaise au XV ^e siècle (Rouen. 1840); THIERRY, Armorial des archevêques de Rouen (Rouen, 1864); LOTH, Histoire du cardinal de la Rochefoucauld et du diocèse de Rouen pendant la Révolution (Rouen, 1893); CLÉRAMBRAY, La Terreur à Rouen (Rouen, 1901); TOUGARD, Catalogue des saints du diocèse de Rouen (Rouen, 1897); IDEM, L'hagiographie Rouennaise in Revue catholique de Normandie, 1909; LONGNON, Pouillés de la province de Rouen (Paris, 1903); Palinods présentés au Puy de Rouen, ed. ROBLLARD DE BEAUREPAIRE (Rouen, 1896); GUIOT, Les trois siècles palinodiques ou histoire générale des palinods, ed. TOUGARD (Rouen, 1898); SARRAZIN, Histoire de Rouen d'après les miniatures des manuscrits (Rouen, 1904); COOK, The Story of Rouen (London, 1899); COLLETTE, Histoire du bréviaire de Rouen (Rouen, 1902); ENLART, Rouen (Paris, 1904); PERKINS, The Churches of Rouen (London, 1900); LAALAND, A Short Guide to Rouen (Rouen, 1907); CHEVALIER, Topobibl., 2618-28. GEORGES GOYAU. Synods of Rouen Synods of Rouen The first synod is generally believed to have been held by Archbishop Saint-Ouen about 650. Sixteen of its decrees, one against simony, the others on liturgical and canonical matters, are still extant. Pommeraye (loc. cit. infra.) and a few others place this synod in the second half of the ninth century. Later synods were presided over by: Archbishop St. Ansbert some time between 689-93; Archbishop Mauger in 1048; the papal legate Hermanfrid of Sitten at Lisieux in 1055, at which Archbishop Mauger of Rouen was deposed for his loose morals; Archbishop Maurilius in 1055, which drew up a creed against Berengarius of Tours to be subscribed to by all newly elected bishops; Archbishop John of Bayeaux, one in 1072 and two in 1074, urging ecclesiastical reforms; Archbishop William in 1096, at which the decrees of the Council of Clermont (1095) were proclaimed; Archbishop Goisfred in 1118, at which the papal legate Conrad asked the assembled prelates and princes to support Gelasius II against Emperor Henry V and his antipope, Burdinus (Gregory VIII); the same Archbishop in 1119, and the cardinal legate Matthew of Albano, in 1128, to enforce clerical celibacy; Archbishop Gualterus in 1190, and the papal legate Robert de Courçon, in 1214 to urge clerical reform. Other synods were held in 1223, 1231, 1278, 1313, 1321, 1335, 1342, 1445, and 1581. The synod held by Archbishop Colbert in 1699 condemned Fénelon's "Maximes des Saints". The last provincial synod was held by Archbishop Bailleul in 1830; for its Acts see "Collectio Lacensis", IV, 513-36. MICHAEL OTT Adrien Rouquette Adrien Rouquette Born in Louisiana in 1813, of French parentage; died as a missionary among the Choctaw Indians in 1887. The great passion of his youth was devotion to the Choctaw Indians. He was sent north in 1824 to divert his mind from his savage associates. In 1829 he was sent to France and finished his collegiate studies in Paris, Nantes, and Rennes, winning his baccalaureate in 1833. He returned to New Orleans, but refused to mingle in worldly pleasures, and spent much time alone or among his Indian friends. Later he returned to Paris to study law, but preferred literature, and returning to Louisiana, led a desultory life until 1842. He then made a third visit to France, where he published his first poetic essay, "Les Savannes". This was well received and he returned to Louisiana to become editor of "Le Propagateur Catholique". Ere long he found his true vocation and was ordained priest in 184. Assigned to duty at the Cathedral of Saint Louis, at New Orleans, his eloquence crowded the building, and his holy life commanded the love and respect of all denominations. He served for fourteen years as a priest at New Orleans, then suddenly, in 1859, he severed all connection with civilization and made his home for twenty-nine years as a missionary among the Chocktaw Indians on the banks of Bayou La Combe. As a result of his patient labours, he won many converts to the Faith. Among his publications are: "La Thébiade de L'Amérique", "L'Antoniade", "La Nouvelle Atala", "Wild Flowers". S.B. ELDER Jean-Baptiste Rousseau Jean-Baptiste Rousseau French poet, b. in Paris, 16 April 1670; d. at La Genette, near Brussels, 17 May, 1741. Although he was the son of a shoemaker, he was educated with the greatest care and made his studies a the Jesuit College of Louis le Grand, Paris. On account of his wit, he was admitted to the most exclusive salons. After a short sojourn in London, as private secretary to the French ambassador, Tallard, be frequented the irreligious society which gathered at the Temple, the evil influence of which caused his misfortunes. His first dramatic attempts were failures, but his epigrams gained him a great reputation. He was elected to the Academy of Inscriptions and Belles-Lettres in 1700. "Couplets infâmes", a libel of a most licentious character. Having retorted that they had been written by Saurin, he was sentenced by the Parliament to pay four thousand livres damages to Saurin, and soon after sent to exile. He went first to Switzerland, where he was sheltered by the French ambassador, Count de Luc, then to Vienna, to Prince Eugène's Court, and finally to Brussels. He tried several times to have the court's decision annulled, but failed because of the hostility of Voltaire and a few others. His works consist of: (1) a comedy in prose, "Le café" (1694), two operas, "Jason" (1696) and "Vénus et Adonis" (1697), and five comedies in verse, only two of which were produced on the stage, "Le flatteur" (1696) and "Le capricieux" (1700); (2) four books of odes, the first being an adaptation of the Psalms, two books of allegories and a score of cantatas; (3) his epigrams, the best part of his work, which will secure his fame; (4) his letters. His works were repeatedly reprinted from 1710 to 1820. His lyrics are not esteemed now, but he is still regarded as the greatest epigrammatist of the eighteenth century. BRUNETIÈRE, Manuel del l'hist. de la litt. Française (Paris, 1899); FAGUET, Revue des cours et conférences (Paris, 1899-1900). LOUIS N. DELAMARRE Benedetto Da Rovezzano Benedetto da Rovezzano Sculptor and architect, b. in 1490, either at Rovezzano, near Florence, or, according to some authorities, at Canapale, near Pistoia; d. at Florence, 1530. His family name is said to have been Gratini or Grazini. One of his most important works was the sculptures for the Church of St. John Gualbertus (1505); these sculptures were injured during the siege of Florence, 1530. The mutilated fragments, five reliefs from the life of the saint, are in the Bargello. Benedetto executed many tombs, chiefly architectural in design, with ornaments in sculpture. The monument of Odde Altoviti, Church of SS. Apostoli, Florence, done in 1507, is by him; the monument of Piero Soderini in the choir, church of the Carmine, Florence; and others. Leo X sent to Card. Wolsey twelve terra cotta medallions by Rovezzano and the sculptor himself went to England in 1524. The cardinal engaged him upon a tomb for himself, but as he fell into disgrace before its completion, it was finished by the king's order. Charles I wished to be buried in it, but the tomb remained empty until the death of Nelson. Rovezzano is believed to have acquired prosperity in England. He returned to Florence in later life, and endured long years of blindness before his death. Further works are the altar of St. Denis in the S. Trinità, Florence; two altars in the church of Badia; door of SS. Aposotoli; a St. John in marble in the Duomo; and in the Bargello, marble niches from the Palazzo Cepparello and a chimney piece. PERKINS, Tuscan Sculptors (London, 1886); SEMPER, Hervorragende Bildhauer, Architekten de Renaissance (Dresden, 1880); SINGER, Allgemeines Künstler Lexicon (Frankfort, 1901); BOCARDO, Nuova Enciclopedia (Turin, 1886). M.L. HANDLEY Stephen Rowsham Stephen Rowsham A native of Oxfordshire, entered Oriel College, Oxford, in 1572. He took orders in the English Church and was minister at the University Church about 1578, but becoming convinced of the truth of the Catholic religion he went to Reims (23 April, 1581), where he was ordained priest, and sent on the English mission (30 April, 1582). Being recognized almost immediately on his landing, he was apprehended and sent to the Tower, 19 May, 1582, and remained a prisoner for more than three years, during half of which time (14 Aug., 1582, until 12 Feb., 1584) he was confined to the dungeon known as the "Little Ease". On the latter date he was transferred to the Marshalsea, from which prison he was carried into exile in the autumn of 1585. He arrived at Reims, 8 October, but set out from England again, 7 Feb., 1586. The field of his labours, which were continued for about a year, was in the west of England. He was taken at the house of the Widow Strange in Gloucester. His trial and martyrdom were at Gloucester in March, 1586-87. Dowdy Diaries; Req. Univ. Oxon.; RISHTON, Diarium Turri-Lundin; POLLEN, Acts of Eng. Martyrs (London, 1891); Prison Lists (Catholic Record Society). J.L. WHITFIELD The Royal Declaration The Royal Declaration This is the name most commonly given to the solemn repudiation of Catholicity which, in accordance with provisions of the "Bill of Rights" (1689) and of "the Act of Succession" (1700), every sovereign succeeding to the throne of Great Britain was, until quite recently, required to make in the presence of the assembled Lords and Commons. This pronouncement has also often been called "the King's Protestant Declaration" or "the Declaration against Transubstantiation" and (but quite incorrectly) "the Coronation Oath". With regard to this last term it is important to notice that the later coronation oath, which for two centuries has formed part of the coronation service and which still remains unchanged, consists only of certain promises to govern justly and to maintain "the Protestant Reformed Religion established by Law". No serious exception has ever been taken by Catholics to this particular formula, but the Royal Declaration, on the other hand, was regarded for long years as a substantial grievance, constituting as it did an insult to the faith professed by many millions of loyal subjects of the British Crown. The terms of this Declaration, which from 1689 to 1910 was imposed upon the sovereign by statute, ran as follows: "I, A. B., by the grace of God King (or Queen) of England, Scotland and Ireland, Defender of the Faith, do solemnly and sincerely in the presence of God, profess, testify, and declare, that I do believe that in the Sacrament of the Lord's Supper there is not any Transubstantiation of the elements of bread and wine into the Body and Blood of Christ at or after the consecration thereof by any person whatsoever: and that the invocation or adoration of the Virgin Mary or any other Saint, and the Sacrifice of the Mass, as they are now used in the Church of Rome, are superstitious and idolatrous. And I do solemnly in the presence of God profess, testify, and declare that I do make this declaration, and every part thereof, in the plain and ordinary sense of the words read unto me, as they are commonly understood by English Protestants, without any such dispensation from any person or authority or person whatsoever, or without thinking that I am or can be acquitted before God or man, or absolved of this declaration or any part thereof, although the Pope, or any other person or persons, or power whatsoever, should dispense with or annul the same or declare that it was null and void from the beginning". The terms of the document are important, for even the extravagant and involved wording of the "long rigmarole" at the end added much to the sense of studied insult conveyed by the whole formula. Not only is the Mass stigmatized as idolatrous, but a false statement of Catholic doctrine is implied in the reference to the "adoration" of the Virgin Mary and the saints "as now used in the Church of Rome", while the existence of a supposed dispensing power is assumed which the Catholic Church has never asserted. What added still more to the just resentment of Catholics at the continued retention of the Declaration was the consciousness that, in the words of Lingard, it owed its origin "to the perjuries of an imposter and the delusion of a nation". The formula was no one drafted by a Parliament in its sober senses. With the object of excluding Catholics from the throne, the Bill of Rights, after the deposition of James II in 1689, exacted of the monarch a profession of faith or "Test". The test selected was one which already stood in the statute book, and which was first placed there during the frenzy excited by the supposed Popish Plot of 1678. It was amid the panic created by the fabrications of Titus Oates, that this Test was drafted (not improbably by himself), and it was imposed upon all officials and public servants, thus effectually excluding Catholics from Parliament and positions of trust. By a curious inversion of history the declaration which was drawn up in 1678 to be taken by every official except the king, had come two hundred years later to be exacted of the king and of no one else. Although statements have been made contending that the substance of the Royal Declaration is older that Titus Oates' time, an examination of these earlier formulæ shows little to support such a conclusion (see a full discussion in "The Tablet", 13 Aug., 1910). A brief account of these formulæ, and of the attempts which were made in 1891 and subsequent years to abolish or modify the Royal Declaration, has already been given in the article OATHS. It will be sufficient to cite here the terms of the new Declaration which was formally carried by Mr. Asquith's Government in August, 1910, in time to relieve King George V from the necessity of wounding the feelings of his Catholic subjects by a repetition of the old formula. In virtue of Mr. Asquith's "Accession Declaration Act" the brief statement, which now replaces that quoted above, runs as follows: "I, N., do solemnly and sincerely in the presence of God, profess, testify and declare that I am a faithful Protestant, and that I will, according to the true intent of the enactments to secure the Protestant Succession to the Throne of my realm, uphold and maintain such enactments to the best of my power." See sections IV and V of the bibliography under the article OATHS: THURSTON IN Dublin Review (Oct., 1909), 225-38; The Tablet (London, July and August, 1910), passim. HERBERT THURSTON Pierre-Paul Royer-Collard Pierre-Paul Royer-Collard Philosopher and French politician, b. at Sompuis (Marne), 21 June, 1763; d. at Châteauvieux (Loire et Cher), 4 September, 1845. An advocate under the ancient régime, and assistant registrar of the municipality of Paris from 1790 till 1792, he withdrew to La Marne during the Terror. In 1797 he represented La Marne in the Council of the Five Hundred (Cinq-Cents) and became prominent through a celebrated discourse in which he demanded liberty for the Catholic religion, "which rallied under its ancient standards seven-eighths of the French people", and accused of "profound folly" those who wished to substitute "I know not what philosophical silliness". Driven from the council by the stroke of the 18 Fructidor, he turned to the restoration of the Bourbons and began a correspondence with Louis XVIII; he was even, up to 1804, a member of a secret council which sent messages to the future king. Under the empire he withdrew from public life, but accepted from Napoleon (December, 1809) the chair of philosophy at the Sorbonne. His teaching, which was influenced by the School of Reid, marked a reaction against the sensualism of the eighteenth century. He held to a certain spiritualism based on "common sense", and an "understanding of human weakness". Under the Restoration he again took up politics; he became deputy and was president for five years of the Committee of Public instruction as counsellor of state. As deputy he opposed both the intrigues of the Ultras, and the anti-constitutional manoeuvres of the Left. His discourses on the religious laws of the epoch show that he was inclined to admit, as a consequence of the Concordat, the interference of the state in Church matters. Educated by a Jansenist mother, and declaring voluntarily that "whoever did not know Port-Royal did not know humanity", he preserved certain prejudices against Roman influence and gave expression to them in his discourses. He opposed the law punishing sacrilege with death, and the laws restraining the liberty of the Press. In 1827 he was elected by seven electoral colleges, became president of the Chamber in 1828, and presented to Charles X in 1830 the address of the two hundred and twenty-one in which the Chamber refused to accept Polignac. Royer-Collard described himself when he wrote to Barante (19 Sept., 1833): "my only vocation as a liberal was on the side of the Legitimists". For the "doctrinaires", of whom he was the head, the legitimist monarchy without liberty was an arbitrary absolutism, liberty without the legitimist monarchy, anarchy. Under the monarchy of July he continued as deputy, but only as a spectator. The "Restoration" writes Barante, "was for him a country", and from 1830 this country no longer existed. He resigned from the Chamber in 1842, and passed his last years in retirement, but his disciples, both in philosophy and politics -- Jouffroy, Cousin, Guizot, Rémusat -- perpetuated the influence of certain of his writings; and M. Faguet declares that in these one must seek "the most penetrating, the most solid, and the most far-seeing doctrine on parliamentary government". This he developed with a grave, austere eloquence, trusting to logic for its strength. Whilst during the first half of the nineteenth century the word "liberal" was generally synonymous with Voltaireanism and hostility to the Jesuits, certain speeches of Royer-Collard quoted by Barante show that this liberal, especially in his later years, professed a deferential attachment for the Church. "If Christianity", he wrote, "has been a degradation, a corruption, Voltaire in attacking it has been a benefactor of the human race; but if the contrary be true, then the passing of Voltaire over the Christian earth has been a great calamity." In a letter to Pere de Ravignan he comments upon the institution of the Jesuits as a wonderful creation. His death was that of a professing and believing Catholic. He was the incarnation of the upper middle class of his time. He was a member of the French Academy from 1827. JOUFFROY, OEuvres de Thomas Reid, III, IV (Paris, 1828-36), contains some lessons in philosophy and historical fragments by Royer-Collard; DE BARANTE, La vie politique de M. de Royer-Collard, ses discours et ses ecrits (2 vols., Paris, 1861); FAGUET, Politiques et moralistes du 19 siecle, first series (Paris, 1891); SPULLER, Royer-Collard (1895). GEORGE GOYAU St. Ruadhan St. Ruadhan One of the twelve "Apostles of Erin"; died at the monastery of Lorrha, County Tipperary, Ireland, 5 April, 584. Ruadhan studied under Saint Finian of Clonard. His embassy to King Dermot at Tara, in 556, is worked into a romance known as the "Cursing of Tara", but the ardri continued to reside at Tara till his death (564). The legend as to Tara's halls having been deserted after 564 is of comparatively late origin, and is contradicted by the fact that a Feis was held at Tara in 697. St. Ruadhan founded the monastery of Lorrha. His bell is preserved in the British Museum; St. Ruadhan's feast is kept on the anniversary of his death. O'HANLON, Lives of the Irish Saints, IV (Dublin, s.d.); HEALY, Ireland's Ancient Schools and Scholars (4th ed., Dublin, 1902); UA CLERIGH, History of Ireland (London, 1908). W.H. GRATTAN-FLOOD Ruben (Reuben) Ruben (REUBEN.) A proper name which designates in the Bible: (1) a patriarch; (II) a tribe of Israel. I. THE PATRIARCH Ruben, Jacob's eldest son (Genesis 46:8; 49:3) by Lia, was born in Mesopotamia, and called Ruben ("see ye, a son") as an allusion to Lia's distress because of Jacob's previous dislike of her: "The Lord saw my affliction: now my husband will love me" (Genesis 29:32). Ruben was deprived of his birthright in punishment of an incest which he committed in Chanaan (Genesis 35:22; 49:4). It was at his suggestion that instead of killing Joseph, his brothers threw the latter into a pit, whence Ruben vainly hoped to rescue him (Genesis 37:18-24; 29-30; 42:22). When Jacob refused to allow Benjamin to go to Egypt with his brothers, Ruben offered two of his sons as a pledge that Benjamin would be brought back (Genesis 42:37). To these few biblical data concerning Jacob's firstborn, numerous and worthless Haggadic details are added in rabbinical and apocryphal literature. II. THE TRIBE OF ISRAEL Situated east of Jordan, and sharing with the tribe of Gad, the original territory of the Amorrhite king, Sehon, between the Arnon and the Jeboc and as far east as Jaser, the border of the Ammonites. The respective lot of Ruben and Gad cannot be given with perfect accuracy, although on the basis of Josue 13:15-23, Ruben's territorial possessions are usually described as on the east of the Dead Sea and Jordan, between Gad on the north and Moab on the south. Among the prominent towns of the Rubenites were Baalmaon, Bethphogor, Cariathaim, Dibon, Hesebon, Jassa, Medaba, and Sabama. During the journey through the wilderness, the tribe of Ruben counted over 40,000 men (Numbers 1:21; 26:7) and marched with Gad and Simeon on the south side of Israel. To the same period are referred the rebellion of the Rubenite chiefs, Dathan and Abiron, against Moses, and its signal punishment (Numbers 16; Deuteronomy 11:6). After contributing to the conquest of Western Palestine and sharing in the various incidents connected with the erection of a great altar, the descendants of Ruben settled in a district favourable to pastoral pursuits (Numbers 32; Josue 22). Together with the Gadites, they held aloof from the war against Sisara (Judges 5), were smitten by Hazael (IV Kings 10:32-3), and carried into captivity by Teglathphalasar (734 B.C.). The Rubenites were pre-eminently a pastoral race, little fitted to resist invasion, and several of their cities fell into the hands of Moab long before the tribes east of Jordan were carried captive by the Assyrians (cf. Isaias 15; Mesa). FRANCIS E. GIGOT Peter Paul Rubens Peter Paul Rubens Eminent Flemish painter, b. at Siegen, Westphalia, 28 June, 1577; d. at Antwerp, 30 May, 1640. His father, Jan Rubens, a lawyer and alderman of Antwerp, was a Protestant who had fled from his native city to Cologne at the time that the Spanish governor was making strong efforts to extirpate heresy in Flanders. After various troublous experiences in connection with the Dutch army, with the wife of Prince William of Orange, and follwing upon more than one imprisonment, the father, who had temporarily to leave Cologne, returned to that city, where Peter Paul commenced his studies. His mother, Maria Pypelinx, had continued a Catholic, although she temporarily concealed the fact during her aggressive husband's life, but she insisted upon the boy's education at a Jesuit school. She herself was formally received back into the Catholic Church, immediately upon the death of the elder Rubens, when, though in reduced circumstances, she was able to return to Antwerp. From her and from his schoolmaster Rombout Verdonck, Rubens acquired the strong religious character which marked the whole of his career. His earliest days were passed as a page in the household of a princess, the widow of Count van Lalaing, former Governor of Antwerp. When nearly thirteen the young Rubens was sent to the studio of Tobias Verhæcht, and thence quickly removed to study under Adam van Noort where he made the acquaintance of Jordaens, a fellow pupil in the same studio and a lifelong friend of the great artist. He soon went to a third studio, that of Otto van Veen, and remained with this last master until 1598, when he was admitted to the Painters' Guild of Antwerp, and started on his first jorney to Italy (1600). He carried introductions to the Duke of Mantua, Vincenzo Gonzaga, received his patronage, and was sent by him to Florence, Genoa, and Rome to carry out important commissions. He then returned to Mantua and was sent to Spain in charge of certain portraits intended as diplomatic presents. On his return to Italy he entered into the Duke's permanent service, but was permitted to spend considerable time in Rome where he continued his studies. In 1608 he left Italy and returned to his own city of Antwerp, where he married Isabella Brant and settled down as an artist of great renown. He joined more than one religious guild connected with the local churches, and especially became attached to that of St. Peter and St. Paul, in honour of whose great festival on the day of his birth, Rubens had received his two Christian names. At this time he commenced his great house, splendidly built, lavishly decorated, and installed with many fine treasures which he had acquired in Italy. He lived there in great luxury, full of commissions, and surrounded by a host of pupils, among whom was Anthony van Dyck who rivalled and even surpassed him in portraiture, and the eminent painters Jordaens, Snyders, de Vos, and Justus von Egmont. Here his two sons, Albert and Nicholas, were born. In 1622 he was commissioned to paint the great pictures representing Marie de' Medici, now in a gallery in the Louvre; this occupied him for two years. His wife died in 1626, and four years after, he married Helena Fourment, the daughter of Isabella Brant's sister. Meantime, he had become painter-in-ordinary to the new Governor of the Spanish Netherlands, the Infanta Isabella, who kept him very busy, both as artist and diplomatist, for which his courtliness and sweetness of manner particularly fitted him. In 1629 he was sent to London by the Count Olivarès by way of Brussels and Paris, and was knighted by Charles I on 21 February,1629-30. After his second marriage he purchased a great house near Mechlin and there prepared his designs for the pageant intended to commemorate the triumphal entry into Antwerp of the new governor, Archduke Ferdinand. This governor made him Court painter and showered various commissions upon him, among them the decorations of a shooting box which the King of Spain was at that time erecting near Madrid. By this time Rubens' wonderful energy and health were so broken, that many of his later pictures were executed by his pupils under his supervision and are to a very slight extent his own work. He had become a man of considerable means through countless commissions not only in painting and designing pictures, but in etching, silver point work, preparing designs for tapestry, engraving on silver, and scheming the entire decoration for the wonderful pageants that were a feature of his period and country. A man of prodigious energy and overpowering enthusiasm, he was the author of perhaps a larger number of huge pictures than can be attributed to any other painter, and though very many of his works were entirely executed by his own hand, he trained his pupils to so skilfully copy his methods and carry out his ideas that in many cases all the rough and bolder work of the picture was executed by them, he himself applying the final details and glazes, which enabled the picture to be declared a masterpiece and gave to it that quality which his hand alone could supply. The best of his religious work is at Antwerp, but the twenty-two pictures representing the history of Marie de' Medici, on all of which he was supposed to have worked to a certain extent, stand supreme in decorative work. Several of his finest portraits are in Madrid, others in Munich, and one or two of his masterpieces in the National Gallery in London, but almost all the great galleries of Europe contain representative examples of his work. Dresden, Brussels, Frankfort, St. Petersburg, Vienna, Berlin, Florence, and Windsor must all be visited if any adequate idea of the output of this extraordinary and remarkable painter is to be obtained. He has been the subject of many biographies and of constant research. He is always somewhat of a mystery, for at first one is depressed by his very exuberance, his unbridled artistic frenzy, and the vast show of flesh and power which characterize his pictures, while to many who love tenderness, mysticism, a sensitive quality, and stately dignity, his impropriety and exaggerated enthusiasm is repugnant. Some of the greatest artists, such as Rossetti, were in their early days unable to understand the anomalies in the art of Rubens or to appreciate his greatest pictures even in their most lenient moods. There is such an abundant glory, such powerful organic life in the work of this majestic colourist, that his pictures are not easy to appreciate until one is practically vanquished by the glory of their colour and the luxuriance of their unrestraint. A deeper consideration awakens fuller appreciation and the marvellous conceptions of the artist and his exuberant ideas of magnificence impress and reveal the high position of the painter. In his drawings he is almost supreme. His religious pictures, when properly regarded and thoughtfully understood, are impressive in their intense religious quality apart from the fury of colour and extravagance. His portraits are triumphant, sometimes perhaps sensual, often dreamy, always impressive. He is unequalled as to colours, and though fuller of the delights of earth than of heaven, yet when the nature of the man is understood the intensely devout quality of his beautiful religious pictures can be appreciated. It is, however, as a draughtsman and colourist, as a master of pageant and a decorator of the highest position that the fame of Rubens has been created. MICHEL, Histoire de la Vie de Rubens (Brussels, 1771); GACHET, Letters of Rubens (Brussels, 1840); ROOSES, The Work of Rubens (Antwerp, 1886); WAUTERS, The Flemish School of Painting (London, 1885). See also various cartalogues of Rubens exhibitions and articles upon him, specially those by WAAGEN, SAINSBURY, and RUELENS. GEORGE CHARLES WILLIAMSON Rubrics Rubrics I. IDEA Among the ancients, according to Columella, Vitruvius, and Pliny, the word rubrica, rubric, signified the red earth used by carpenters to mark on wood the line to follow in cutting it; according to Juvenal the same name was applied to the red titles under which the jurisconsults arranged the announcements of laws. Soon the red colour, at first used exclusively for writing the titles, passed to the indications or remarks made on a given text. This custom was adopted in liturgical collections to distinguish from the formulæ of the prayers the instructions and indications which should regulate their recitation, so that the word rubric has become the consecrated term for the rules concerning Divine service or the administration of the sacraments. Gavanti said that the word appeared for the first time in this sense in the Roman Breviary printed at Venice in 1550, but it is found in MSS, of the fourteenth century, such as 4397 of the Vatican Library, fol. 227-28; see also the fifteenth-century "Ordo Romanus" of Peter Amelius. The word is used sometimes to indicate the general laws, sometimes to mark a particular indication, but always to furnish an explanation of the use of the text, hence the saying: "Lege rubrum si vis intelligere nigrum" (read the red if you would understand the black). Thus in liturgical books the red characters indicate what should be done, the black what should be recited, and the Rubrics may be defined as: the rules laid down for the recitation of the Divine Office, the celebration of Mass, and the administration of the sacraments. In some respects the rubrics resemble ceremonies, but they differ inasmuch as the ceremonies are external attitudes, actions considered as accidental rites and movements, while the Rubrics bear on the essential rite. II. KINDS Writers distinguish between the rubrics of the Breviary, the Missal, and the Ritual, according as the matter regulated concerns the Divine Office, the Mass, or the sacraments; and again between essential and accidental rubrics according as they relate to what is of necessity or to external circumstances in the act which they regulate, etc. But the chief distinction seems to be that which divides them into general and particular rubrics. The first are the rules common to the same sacred function, e.g., those which regulate the recitation of the Divine Office, whether considered as a whole, in its chief parts, or in its secondary parts; they are at present printed under thirty-four titles in the editions of the Roman Breviary at the head of the part for autumn; those which regulate the celebration of Mass printed at the beginning of the Roman Missal (twenty titles containing the general rules, thirteen others giving the rite to be followed in the celebration, and ten others explaining the defects which may occur); those which regulate the administration of the sacraments (given by the Ritual at the beginning of each of the sacraments, as also by the Pontifical for the sacraments administered by a bishop). The particular rubrics are the special rules which determine during the course of the action what must be done at each period of the year, on certain fixed days, as the days of Holy Week, or when a particular formula is recited. They are inserted in the midst of the formulæ of Breviary, Missal, or Ritual. III. ORIGIN AND DEVELOPMENT The Rubrics are as ancient as the Offices themselves. They were long transmitted by oral tradition and when they were consigned to writing it was not in the fullness known to us. Like the various elements of the Divine Office and the Mass, the manner of celebrating them had at first a local character; there were observances peculiar to churches. Thus St. Cyprian (Ep. lvi, in P. L., IV, 410) mentions the peculiarities of Carthage in the administration of the sacraments; St. Augustine in his reply to Januarius (Ep. lv, in P.L., XXXIII, 204) treats at length the rites of the Church, those which might under no circumstances be neglected and those which might be discontinued; St. Gregory the Great, writing to St. Augustine of Canterbury (XI, lxiv, in P.L., LXXVII, 1186) suggests to him the same wise direction with regard to local practices. It is difficult to determine the period at which these rules were consigned to writing. The ancient Sacramentaries, the MSS. Missals, and even the early printed Missals contain some, but very few, rubrics. There is every reason to believe that they were contained in special collections known as Ordinaries, Directories, and Rituals. An Ordo Romanus has been attributed to Gregory the Great (see LITURGICAL BOOKS), but it is difficult to say what it was. Relying on the "Ordines Romani" published by Mabillon, Father Grisar (Civiltà Cattolica, 20 May, 1905) gives the oldest description of the solemn pontifical Mass as dating from the pontificate of Gregory the Great. Hittorp s publication has been much discussed, Cardinal Bona (De divina psalmodia, i, 604) regarding the collection as very ancient but overloaded with the ceremonies of subsequent ages, which is the case with all the ritualistic books. Cardinal Tommasi (Opera, IV, p. xxxv) characterizes it as a confused mass in which it is impossible to distinguish the most ancient and authentic practices. In this primitive state rubrics and ceremonies were generally mingled. There were no rubricists until the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries. At first they were compilers and worked on separate parts. Cardinal Quignónez found the ancient rubrics obscure and confused; the new rubrics which still exist with some additions and alterations form an excellent exposition borrowed from the "Directorium Officii Divini", published in 1540 by the Franciscan L. Ciconialano with the approval of Paul III. In 1502, under Leo X, Burchard edited the general rubrics of the Roman Missal; they were printed in the edition of the "Missale Pianum" and have thuis reached us. In collaboration with Aug. Patrizi Piccolomini, Burchard also issued (1488) the ordinary and the ceremonies of the pontifical Mass under the title "Romanæ Ecclesiæ Cæremoniarium libri tres"; these have passed into our present Pontifical. Finally the Roman Ritual, edited in 1614 under Paul V, was compiled, with the aid of the Ritual of Cardinal Giulio Antonio Santario, from which most of the rubrics are derived. Thus various collections of the rubrics compiled by individuals have received the approval of the sovereign pontiffs, and since Pius V, instead of being published as separate treatises, they have been inserted in the liturgical books with which they dealt. The S. C. of Rites, instituted by Sixtus V in 1587, is commissioned to approve new rites, to suppress abuses in liturgical matters, issue authentic editions of liturgical books, to interpret the rubrics, and to solve difficulties connected therewith. Besides this interpreting authority, individual liturgists may also write commentaries and explanations on the subject. IV. OBLIGATORY CHARACTER In describing the kinds of rubrics we have intentionally omitted mention of distinctions which seem to us without sufficient foundation, writers distinguish between Divine and human rubrics, but as soon as rubrics are approved by the soverign pontiff and promulgated in his name it seems to us that they emanate from a Divine-human authority, and none save the Church has the right to establish such rules. According to a prevalent sentiment, we should do away with the distinction between the preceptive rubrics (those which bind under pain of sin, mortal or venial according to the matter) and directive rubrics (those which are not binding in themselves, but state what is to be done in the form of an instruction or counsel). It may be said that the rubrics of the liturgical books are real laws; this follows from the definition: they are prescriptions for the good order of external worship in the Catholic Church, they emanate from the highest authority--the sovereign pontiff--and considering the terms in which they are promulgated it does not appear that the supreme head of the Church merely desires to give a counsel. Hence the distinction between the preceptive and directive rubrics is (a) in contradiction to the terms of the definition of rubrics, which are rules, consequently ordinances, laws, whose character is to be at once both directive and preceptive, i.e., to impose an obligation: (b) it is contrary to the mind of the sovereign pontiffs as expressed in their Bulls, which in establishing and promulgating rubrics intend to make them real laws. Pius V in the Bull "Quod a nobis", for the publication of the Roman Breviary (1508), expressed himself as follows: "Statuentes Breviarium ipsum nullo unquam tempore, vel totum vel ex parte mutandum, vel ei aliquid addendum, vel omnino detrahendum esse". The same pope uses similar terms in the Bull "Quo primum tempore", for the publication of the Roman Missal (1870): "Mandantes, ac districte . . . praecipientes ut coeteris omnibus rationibus et ritibus ex aliis Missalibus quantumvis vetustis hactenus observari consuetis, in posterum penitus omissis ac plane rejectis, Missam juxta ritum, modum ac normam quæ per Missale hoc a Nobis nunc traditur decantent ac legant, neque in Missæ celebratione alias cæremonias, vel preces quam quæ hoc Missali continentur addere vel recitare præsumant." No less explicit are the expressions employed by Paul V for the publication of the Ritual (Brief "Apostolicæ Sedi", 1614), by Clement VIII for the publication of the Pontifical (Brief "Ex quo in Ecclesia", 1596), etc.; (c) this distinction is equally contrary to the decrees of the Sacred Congregation of Rites, which constitute a real command, while it cannot be said that they involve a greater obligation than the rubrics which they explain, which would be the case if the rubrics were not preceptive, when the commentary would have greater force than the text itself. (d) It is contrary to the rubricists' manner of expressing themselves. Thus Bissus declares that the rubrics are laws: "Leges tam Missalis quam Breviarii dicuntur Rubricæ, cum legibus et aliis ordinationibus et solent esse firmæ donec revocentur". De Herdt is still more explicit: Rubricæ sunt regulæ juxta quas officium divinum persolvi, Missæ sacrificum celebrari, et sacramenta administrari debent. It is true that many others admit the distinction between preceptive and directive rubrics, as De Herdt does, but they write from the standpoint of conscience, and when they excuse infractions of the rule it is in virtue of special reasons due to circumstances. It is also objected that certain rubrics are marked "Ad libitum", e.g. the third Collect of the Mass for certain days, the optional recitation of the "Dies Iræ" in low unprivileged Masses for the dead. But even in these cases there is a certain prescription: a third prayer must be said, which is left to the choice of the celebrant; half of the "Dies Iræ" may not be said, but it must either be omitted or said entire. Rubrical indications whose obligatory character is completely lacking, such as the prayers in preparation for Mass, "pro opportunitate sacerdotis facienda", are exceptional instances, the very terms of which show what is to be understood, but these exceptions merely confirm the thesis. To make them the starting-point in establishing a distinction is merely to multiply distinctions at will, a procedure that is all the more useless because it would eventually amount to saying that there are preceptive precepts and non-preceptive precepts. We can only conclude that the distinction between preceptive and directive rubrics should be done away with, or if it be mentioned at all, it should be simply as an historical reference (see Ephemerides Liturgicæ, I, 146). Under certain circumstances rubrics may be modified by custom, but in this respect they do not differ from laws in general. GAVANTI, Thesaurus sacr. rit. cum addit.. Merati (Venice, 1769); DE HERDT, Sac. liturg. praxis (Louvain, 1863); MENGHINI, Elem. juris liturg. (Rome, 1907); VAN DER STAPPEN, Sac. liturg. cursus (Mechlin, 1898); ZACCARIA, Bib. ritual. (Rome, 1778); ONOMASTICON (Fraenza, 1787). F. CABROL William Rubruck William Rubruck (Also called William of Rubruck and less correctly Ruysbrock, Ruysbroek, and Rubruquis), Franciscan missionary and writer of travels; b. at Rubrouc in northern France probably about 1200; d. after 1256. He became closely connected with St. Louis (Louis IX) in Paris, accompanied him on his crusade, and was at Acre and Tripoli. Louis, notwithstanding his repeated ill-success, again formed the plan of converting the Tatars to Christianity, and at the same time of winning them as confederates against the Saracens. Consequently at his orders Rubruck undertook an extended missionary journey, going first to visit Sartach, son of Batu and ruler of Kiptchak, then reported to have become a Christian. In 1253 Rubruck started from Constantinople, crossed the Black Sea, traversed the Crimea towards the North, and then continued eastward; nine days after crossing the Don he met the khan. The latter was not inclined to agree to the schemes of St. Louis and sent the ambassadors to his father Batu, living near the Volga. Batu would not embrace Christianity and advised the envoys to visit the great Khan Mangu. In midwinter they reached the eastern point of Lake Alakul, south of Lake Balkasch, and near this the Court of the khan, with which they arrived at Karakorum at Easter, 1254. After residing for some time in this city they had to return home without having obtained anything. On the return journey they took a somewhat more northerly route and arrived in the spring of 1255 by way of Asia Minor at Cyprus, whence they proceeded to Tripoli. The report of the journey which Rubruck presented to the king is a geographical masterpiece of the Middle Ages. It exceeds all earlier treatises in matter, power of observation, keenness of grasp, and clearness of presentment, besides being but little spoiled by fabulous narratives. In it Rubruck gives a clear account of the condition of China, of the characteristics and technical skill of its inhabitants, of their peculiar writing, and of the manufacture of silk; he also mentions paper money, printing, the division into castes, rice brandy, kumiss, speaks of the physicians who diagnosed diseases by the pulse, and prescribed rhubarb. The Middle Ages also owed to him the solution of a disputed geographical question; he proved that the Caspian was an inland sea and did not flow into the Arctic. He called attention to the relationship between German and the Indo-Germanic group of languages, and to the family unity of the Hungarians, Bashkirs, and Huns in the great racial division of the Finns; and he also gave a circumstantial account of the religion of the Mongols and the various ceremonies of the idolaters. Rubruck's account has been edited by the Société de Géographie in the "Recueil de voyages et de mémoires", IV (Paris, 1893), German translation by Kulb in the "Geschichte der Missionsreisen nach Mongolei", I, II (Ratisbon, 1860); English tr. by Rockhill, "The Journey of William of Rubruk to the Eastern Parts" (London, 1900). SCHMIDT, Uber Rubruks Reise in Zeitschrift der Gesellschaft fur Erkunde zu Berlin, XX (Berlin, 1885); MATROD, Le voyage de Fr. Guillaume de Rubrouck (Couvin, 1909); SCHLAGER, Mongolenfahrten der Franziskaner (Trier, 1911), 45-126. PATRICIUS SCHLAGER Rudolf of Fulda Rudolf of Fulda Chronicler, d. at Fulda, 8 March, 862. In the monastery of Fulda Rudolf entered the Benedictine Order, studied under the celebrated Rabanus Maurus, and was himself a teacher. He was undoubtedly associated with King Louis the Pious, whose intimate friend he considered himself, but it is not known how long he remained at court. It is probable that, after the elevation of Rhabanus to the Archiepiscopal See of Mainz, Rudolf followed him thence, and only towards the close of his life took up his permanent residence once more at Fulda. He was one of the most distinguished scholars of his time. The "Annales Fuldenses", begun by Einhard and continued (838-63) on the same lines by Rudolf, are valuable contributions to the general history of the period on account of his close connection with the court. Among the many editions of the "Annales Fuldenses sive Annales regni Francorum orientalis", that of Kurze (Hanover, 1891) is the best (German tr.by Wattenbach, "Geschichtsschreiber der deutschen Vorzeit", XXIII, Leipzig, 1889). At the suggestion of his master Rabanus, Rudolf (838) compiled, from notes of the priest Mego and from oral tradition, a life of St. Lioba or Leobgyth (published in "Acta SS.", VII, Sept., Antwerp ed., 760-9, and in "Mon. Germ. Script.", XV, i, 121-31). It was St. Lioba whom St. Boniface called to Bischofsheim on the Tauber to assist him by her activity. Under the misleading title, "Vita beati Rabani Mauri, archiepiscopi Moguntini in Germania", there is extant a work upon the miracles performed by the relics brought to Fulda by Rabanus, interspersed, according to the spirit of the times, with important historical and ethnological notes. In the "Mon. Germ. Script." (XV, 329-41) it is printed under the more correct title, "Miracula sanctorum in Fuldenses ecclesias translatorum". A similar work of much more importance historically is "Translatio sancti Alexandri Wildeshusam anno 851" in "Mon. Germ. Script.", II, 673-81, begun by Rudolf in 863 at the request of Waltbraht, a grandson of Widukin, and completed by Meginhart. Taking the "Germania" of Tacitus for his model, he pictured the history of ancient Saxony and the introduction of Christianity. WATTENBACH, Deutschlands Geschichtsquellen im Mittelalter, II (Berlin, 1893), 227 sq., 238 sq.; POTTHAST, Bibliotheca historica medii ævi (Berlin, 1896), I, 67; II, 1151, 1429, 1540. PATRICIUS SCHLAGER Rudolf of Habsburg Rudolf of Habsburg German king, b. 1 May 1218; d. at Speyer, 15 July, 1291. He was the son of Albert IV, the founder of the Habsburg line, and Countess Heilwige of Kiburg. After the death of his father in the Holy Land, Rudolf pursued an independent line of politics. In the conflict between the papacy and the empire he supported the Hohenstaufens, and, during the interregnum, strove to increase the power of his house, especially in Switzerland. In his extensive domains, of which Swabia formed the centre, he showed himself a good, if stern ruler, and especially in the south won many friends. At the instigation of Gregory X, who threatened to appoint a regent to govern the empire if steps were not taken to restore order to the country by the election of a prince who would exercise an effective rule, Rudolf was chosen emperor 1 October, 1273. Towering but lean of stature, with bony cheeks and hooked nose, he was a courageous warrior, a skilled diplomat, and distinguished alike for unrelenting sternness and genial kindness. Six electors voted for Rudolf; the seventh, Ottakar of Bohemia, abstained from voting. This powerful king ruled from Meissen and the mountains in the north of Bohemia as far as the Adriatic, having added Austria, Styria, Carinthia, and Krain to his inherited domains. When Ottakar was summoned to answer for this alienation of the imperial fiefs, Rudolf proved himself an astute politician in the proceedings against Bohemia. Recognizing that it was impossible to force the German princes to the position of vassals, he utilized every opportunity to enhance the power of his house, for only the possession of great domains could ensure for a German king a position of prominence. Supported by the Church, Rudolf began the war in 1276, and on the Marchfeld on 26 August, 1278, Ottakar lost his throne and his life. The ancient possessions of the Bohemian royal house were left to Ottakar s son Wenceslaus, who was still a minor, but the Austrian lands had to be given up and were formally granted by Rudolf to his sons, as according to the prevailing laws of the empire, the sovereign could not retain confiscated lands. In this manner Ostmark came permanently into the possession of the Habsburgs. Whether the downfall of Ottakar was a German success or not, is still an open question among scholars. In recent times, the opinion has prevailed that, far from being hostile to the Germans, Ottakar favoured German immigration into Bohemia, and that, with the possession of the Austrian lands, he might perhaps have completely germanized Bohemia; and, had he secured the imperial crown, this powerful prince might have given a new importance to the imperial authority. The creation of a strong central power was also the object of Rudolf s politics. For the consolidation of his kingdom about the Danube, peace and stability were necessary, and these only a strong imperial government could guarantee. There was no fixed imperial constitution, and the development of such would have been resisted by the territorial princes. Rudolf was shrewd enough to abstain from attempting forcibly to increase his constitutional powers, and contented himself with preserving such domains and rights as were still left to the crown. He sought to recover the many imperial possessions which had been lost since 1245, moreover he saw to it that the taxes laid upon the imperial cities and towns were duly paid; although he failed to establish uniform system of taxation owing to the resistance of many cities which had to be put down by force of arms before they came to an agreement with the Emperor. With Rudolf began a period of national peace for Germany which was to last for two hundred years. Taking as his model the pacific settlement made by the Emperor Frederick II, in the Landfrieden at Mainz, in 1235, he drew up a number of agreements which, though often broken, were the chief means of protecting commerce and trade. But here also he had to be content, if the princes and towns really carried out these settlements to do which they claimed as their right and if they really checked the system of robbery, which, under the form of feuds, prevailed more and more. This however was not always the case. Even in such cases Rudolf did not take vigorous measures and prove practically that the maintenance of public peace was the duty of the Emperor. Lesser peace-breakers he punished; greater ones only in case they threatened his dynastic interests. In Swabia his governor (Landvogt), Count Albert of Hohenberg, fought without much success against Count Eberhard the Illustrious of W rtemberg; against Siegfried, the ambitious Metropolitan of Cologne, he proceeded by force of arms. But it was not the warlike measures of Rudolf, but the defeat of Siegfried near Worringen in 1288 by the Duke of Brabant in the quarrel concerning the inheritance of Duke Walram of Limburg that curbed the ambitious efforts of the archbishop. Rudolf was more successful in his efforts (1289) to settle the disputes in the House of Wettin. But his chief ambition, to secure the imperial crown for his house, he failed to realize. The electoral authority grew stronger during his reign, and the system of electing its kings remained the canker of the German Empire. Until the very last he endeavored to increase the power of his family; indeed, in the east of the empire, he created for his family such a position that a little later it developed into a decisive factor in the subsequent historical evolution of the German Empire. Meanwhile, considering the difficult conditions, he did very much to restore the unity of the empire. By his wise moderation he secured for himself general recognition, being the first emperor for a long period to achieve this end. The many diets which he held must also have strengthened the feeling of the unity of the empire. His foreign policy showed the same wise moderation. He abstained from taking any action in the Italian question, without however resigning the rights of the empire. However much the pope strove to secure the support of the German king against the powerful Charles of Anjou in order to check his power in the south of the peninsula, Rudolf was always able to skilfully avoid the overtures; even the attractions of the imperial crown were of no account in the eyes of this sober and calculating prince. In Burgundian affairs he interfered only as far as his action was likely to increase the power of his house, by strengthening it on the imperial frontiers towards Burgundy. Otherwise his policy in the west was guided by the principle of preserving peaceful relations with France. The death of this upright and popular monarch was received with lamentations throughout the empire. He was buried at Speyer. LIUDNER, Deutsche Gesch. unter den Habsburgern u. Luxemburgern (Stuttgart, 1888-93); KOPP, Gesch. der eidgen ssischen B nde (Basle, 1882); MICHAEL, Gesch. des deutschen Volkes vom13. Jahrh. bis zum Ausgang des Mittelalters (Freiburg, 1897-1903); SCHULTE, Gesch. der Habsburger in den ersten drei Jahrhunderten (Innsbruck, 1887); REDLICH, Rudolph von Habsburg (Innsbruck, 1903). FRANZ KAMPERS Rudolf of Rudesheim Rudolf of Rüdesheim Bishop of Breslau, b. at Rüdesheim on the Rhine, about 1402; d. at Breslau in Jan., 1482. From 1422 to 1426 he studied at the University of Heidelberg from which he graduated as master. He then proceeded to Italy, graduated as doctor in ecclesiastical law and became auditor of the Rota. Numerous benefices were conferred upon him at an early date, particularly in the dioceses of Mainz and Worms. From 1438 onward he represented the cathedral chapter of the latter city at the schismatic Council of Basle, where he formed a friendship with Enea Silvio de' Piccolomini, subsequently Pope Pius II. The latter, his successor Paul II, and the Emperor Frederick III entrusted Rudolf with important missions and difficult negotiations. Pius II named him in 1463 Bishop of Lavant in Tyrol. The See of Breslau was conferred on him in 1468, at a time when the inhabitants were spiritedly resisting their ruler, George Podiebrad, King of Bohemia. The latter had been deposed and excommunicated, but maintained his position as ruler. The war which resulted was protracted beyond Podiebrad's lifetime and terminated, with Rudolf's co-operation, in the Peace at Olmütz in 1479. Now intent more exclusively upon the spiritual welfare of his diocese, the bishop sought to heal the wounds of the war, endeavoured to imbue the diocesan secular and regular clergy with a sound ecclesiastical spirit, and insisted upon the importance of their proper theological training. The acts of the synods held in 1473 and 1475 bear witness to the zeal and energy of the skilful prelate. ZAUN, Rudolf von Rüdesheim, (Frankfort, 1881); PASTOR, Hist. of the Popes, tr. ANTROBUS, III (London, 1894), 174, 198-201. N.A. WEBER Rudolf von Ems Rudolf von Ems (Hohenems in Switzerland). A Middle High German epic poet of the thirteenth century. Almost nothing is known of his life. He himself tells us that he was in the service of the Counts of Montfort and from the anonymous continuator of the "Weltchronik" we learn that the poet died "in welschen richen", i.e. in Italy, whither he had probably gone with King Konrad IV, about 1254. He professes himself a follower of Gottfried von Strassburg, for whom he entertains the greatest admiration, but his moralizing and didactic tendency differs strikingly from Gottfried's joyous sensualism, and he is prone to diffuseness and redundancy. In the choice of subjects he shows a predilection for those that are learned, and he generally draws from Latin sources. The earliest of his extant poems and one of the best is "Der gute Gerhard" in which the simple piety of an humble merchant of Cologne puts to shame the pharisaical ostentation of the Emperor Otto. The didactic tendency is very conspicuous in the poem "Barlaam und Josaphat", which treats a well-known Christian legend that seems to have its root in Buddhist sources and which on account of its glorification of the ascetic life and its defense of Christianity against Paganism was a favorite subject with medieval poets. Another poem on a legendary subject, the conversion of St. Eustace, which Rudolf mentions among his works, has not been preserved. "Wilhelm von Orlens", a courtly epic with a conventional love story, is based on a French original and was written for one Konrad von Winterstetten (d. 1241). Rudolf's most ambitious efforts were the historical epics "Alexander" and "Weltchronik". For the former the chief sources are the "historia de preliis" and the work of Curtius Rufus. The "Weltchronik" was undertaken at the request of King Konrad IV and was to be a complete history of the world from the beginning to the poet's own time. But death intervened and the story breaks off with King Solomon's reign. An anonymous poet then took up the subject and, making free use of Rudolf's material as well as drawing on Godfrey of Viterbo's "Pantheon", he gave a version that carried the story as far as the Book of Judges. This second recension, usually called the "Christ-Herre-Chronik", from its opening words, was subsequently still further amalgamated with Rudolf's version and amplified by various continuators, notably one Heinrich von München (fourteenth century). In this form the work became very popular and was finally resolved into prose. "Der gute Gerhard" was edited by Haupt (Leipzig, 1840); "Barlaam und Josaphat" by Pfeiffer (Leipzig, 1843). Of the other works there are as yet no critical editions. A MS. reprint of a "Willehalm von Orlens" was given by Victor Junk in "Deutsche Texte des Mittelalters" (Berlin, 1905), II; selections from "Alexander" by Junk in "Beitrage zur Geschichte der deutschen Sprache" (1904), 29, 369-469; from "Weltchronik", by Vilmar, "Die zwei Rezensionen und die Handschriftenfamilien der Weltchronik Rudolfs v. E." (Marburg, 1839). KRUGER, Stilistische Untersuchungen uber R. v. E. als Nachahmer Gottfrieds (Lubeck, 1896); ZINGERLE, Die Quellen zum Alex. des R. v. E. in WEINHOLD AND VOGT, Germanistische Abhandlungen IV (Breslau, 1885); ZEIDLER, Die Quellen von Rudolfs v. E. Wilhelm von Orlens (Berlin, 1894); JUNK, Die Epigonen des hofischen Epos in Sammlung Goschen, no. 289 (Leipzig, 1906), 16-62. ARTHUR F.J. REMY Family of Rueckers Family of Rueckers Famous organ and piano-forte builders of Antwerp. Hans Rueckers, the founder, lived in Amsterdam at the end of the sixteenth and the beginning of the seventeenth century, where he became a member of the Guild of St. Luke and was active principally as organ-builder. He died in 1640 or 1641. In what year the house which he established in Amsterdam was transferred to Antwerp is not known, but it was in the latter city that it attained its renown. Hans Rueckers originated a spinet (forerunner of the piano-forte) with two keyboards, which could be played singly or simultaneously. They could be coupled, a higher octave on one keyboard, with a lower octave on the other, thereby doubling the sonority. Hans Rueckers' son, Andreas, b. in 1579, still further perfected the mechanism of their instruments, which gained world-wide celebrity under Andreas the Younger during the second half of the seventeenth century, their importance continuing under his successors throughout the greater part of the eighteenth. Rueckers' pianos were exported to foreign countries, particularly to England, and sold for the price, in those days fabulous, of 3000 francs. Many of these instruments were decorated by famous painters, which caused some of them to be destroyed so that the paintings might be preserved. RIMBAULT, The Pianoforte, its Origin, Progress, and Construction (London, 1860); HOPKINS, Old Keyboard Instruments (London, 1887); Musikalisches Konversationslexikon (Berlin, 1877). JOSEPH OTTEN Paolo Ruffini Paolo Ruffini Physician and mathematician, b. at Valentano in the Duchy of Castro, 3 Sept., 1765; d. at Modena, 10 May, 1822. At first he intended to enter Holy orders and went so far as to receive the tonsure, but changing his mind, he began the study of mathematics and medicine in the University of Modena, where he received the degree of doctor. At the age of twenty-three he was appointed professor of analysis after having substituted for a year for his teacher Cassiani. In 1791, the chair of elementary mathematics was entrusted to him. In the meantime, he did not neglect the study and practice of medicine. At the time of the French invasion of Italy (1796), he was unexpectedly appointed a member of the Juniori in the legislative body at Milan. It was not without difficulty that he succeeded in returning to his lectures at Modena. Because he refused to take the republican oath without the conditional declaration dictated by his conscience, he was dismissed from his position as a public lecturer; but with the return of the Austrians in 1799 he was restored to his former post and maintained therein by succeeding governments. A call to the chair of higher mathematics in Pavia he declined, because he did not wish to give up his medical practice among his dear Modenese. The university having been degraded to the rank of lyceum, he accepted (1806) the chair of applied mathematics at the newly established military school. In 1814 Franceso IV re-established the university and appointed Ruffini rector for life, and at the same time professor of practical medicine and applied mathematics. By his lectures with the patients actually present he revived the clinical studies which had been neglected for several years. During the typhus epidemic of 1817 he sacrificed himself for his fellow citizens, and finally succumbed. Although he recovered, he never regained his strength. He was buried in the Church of Santa Maria di Pomposa, between the tombs of Sigonio and Muratori. Ruffini's sole medical treatise is a "Memoria sul tifo contagioso". As a mathematician his name is inseparably associated with the proof of the impossibility of solving algebraically the quintic equation, on which subject he wrote several treatises ("Teoria generale delle equazioni, in cui si dimostra impossibile la soluzione algebraica delle equazioni generali di grado superiore al 4°", 2 vols., Bologna, 1798; "Della soluzione delle equazioni alg. determinate particolari di grado sup. al 4°" in "Mem. Soc. Ital.", IX, 1802, which was awarded a prize by the National Institute of Milan; "Della insolubilità etc. qualunque metodo si adoperi, algebraico esso sia o trascendente" in "Mem. Inst. Naz. Ital.", I, 1806). He also proved the impossibility of the quadrature of the circle ("Riflessioni intorno alla rettificazione ed alla quadratura del circolo" in "Mem. Soc. Ital.", IX, 1802). Less known, however, is the fact that Ruffini published the now familiar "Horner's method" of approximation to the roots of numerical equations fifteen years before Horner's first paper on it appeared in the "Philosophical Transactions" of 1819 (pt. I, pp. 308-35). In 1802 the Italian Society of Forty offered a gold medal for the best method of determining the root of a numerical equation of any degree. In 1804 the medal was awarded to Ruffini, and the dissertation was published under the title "Sopra la determinazione delle radice nelle equazioni numeriche di qualunque grado". In a paper read before the Southwestern Section of the American Math. Soc. (26 Nov., 1910), Professor Florian Cajori pointed out that the computation demanded by Ruffini is identical with that in "Horner's method", and that this method is elaborated by Ruffini with a clearness and thoroughness not surpassed in Horner's own exposition of 1819. In view of this fact, Professor Cajori insists that the name of Ruffini should be associated with that of Horner in the designation of the method. Ruffini again wrote on this subject in 1807 (Algebra elementare, cap. iv, v), and in 1813 (Memorie Soc. It., XVI, XVII). Ruffini was during his whole life a zealous Catholic. His convictions find expression in his apologetic works: "Dell' immortalità dell' anima" (Modena, 1806), dedicated to Pius VII, who sent him a gold medal; "Riflessioni critiche sopra il saggio filosofico intorno alle probabilità del Sig. Conte de la Place" (Modena, 1821), in which he proves himself to be as familiar with metaphysics as with questions of religion. FANTONETTI, Note storiche sopra i socj defunti: Paolo Ruffini in Mem. Imp. Reg. Ist. del Regno Lomb. Ven., V (1838), 40-41; LOMBARDI, Notizie sulla vita di Paolo Ruffini (Florence, 1824); POGGENDORF, Biogr.-Litt. Handwörterb. zur Gesch. der Exact. Wiss. (1858-63); CAJORI, Horner's Method of Approximation Anticipated by Ruffini in Bull. of American Math. Soc. (May, 1911). J. STEIN Rufford Abbey Rufford Abbey A monastery of the Cistercian Order, situated on the left bank of the Rainworth Water, about two miles south of Ollerton in Nottinghamshire, was founded by Gilbert de Gant in or about 1147, and colonized with monks from Rievaulx abbey. Gilbert endowed it with the manor of Rufford, and shortly afterwards added "Cratil" (Wellow), Barton, and Willoughby; these donations were confirmed by Stephen and Henry II, who also granted exemption from certain tolls and customs. Other benefactions followed and the abbey grew rich enough to be required in 1310 to supply victuals for Edward II's expedition to Scotland, and to be asked in 1319 for a contribution towards making good the losses suffered by the Archbishop of York through the Scottish war; yet in 1409 it escaped payment of a tenth to the king on the ground of extreme poverty. The published lists of abbots, in Dugdale and the Victoria County History, begin with Philip de Kyme, a well-known Lincolnshire magnate, whose inclusion is due to a mis-punctuation in a Pontefract charter. Both lists also omit the following early abbots: Gamellus, who occurs as witness to a Kirkstead charter of 1148-49 (Dugdale, V, 420) and is eulogized in two epitaphs contained in a Rufford manuscript now in the British Museum (Tit. D. xxiv, ff., 81b, 88); Elias (1156 and 1160), in Bulls of Adrian IV and Alexander III (Harl. Ch. 111, A.2,5); Matthew (c. 1170-80), in various undated charters (Harl. MS. 1063, ff. 10b, 65b, etc.); William, oc. between 1189-95 ("Reg. of Abp. W. Gray", Surtees Soc., p. 39); Walter, 1212 (Harl. MS. 1063, f. 66); Robert, 1228 (ib., f. 127b); John, c. 1260-70 (ibid., f. 22b). The last abbot but one, Rowland Blyton, or Bliton, left Rufford in 1533 to become Abbot of Rievaulx. His successor, Thomas Doncaster, was given a pension of £25 at the dissolution in 1536; but relinquished it within a few months on becoming rector of Rotherham. The dissolved abbey, with its estates, valued at £246 15s. 5d. yearly, was granted in 1537 to George Talbot, fourth Earl of Shrewsbury. On the death of Edward, eighth earl, in 1618, it passed to Sir George Savile through his marriage with Lady Mary Talbot; and it has remained ever since in the possession of the Savile family, the present owner being John, Lord Savile. The remains of the monastic buildings are incorporated in the modern mansion. DUGDALE, Monast. Anglicanum, V (1825), 517-21; PAGE, Victoria History of co. Nottingham, ii (1910), 101-5; WARNER AND ELLIS, Facsimiles of Brit. Mus. Charters, I (1903), no. 48; authorities cited, especially Harl. MS. 1063, a seventeenth cent. transcript of Abbot John Lyle's chartulary compiled in 1471. J.A. HERBERT Sts. Rufina Sts. Rufina The present Roman Martyrology records saints of this name on the following days: (1) On 10 July, Rufina and Secunda, Roman martyrs, who according to the legendary Acts (Acta SS., July, III, 30-1) suffered in 287 during the Aurelian persecution. Their place of burial was at the ninth milestone of the Via Cornelia, as is stated in the Berne manuscript of the "Martyrologium Hieronymianum" (ed. De Rossi-Duchesne, 89). These martyrs are also recorded in the Itineraries of the seventh century as on the road just mentioned (De Rossi, "Roma sotterranea", I, 18283). Pope Damasus erected a church over the grave of the saints. The town on this spot named after St. Rufina became the see of one of the suburbicarian dioceses that was later united with Porto (cf. Allard, "Histoire des Persécutions":, III, 96). (2) On 19 July, Justa and Rufina, martyrs at Seville (Hispalis) in Spain. Only St. Justa is mentioned in the "Martyrologium Hieronymianum" (93), but in the historical martyrologies (Quentin, "Les martyrologes historiques", 176-77) Justina is also mentioned, following the legendary Acts. There is no doubt that both are historical martyrs of the Spanish Church. (3) On 31 August, Theodotus, Rufina, and Ammia, of who the first two are said to be the parents of the celebrated martyr Mamas (Mammes), venerated at Cæsarea in Cappadocia (cf. the various Passions of these saints in the "Bibl. hagiographica latina", II, 771 sq., and in the "Bibl. hagiogr. græca", 2nd ed., 143). (4) On 24 of 25 August, the feast of two martyrs, Rufina and Eutyche, at Cupua in Campania is recorded in the "Martyrologium Hieronymianum" (110). Nothing further is known of either of these saints. J.P. KIRSCH Saints Rufinus Sts. Rufinus The present Roman Martyrology records eleven saints named Rufinus: (1) On 28 February, a Roman martyr Rufinus, with several companions in martyrdom; nothing is known concerning them. (2) On 7 April, an African martyr Rufinus with two companions; their names are mentioned under 6 April in a list of martyrs in the "Martyrologium Hieronymianum" (ed. De Rossi-Duchesne, 40). (3) On 14 June, the two martyrs Valerius and Rufinus who suffered at Soissons, France, during the Diocletian persecution; their names are given under this date in the "Martyrologium Hieronymianum" (ed. cit., 78; cf. 66 under 26 May; also Acta SS., June, II, 796 sqq.). (4) On 21 June, Rufinus who suffered martyrdom with Martia at Syracuse; nothing is known concerning him. (5) On 30 July, Rufinus of Assisi, who was according to legend the bishop of this city and a martyr. He is probably identical with the "episcopus Marsorum" noted under 11 August. The Acts of the martyrdom of this Rufinus are purely legendary [cf. "Bibliotheca hagiographica latina", II, 1068; Elisei, "Studio sulla chiesa cattedrale di S. Rufino" (Assisi, 1893); D. de Vincentiis, "Notizie di S. Rufino" (Avezzano, 1885)]. (6) On 19 August, Rufinus, confessor at Mantua. (7) On 26 August, a confessor Rufinus venerated at Capua (cf. Acta SS., August, V, 819-820). His name is given in the "Martyrologium Hieronymianum" under 26 and 27 August. (8) On 4 September, a martyr Rufinus with his companions in martyrdom who suffered at Ancyra in Galatia; he is also mentioned in company with several others in the "Martyrol. Hieronym." (ed. cit., 113) under 31 August, and again under 4 September (ed. cit., 116). (9) On 9 September, Rufinus and Rufinianus, with no further particulars. (10) On 16 November, Rufinus, a martyr in Africa with several companions in martyrdom; nothing is known concerning this saint. (11) Besides the saints already given mention should also be made of a martyr Rufinus of Alexandria whose name is given under 22 June in the "Martyrol. Hieronym." (ed. cit., 81) J.P. KIRSCH Saints Rufus Sts. Rufus The present Roman Martyrology records ten saints of this name. Historical mention is made of the following: (1) On 19 April, a group of martyrs in Melitene in Armenia, one of whom bears the name of Rufus. These martyrs are mentioned already in the "Martyrologium Hieronymianum" (ed. De Rossi-Duchesne, 46). (2) On 1 August, Rufus, with several companions who, according to the most reliable manuscripts of the "Martyrol. Hieronym." died at Tomi, the place being afterwards by mistake changed to Philadelphia (cf. Quentin, "Les martyrologes historiques", 337). (3) On 27 August, two martyrs named Rufus at Capua -- one, whose name also appears as Rufinus in the "Martyrol. Hieronym." (ed. cit., 111). The other is said to have suffered with a companion, Carponius, in the Diocletian persecution (cf. "Bibliotheca hagiographica latina", II, 1070; Acta SS., VI August, 18-19). (4) On 25 September, several martyrs at Damascus, among them one named Rufus. (5) On 7 November, a St. Rufus, who is said to have been Bishop of Metz; his history, however, is legendary. His name was inserted at a later date in an old manuscript of the "Martyrol. Hieronym." (ed. cit., 140). In the ninth century his relics were transferred to Gau-Odernheim in Hesse, Diocese of Mainz. (6) On 12 November, Rufus, a supposed Bishop of Avignon, who is perhaps identical with Rufus, the disciple of Paul (21 November). Legend, without any historical proof, has made him the first Bishop of Avignon [cf. Duchesne, "Fastes épiscopaux de l'ancienne Gaule", I, 258; Duprat in "Mémoires de l'Académie de Vaucluse" (1889), 373 sqq.; (1890), 1 sqq., 105 sqq.]. (7) On 21 November, Rufus the disciple of the Apostles, who lived at Rome and to whom St. Paul sent a greeting, as well as he did also to the mother of Rufus (Rom., xvi, 13). St. Mark says in his Gospel (xv, 21) that Simon of Cyrene was the father of Rufus, and as Mark wrote his Gospel for the Roman Christians, this Rufus is probably the same as the one to whom Paul sent a salutation [cf. Cornely, "Commentar. in Epist. ad Romanos" (Paris, 1896), 778 sq.]. (8) On 28 November, a Roman martyr Rufus, probably identical with the Rufinianus who was buried in the Catacomb of Generosa on the Via Portuensis, and who is introduced in the legendary Acts of the martyrdom of St. Chrysogonus (cf. Allard, "Histoire des persécutions", IV, 371 sq.). (9) On 18 December, the holy martyrs Rufus and Zosimus, who were taken to Rome with St. Ignatius of Antioch and were put to death there for their unwavering confession of Christianity during the persecution of Trajan. St. Polycarp speaks of them in his letter to the Philippians (c. ix). J.P. KIRSCH Juan de Ruiz de Alarcon y Mendoza Juan de Ruiz de Alarcón y Mendoza Spanish dramatic poet, b. at Mexico City, about 1580; d. at Madrid, 4 August, 1639. He received his elementary education in Mexico and finished his studies at the University of Salamanca, obtaining the degree of Bachelor of Laws. In 1606, he removed to Seville with the object of practicing his profession, and remained in that city for three years. While there his friends and associates were the men of letters of the city, among them the illustrious Miguel Cervantes Saavedra, with whom he formed a close friendship The years between 1609 and 1611 he passed in his native country. Returning to Spain, he settled in Madrid. A few years before Philip II had transferred his court to that city, and it was not long before Alarcón's dreams of a prominent position at the bar were shattered, for he saw that only through intrigue and adulation could he hope for preferment. This being distasteful to a man of his temperament, he turned to writing for the stage, attracted by the success of Lope de Vega, Gabriel Tellez (Tirso de Molina), and others of that period, which was so rich in literary masters. He was successful almost from the start. Unfortunately, he gained as well the envy and enmity of some of the poets of the time, among them Lope de Vega, Gongora, and Montalván, who lampooned him mercilessly. After his death he was gradually forgotten, save by plagiarists, who could safely pilfer from his unread works. Posterity, however, has given him his due, and he is considered the first great literary product of the New World and perhaps even to this day, one of the greatest. He is admittedly in the foremost rank of Spanish dramatists, being surpassed if at all, only by Lope de Vega and Calderón. Alarcón was the author of many plays, all of them masterpieces. Among the best known are: "Truth Suspected", which drew forth the highest praise from Corneille, who used it as a basis for his "Le Menteur"; "Walls have Ears" was meant to ridicule the habits of gossip and slander; "The Weaver of Segovia", a drama of intrigue and passion, in two parts, the first of which has been attributed to another author, being so much inferior to the second. In general his plays are distinguished by their ingenious plots, moral tone, vigorous and pure style, and purity of versification. HARTZENBUSCH, Comedias de J. Ruiz de Alarcón y Mendoza (1852); ANTONIO, Bibliotheca hispana nola (Madrid, 1783-88); LATOUR, Espagne, tradition, maeurs et litterature (1869); GUERRE Y ORBE, D. J. R. de Alarcón y Mendoza (Madrid, 1871). VENTURA FUENTES Antonio Ruiz de Montoya Antonio Ruiz de Montoya One of the most distinguished pioneers of the original Jesuit mission in Paraguay, and a remarkable linguist; b. at Lima Peru, on 13 June, 1585, d. there 11 April, 1652. After a youth full of wild and daring pranks and adventures he entered the Society of Jesus on 1 November, 1606. In the same year he accompanied Father Diego Torres, the first provincial of Paraguay, to this mission, where he laboured for thirty years as one of its most capable and successful apostles. Father Ruiz de Montoya was one of the true type of great Spanish missionaries of that era, who, as if made of cast-iron, united a burning zeal for souls with an incredible fewness of wants and great power of work. In co-operation with Fathers Cataldino and Mazeta he founded the Reductions of Guayra, brought a number of wild tribes into the Church, and is said to have baptized personally 100,000 Indians. As head of the missions he had charge from 1620 of the "reductions" on the upper and middle course of the Paraña, on the Uruguay, and the Tape, and added thirteen further "reductions" to the twenty six already existing. When the missions of Guayra were endangered by the incursions of marauders from Brazil in search of slaves, Father Mazeta and he resolved to transport the Christian Indians, about 15,000 in number, to the Reductions in Paraguay, partly by water with the aid of seven hundred rafts and numberless canoes, and partly by land through the mazes of the primeval forest. The plan was successfully carried out in 1631 after the suffering of incredible hardships and dangers. "This expedition", says the Protestant von Ihering, "is one of the most extraordinary undertakings of this kind known in history" [Globus, LX (1891), 179]. In 1637 Montoya on behalf of the governor, of the Bishop of Paraguay, and of the heads of the orders laid a complaint before Philip IV as to the Brazilian policy of sending marauding expeditions into the neighboring regions. He obtained from the king important exemptions, privileges, and measures of protection for the Reductions (see REDUCTIONS OF PARAGUAY). Soon after his return to America Montoya died in the odor of sanctity. He was a fine scholar in the beautiful but difficult language of the Guaraní Indians, and has left works upon it which were scarcely exceeded later. These standard works are: "Tesora de la lingua guaraní" (Madrid, 1639), a quarto of 407 pages; "Arte y vocabulario de la lingua guaraní" (Madrid, 1640), a quarto of 234 pages; "Catecismo de la lingua guaraní" (Madrid, 1648), a quarto of 336 pages. Mulhall calls Ruiz de Montoya's grammar and vocabulary "a lasting memorial of his industry and learning". The German linguist Von der Gabelentz regarded them as the very best sources for the study of the Guaraní language, while Hervas declares that the clearness and comprehensive grasp of the rules to which Montoya traced back the complicated structure and pronunciation of Guaraní are most extraordinary. All three works were repeatedly republished and revised. In 1876 Julius Platzmann, the distinguished German scholar in native American languages, issued at Leipzig an exact reprint of the first Madrid edition of this work "unique among the grammars and dictionaries of the American languages". A Latin version was edited by the German scholar Christ. Friedr. Seybold at Stuttgart in 1890-91. A collected edition of all Montoya's works was published at Vienna under the supervision of the Vicomte de Porto Seguro in 1876. Of much importance as one of the oldest authorities for the history of the Reductions of Paraguay is Montoya's work, "Conquista espiritual hecha por los religiosos de la C. de J. en las provincias del Paraguay, Paraña, Uruguay y Tape" (Madrid, 1639), in quarto; a new edition was issued at Bilbao in 1892. In addition to the works already mentioned Montoya wrote a number of ascetic treatises. Letters and various literary remains of Ruiz de Montoya are to be found in the "Memorial histor. español", XVI (Madrid, 1862), 57 sqq.; in "Litterae annuae provinc. Paraguariae" (Antwerp, 1600), and in the "Memorial sobre limites de la Repúbl. Argentina con el Paraguay" (Buenos Aires, 1867), I, appendix; II, 216-252; cf. Backer-Sommervogel, "Bibl. de la C. de Jesus", VI, 1675 sqq. DAHLMANN, Die Sprachenkunde und die Missionen (Freiburg 1891), 84 sqq.; Conquista espiritual (Bilbao), Prologo; SALDAMANHO, Los antiquos Jesuitas del Peru (Lima, 1882), 61 sqq.; XARQUE, Vida de P. Ant. Ruiz de Montova (Saragossa, 1662); DE ANDRADE, Varones ilustres (Madrid, 1666); PLATZMANN, Verzeichniss einer Auswahl amerikan. Grammatiken, Worterbucher, etc. (Leipzig, 1876), s. vv. GUARANI and RUIZ; MULHALL, Between the Amazon and Andes (London, 1881), 248 sqq. Revista Peruana, IV, 119. ANTHONY HUONDER Diego Ruiz de Montoya Diego Ruiz de Montoya Theologian, b. at Seville, 1562; d. there 15 March, 1632. He entered the Society of Jesus in 1572 and was professed 22 July 1592. He taught philosophy in Granada, moral theology for one year in Baeza, and theology for about twenty years in Cordova and Seville. For a time he was rector of the College of Cordova, and represented his province, Andalusia, at the Sixth General Congregation. The last years of his life were devoted to writing. His distinguishing characteristics seem to have been humility, a retiring disposition, and integrity. Notwithstanding the fact that the Duke of Lerma promised to obtain permission from Paul V to publish his manuscripts "De Auxiliis", if he furthered his plans, he declined to advise the citizens of Seville to pay a certain tribute. Fray Miguel de San Jose considers him a most finished theologian; Merlin a wise, subtle, prudent student and faithful interpreter of the Fathers, and Kleutgen and Menendez-Pelayo think that he combined positive historic theology with scholastic, in a manner not achieved by any of the theologians who preceded him. His published works are: "Doctrine Christiana", written by command of the Bishop of Cordova, published anonymously and several times reprinted; "Commentaria ac disputationes in primam partem D. Thomae"—(a) "De Trinitate" (Lyons, 1625), his principal treatise and one of the best on this subject; (b) "De praedestinatione ac reprobatione hominum et angelorum" (Lyons, 1628); (c) "De scientia, ideis, veritate ac vita Dei" (Paris, 1629); (d) "De voluntate Dei et propriis actibus ejus" (Lyons, 1630); (e) "De providentia" (Lyons, 1631); (f) "De nominibus Dei". These are rare and much sought editions. In manuscript preserved in various libraries: "De auxiliis", two volumes classified as very good by Father Vitelleschi; "De angelic"; "Commentarii in materiam de peccatis"; "Controversiae et quaestiones theologicae"; "De beneficiis parochialibus conferendis"; "De eliminandis e republica comoediis vulgaribus"; "De statu eorum, qui petunt dimissionem in Societate Jesu"; "De causis dimittendi a Societate Jesu". MUNOZ DE GALVEZ, Carta . . . sobre la muerte y virtudes del Padre Montoya. Uriarte says this was signed in Seville in 1632 and was written by Father Feliciano de Figuero (Catalogue. . .No. 3797). ANDRADE, Varones ilustres, VII (Bilbso, 1891), 162; MICHAEL A S. JOSEPH, Bibliogr. Crit. sacra et prof., IV (Madrid, 1742), 85; NICOLAS ANTONIO, Bibliotheca Hispana Nova, I (Matriti, 1793), 311; SOTWEL, Bibliot. scrip. societ. (Rome, 1676, 1774); HURTER, Nomenclator, I (Innsbruck, 1892), no. 265; SOMMERVOGEL, Bibliotheque, VII (l896), col. 323; Memorial del Colegio de Cordoba, I, cap. viii, p. iv, n. ii; GUlLHERMY, Menologe: Espagne, I, 433. ANTONIO PEREZ GOYENA Rumania Rumania A kingdom in the Balkan Peninsula, situated between the Black Sea, the Danube, the Carpathian Mountains, and the Pruth. I. HISTORY The modern Rumanians are generally regarded as the descendants of the Dacians, a branch of the ancient Thracians; they dwelt north of the Danube in the territory now known as Transylvania, and formed at the beginning of the Christian era a comparatively well-organized state. Under the rule of able princes (e.g. Decebalus) they frequently threatened the Roman civilization between the Adriatic Sea and the Danube. Trajan first succeeded after several campaigns (102-06) in bringing the country under the Roman dominion: the new Roman province received the name of Dacia, and embraced the modern Transylvania, Banat, and Rumania. To replace the Dacians, a portion of whom had emigrated northwards, Trajan introduced colonists into the land from every part of the Roman Empire, especially from the neighbouring Illyrian provinces; these settlers soon converted the Dacian territories wasted by the wars into one of the most flourishing Roman provinces, which was shortly known as "Dacia felix". From the fusion of the remaining Thracians and the Roman colonists, who possessed a higher culture, issued in the course of the third and fourth centuries the Daco-Rumanian people. As early as the second century began the assaults of the Germanic tribes on the Roman Empire. After several unsuccessful attempts, the Goths occupied the Dacian province in the third century, and in 271 Emperor Aurelian formally ceded the territory to them. In the fourth century the Goths were followed by the Huns, who in similar fashion brought the Romans and Goths into subjection after several campaigns. In the fifth century came the Gepidæ, and in the sixth the Avars, who occupied Dacia for two centuries. Under the dominion of the Avars the Slavs made their appearance, settling peacefully among the inhabitants; they have left many traces of their presence in the names of places and rivers. Gradually, however, they were absorbed and Romanized, so that the Latin character of the language was preserved. The influence of the Slavs was greater on the right bank of the Danube, where they overwhelmed the Thraco-Roman population by weight of numbers, and denationalized the Finnic Bulgars who settled in the country in the seventh century. In this way the Romanic population of the Balkan Peninsula was divided by the Slavs into two sections; the one withdrew northwards to the Carpathians, where people of kindred race had settled, while the other moved southwards to the valleys of the Pindus and the Balkan Mountains, where their descendants (the modern Aromuni or Macedo-Vlachs) still maintain themselves. In the history of the Southern Rumanians the erection of the Rumano-Bulgar Empire by the brothers, Peter, Jonita, and Asen at the end of the twelfth century is especially noteworthy; this empire became disintegrated in the middle of the thirteenth century on the extinction of the Asen dynasty (see BULGARIA). The Bulgar dominion over ancient Dacia exercised a decisive influence on the ecclesiastical development of the country. Christianity had been introduced — especially into the modern Dobrudja, where there was a strong garrison — by Roman colonists and soldiers, the Latin form and liturgy being employed. In Tomi (now Constanta) existed an episcopal see, nine occupants of which between the fourth and sixth centuries are known. During the dominion of the Bulgars the ancestors of the Rumanians with their lords came under the jurisdiction of the Greek Patriarch of Constantinople, and were thus drawn into the Greek Schism. Consequently, even to-day the vast majority of the inhabitants of Rumania belong to the Orthodox Church (see below). The immigration of the Bulgars was followed by the campaigns of the Magyars, who however made no permanent settlement in the land, choosing for settlement the plain between the Danube and the Theiss. At the beginning of the tenth century the country was subjected to the repeated attacks of the Peshenegs, and in the middle of the eleventh to those of the Cumans. During the migrations and invasions of various tribes, the population of the country was strongly impregnated with Slav and other elements, and only in the wooded hills of Northwestern Moldavia and Transylvania did the original Daco-Rumanian population remain pure and unmixed. After peace had been restored, the people descended from these remote retreats, and united with the inhabitants of the plains to form the Rumanian people. During the tenth and eleventh centuries small principalities called Banats were formed in the territory of ancient Dacia; those which extended from Transylvania northwards and westwards to the valley of the Theiss came gradually under the sway of the Magyars, while those extending eastwards and southwards from the Carpathians maintained their independence. From the latter originated the principalities of Wallachia and Moldavia. By uniting the smaller districts on both sides of the River Olt, Voivode Bassarab (died 1340) founded toward the end of the thirteenth century the Grand Banat, Little Wallachia, and successful wars against Charles I, King of Hungary, and Robert of Anjou enabled him to preserve his independence and to extend his authority to the Danube and the Black Sea. A little later (about the middle of the fourteenth century) Bogdan, Voivode of Maramaros in Transylvania, who rebelled against the suzerainty of Hungary in 1360, founded the Principality of Moldavia by overrunning the Carpathians and reducing under his sway the hilly country along the River Moldau. Both these Rumanian principalities had to contend with great difficulties from their foundation: on the one hand their independence was threatened by the neighbouring kingdoms of Hungary and Poland, while on the other domestic quarrels and a want of unity between the kindred principalities lessened their strength. But their most dangerous enemy was the Turk, who extended his conquests into the Balkan Peninsula in the middle of the fourteenth century. In wars against the Turks and vain efforts to shake off the Turkish yoke, almost the whole activity of the two principalities was exhausted for several centuries. By their unflinching defence of their religion, the ancestors of the present Rumanians protected the culture and civilization of the Christian West from the onslaught of Islam, and thus played a rôle in universal history. Several of the princes who reigned during this heroic period of Rumanian history are especially conspicuous: Mircea the Old or the Great (1386-1418) and Radul the Great (1496-1508) in Wallachia, and Alexander the Good (1400-33) and Stephen the Great (1457-1504) in Moldavia. Mircea organized his dominions and extended his frontiers to the Black Sea by seizing Dobrudja and the town of Pilistria from the Bulgars in 1391. To repel the onsets of the Turks, he formed with King Sigismund of Hungary (afterward emperor) an offensive and defensive alliance in accordance with which he participated in the ill-fated battle near Nicopolis in 1396. In 1402 he had to recognize the suzerainty of Turkey, to vacate the right bank of the Danube, and to pay a yearly tribute, in return for which the Porte guaranteed the free election of the Wallachian princes and the independent internal administration of their territory. The immediate followers of Mircea were weak princes, and disputes concerning the succession postponed the casting off of the Turkish yoke. Radul the Great, son and successor of the ex-monk Vlad I who had been appointed prince by the Turks (1481), sought by reforms in the administration and in ecclesiastical matters to mitigate the general distress and to secure greater independence from Turkey. For Moldavia the long reign of Alexander the Good (1401-32) was a time of prosperity: he organized the finances, the administration, and the army, drew up a code of laws after Byzantine models, and increased the culture of the people by founding schools and monasteries. Alexander had on three occasions to take the oath of fealty to the King of Poland; his sons had likewise to recognize the suzerainty of Poland, and his natural son, Peter (1455-57), had in addition to pay tribute to the Turks. After a period of almost uninterrupted wars for the princely dignity, Stephen the Great (1457-1504), a grandson of Alexander, inaugurated a period of peace and splendour for Moldavia. Thanks to his valiant and well-organized army, he succeeded not only in keeping his country independent of the Turks and Poland for nearly half a century, but also increased his territory by subduing a portion of Bessarabia, organized the Church, founded a new bishopric, and built several new churches and monasteries. Under him Moldavia reached its greatest power and extent. His son Bogdan III (1504-17), in view of the superior forces of the Turks, had to engage to pay a yearly tribute, in return for which Moldavia was (like Wallachia) allowed the maintenance of the Christian faith, the free election of its princes, and independent domestic administration. In spite of these treaties, a period of bondage began for both lands after the battle of Mohács, which had brought Turkey to the height of its power. The Turks created a military zone along the Danube and the Dniester, established Turkish garrisons in important places, and compelled the princes to do personal homage to the sultan in Constantinople every three years, to bring (in addition to the tribute) presents in token of their submission, to perform military service, to maintain a troop of janizaries in their retinue, and to give relatives as hostages for their fidelity. The sultans finally arrogated to themselves the right of appointing and removing at will the vaivodes of both principalities; the princes thus became mere blind tools of the Porte, were for the most part engaged in harrying each other, and in very many instances fell by the hands of assassins. Turkey abused its power to appoint new princes at short intervals; as the princes had usually to purchase the recognition of the Porte with large sums of money, they exacted from their subjects twice or three times the amounts thus paid. The chief portions of these extortions were wrung from the peasants, who were reduced by the large landowners and the nobles (the boyars) to the condition of serfs. The nobles also became demoralized, and wasted their strength in scheming to obtain the vaivodeship. Both principalities, however, occasionally enjoyed a brief period of prosperity. Thus, Michael the Brave of Wallachia (1593-1601) succeeded in casting off the Turkish yoke, defeating an army twenty times as numerous as his own in 1595. In 1599 he occupied Transylvania and in 1600 Moldavia, and thus formed an united Rumanian Kingdom which, however, again collapsed on his assassination in 1601. The reign of Matthias Bassarab (1632-54) was also beneficient for Wallachia; he protected his boundaries from the attacks of the Turks on the Danube, restrained the previously inordinate influence of the Greeks, founded in 1652 the first Rumanian printing establishment, and had a code of laws compiled after Greek and Slav models. His example was imitated by Vasili Lupu, Vaivode of Moldavia (1632-53), who in addition endeavoured by the foundation of schools and charitable institutions to promote the culture of the land. Thus, despite the oppressive political conditions of the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries, became possible the existence of a flourishing ecclesiastical literature and spiritual lyrical poetry, which kept alive the national consciousness of the people. At this period were laid the enduring foundations of Rumanian culture. Of great importance also was the circumstance that the Old Slavonic language then began to be replaced by the Rumanian both in public life and in the Church. When, towards the end of the seventeenth and the beginning of the eighteenth century, the Turkish power was broken by the victories of Austria, the influence of Austria and Russia began to make itself felt in the affairs of the two Rumanian principalities. To rid themselves of the Turkish domination, the princes turned now to one power and now to the other, but were deceived by both. To oppose these attempts the Porte ceased to appoint native Rumanian nobles to the vaivodeship as previously, appointing Greeks — especially from the Fanar district in Constantinople, who were able to offer larger sums for their appointment than the boyars; the princely dignity was thus in the strictest sense of the word leased. For the Rumanian lands thus began the gloomiest period of their history, the period of the Fanariots, which lasted from 1712 to 1821. Foreign princes succeeded one another at the shortest intervals, taking possession of the country with a numerous retinue of wards, relatives, and creditors, and reducing it to greater and greater poverty. A great portion of the land was presented to Greek monasteries, and much of its income left the land and enriched Greek monasteries throughout the East (especially Mount Athos). Meanwhile the Porte arbitrarily raised the tribute to many times its former amount. Some Greek princes formed a glorious exception, and, by introducing reforms in favour of the peasants, rendered great services to both countries; especially notable in this respect were Nicholas and Constantine Mavrocordatus in Wallachia and Gregory Ghica in Moldavia. During the Fanariot dominion Rumania was frequently the scene of the wars waged by Turkey against Austria or against Russia. In 1718 the western portion fell to Austria, but in 1739 it was recovered by Turkey. After the Turco-Russian War of 1768-74 Russia wished to occupy the Rumanian principalities; Austria opposed this and, in return for this service, the Porte ceded to Austria Upper Moldavia (the present crownland of Bucovina). Moldavia had to bear the cost of the Russo-Turkish War of 1806-12, the eastern portion of the country between the Pruth and the Dniester (Bessarabia) being ceded by Turkey to Russia. Of the Moldavia of Stephen the Great only half now remained. When Vaivode Alexander Ypsilanti, a Fanariot, utilized the princely office to promote the rebellion of the Greeks against the Turkish rule, the Porte found itself compelled to cease appointing Greeks to the princely dignity, and to revert to the old practice of naming Rumanians. Russia now began to interest itself in the principalities, though only for interested reasons; by the Treaty of Akerman it obtained that only boyars should be appointed princes. A new war having broken out between Russia and Turkey in connexion with the Greek struggle for freedom, Russia occupied the two principalities after the Peace of Adrianople (1828); the Russian Count Kisselew, who governed the territories at the head of the Russian army of occupation, regulated anew the administration and the political organization of the countries. After the Russian occupation Russia appointed as princes for life, for I Moldavia Michael Sturdza (1834-49), and for Wallachia Alexander Ghica (1834-43), who was succeeded by another favourite of the tsar, George Bibescu. The reforms introduced under the Russians subsequently prepared the way for the gradual economic development of the territories. However, this improvement benefited almost exclusively the boyars and the great landowners, while the people remained in their former pitiable condition. These circumstances, as well as the interference of Russia in the domestic affairs of the principalities, the spread of patriotic and liberal ideas, the desire for national unity, the curtailment of the privileges of the boyars, and free institutions, finally led (owing to the example given by the French Revolution of February) to an insurrection, which was successful only in Wallachia. On 21 June, 1848, George Bibescu was forced to abdicate, a new constitution was proclaimed, and a provisional government appointed. However, Russia and Turkey occupied the principalities in common, set aside the constitution, and restored the old conditions by the Convention of Balta-Limani (1 May, 1849); at the same time the election of princes for life and the national assembly were abolished. Barbu Stirbeiu, Bibsecu's brother, was named Prince of Wallachia, and Gregory Alexander Prince of Moldavia for a period of seven years. During the Crimean War both principalities were occupied first by Russia, and then (after 1854) by Austria. The Congress of Paris rearranged their relations, setting aside the Russian suzerainty and restoring that of Turkey. A commission of the great powers which had been sent to the principalities having learned the wishes of the Rumanian people, both were given autonomy to the extent of their ancient treaty with Turkey and a constitutional government by the Convention of Paris (1858); the further wishes of the people for the union of the two territories and the nomination of a prince from one of the ruling houses of Europe were not fulfilled, the two principalities being kept separate and each electing a prince for life. In 1859, however, a personal union was effected, Colonel Alexander John Cuza being elected for Moldavia on 17 January and for Wallachia on 24 January; the double election was ratified by the Porte after some hesitation. In 1861 Cuza established, instead of the separate ministries, a common ministry and a common representative assembly, and in 1862 the union of the principalities, henceforth known as Rumania, was proclaimed. Prince Cuza introduced a series of reforms; the most important were the secularization of the Greek monasteries, the law dealing with public instruction, the codification of the laws on the basis of the Napoleonic Code, and especially the land laws of 1864, by which the peasants were given free possession of the land and the remnants of serfdom, socage and tithes, were abolished. As the chamber, which was controlled by the boyars, was particularly opposed to the last measure, Cuza abolished the chamber in 1864 and gave the country a new constitution with two chambers. Notwithstanding all his services, Cuza brought the country into a financial crisis. A conspiracy was formed against him, in which the army participated; on the night of 22 February, 1866, he was seized by the conspirators and compelled to abdicate the following morning. After Count Philip of Flanders, brother of King Leopold of Belgium, had refused the sovereignty, the Catholic prince, Charles of Hohenzollern-Sigmaringen, was elected hereditary prince at the instance of Napoleon III on 14 April, 1866. On 22 May he entered Bucharest, and after some months was recognized by the Porte, although Rumania had again to recognize its obligation to pay tribute. From the beginning of his reign Charles had great difficulties to overcome; the development of the country had been prevented by centuries of foreign occupation, commerce and manufacture were to a great extent in the hands of foreigners, the land was for the most part in the power of a few great landowners, while the mass of the population were poor and burdened with heavy taxation. Notwithstanding frequent rotation in power of the political parties, a series of reforms were passed, and the army, organized after the Prussian model, made creditably efficient. When the Russo-Turkish War broke out in 1878, Rumania made a treaty with the tsar, allowing the Russian troops to march through its territory, and on 22 May, 1877, declared its independence of the Porte. At the storming of Plevna and the besieging of other places the Rumanian army rendered very important services to Russia — services for which Russia showed no gratitude. The complete independence of Rumania was recognized by the Congress of Berlin (13 July, 1878), but it was compelled to cede to Russia Bessarabia, which it had acquired in 1856, and to content itself with the less important Dobrudja. In consequence of this disappointment Rumania has since favoured Germany and Austria in its foreign policy. On 26 March, 1881, Charles had himself crowned king. The new kingdom soon began to display a successful activity in both the material and intellectual domains. The natural richness of the land was developed, the building of roads and railways promoted, and the standard of public instruction raised. Between 1882 and 1885 the independence of the Orthodox Church in Rumania from the Patriarchate of Constantinople was effected, and in 1883 the Archdiocese of Bukarest was erected for the Catholics. Thanks to its intellectual and material development and its military strength, Rumania has become an important factor in European politics. Grievous conditions, however, still prevail in the country in one connexion — the distribution of the land and real property. Almost half of the landed interest (over 47 per cent) is vested in the hands of scarcely 4200 persons, so that Rumania out rivals Southern Italy as the land of big estates with all the resulting evils. As these great landowners possess political as well as economical power, and exercise it to the detriment of the peasants, a serious rising of the peasants broke out in 1907, and could be suppressed only with the aid of the army after the proclaiming of martial law. To abolish gradually these evil conditions and to protect the peasants from the oppression of the landowners and lessees and from usury, a series of excellent agrarian reforms have been introduced since 1907 and have been in many cases already enforced. II. PRESENT CONDITION The area of Rumania is 50,720 sq. miles; according to the census of 1899 the population was 5,956,690 (at the beginning of 1910 the estimated population was 6,865,800). In 1899 the population included: 5,451,787 Greek Orthodox (over 91.5 per cent), 149,677 Catholics (2.5 per cent), 22,749 Protestants, 15,094 Lippovans, 5787 Armenians, 266,652 Jews, 44,732 Mohammedans, 222 of other religions. According to nationality the population was as follows: 5,489,296 Rumanians, 108,285 Austrians and Hungarians, 23,756 Turks, 20,103 Greeks, 8841 Italians, 7964 Bulgarians, 7636 Germans, 5859 foreign Jews, 11,380 of other nationalities. According to the constitution of 19 June, 1866, Rumania is a constitutional monarchy, the legislative power being vested jointly in the king and parliament. The national assembly consists of two chambers, a senate and a house of representatives. To the senate belong the adult princes of the royal house, the eight bishops of the Orthodox Church, one representative of each of the two national universities, and 110 members elected by two electoral colleges; the house of representatives consists of 183 members elected by adult Rumanians paying taxes organized into 3 electoral colleges. The bills passed by Parliament receive the force of laws only when sanctioned by the king. While according to the constitution the Greek Orthodox is the State Church, liberty in the practice of their religion is granted to all the other Churches, and the State refrains from all interference in the election and appointment of the clergy of the various denominations. State support is given only to the Orthodox Church. The Orthodox Church of Rumania declared itself independent of the Patriarch of Constantinople in 1859, a declaration which was not recognized by the latter until 1885. The supreme ecclesiastical authority is the Holy Synod, consisting of the two metropolitans, the six bishops, and the eight titular archpriests of Rumania; its duties are to preserve the unity of the Rumanian with the Eastern Church in dogma and the canons, to maintain ecclesiastical discipline within the territory of Rumania, and to decide all purely ecclesiastical spiritual and legal questions according to the holy canons. The choice of bishops is vested in an electoral body composed of the eight bishops, the titular archpriests, and all the Orthodox representatives and senators; the election is by secret ballot. For ecclesiastical administration the country is divided into eight eparchies (dioceses), of which the eparchies Ungro-Wallachia, with its seat at Bukarest, and Moldau, and Sucea, with its seat at Jassy, are metropolitan. The Primate of Rumania is the Metropolitan of Bukarest. For the Catholics of Rumania have been erected the Archdiocese of Bukarest and the Diocese of Jassy. The ancient Catholic Church of Rumania disappeared when the people, influenced by the Bulgars, placed themselves under the jurisdiction of the Greek Church in the ninth century and thus became involved in its schism. The seed of the modern Catholic Church in Rumania developed in the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries in consequence of the immigration of the Hungarians and Poles, and various Catholic dioceses were founded in the Middle Ages. However, the mass of the population was never won over to reunion with Rome, and the dioceses soon vanished. In 1211 King Andreas II presented to the Teutonic Order the land about Kronstadt in Transylvania, but he withdrew his donation in 1225 and entered into personal possession of the territory. Numerous Hungarians and Germans had meanwhile settled in the plain of the Danube, then occupied mostly by the pagan Cumans, and the majority of the latter were won for Christianity. For these converted Cumans the Archbishop of Gran erected the "Diocese of the Cumans", which included not only the modern Rumania, but also Bessarabia and a portion of Transylvania. Theodorich, a Dominican, was the first occupant of the see, and fixed his seat at Milcov. In 1241, however, the diocese was ravaged by the Tatars; the title alone was retained, being given to Hungarian vicars-general (even to ordinary parish priests) until 1523. To replace this see a Catholic bishopric was established in 1246 at Severin, a town on the Danube near the Hungarian frontier which had been taken from the Bulgar-Rumanian Empire of the Asens by King Andreas II in 1230 and presented to the Knights of Malta in 1247. The first bishops, Gregory (about 1246) and another Gregory (about 1382), were actual bishops, but the remaining ten occupants of the see (mentioned until 1502) were merely titular bishops, who lived mostly in Hungary. A third Catholic diocese was founded at Sereth. When the Eastern emperor, John Palæologus the Elder, made his submission to Rome in 1369, Latzco, the Rumanian Prince of Moldavia, followed his example, and asked Pope Urban V to erect a diocese at Sereth (1370). The first bishop was the Conventual, Nicholas Andrea Wassilo; he became Administrator of Halicz in 1373, and Bishop of Wilna in 1388. As the next two bishops were also coadjutors of Cracow, this see was reduced to the rank of a titular see. In consequence of the efforts for reunion of Urban V, who wished to restore the old Diocese of Milcov, another Catholic diocese was founded at Arges in 1381, and the Dominican Nicholas Antonii appointed its first incumbent. Of his sixteen successors, known until 1664, all lived outside the diocese, the title of which they added to their other titles. A fifth diocese was founded at Baja, the oldest town in Moldavia. The names of seven bishops who lived before 1523 are known; in the sixteenth century the population almost unanimously embraced Protestantism. The foundation of the Diocese of Bacau (1G07), whose occupants resided in Poland, did as little to strengthen the Catholic Church. As the bishops of these dioceses resided almost exclusively outside their sees, the ministration to the Catholics, whose number was never very great, was undertaken by the religious orders — especially the Franciscans and Dominicans, who founded many monasteries in the territory of the present Rumania. During the time of the Reformation most of the Catholics joined either the Greek schismatics or the Protestants. The spiritual care of the few who remained faithful was undertaken by the Conventuals from Constantinople; to these friars is due the maintenance of the Catholic faith in Rumania, and the erection of a church in Bukarest (1633). When, at the beginning of the seventeenth century, an episcopal see was established at Sofia, its first occupant, Petrus a Solis (1610), was named Administrator Apostolic of Wallachia — an office also fulfilled by his successors. The most famous of these administrators was Petrus Deodatus Baksich (1641-74; from 1642 archbishop), whose report of his canonical visitation is preserved in the Archives of the Propaganda. As most of the bishops of Sofia were chosen from the Franciscan Observants, these friars gradually replaced the Conventuals as missionaries. In similar fashion the bishops of the Diocese of Marcianopolis (erected in 1643) were appointed administrators Apostolic for the Catholics of Moldavia, and the bishops of Nicopolis (1648) for the Catholics of Dobrudja. When, subsequently to 1715, the See of Sofia was left vacant, the administration of Wallachia was transferred to the Bishop of Nicopolis. During the plague of 1792-3 Bishop Paulus Dovanlia of Nicopolis (1777-1804) transferred the seat of his diocese to the Franciscan monastery in Bukarest; since then the bishops of Nicopolis have resided in Bukarest, or at Ciople in the neighbourhood. Dovanlia's successors have been chosen mostly from the Passionists, who came to Bukarest in 1781. The first was Francis Ferrari, who died of the plague in 1813. His successor, Fortunatus Ercolani (1815), became involved in a quarrel with his flock in consequence of his attitude towards the Franciscans, who had won the affection of the people, and was transferred to Cività Castellana in 1822. The next bishops were Josephus Molajoni (1822-47) and Angelo Parsi (1852-63); the latter built a new church and episcopal residence at Bukarest and introduced the Brothers of the Christian Schools and religious orders of women into the country. Parsi's successor, Joseph Pluym, became Patriarchal Vicar of Constantinople in 1869. The number of Catholics so greatly increased in the nineteenth century, owing mainly to immigration from Austria and Hungary, that a reorganization of the Catholic Church in Rumania became necessary. This was done in 1883: the territory of Rumania was separated ecclesiastically from the Diocese of Nicopolis, Bishop Ignatius Paoli (1870-85) was named Archbishop of Bukarest in 1883, and the exempt Diocese of Jassy simultaneously re-erected. (Concerning the further history and ecclesiastical statistics, see BUKAREST and JASSY.) ABT, Die katholische Kirche in Rumanien (Würzburg, 1879); SAMUELSON, Rumania, past and present (London, 1882); RUDOW, Gesch. des rumän. Schrifttums (Wernigerode, 1892); DE MARTONNE, La Roumanie (Paris, 1900); BENGER, tr. KEANE, Rumania in 1900 (London, 1901); NETZHAMMER, Aus Rumänien (Einsiedeln, 1909); STURDZA, La terre et la race Roumaines depuis leurs origines jusqu'à nos jours (Paris, 1904); ONCIUL, Din Istoria Romanici (Bukarest, 1906); BELLESSORT, La Roumanie contemporaine (Paris, 1907); XENOPOL, Les Roumains (Paris, 1909); FORGA, Istoria biscricii Românesti (2 vols., Bukarest, 1905-09); CREANGA, Grundbesetz verteilung u. Bauernfrage in Rumänien (3 vols., Leipzig, 1907-09); LE POINTE, La Roumaine moderne (Paris, 1910); FISCHER, Die Kulturarbeit des Deutschtums in Rumanien (Hermannstadt, 1911). JOSEPH LINS. Karl Friedrich Rumohr Karl Friedrich Rumohr Art historian, b. at Dresden, 1785; d. there, 1843. He became a Catholic in 1804. He was blessed not only with worldly possessions, but also with a practically unquenchable thirst for knowledge, and especially with a keen sense of form and beauty, which fitted him for the critical treatment of art and social relations. Italy was frequently visited by him, and he was fond of varying life in the large cities with the stillness and loneliness of the country. Exercising a magnificent hospitality, he himself was in many places, despite his very irritable temperament, a welcome guest—even with King William IV of Prussia and Christian VIII of Denmark. In his "Italienische Forschungen" (3 vols., 182-31), he treated in masterly fashion the Umbrian-Tuscan School of painting, and prepared the way for a critical conception of art history in Italy. His residence in Italy also gave rise to interesting works on the rural condition of Central and Upper Italy. His "Drei Reisen nach Italien" appeared as a special work. As the result of searching study he wrote "Hans Holbein der Jungere in seinem Verhältnis zum deutschen Formschnittwesen", "Zur Geschichte und Theorie der Formschneidekunst", and "Geschichte der königlichen Kupferstichsammlung zu Kopenhagen". His "Novellen" ae unimportant, his "Deutsche Denkwürdigkeiten" (4 vols.), of little interest; his "Hunde-Füchsestreit" (Kynalopekomachie) and "Schule der Höflichkeit" are written in a humorous vein. The "Geist der Kochkunst" also extended his fame and popularity. King Christian VIII built a monument in his honour. Biography by SCHULZ (Leipzig, 1844); POEL in Allg. Deutsche Biogr., XXIX. G. GIETMANN St. Rupert St. Rupert (Alternative forms, RUPRECHT, Hrodperht, Hrodpreht, Roudbertus, Rudbertus, Robert, Ruprecht). First Bishop of Salzburg, contemporary of Childebert III, king of the Franks (695-711), date of birth unknown; d. at Salzburg, Easter Sunday, 27 March, 718. According to an old tradition, he was a scion of the Frankish Merovingian family. The assumption of 660 as the year of his birth is merely legendary. According to the oldest short biographical notices in the "Mon. Germ. Script.", XI, 1-15, Rupert was noted for simplicity, prudence, and the fear of God; he was a lover of truth in his discourse, upright in opinion, cautious in counsel, energetic in action, far-seeing in his charity, and in all his conduct a glorious model of rectitude. While he was Bishop of Worms, the fame of his learning and piety drew many from far and wide. The report of the bishop's ability reached Duke Theodo II of Bavaria, who had placed himself at the head of the current ecclesiastical movement in Bavaria. Theodo sent Rupert messengers with the request that, he should come to Bavaria to revive, confirm, and propagate the spirit of Christianity there. Despite the work of early missionaries, Bavaria was only superficially Christian; its very Christianity was indeed to some extent Arian, while heathen customs and views were most closely interwoven with the external Christianity which it had retained. St. Rupert acceded to Theodo's request, after he had by messengers made himself familiar with the land and people of Bavaria. St. Rupert was received with great honour and ceremony by Theodo in the old residential town of Ratisbon (696). He entered immediately upon his apostolic labours, which extended from the territory of the Danube to the borders of Lower Pannonia, and upon his missionary journey came to Lorch. Thence he travelled to the lonely shores of the Wallersee, where he built a church in honour of Saint Peter, thereby laying the foundation of the present market-town of Seekirchen in the Newmarket district of Salzburg. From the Roman colony there Rupert obtained an account of the ancient Roman town of Juvavum, upon the site of which there still remained many more or less dilapidated buildings, overgrown with briars and brushwood. Having personally verified the accuracy of this account concerning the place and position, Rupert requested Theodo, in the interests of his apostolic mission to the country, to give him the territory of Juvavum (which was still a place of considerable commerce) for the erection of a monastery and an episcopal see. The duke granted this petition, bequeathing the territory of Juvavum (the modern Salzburg), two square miles in area, to St. Rupert and his successors. At the foot of the precipice of the Monchberg, where once St. Maximus, a disciple of St. Severin, had suffered martyrdom with his companions (476), St. Rupert erected the first church in Salzburg, the Church of St. Peter, in honour of the Prince of the Apostles, as well as a monastery. Upon the lofty prominences (Nonnberg) to the southeast of the town, where the old Roman fortress once towered, he established a convent of nuns which, like the monastery of the Mönchberg, he placed under the protection and Rule of St. Benedict. To set his institutions upon a solid basis, Rupert repaired home, and returned with twelve companions besides his niece Ehrentraud (Erindruda), whom he made abbess over the Benedictine Convent of Nonnberg, while he with his twelve companions formed the first congregation of the famous Benedictine Monastery of St. Peter at Salzburg, which remains to the present day. St. Rupert thenceforth devoted himself entirely to the work of salvation and conversion which he had already begun, founding in connection therewith manny churches and monasteries—e.g., Maxglan, near Salzburg, Maximilianszelle (now Bischofshofen in Pongau), Altotting, and others. After a life of extraordinarily successful activity, he died at Salzburg, aided by the prayers of his brethren in the order; his body reposed in the St. Peterskirche until 24 Sept., 774, when his disciple and successor, Abbot-Bishop St. Virgil, had a portion of his remains removed to the cathedral. On 24 Sept., 1628, these relics were interred by Archbishop Paris von Ladron (1619-54) under the high altar of the new cathedral. Since then the town and district of Salzburg solemnize the feast of St. Rupert, Apostle of Bavaria and Carlnthia, on 24 September. In Christian art St. Rupert is portrayed with a vessel of salt in his hand, symbolizing the universal tradition according to which Rupert inaugurated salt-mining at Salzburg; this portrayal of St. Rupert is generally found upon the coins of the Duchy of Salzburg and Carinthia. St. Rupert is also represented baptizing Duke Theodo; this scene has no historical foundation. St. Rupert was the first Abbot-Bishop of Salzburg, for, as he established his foundations after the manner of the Irish monks, he combined in his own person the dignities of abbot and bishop. A similar combination of dignities existed also in Ratisbon and Freising. This twofold character of the bishop continued in Salzburg for nearly 300 years until the separation of the dignities was effected in 987 by Archbishop Friedrich I of Salzburg, Count of Chiemgau, the twenty-first Abbot of the Monastery of St. Peter. The period of St. Rupert's activity was until very lately a matter of great discussion. Formerly the opinion was held that the end of the fifth and beginning of the sixth centuries was the age of his missionary work, but, according to the most exhaustive and reliable investigations, the late seventh and early eighth centuries formed the period of his activity. This fact is established especially by the "Breves notitiae Salzburgenses", a catalogue of the donations made to the Church of Salzburg, with notices from the ninth century. In these latter Bishop St. Virgil, whose ministry is referred to 745-84, appears as a direct disciple of St. Rupert. It is forthwith evident that the assumption of the end of the sixth and beginning of the seventh centuries as the period of Rupert's activity is extremely doubtful, even apart from the fact that this view also involves the rejection of the catalogue of the bishops of Salzburg and of Easter Sunday as the day of Rupert's death. Many churches and places bearing Rupert's name, serve as surviving memorials of his missionary activity. A successor of St. Rupert, the present scholarly Abbot of St. Peters in Salzburg, Willibald Hauthaler, has written an interesting work upon this subject entitled "Die dem hl. Rupertus Apostel von Bayern geweihten Kirchen und Kapellen" (with map, Salzburg, 1885). ULRICH SCHMID Rusaddir Rusaddir A titular see of Mauritania Tingitana. Rusaddir is a Phoenician settlement whose name signifies a lofty cape. This city is mentioned by Ptolemy (IV, 1) and Pliny (V, 18) who call it "oppidum et portus", also by Mela (I, 33), under the corrupted form Rusicada and by the "Itinerarium Antonini". During the Middle Ages it was the Berber city of Mlila; it is now known as Melilla. In 1497 it fell into the hands of the Duke of Medina Sidonia, and in 1506 was returned to the Crown of Spain. Since then its history is a succession of famines and sieges of which the most renowned is that of 1774 and the most recent that of 1893. In 1909 it was the seat of the warfare carried on between Spain and the Rif tribes. Melilla is, after Ceuta, the most important of the Spanish fortresses or presidios on the African coast. It has about 9000 inhabitants, and is built in the form of an amphitheatre on the east slope of a steep rock 1640 feet high, bounded by abrupt cliffs, whereon is the Fort of Rosario. A free port since 1881, Melilla carries on an active commerce with the Rif. There is no record of any bishop of this see. SMITH, Dict. of Greek and Roman geogr. s. v.; MULLER, Notes on Ptolemy, ed. DIDOT, I, 583; MEAKIN, The Land of the Moor (London, 1901); BARRE, Melilla et les presides espagnols in Revue francaise (1908). S. PÉTRIDÈS Rusicade Rusicade A titular see of Numidia. It is mentioned by Ptolemy (IV, 3), Mela (I, 33), Pliny (V, 22), "Itinerarium Antonini", the "Tabula Peutingerii'; etc. Nothing is known of its history. Situated near the mouth of the Thapsus, it served as the commercial port of Cirta and exported grain to Rome. The port was called Stora or Ustura, where under Valentinian and Valens granaries were built whose ruins are still visible. The city was known as Colonia Veneria Rusicada. It was a total ruin when rebuilt by the French as Philippeville. Philippeville is the capital of the province of the Department of Constantine (Algeria); it has 21,550 inhabitants of whom 8200 are French, 5900 foreigners, mostly Italians and Maltese, 450 Jews, and 7000 Arabs. The ancient name survives in Ras Skidda, a point of the Djebel Addouna from which juts forth the great pier. The commerce is considerable. Ruins of a theatre, museum, Christian sarcophagus, Christian inscriptions, and the remains of a basilica dedicated to Saint Digna may be found there. Six bishops of Rusicade are known: Verulus, present at the Council of Carthage (255), perhaps the martyr in the martyrology, 21 February; Victor, condemned at the Council of Cirta (305) as a traitor or betrayer of the Scriptures; Navigius whose remains and epitaph have been recovered in the church which he erected to Saint Digna in the fourth century; Faustinianus, present at the Conference of Carthage (411) with his Donatist rival, Junior; Quintilianus (?) in 425; Eusebius, exiled by Huneric in 484. SMITH, Dict. of Greek and Roman geogr., s. v., MULLEN, Notes on Ptolemy, ed. DIDOT, I, 614; TOULOTTE, Geographie de l'Afrique chretienne: Numidie (Rennes and Paris, 1894), 258-63. S. PÉTRIDÈS Ruspe Ruspe Titular see of Byzacena in Africa, mentioned only by Ptolemy (IV, 3) and the "Tabula" Peutinger. According to the first it was on the coast between Acholla (Kasr el Abiah) and Usilla (Henshir Inshilla); the "Tabula", or map of Peutinger, states that it was six (doubtless twenty-six) miles from the latter place. It is identified with the ruins called Ksour Siad, seventeen miles from Acholla. Others believe it to be at Henshir Sbia, four miles west of Cape Kapoudia (north of the Gulf of Gabes, Tunisia), its name being preserved at Koudiat Rosfa near Ras el Louza. It seems more probable that Koudiat Rospa is itself the ancient Ruspe. Four bishops of the see are known: Stephanus, exiled by King Huneric (484); St. Fulgentius, consecrated in 508, died in 533; Felicianus, his companion in exile and successor, who assisted at the Council of Carthage (about 534); Julianus, who signed in 641 the Anti-Monothelite letter of the bishops of Byzancena to the Emperor Constantine. SMITH, Dict. of Greek and Roman geogr., s. v.; MULLER, Notes on Ptolemy, ed. DIDOT, I, 622; TOULOTTE, Geographie de l'Afrique chretienne: Byzacene et Tripolitaine (Montreuil, 1894), 164-6. S. PÉTRIDÈS Charles Russell Charles Russell (BARON RUSSELL OF KILLOWEN). Born at Newry, Ireland, 10 November, 1832; died in London, 10 August, 1900. He was the elder son of Arthur Russell of Killowen and Margaret Mullin of Belfast. The family was in moderate circumstances, their ancestors having suffered much for the Faith in the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries. Arthur Russell having died in 1845, the care of his large family devolved upon their talented mother and their paternal uncle, the celebrated Dr. Russell of Maynooth. Having studied at the diocesan seminary, Belfast, at a private school in Newry, and St. Vincent's College, Castleknock, Dublin, Charles Russell entered the law offices of Mr. Denvir, Newry, in 1849, and of Mr. O'Rorke, Belfast, in 1852. Admitted a solicitor in 1854, he practiced in the county courts of Down and Antrim, and became at once the champion of the Catholics who had resisted organized attempts at proselytizing by Protestants in these counties. His success was so striking that his legal friends urged him to become a barrister in London, and in 1856 he entered at Lincoln's Inn. Having followed an extensive course by close private study under the direction of Maine, Broom, and Birkbeck, he was called to the bar in 1859. His success on the northern circuit soon recalled him to London, where he became "Queen's Counsel" in 1872, and divided the mercantile business of the circuit with Lord Herschell. The increasing demand for his services may be judged by his fees which averaged $15,000 a year from 1862-72, $50,000 in the next decade, $80,000 in the third, and in 1893-4, his last year of practice, reached $150,000. His knowledge of law, business, and human character, a flexible and often passionate eloquence which derived its force from intense earnestness rather than oratorical device, marvelous dexterity in extracting the truth from witnesses, and a manifest honesty of purpose gave him a power over judge and jury which made him universally regarded as the first advocate of his age. Though in his first years in London he had been weekly correspondent of the Dublin "Nation", an advanced Nationalist organ, he entered Parliament as a Liberal being elected, after two defeats, member for Dundalk in 1880. He generally acted with the Nationalists on Irish, and always on Catholic, questions, and, when he visited the United States in 1883, bore a flattering introduction from Mr. Parnell. Elected member for South Hackney (1885-94), he was appointed attorney-general by Mr. Gladstone in 1886, and again in 1892 on the return of the Liberals to power. He was a strenuous advocate of Home Rule in Parliament and on public platforms, and was leading advocate for Mr. Parnell at the Parnell Commission trial in 1888. His cross-examination of the witnesses of the "Times", and especially his exposure of Pigott, the author of the "Times" forgeries, made a favorable verdict inevitable. His famous eight-day speech for the defense was his greatest forensic effort. In 1893 he represented Great Britain in the Behring Sea Arbitration, his speech against the United States' contentions lasting eleven days, and was knighted for his services. Made Lord of Appeal, 1894, he was raised to the peerage for life, taking his title from his native townland of Killowen. In the same year he was appointed Lord Chief Justice of England, the first Catholic to attain that office for centuries. He won speedily the public confidence and is ranked with the most illustrious of his predecessors. He revisited the United States in 1896 as the guest of the American Bar Association and delivered a notable address on arbitration. In 1899 he represented England on the Venezuelan Boundaries Commission, and displayed all his old power of separating vital points from obscuring details. The following year he was attacked while on circit by an internal malady, and, after a few weeks illness, died piously in London, after receiving the sacraments of the Catholic Church, of which he had been always a faithful and devoted member. He was survived by his widow (Ellen, daughter of Dr. Mulholland of Belfast), whom he married in 1858, and by five sons and four daughters. The unanimous tribute paid him by the English and American Bar and by the people and journals of the most diverse political and religious views attested that, despite his masterful character as lawyer, judge, and parliamentarian, and his stalwart loyalty to his Faith and country, he had attained a rare and widespread popularity. In him were blended many qualities not usually found together. With a keen and orderly mind, a resolute will, great capacity for work, and severe official dignity, he combined sensibility of temperament, a spirit of helpfulness and comradeship, and a dreamer's devotion to ideals. He was always ready to write and speak for educational, religious, and benevolent purposes, though such action was not calculated to forward his political ambitions. Devoted to his family, he crossed the continent on his first American trip to visit Mother Mary Baptist Russell of San Francisco (who, with two others of his sisters, had entered the Order of Mercy), and found time to write for his children and send them day by day an admirable account of his experiences. This "Diary of a Visit to the United States" has been since edited by his brother, Rev. Matthew Russell, S.J., and published (1910) by the U.S. Catholic Historical Society. His other published works include: "New Views of Ireland" (London, 1880); "The Christian Schools of England and Recent Legislation" (1883); his speech before the Parnell Commission (1888); essay on Lord Coleridge in the "North American Review" (1894), and on the legal profession in the "Strand Magazine" (1896); "Arbitration, its Origin, History, and Prospects" (London, 1896). BARRY O'BRIEN, Life (London, 1901); personal recollections in The Times (London, 11 Aug., 1900), and files of the daily press; Irish Monthly and other magazines (Sept. and Oct., 1900); Reports of American Bar Association (31 Aug., 1900), and of the unveiling of the Lord Russell Statue (London, Jan.,1905); FOSTER, Men at the Bar; Lincoln's Inn Reg.; Burke's Peerage (1900), COKAYNE, Complete Peerage (1900). M. KENNY Charles William Russell Charles William Russell Born at Killough, Co. Down, 14 May, 1812; died at Dublin 26 Feb., 1880. He was descended from the Russells who held the barony of Killough of Quoniamstown and Ballystrew. He received his early education at Drogheda grammar school and Downpatrick, after which he entered Maynooth in 1826. After a brilliant course he was ordained on 13 June, 1835, and became one of the professors of humanities at the college. In 1842 he was chosen by Gregory XVI to be the first Vicar Apostolic of Ceylon, but he refused the dignity as also the Bishopric of Down and the Archbishopric of Armagh. Three years later he returned to Maynooth as professor of ecclesiastical history. Having published his translation of Leibnitz's "System of Theology" in 1850, he was occupied on his "Life of Cardinal Mezzofanti" which appeared in 1858. In 1857 he succeeded Dr. Renehan as President of Maynooth. His profound antiquarian learning caused him to be appointed a member of the Historical Manuscripts Commission in 1869, and in that capacity he acted as joint editor (with John Prendergast) of the eight-volume "Report on the Carte Manuscripts in the Bodleian Library" (1871) and the "Calendar of Irish State Papers during the reign of James I" (4 vols., 1872-77). He was also a frequent contributor to the "Dublin Review" which for thirty years he enriched by various papers, often writing more than one for the same number. The last of these were the two masterly articles on the sonnet (1876-77). He wrote many articles for "Chambers's Encyclopedia", and two—"Palimpsests" and "Papyrus"—for the "Encyclopedia Britannica". He contributed also to many other magazines such as the "Edinburgh Review", the "Month", and "Irish Monthly". A humbler but very popular work has been his translation of Canon Schmid's " Tales for the Young" first published in 1846. Besides his literary work and all that he accomplished for Maynooth, he exercised a very powerful influence on the leading men of his age by the charm and force of his personality. Wiseman and Newman alike counted him as an intimate friend, and the latter wrote of him: "He had perhaps more to do with my conversion than any one else". Dr. Russell lived to witness the early success of his nephew Charles who subsequently became Lord Chief Justice of England. HEALY, Centenary History of Maynooth College (Dublin, 1895); CARLYLE in Dict. Nat. Biog,; WARD, Life and Times of Cardinal Wiseman (London, 1897). EDWIN BURTON Richard Russell Richard Russell Bishop of Vizéu in Portugal, b. in Berkshire, 1630; d. at Vizéu, 15 Nov., 1693. He was of humble station, and when twelve years old became servant to Dr. Edward Daniel, newly appointed President of Lisbon College. Five years later, having meanwhile applied his leisure to study, he was admitted an alumnus of the college and took the oath, 14 Aug, 1647. In 1653 he went to Douai College, and thence to Paris, where he was ordained. In 1655 he returned to Lisbon as procurator, but two years later was summoned by the Chapter to England, where he spent three years as a chaplain to the Portuguese ambassador. On his return to Portugal he received the title of Secretary to the Queen, and a pension, in consideration of his services to the crown of Portugal. Shortly afterwards he was again in England on business connected with the marriage treaty of Charles II and Catharine of Braganza, and on this occasion he was elected a Canon of the English Chapter (26 June, 1661). Having declined the Bishopric of the Cape Verde Islands, Russell accompanied the Infanta to England. The English Chapter hoped that he might be consecrated bishop of a Portuguese see and that then he would return to England, resign his diocese and become head of the English clergy with episcopal powers; for the English Catholics had long been without a resident bishop, and they had had no episcopal superior at all since the death of Bishop Smith in 1655. This plan, however, came to nothing, and when Russell was persuaded to accept the see of Portalegre in 1671 he decided to remain in his diocese. He was consecrated bishop in the chapel of the English College, Lisbon, on 27 Sept., 1671. Overcoming the first opposition of his clergy to a foreign bishop, he spent ten years in zealous and apostolic labor and effected a complete reformation of the diocese. In 1682 he was transferred to the diocese of Vizéu where he spent the last eleven years of his life. His portrait is preserved at the English College, Lisbon. KIRK IN CROFT, Historical Account of Lisbon College (London 1902), with portrait; DODD, Church History, III (Brussels vere Wolverhampton, 1737-42); SERJEANT, Account of the Chapter (London, 1853); BRADY, Episcopal Succession, III (Rome, 1877); GILLOW, Bibl. Dict. Eng. Cath., s. v. Russell, Richard Fifth Douay Diary in Catholic Record Society, X (London, 1911). EDWIN BURTON Russia Russia GEOGRAPHY Russia (Rossiiskaia Imperiia; Russkoe Gosudarstvo) comprises the greater part of Eastern Europe, and a third of Asia; its area is one-sixth of the land surface of the globe. In the reign of Alexander II the total area of the empire was 8,689,945 sq. miles, of which only 2,156,000 were in Europe. The greatest length of Russia from east to west is 6666 miles, and its greatest breadth is 2666 miles; it lies between 35º 45' and 79º N. lat., and 17º 40' and 191º E. long. (i. e., 169 W. long.). The boundaries of Russia are: on the north, the Arctic Ocean; on the west, Sweden, Norway, the Baltic Sea, Germany, Austria-Hungary, and Rumania; on the south, the Black Sea, Turkey, Persia, the Caspian Sea; Afghanistan, and China; on the east, the Pacific Ocean. Russia forms a vast, compact territory, the area of its islands being only 107,262 sq. miles, which was greatly reduced by the cession of the southern part of Sakhalin to Japan. Geographers usually divide Russia into European and Asiatic Russia, regarding the natural boundary to be the Ural Mountains, the Ural River, the Don, and the Volga; this division is based neither on natural nor on political grounds. The Ural Mountains form a chain of wooded highlands, which may be compared to the central axis of the empire rather than to a dividing barrier; moreover there is no natural boundary line between the southern extremity of these mountains and the Caspian Sea. The division between European and Asiatic Russia can best be established ethnologically, and this method is frequently used in Russian geographies. SEAS The coasts of Russia are washed by many seas; the Arctic Ocean, the White Sea, the Bay of Tcheskaya, the Bay of Kara, the Gulf of Obi, the Baltic Sea, the Gulfs of Bothnia, Finland, and Riga, the Black Sea, the Sea of Azof, the Caspian Sea, the Pacific Ocean, Behring Sea, the Sea of Okhotsk, and the Sea of Japan. But Russia is not destined to become a great maritime power, because for the most part the seas of Russia are in regions where navigation is impossible in winter; for periods of six months in the Arctic Ocean, and from fifteen days to one month at some points in the Black Sea. And the future of Russia as a maritime power is moreover obstructed by political difficulties; the way from the Black Sea to the Mediterranean is closed by the Bosphorus and the Dardanelles; the way from the Baltic to the Atlantic is closed by Sweden, Germany, Norway, and Denmark. The Arctic Ocean washes the extreme northern coasts of Russia, sterile, uninhabited regions, over which there hangs a winter of nine months, paralyzing the activities of life. The ice, whether fixed or floating, blocks the way of ships; these ply however in the White Sea, which is free of ice for three months of the year, and the waters of which form the Gulfs of Mezen, the Dwina, Onega, and Kandalak, the latter being the most frequented. There are but few islands in this immense extent of ice; the more important ones are the islands of Kolguet, Vaigatch, Nova Zembla, New Siberia, and the islands of Solovka, on one of which is a famous monastery founded in the fifteenth century by St. Sabbatius and the Blessed Germanus. Among the most important peninsulas may be cited that of Kola or Russian Lapland. Russia shares the possession of the Baltic Sea with Sweden, Germany, and Denmark, and its waters have been the highway of Russian commerce since the time of Peter the Great, although their shores are rugged and reefs numerous. The Gulfs of Bothnia, Finland and Riga are frozen for several months of the year, while the Gulf of Livadia is frozen for six weeks, although it sometimes remains free of ice through the whole year. Notwithstanding these natural obstacles, Russian commerce has been developed on the Baltic, the shortest route for the exportation of Russian products to European countries and America. The Baltic Sea is studded with islands, of which the following belong to Russia: the numerous Aland group, eighty of which are inhabited; the Islands of Dago, Oesel, Mohn, Wornes, and Kotlin; on the last is built the formidable fortress of Kronstadt. CLIMATE In European Russia the climate is severe, both in winter and summer, the rains are scanty, and the temperature is not as mild as in Western Europe. The coasts of the Baltic and the shores of the Vistula have a climate similar to that of Western Europe. European Russia presents graduated variations of climate between 40º and 70º N. lat., and also from east to west. At Nova Zembla the lowest winter temperature is 16º F., while at the south of the Crimea it rises to 56.3º in summer. The isothermal lines of European Russia are not coincident with the parallels of latitude, but diverge towards the southeast. There are places situated on the same parallel presenting considerable differences in mean temperature, e. g. Libau, 49.1º; Moscow, 39.2º; Kazan, 37.4º; Yekaterinburg, 32.9º. In the valley of the Rion in the Caucasus, cotton and sugar-cane are grown, while the tundras of the Kola Peninsula are sparsely covered with moss. In Western Russia, the cold of winter is never greater than 31º below zero, while the heat of summer is never in excess of 86º; but in Eastern Russia the thermometer falls to 40º below zero in winter, and rises to 109º in summer. European Russia may be divided into four climatic zones: the cold zone, which includes the coasts of the Arctic Ocean and their adjacent islands, and extends beyond the Arctic Circle; its winter lasts nine months, and its summer three; the cold-temperate zone, from the Arctic Circle to 61º N. lat.; its winter Lasts six months, and each of the other seasons two months; the temperate zone, extending from 61º to 48º N. lat.; each season lasts three months, the winter being longer towards the north, and summer longer towards the south; the warm zone, between 48º N. lat. and the southern frontier of Russia; the summer lasts six months, and the other three seasons two months each. European Russia is not unhealthy, although in the cold zone scurvy is frequent, and near the Gulf of Finland ailments of the throat and the respiratory organs; plica polonica infects the marshy regions of Lithuania and Russian Poland; and there is the so-called Crimean fever in the neighbourhood of the Sivash and in a region on the coast of the Black Sea. The climate of the Caucasus is not of a uniform character; it belongs in the north to the cold-temperate zone, and in Transcaucasia to the warm zone. In the north, summer lasts six months, and the other seasons two months each. In Transcaucasia the summer lasts nine months, and the other three months of the year are like spring. Nevertheless the irregularity of the mountain system of the Caucasus produces differences of temperature in places separated by short distances. On the coast of the Black Sea between Batum and Sukhum, the temperature seldom falls below 32º; in January the temperature rises as high as 43º. Western Transcaucasia receives warm and humid winds, while the eastern part is exposed to dry winds from the north-east. The part of Siberia that borders on the Arctic Ocean lies entirely within the cold zone; the winter lasts nine months, and the summer is like the beginning of spring in European Russia. The portion of Siberia between the Arctic Circle and 60º N. lat. has a winter that lasts six months; the region below the parallel of 60º N. lat. has a winter a little longer than the summer. In proportion to the distance from the Ural Mountains the climate of Western Siberia experiences greater extremes of temperature, the winter and the heat of summer becoming more severe; and the same is true of Eastern Siberia in relation to the Pacific Ocean. The greatest variations of temperature in Eastern Siberia are observed at Irkutsk, Yakutsk, and Verkhoyansk, where the thermometer registers at times 59.6º below zero in winter, and 49.46º in summer. In midwinter the northern extremity of Siberia resembles the polar regions; during several days the sun does not rise, and the vast plain of snow is lit up by the Aurora Borealis, while at times the region of the tundras is swept by violent snowstorms. The climate of Turkestan is similar to Siberia. Those regions are far from the sea, and have cold winters and very warm summers, a sky that is always clear, a dry atmosphere, and strong northerly and north-easterly winds. The north winds develop violent snowstorms. The summer is unbearable; in the shade, the thermometer rises to 104º, and even to 117.5º, while the ground becomes heated to 158º. MEAN TEMPERATURE OF CERTAIN RUSSIAN CITIES: — January July St. Petersburg 15.26 63.86 Moscow 12.20 66.10 Kieff 20.84 66.56 Kazan 07.16 67.46 Yekaterinburg 02.30 63.50 Reval 42.80 53.96 Libau 36.14 62.00 Astrakhan 44.96 77.90 Verhoyansk -59.44 49.46 The mean yearly rainfall is estimated at from 8 to 24 inches. In general, those parts of Russia that are exposed to the North, and are covered with snow during the winter, abound in forests that preserve the humidity, in which they have an advantage over the southern part of the country. In the former, the rains are not violent, but are lasting, and moisten the earth to a considerable depth; in the South they are resolved into severe tempests, which pour down great quantities of water that are dispersed in torrents and rivers, and do not sink deep into the ground. The greatest rainfall of Russia is around the Baltic Sea (20 to 28 inches); and the least is in the Caucasus (4 to 8 inches). The advantages of the western over the eastern part of Russia are due to its greater proximity to the Atlantic Ocean, the vapours of which are carried over Europe into Russia. The mean rainfall of Western Russia is calculated at 18.3 inches; that of the north-east, 15 inches; that of the east, from 12 to 15 inches; and that of the south is still less. The months of greatest rainfall are June, July, and August. The yearly rainfall at St. Petersburg is 20 inches, there being rain on 150 days of the year. The number of days upon which rain falls diminishes considerably towards the East and South. MINERAL RICHES The mineral riches of Russia consist principally of salt, coal, and iron. Salt is found in the mineral state in the Governments of Orenburg, Astrakhan, Kharkoff, and Yekaterinoslaff; and as a sediment, deposited by salt waters, in the Government of Astrakhan, and in the Crimean lakes of Sakskoe, Sasyk, and Sivash. The river basin that most abounds in coal is that of the Donetz; it is 233 miles in length, and 100 in breadth, and produces every known species of fossil coal. This basin also furnishes great quantities of peat, naphtha, gold, silver, platinum, copper, tin, mercury, iron, emeralds, topazes, rubies, sapphires, amethysts, porphyry, marble, granite, graphite, asphalt, and phosphorus. The Central Ural Mountains yield malachite and jasper. There are abundant petroleum springs in the Caucasus Mountains, especially in the vicinity of Baku. In the Kolivan Mountains, which is a ramification of the Altai system, deposits of malachite are found. ETHNOGRAPHY AND STATISTICS OF POPULATION The ethnographical history of primitive Russia is obscure. There is record of the Anti, a people who in the fourth century inhabited the regions about the mouths of the Danube and Don, but their name is lost after that date. Constantine Porphyrogenitus and the Russian chroniclers refer to twelve tribes, collected under the general name of Russians; they are the Slovenes, Krivitches, Dregovitches, Drevilans, Polians, Duliebys, Buzhans, Tivercys, Ulitches, Radimitches, Viatics, and the Sieverians. The political cradle of Russia is the region of Kieff, where the Varangian princes formed the first Russian state. The invasions of the Tatars exercised a great influence upon the Russians; but it is a mistake to say that the Russians disappeared entirely before the Tatars and that, in the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries, the regions evacuated by the Tatars were peopled by Little Russians from Galicia. The population of Russia has steadily increased in numbers during the last two centuries, its rapid development being partly due to the birth-rate, and partly to the conquest of vast foreign territories. In 1724 Russia had a population of 14,000,000, which had increased to 36,000,000 in 1793, to 69,000,000 in 1851, and to 128,967,694 in 1897. The census of 1897 was the first official census of Russia. Its data, however, are only relatively correct, partly on account of the great extension of the Russian Empire, partly on account of the continuous emigration within the frontiers of that country, partly because of the lack of information concerning some of the centres of population in Siberia, and partly because of the resistance of some tribes to submit to the control of European civilization. In view of the enormous excess of births over deaths, the progressive increase of the population is calculated to be 2,000,000 each year. In 1904, basing the calculation on the statistics of births, the population of Russia was 146,000,000; in 1908, 154,000,000; and in 1910, 158,000,000. The greatest increase in the population is given by the region of New Russia, that of the Baltic, and the Province of Moscow. In general, the number of births in Russia is calculated at 48 per 1000, and that of the deaths at 34 per 1000. Compared with other European states, Russia is very thinly peopled, except in a few regions; for the whole empire, it is 17.325 per sq. mile; for European Russia 65; for Poland, 214; and for Siberia, 1.35. The government in which the population appears to be most dense is that of Piotrkow, where the corresponding figures are 295 inhabitants per sq. mile; after which follow in order the Governments of Moscow (187), Podolia (184.5), and Kieff (180). In the Government of Archangel, there are 2.25 inhabitants per sq. mile, and in Yakutsk .225. The great mass of the population consists of peasants; they form 84 per cent of the population of European Russia, a percentage greatly in excess of that of Rumania, Hungary, and Switzerland, nations that are essentially agricultural. The nobles and their servants constitute 1.5 per cent of the population; the clergy, 0.5 per cent; the citizens or merchants, 0.6 per cent; the burgesses (mieshanstvo), 10.6 per cent. The proportion of working men shows a notable increase: from 1885 to 1897 the increase in the mining centres was 91 per cent, and in the manufacturing centres 73 per cent; the population of the cities also is continually increasing. Some of these cities, as Kazan, Astrakhan, Tiflis, and Bakhtchisarai, are semi-Asiatic in character, as are also the cities of Turkestan. The cities of ancient Livonia, e. g., Riga and Reval, have the appearance of medieval German towns. The villages of Great Russia have a commercial character, and stretch along the principal roads and waterways. On the other hand the villages of Little Russia are agricultural in character. The White Russian villages are noticeable for the small number of houses they contain. With relation to sex, according to the statistics of 1905, the population of Russia has 103.2 women for each 100 men. In the villages, the corresponding proportion of women is 106.1; in the cities, it is 85.9. In 13 out of 50 of the governments of European Russia, the number of men is greater than that of the women; in 3 the numbers are equal, and in 34 the number of women is in excess of that of the men; in 12 governments the proportion is 100 men to 110 women. With regard to religion, Christianity in various denominations is the religion of the great majority of the people. There are 123,000,000 Christians (84.3 per cent of the entire population). The majority are of the Orthodox Church, which has 102,600,000 adherents (69.9 per cent of the population, the corresponding figures for European Russia being 91,000,000 (75 per cent). Consequently among the Russians Orthodox and Russian are synonymous terms. Since the Ukase of 17 April, 1905, which proclaimed freedom of conscience, Russian orthodoxy has lost 1,000,000 of followers, through conversions to Catholicism, to Protestantism, and to Mohammedanism. The Catholics of Russia number 13,000,000 (8.9 per cent); the Protestants, 7,200,000 (4.9 per cent); other Christian denominations, 1,400,000 (1 per cent); Mohammedans, 15,900,000 (10 per cent); pagans, 700,000 (0.4 per cent). Pagans, to the number of 300,000, are to be found, not only in Siberia, but also in European Russia (Kalmucks and Samogitians). The Catholics are chiefly in Poland, where, according to the census of 1897, they constituted 74.8 per cent of the population. On the other hand, one-half of the Jews who are scattered over the earth are in Russia, the number of them in that country being estimated at from 6,000,000 to 7,000,000, all concentrated within the boundaries of fifteen governments. From the standpoint of education, Russia does not occupy even a secondary position in Europe. In European Russia the percentage of those who know how to read and write is 22.9. The regions in which there are the least numbers of the educated are as follows: Esthonia (79 per cent); Livonia (77.7 per cent); Courland (70.9 per cent); the cities of St. Petersburg (55.1 per cent) and Moscow (40.2 per cent), and Poland (41 per cent). Emigration, as a rule, takes place only within the boundaries of the empire. From the most remote times, the inhabitants of Novgorod founded colonies as far away as the shores of the White Sea and the Ural Mountains. Emigration to Siberia began in 1582; the first colonists of that country were the exiles, the Cossacks, fishermen, and prospectors in search of gold; and this emigration was considerably increased after the liberation of the serfs in 1861. In 1891 the Siberian Railway Company undertook the colonization of Siberia, and by opportune measures gave a great impulse to Siberian immigration. In 1889 the number of Russian emigrants to that region was between 25,000 and 40,000; in 1900 it had increased to 220,000. These emigrants, who came from Central Russia and from Little Russia, spread at first over Western Siberia, and then over Central Siberia; but later they went farther and farther towards the extreme east, a movement to which the war with Japan put a stop, but which was again taken up with greater activity when that war ended. In 1906, 200,790 emigrants passed through Cheliabinsk to Siberia, and 400,000 in 1907. A part of the emigration is directed towards the southeast of Turkestan. The first colonists arrived in the Province of Semiryetchensk in 1848, and in the Province of Sir-Daria in 1876. Emigration beyond the frontiers of Russia is very limited, amounting in numbers at the present time to from 75,000 to 100,000, who for the greater part pass through the ports of Bremen and Hamburg. From 1891 to 1906, out of every 1000 Russian emigrants, 900 went to the United States, and the majority of the others to Brazil and the Argentine Republic. The population of Russia is very much divided linguistically, it being calculated that a hundred languages are spoken within the empire, of which forty-two are in use in the city of Tiflis alone. Russian is the official language of eighty-nine governments and provinces, but it is the predominant language in only forty-one of them. Among the dialects, Great Russian is the one that is most extensively used. The tongues of the Mongolian tribes that are subject to Russia are little developed, and are generally without a literature. The population of Russia presents a great variety of races, united by a political rule, by the community of the Russian language, and to a great extent by the Orthodox religion; it is characterized also by a great preponderance of the rural over the urban population, and by the presence of a high percentage of peoples or tribes with little culture of their own, and little aptitude for the assimilation of the culture of Europe. SPECIAL ETHNOGRAPHY Ethnographically the population of the Russian Empire is divided into two races, the Caucasian, which predominates, and the Mongolian. Of the total population 121,000,000, or 82.6 per cent, are Caucasians; while the Mongolian races in all Russia constitute 17 per cent of the whole population. Russians, properly so-called, constitute 87.7 per cent of the population in Western Siberia, 80 per cent in European Russia, 53.9 per cent in eastern Siberia, 8.9 per cent in central Asia, 6.7 per cent in the region of the Vistula, and 0.2 per cent in Finland. Notwithstanding the difference in types, the Russians constitute a single people, ethnographically divided into three classes, Great Russians, Little Russians, and White Russians. These three ethnographical branches are differentiated from each other by dialectical differences, domestic traditions and customs, character, and historical tradition. It is difficult to determine the zones of the three branches, or the numbers of individuals of which they consist. According to the census of 1897, there were 55,667,469 Great Russians (Velikorussi), 22,380,350 Little Russians (Malorussi), and 5,885,547 White Russians (Bielorussi). At present, there are 65,000,000 Great Russians. They occupy the central and northern parts of European Russia, their centres of population extending from the White Sea to the Caspian Sea and the Sea of Azoff, and are to be found also in Siberia and in the Caucasus. They have emigrated to Little Russia in considerable numbers; at the beginning of the nineteenth century, Kharkoff was inhabited almost entirely by Little Russians, but in 1897 Great Russians constituted 58 per cent of the population, and the Little Russians only 25 per cent. The Great Russians are active and energetic, and have great aptitude for commerce and work in general. They are regarded as the essentially Russian race, which has not only preserved its known ethnical characteristics under difficult conditions, but has assimilated with itself other races, especially of the Finnish stock. Their language is the predominant tongue of the Russian Empire. The small commerce of the cities is in their hands, as is also the commerce of the wines and fruit that come from Bessarabia, the Crimea and the Don, and the fish from the Black Sea and the Ural River. The Little Russians inhabit the south of Russia and the basin of the middle and lower course of the Dnieper, and constitute 26.6 per cent of the total population of the empire. Their greatest masses are to be found in the Governments of Pultowa (93 per cent), Tchernigoff (85.6 per cent), Podolia (80.9 per cent), Kharkoff (80.6 per cent), Stavropol (80 per cent), Kieff (79.2 per cent), Volhynia (70.1 per cent), and Yekaterinoslaff (68.9 per cent). The Little Russians are an agricultural people, and remain in their native districts. Their emigrations extend only to the steppes of New Russia, and to the territories of the Don and of the Kuban rivers. Of recent times they have furnished a large contingent to the agricultural colonization of Siberia. From the standpoint of culture that of the Great Russians is superior to that of the Little Russians, although the intellectual level of Little Russia was much higher than that of Great Russia during the Polish domination. The musical and poetical talents of this people are very much developed and their popular literature abounds in beautiful songs. The difference between Great and Little Russians is not only anthropological, but is also one of temperament and character, the Little Russians protesting that they are not Muscovites; and to emphasize their antipathy for the other race, in the nineteenth century they attempted to give a literary development to their dialect. The White Russians inhabit the forest and marsh region that is comprised between the Rivers Düna, Dnieper, Pripet, and Bug. They represent 7 per cent of the total population, and are scattered through the Governments of Vilna, Vitebsk, Grodno, Kovno, Minsk, Mohileff, Suwalki, and Yelisavetpol. Both physically and intellectually they are less developed Great and Little Russians. According to the Russians, the intellectual inferiority of that people is due to the despotism of Polish masters, under which they lived for several centuries to the loss of their nobility, which became Polish, and to the economic supremacy of the Jews. Accordingly, the White Russians are poor, ignorant, and superstitious. There is a great admixture of Polish and Lithuanian terms in their dialect. At the present time, however, national sentiment is awakening in the White Russians, who publish newspapers in their own language, and aspire to better their economic conditions. Ethnographically, the Caucasians are Great and Little Russians. They are a race of warrior-merchants and agriculturists, who developed the characteristic traits of their social and domestic life in struggles with the Tatars and Turks. According to the statistics of 1905, there were 3,370,000 Cossacks in all Russia, or 2.3 per cent of the population of the empire. Those of the Don are Great Russians. They are famous for their military qualities in general, and in particular for the part that they took in the liberation of Moscow from Polish occupation in 1612, in the conquest of Siberia, and in the war of 1812. At present they devote themselves to agriculture, raising cattle, commerce, and military service, and they enjoy many exemptions and privileges. The Cossacks of the Urals are noted for their religious fanaticism. Those of the Kuban and of the Black Sea are of Little Russian origin. They are called Cossacks of "the Line", because, after the Russian conquest of the Caucasus, they built a line of fortified villages on the shores of the Kuban, to defend their new possessions against incursions of the so-called mountaineers of the Caucasus, the Tcherkesy, Tchetchency, Abkhazy, Osetiny, and Lezginy. In their life they have preserved the Little Russian customs and traditions. Besides the Russian, properly so-called, there are a great many other races that belong politically to Russia. Among the Slav races within the Russian frontiers, the most numerous are the Poles, of whom there are 12,000,000, and who chiefly inhabit the region of the Vistula. The Bulgarians and Servians have emigrated to the region of New Russia since 1752, forming colonies of peasants. The Servians allowed themselves to be easily russianized; but the Bulgarians showed reluctance to this, and still preserve their national character. The Lithuanians live along the Vilia River and the lower course of the Niemen, at the Prussian frontier. Their number is given as 3,500,000. They come in succession under Russian, Polish, Finnish, and Jewish influence. They are fervent Catholics, and their economic conditions are prosperous. Their national sentiment, depressed for several centuries, has awakened in recent times, and nationalist Lithuanians seek to throw off Russian and Polish influence and to form a national literature. Related to the Lithuanians are the Letts (Latyshi); they are a hard-working race and have a high moral standard. Their religion is chiefly Lutheranism; a few of them are of the Orthodox Church. To the Germanic race belong the Germans and Swedes. The Germans of Russia live on the Baltic Sea and on the western frontier, while colonies of them are to be found in European Russia and in the region of the Volga. In the Baltic region they constitute the higher classes of the population, being for the most part merchants and artisans. They own the greater portion of the land, because, after the imperial manifesto of 19 February, 1861, they freed their serfs (Letts and Esthonians), but did not divide their lands among them. There are over 100,000 of them in this region; in that of the Vistula, there are German colonists, some of whom descend from those who were called by the Polish nobility to occupy the free lands. At the present time, the Germans are devoted chiefly to industry, and have established a great many factories, especially at Lodz. There are German colonies on the steppes, which, having the authorization of the Government and special privileges, are prosperous, but which oppose effective resistance to all attempts to russianize them. The Swedes, about 400,000 in number, are concentrated in Finland, especially in the Governments of Nyland (45 per cent) and Vasa (28.8 per cent). They constitute the aristocratic and intellectual classes of Finland; but their political and literary influence, which was considerable, tends to diminish before the development of Finnish national sentiment. The Romanic races are represented by about 1,000,000 Moldavians, and by the Wallachians, who inhabit Bessarabia and the western part of the Government of Kherson. They are all of the Orthodox religion, and as a rule are employed in wine production and gardening. They resemble the Little Russians both physically and morally. The Iranian races are represented by about 1,000,000 Armenians, part of whom inhabit the Little Caucasus; the rest are scattered about the Various cities of the Caucasus and in European Russia. They are famous for the beauty of their type and for their patriarchal habits. Families are to be found among them numbering as many as fifty individuals, who are ruled by the eldest of them. They devote themselves to agriculture and commerce, for the latter of which pursuits they have a special aptitude. They are Monophysites, and reject the Council of Chalcedon (Armenian-Gregorians), being under the jurisdiction of a katolicos who resides at Etchmiadzin. They have the greatest attachment to their language and the traditions of their mother-country. Among those who live in the Caucasus, there is a considerable literary culture. Several thousands of them are Catholics. On the shores of the Black Sea and the Sea of Azoff there are several colonies of Greeks who devote themselves to agriculture, and especially to the production of tobacco. There are Greek colonies also in the chief centres of population of Russia, especially at Odessa and St. Petersburg. The Jews are a scattered population, principally in the Governments of Western and Southern Russia. Their presence in Russia is due to emigrations of German Jews from Poland, and they still preserve their dialect of Hebrew German, which is the language of their Press. As elsewhere, they evince the greatest aptitude for commercial matters and the commerce and industry of Western Russia is in their hands. The severe laws that limit the civil rights of the Jews in Russia have concentrated the members of that race in the cities, and the number of workmen and of artisans among them is very great, making their struggle for existence very difficult. Large fortunes are to be found among the Russian Jews, but their masses constitute a proletariat that on various occasions has been the victim of cruel massacres. Among these Russian Jews there is the greatest devotion to the Jewish religion and the greatest racial brotherhood. The Government admits only a limited number of them to the establishments of higher education; nevertheless, in the large cities, there is a great number of Jews who exercise the liberal professions, and especially that of medicine. The number of those who devote themselves to industrial pursuits increases each year. The Finns inhabit the regions of the Baltic Sea, the Volga, and the Ural Mountains. The Finns, properly so-called, who inhabit Finland are 2,500,000 in number. For several centuries they were under the domination of Sweden, by which country they were barred from western civilization. They are famous for their honesty, love of their country and traditions (they are Lutherans), their high intellectual level (there are scarcely any illiterate among them), the status of their women (the University of Helsingfors has six hundred women students, and the Parliament of Helsingfors has twenty-two women members), and their tenacity of character, by which they have transformed the poor soil of Finland. The progress of the Finns during the last fifty years has been considerable, but in 1910 the Government suppressed the liberty and autonomy of Finland, and possibly thereby has placed a barrier to the development of Finnish culture. The Korely, who live to the north of Lakes Ladoga and Onega, and of whom there are 210,000, are Baltic Finns; there are also small groups of them between Lake Ilmen and the Volga. They have been more amenable to russianization, and have embraced the Orthodox faith. The Esthonians occupy the southern part of the plain of the Baltic. There are 1,300,000 of them, who constitute a class of poor peasants, among whom remain many traditions and customs of paganism. They are mostly Lutherans. The Finns of the Volga comprise the Tcheremisy, the Mordva, and the Tchuvashi. The first, to the number of 400,000, live on the banks of the Volga, in the Governments of Kazan and of Vyatka. They were converted to Christianity by the Russian missionaries, but they remain pagans at heart, and in their customs. They devote themselves to agriculture, the chase, lumber commerce, and fishing. Their villages are small, having each not more than thirty houses. They are poor but honest, theft being regarded among them as a grave offence. The Tchuvashi are 800,000 in number; they live on the right bank of the Volga, and their chief centres of population are in the Governments of Kazan, Orenburg, Simbirsk, and Saratoff. Although they are Finns, they have adopted Russian customs, and tend more and more to become russianized. From the eighteenth century the Russian missionaries have attempted to convert them to orthodoxy, and have baptized a great number of them; but the Tchuvashi preserve a basis of paganism that is revealed in their rite and in their creed. Agriculture is their favourite pursuit, but they devote themselves also to the culture of bees, and they supply the markets of St. Petersburg with poultry and eggs. Other less important races are mentioned by Russian geographers. The total number of the various nationalities that constitute the Russian Empire is about one hundred. Their multiplicity, which transforms Russia into a true ethnographical museum, is an obstacle in the way of civilization, to the dissemination of instruction, and to the stability of the representative system. ADMINISTRATIVE DIVISIONS For the purposes of administration Russia is divided into six great territorial regions: + (1) European Russia, properly so-called; + (2) the Governments of the Vistula (Privislanskila gubernii); + (3) the Grand duchy of Finland; + (4) the Caucasus; + (5) Siberia; + (6) Central Asia. These territories are divided into governments (gubernii) and provinces (oblasti). The governments are ruled with laws that are called "Statutes of the Governments" (Polozhenie o guberniiazh); the provinces, besides the general laws, have special laws that are made necessary by the great number of non-Russians and of the non-Orthodox who inhabit those regions. The governments are divided into districts called uiezdy, and the provinces into districts called okrugi. The number of these districts, both in the governments and provinces, varies from four to fifteen. The districts are divided into volosti, selskiia obshestva, etc. The okrugi are divided into military, judicial, scholastic, postal, etc. In European Russia there are seven gradonatchalstva, i. e., cities that have administrations independent of the governments and provinces in which they are situated: these are St. Petersburg, Moscow, Odessa, Rostoff-on-the-Don, Sebastopol, Kertch-Yenikale, and Nikolaieff. Kronstadt constitutes a separate military government. European Russia contains fifty-nine governments and two provinces. The governments of the Vistula, consisting of the territory of the former Kingdom of Poland that was annexed to Russia (carstvo polskoe), belong to European Russia. They enjoyed a certain autonomy until the revolution of 1863 led the Russian Government to suppress all their privileges and to employ every means for their russianization. After the liberal edicts of 1905 it was hoped that autonomy would be restored to the Russian Poles; but these hopes are far from being realized. The Grand duchy of Finland, which was united to Russia in 1809 as an integral part of the empire, enjoyed a special autonomy that gave an admirable development to the culture and prosperity of that land. The Finns had a code of special laws, a diet, senate, bank, coinage, and postal service. After 1905 there was universal suffrage, and the new chamber of deputies admitted women also to its membership. In 1910, however, the Duma approved a bill relating to Finland, which, if carried into effect, would bring Finnish autonomy to an end. Finland is divided into eight governments. In the Caucasus, where the Russian population is in a minority, besides the various governments, there are provinces where special laws are in force. Siberia is divided into governments and provinces. Among the latter the Island of Sakhalin, with an area of 14,836 sq. miles, has a population of 17,900. The southern portion of this island, however, was ceded to Japan by the treaty of Portsmouth, 16-29 August, 1905. The governments and provinces of Siberia are eight in number. Asiatic Russia has provinces (oblasti) only, because the Russians constitute only a small minority of the population. AGRICULTURE, AND CONDITION OF THE PEASANTS. Russia is a great agricultural nation; three-quarters of its population derive their support from the soil, which furnishes the most important resources of the country. The statistics concerning agriculture date from 1877-78, and were collected by the Central Committee of Statistics. More precise information was gathered by the same committee in 1886-88, and in 1905. According to the latest of these statistics, there were in European Russia, exclusive of the Kingdom of Poland, 1,067,019,596 acres of cultivated land, besides 17,609,124 acres in the Kalmuck steppes, and 19,133,296 in the steppes of the Kirghiz. The cultivated lands are divided into three classes: + (1) private property (274,685,426 acres); + (2) lands granted by the government to the peasants or nadiel'nyja zemli (374,672,484 acres); + (3) lands belonging to the treasury, the churches, monasteries, cities, and institutions (417,661,685). A comparison of these statistics with those of 1877 shows that in 1905 the lands owned by the nobles had diminished in area by 53,851,008 acres, and those of foreign subjects by 341,679 acres. On the other hand the landed property of the peasants had increased by 20,051,428 acres, and that of the other social classes had increased proportionately. In Siberia all the land, except the southern part of the Government of Tomsk which belongs to the imperial family, is the property of the Government, for as yet only a small portion has been granted to public and private institutions. The state lands of European Russia are distributed very irregularly. In the Governments of Archangel, Olonetz, and Vologda, the State owns from 83 to 90 per cent of the land; in the region of Tchernozom, 5 per cent, and in the Governments of Pultowa, Bessarabia, and in Esthonia less than 1 per cent. The lands granted to the peasants occupy more than half of the Governments of Orenburg, Vyatka, Ufa, Kazan, Penza, Voronezh, Samara, the Province of the Don, Vladimir, Ryazan, Kursk, Moscow, Kaluga, Kharkoff, Tchernigoff, and Pultowa. Of the lands that are private property, 52 per cent belong to the nobility, 24 per cent to the peasants, 16 per cent to the merchants, and the remainder is divided among other classes. The possessions of the nobility are chiefly in the Baltic region, Lithuania, and the Governments of Minsk, Perm, Podolia, and Kieff. In the period between 1860 and 1905 the rural property of the nobility, which had reached 213,300,000 acres, was reduced to 143,100,000 acres. The great landowners, possessing more than 2700 acres each, are chiefly in the eastern governments and in those of the Baltic. The arable lands of the Kingdom of Poland occupy an area of 30,312,168 acres of which 44.56 per cent belong to private owners, 45.58 per cent to the peasants through government concessions, 4.02 per cent to the cities, and 5.84 per cent to the churches and other institutions. The land belonging to the churches and monasteries in the whole of European Russia, including Poland, is estimated at 0.6 per cent of all the arable land of that division of the empire. There are 591,788 rural villages in European Russia, with a total population of 81,050,300, of whom 84.5 per cent are peasants. According to statistics, 38.8 per cent of the total surface is forest; 26.2 per cent is arabic land; 19.1 per cent is land not available for cultivation; and 15.9 per cent is prairies and pasture lands. The lands unavailable for cultivation are the salt steppes, the marshes, and the tundras. In Finland these lands occupy 35.6 per cent of the country, and the proportion is still greater in Siberia and Turkestan, where the arable land is only 2 per cent. The "extensive" and the "intensive" systems of cultivation are variously applied in Russia, according to the region. In the governments of Northern Russia (Archangel, Olonetz, Vologda, Novgorod, and in parts of Yaroslaff, Kostroma, Vyatka, and Perm) the system called podsietchnaja obtains, consisting in stripping and uprooting the forests, planting wheat on their sites for intervals of from three to nine years, and then allowing the forests to grow up again when the fertility of the soil has been exhausted. In the Governments of Kherson, Yekaterinoslaff, Taurida, Stavropol, Orenburg, the Province of the Urals, and the Province of the Don Cossacks is practised the method called zalezhnaia (Fr. jachère). This consists in cultivating the land while its productive power endures; then it is transformed into pasture, and its cultivation is not resumed for an interval of ten, twelve, or fifteen years, as occasion may require. The intensive method of agriculture obtains in the central governments of Russia, in the zone of Tchernozom, and in other governments. A field is divided into three sections; in the first, winter grain (rye, corn) is sown; in the second, a crop of summer grain is put in (wheat, barley, oats); and in the third, grass for pasture is allowed to grow; each year the crop of each section is changed for one of the other two, thus allowing each section to rest once in three years. In the regions of the Vistula and the Baltic and in the south-western part of Finland the intensive system of agriculture obtains; no portion of the land remains untilled, but the peasants sow seed and plant vegetables in alternate years, so as not to exhaust the productiveness of the soil. In several regions, especially in the Caucasus, in Daghestan, Transcaucasia, and Turkestan, a remedy is found for the aridity of the soil in irrigation by means of canals. In other regions of a marshy character the work of draining the swamps is carried on, at times by the Government, and at times by private parties. In Podlachia alone, from 1874 to 1892, there were reclaimed 6,210,000 acres of swamp lands. The same kind of work was accomplished in Siberia. Russia is a great cereal-producing country. According to the statistics of 1908, in 73 governments (63 in Russian Europe, 1 in Transcaucasia, 4 in Siberia, and 5 in Central Asia), out of 327,642,983 acres of land, 56.2 per cent were devoted to the culture of cereals, 3.2 per cent to the culture of the potato, 13.9 per cent to the oat crop, and 26.7 per cent to artificial meadow lands. In 1908 the grain crop amounted to 48,000,000 tons; the potato crop yielded 29,000,000 tons; oats, 13,000,000 tons, and hay from artificial meadows, 47,000,000 tons. The governments that are the most productive of cereals are those of Bessarabia, Kherson, Taurida, Yekaterinoslaff, and the Province of the Don Cossacks. As a cereal-producing country, Russia is the second in the world, the United States being the first. The development of potato culture, which was introduced into Russia in 1767, is notable. The grain that Russia produces is not only sufficient to supply the home market, but also constitutes one of the chief exports. The amount of it that is exported amounts on an average to 15,000,000 tons a year. It should be noticed, however, that in proportion to the area of the empire, the grain production of Russia is not high: Germany, France, and Austria, the combined area of which countries is only one-third of that of European Russia, produce together more grain than is produced in all Russia. There are abundant crops of other staples, also, that Russia produces; these are the flax crop, which yields 500,000 tons a year, produced in several of the governments of the north-east, north-west, and south; hemp, 400,000 tons; cotton, raised in Transcaucasia and Turkestan, especially in the Province of Ferghana, annual yield more than 170,000 tons. Tobacco was introduced into Russia in the seventeenth century; its use was prohibited by severe laws, but was allowed from the time of Peter the Great; it is cultivated in the Governments of Tchernigoff, Pultowa, Samara, Saratoff, Taurida, Bessarabia, Kuban, etc. Its annual yield is about 100,000 tons, while the lands that are devoted to its cultivation cover an area of 1,755,000 acres. The principal tobacco factories are at St. Petersburg, Moscow, Riga, Kieff, and Odessa. The culture of beets, introduced into Russia about the beginning of the nineteenth century, has been greatly developed during the last thirty years, there being now devoted to it an aggregate area of 1,485,000 acres, the greater portion of which is in the Governments of Kieff and Podolia, the annual crop amounting to 10,000 tons. Wine is not extensively produced in Russia, and is of inferior quality. The best vineyards are in the Crimea, in Kakhetia, and in the Province of the Don Cossacks. There are 729,000 acres devoted to vine culture, and the yearly product amounts to not more than 88 million gallons. The Government seeks to encourage the home production of wine by very high duties on foreign wines. The culture of vegetables and fruit is not greatly developed; market gardens thrive in the neighbourhood of the large cities, especially in the District of Rostoff, and in the Governments of Saratoff and Samara. The production of fruit is abundant in Transcaucasia and the Crimea. According to the statistics of 1908 there were in Russia 140,656,000 head of cattle, namely, 28,723,000 horses, 42,031,000 horned cattle, 57,466,000 sheep and goats, and 12,436,000 hogs. The horned cattle are scattered over the whole of European Russia: the cattle of Siberia are of a better class, on account of the abundance of forests. There are numerous breeds of horses in Russia, and special establishments are devoted to the improvement of these breeds in the Province of the Don Cossacks and the Governments of Voronezh, Kherson, Tamboff, Pultowa, and Kharkoff. The annual product from the sheep is calculated at 120 000,000 roubles (1 rouble=52 cents U. S. A.). The best wool is produced by the flocks of the Governments of Novgorod and Voronezh, of the Volga, the Vistula, the Baltic, the Caucasus, and Turkestan. The raising of hogs is especially pursued in the Governments of Minsk and Volhynia. The chicken industry flourishes in Western and Central Russia; fowls and eggs are exported and yield an annual income of more than 70,000,000 roubles, of which 61,000,000 are for eggs. The yearly production of honey is nearly 26,000 tons, and wax 5000 tons, yielding an aggregate income of from 15,000,000 to 20,000,000 roubles. The culture of the silk-worm is being developed, chiefly in the Governments of Bessarabia, Kherson, and Taurida, and in Turkestan and the Caucasus. The yearly production of silk amounts to about 1000 tons. The condition of the peasants, although greatly improved, is far from being prosperous, and the agrarian question is one of the gravest with which Russian statesmen have to deal. Prior to 1861, or since 1592 according to some authorities, 1649 according to others, the peasants were legally reduced to servitude (kriepostnoe pravo). They were under serfdom to the landowners, were attached to the soil, and were not allowed to change their place of residence or dispose freely of their property; they were obliged to cultivate the lands of their employers and pay a tax to the State. The pomieshshiki, or landowners, became so many little tsars, and the peasants were reduced to the condition of slaves. As a consequence there occurred the revolts of the peasants, in the seventeenth century, under Stenko Razin, and in the eighteenth century, under Pugatcheff. During the reign of Catherine II a Russian author, Radishsheff, in his "Voyage from St. Petersburg to Moscow", suggested the necessity of freeing the peasants from their servitude; the book was held to be dangerous, and its author was exiled to Siberia. Paul I in 1797 alleviated the condition of the peasants by decreeing that they should work only three days on the lands of their employers. Alexander I attempted in vain to free them: his humanitarian efforts were thwarted by the opposition of the nobles. Nicholas I entertained the same purpose, but notwithstanding his absolutism was unable to realize it; he promulgated various laws, however (1826, 1835, 1839, 1845, 1846, 1847, and 1848), by which the right of the peasants and of their communities (mir) to acquire real estate was recognized; but these laws were not executed, and the pomieshshiki pretended to be uninformed of them. The European revolution of 1848 and the Crimean War brought an awakening of Liberal ideas in Russia, and Alexander II, as one of the first measures of his reign, abolished serfdom. The preparatory measures for this consummation were studied by a secret committee in 1857. In 1859 the committees of the nobility and of the pomieshshiki in the various provinces discussed this question of the abolition of serfdom, and the Press dealt with it in an active way, showing Russia's moral and political need to solve it. An imperial commission, established in 1859, prepared a law which, after long deliberations and frequent modifications, received the signature of the tsar, 12 Feb., 1861, and was promulgated on 5 March of the same year. The terms of this law made all peasants free, and secured to them, upon the payment of a tax established by law, the use of their habitations (dvor) and a grant of land, of which they could become owners in fee simple by pecuniary redemption. Moreover, the pomieshshiki were obliged to grant to the peasants or to the mir the lands occupied by them, conformably with a maximum or minimum established by law. On the other hand, the dvorovie, or servants, who numbered 1,500,000, in 1861 regained their freedom, with however the obligation of serving their masters for a further period of two years. The lands were so distributed that each peasant who was entitled to share in them received, on an average, fourteen acres; on an average, because the quality of the lands was taken into account in the distribution; in the zone of the Tchernozom, the concessions were of eight acres. Moreover, the distribution of lands was very unequal, and 42.6 per cent of the peasants who participated in it received concessions that were insufficient for their needs; to this may be added that many millions of peasants were not benefited by the law, and that the annual tax to be paid to the Government by those who received portions of land became a burden. The Government therefore continued to enact laws to solve the agrarian question. The taxes were diminished in 1881, and in 1882 the Agrarian Bank was established, which helped the peasants to acquire possession of 19,000,000 acres in a few years. In 1885 the per capita tax paid by the peasants was abolished, by which the Government lost 50,000,000 roubles. Other laws, some of them promulgated as late as 1900, are directed towards the protection of the rights of the peasants. These measures, however, are insufficient. The increase in the population has greatly reduced the average holding of land, which in 1893 amounted to 6.5 acres for each peasant. The improvidence of the peasants, drink, backward methods in agriculture, and bad crops have on more than one occasion caused famine to be felt in the agricultural regions. The agrarian question, therefore, lies like an incubus on Russia, while the various parties of the Duma propose different solutions for it. The moderate parties advise directing the peasant emigration towards Siberia, dispersing the peasants in less populous governments, and imparting to them agricultural instruction; while the more advanced parties demand that the crown lands and the lands of the churches and the monasteries be divided among the peasants, or again that the great landowners be deprived of their rural possessions (socialization of lands). Until now, however, the debates that have taken place in the various dumas on this subject have led to no practical results. STATISTICS OF COMMERCE According to the statistics of 1908 Russia occupies the ninth place among nations as regards her merchant fleet, which including that of Finland has 6250 ships, with a gross tonnage of 1,046,195; this includes 1240 steamers with a tonnage of 500,000. Finland has 2800 ships, with a tonnage of 346,195. The ships of more than 1000 tons burden in the Russian merchant fleet number 114. Of Russian vessels, 1129 belong to the Black Sea ports and the Sea of Azoff, and 1104 to the Baltic ports. According to the statistics of the same year, there arrived at Russian ports during 1908 11,011 ships, of which 1777 were Russian, with an aggregate tonnage of 1,241,000, and 9519 foreign, aggregate tonnage 9,519,000. The chief centres of Russian maritime commerce are the ports of the Baltic, the Black Sea, and the Sea of Azof. The foreign maritime commerce of Russia is divided by tonnage as follows: England, 42 per cent; Germany, 16 per cent; Denmark, 10 per cent; Greece, 8 per cent; and Sweden and Norway, 4 per cent. The coasting trade between small ports is reserved exclusively for Russian shipping; it has found its greatest development in the Black Sea and the Sea of Azof (36,590 ships, 15,098,000 tons), in the Caspian Sea (16,538 ships, 8,884,000 tons), and in the Baltic Sea (10,809 ships, 1,230,000 tons). This shipping carries on an average 10,000,000 tons of merchandise a year, of which 4,400,000 tons are petroleum, and 1,100,000 tons grain. The great coasting commerce between the Black and the Baltic Seas, between the ports of European Russia and those of Eastern Siberia, and between the Murman coasts (Murmanskii bereg) and the Baltic Sea, employs 212 steamships, of an aggregate tonnage of 450,000, carrying a yearly average of 270,000 tons of merchandise. The most important commercial ports of Russia are St. Petersburg, Riga, Libau, Reval, and Odessa. According to the most recent statistics, the river fleet consists of 3300 steam and 22 860 other craft, with an aggregate tonnage of 11,200,000. The yards that build this shipping are at Nizhni-Novgorod, St. Petersburg, Moscow, Perm, and in Finland. The river fleet carries a yearly average of 32,000,000 tons of merchandise, of an aggregate value of 800,000,000 roubles. The first railway that was constructed in Russia was that of Tsarskoi Selo in 1837; in 1850, Russian railways had 666 miles of line, which had increased to 7094 miles in 1870, to 14,786 in 1880, and to 20,000 in 1890. The greater portion of these was constructed by private companies, and in 1882 13,582 of a total of 15,724 miles of railway belonged to those companies. In 1908 the railway mileage of Russia amounted to 45,132 miles, of which 35,076 were in Europe, 2078 in Finland, and 7978 in Asia. At present four-fifths of these railways belong to the State, and one-fifth to private parties. In 1909 there were 270 miles of new railways opened and the construction of 3074 miles more was determined upon. Russia has the second railway mileage of the world, being second only to the United States; but compared with the area of the empire, the railway mileage of Russia is small. The railway centre of Russia is Moscow. The Trans-Siberian Railway is the greatest enterprise of modern Russia: it has made possible the exploitation of the natural riches of Siberia, and has opened a way for the commerce of Europe with the Far East. Its construction was begun in 1891, and finished in 1903, at a cost of 850,000,000 roubles. It has a length of 5532 miles. After the war with Japan, the branch to Port Arthur became a part of the Eastern China Railway. The voyage from Europe to Shanghai, which takes forty-five days by the Suez Canal, and thirty-five days by Canada and the Pacific Ocean, is made in from eighteen to twenty days over the Trans-Siberian Railway by way of Vladivostok. The total value of the Russian railways is 5,500,000,000 roubles, and their average cost is estimated at 169,500 roubles per mile. In foreign commerce, exports and imports, Russia occupies the seventh place among commercial nations, the imports and exports representing a value approximately of 2,000,000,000 roubles (in 1906, 800,000,000 roubles of imports, and 547,500,000 roubles of exports). This commerce to the amount of 1,545,000,000 roubles is carried on across the European frontiers; 268,000,000 roubles across Asiatic frontiers; and 83,000,000 roubles across the frontiers of Finland. Russia exports wheat, barley, oats, rye, and corn to Germany, England, Holland, Italy, France, Austria, etc.; eggs, sugar, butter, caviare, fish, fowls, petroleum, cattle, and raw minerals; and imports woollen textiles amounting to 25,000,000 roubles, worked metals, paints, and dyes, coal, silk, rubber goods, machinery, watches, tea (in 1906, 90,000 tons of this commodity were imported at a cost of 77,000,000 roubles), herrings, wines (11,000,000 roubles), lemons and oranges (4,500,000 roubles), other fruits, etc. The internal commerce of Russia is greatly developed by the periodical markets or fairs, of which 26,000 are held in 6830 different places. The most important one of them is that of Nizhni-Novgorod, originating in the seventeenth century near the monastery of the Blessed Macarius, which was built within the Government of Nizhni-Novgorod. To that market Turks, Tatars, and Persians went in great numbers. In 1816 the fair was transferred to Novgorod, a city which, on account of its position at the confluence of the Volga and the Oka Rivers, possessed the requisites for becoming a great commercial centre; the commercial importance of the fair increased rapidly; it was visited by as many as 200,000 merchants from all parts of Russia and Siberia. The value of the merchandise brought to this market, which amounted to 32,000,000 roubles in 1817 attained a sum of 246,000,000 roubles in 1881, after which it fell to a yearly average of from 160 to 170 million roubles. The fair is held from 15 July to 25 Aug., the chief commodities being silk, cotton, linen and woollen goods, worked metals, and skins. Another important fair is that of Irbit, in the Government of Perm. This fair originated in 1643; it is held from 1 Feb. to 1 March, the value of the merchandise brought to it being estimated at 30,000,000 roubles each year. In Little Russia these fairs are frequently held; among them the most noted are those of the Epiphany, at Kharkoff, from 6 to 26 Jan. (merchandise of a value of from 11 to 13 million roubles); those of the Assumption, the Intercession of the Blessed Virgin, and the Holy Trinity, in the same city, from 15 Aug. to 1 Sept., 1 to 15 July, and 1 Oct. to 1 Nov. respectively; the fair of Kieff, from 5 to 26 Feb.; those of Kursk, Simbirsk, Menzelinsk, Ivanoffskaia etc. The growth of the railways tends to diminish the importance and volume of business of these fairs. The number of commercial establishments in Russia (statistics of 1907) is 889,746, and the number of people engaged in commerce is 1,600,000. INDUSTRIES, AND CONDITION OF THE WORKERS Russian industries have been greatly developed, although they are far from being in a position to supply the home demand. In 1906 there were in Russia 14,247 industrial establishments, in which there were 1,684,569 workers; in 1907 the number of those establishments had decreased to 14,190, while the workers had increased to 1,723,173. The industrial districts are those of St. Petersburg (2049 establishments, 296,109 workers), Moscow (2485 establishments, 610,402 workers), Warsaw (2978 establishments, 268,256 workers), Kieff (2791 establishments, 207,751 workers), the Volga (1768 establishments, 137,235 workers), and Kharkoff (2119 establishments, 203,424 workers). The number of women employed in these establishments increases continually, and grew from 383,782 in 1901 to 435,684 in 1906. The metal industries are the most important. Under Peter the Great there was declared the so-called freedom of mines (gornaia svoboda), according to which the ownership of a mine was independent of that of the land under which it was found. This law was revoked by Catherine II in 1781, to the detriment of the metallurgical industries. According to the latest statistics, the number of workmen employed in these industries is 700,000, of whom more than half are employed in the extraction and working of iron. The value of the yearly output of the metallurgical industries is 300,000,000 roubles. Russia holds an important position as a gold-producing country: in 1906 Siberia, the Urals, and Finland produced 30 tons of gold. The average production of gold each year, from sand and quartz, amounts to 80,960 lb., of a value of 60,000,000 roubles. Russia occupies the fourth place among gold-producing countries. The Province of Irkutsk, in Eastern Siberia, is the chief gold region of the country, and especially the District of Olekminsk, which produces 6 tons of the metal. By the laws of 12 March, 1901, and 1 March, 1902, the prohibition that had been placed upon free commerce in gold was removed. There are 80,000 workers employed in the gold industries of the country. Russia may be said to be the only platinum-producing country. This metal is taken from the Urals, where it was discovered in 1819, the yearly production of it amounting to 5 tons, although in 1906 the amount was 5½ tons. It is mined in the Government of Perm, giving employment to 1292 men, and is usually sold to the British at a price of 806,000 roubles per ton; when refined in England, it is sold for 1,240,000 roubles per ton. The production of silver, which from 1886 to 1890 was 16 tons a year, has decreased to 6 tons yearly. The metal is mined in the Districts of Nertchinsk and the Altai, and in the Governments of Viborg and Archangel. Russia has produced copper since the seventeenth century, and her annual production of that metal increases continually: from 8,300 tons in 1905, it increased to 70,000 tons in 1906, and to 14,000 in 1907. There are 22 establishments devoted to the copper industry; the metal is mined chiefly in the Caucasus and in the Urals, and to a small extent in the steppes of the Kirghiz and in the Altai Mountains. Lead is usually found in Russia mixed with silver, and is obtained in the Province of Terek and the Districts of Nertchinsk and the Altai. An exact average of the yearly production of lead cannot be established; in 1890 it amounted to 800 tons; in 1895 to 400 tons; in 1904 to only 80 tons while it increased to 770 tons in 1905, and to 1000 tons in 1906. Zinc is furnished by four great establishments, situated respectively at Bendzin, Constantin, Paulina (Government of Piotrkow), and Alagir, in the Province of Terek. The production of this metal yielded 8100 tons in 1902, 14,000 tons in 1904, and 10,000 tons in 1906. Mercury was discovered in 1879 in the District of Bakhmut (Government of Yekaterinoslaff), and its yearly production amounts to 320 tons. Manganese, which is worked chiefly in the Governments of Kutais and of Yekaterinoslaff, yielded a production of 320 tons in 1898, 790 tons in 1900, and 500 tons in 1905. Russia produces great quantities of iron. The first establishments for the working of this metal originated in the seventeenth century and were the property of the State. In 1906 the total production of iron amounted to 5,183,579 tons. There are 126 foundries which produce 2,700,000 tons of melted iron. Russia occupies the seventh place among the coal-producing countries. The first coal was mined in the reign of Peter I, but the coal industry was only developed to any extent under Catherine II, and that development continues from year to year. The production of this mineral amounted to 25,000,000 tons in 1906. Russia is exceptionally rich in petroleum. Many of its oil deposits are yet undeveloped, especially in the Governments of Kielce and Taurida, and in the Urals. The greatest supply of Russian petroleum now comes from the northern and southern slopes of the Caucasus Mountains, especially from the Government of Baku (90 per cent), from the Provinces of Terek, Kuban, and Daghestan, from the Government of Tiflis, and from the Transcaspian region. In 1907 the total production of petroleum in Russia amounted to 8,300,000 tons. The petroleum exported in 1908 represented a value of 30,000,000 roubles. Among salt-producing countries Russia holds the fourth place, producing from mines and salt lakes a yearly average of more than 1,770,000 tons of salt, chiefly from the Governments of Yekaterinoslaff, Astrakhan, Perm, and Taurida. The textile industry holds an important place, there being 2000 factories, employing 700,000 workers, and producing fabrics valued at 800,000,000 roubles a year. Of those establishments 730 are cotton factories, which employ 437,000 workers, and produce a yearly output valued at 520,000,000 roubles. The principal establishments for the cleaning of cotton are in Turkestan and the Government of Erivan. Factories for spinning and weaving cotton first appeared in Russia during the second half of the eighteenth century; the principal ones among them at the present time are in the Governments of Vladimir, Moscow, Piotrkow, St. Petersburg, Kostroma, Terek, and Yaroslaff. The wool industry has 916 factories that produce an aggregate yearly income of nearly 170,000,000 roubles. Russia has 145 linen factories that produce a yearly income of 42,000,000 roubles. The silk industry, which was introduced at the beginning of the eighteenth century, had in 1900 200 factories (Governments of Moscow, Vladimir, and Piotrkow), and was producing a yearly income of 23,000,000 roubles. The flour industry is an important one, there being 1400 large mills, the yearly products of which are valued at 225,000,000 roubles, besides which there are 20,000 small mills. The distillation of spirits, made free in 1863, is another important industry, there being 2480 distilleries with a yearly production of 89,100,000 gallons. There are 80 distilleries for the production of vodka, which has become a government monopoly, and the yearly product of which is 2,160,000 gallons, chiefly in the Governments of Moscow and St. Petersburg. The brewing of beer was begun in Russia more especially in the nineteenth century, and as a beer-producing country Russia occupies the sixth place, having 918 breweries with a yearly product of 162,000,000 gallons. Russia also produces sugar. In the eighteenth century it had 7 refineries. The first refinery for the production of beet sugar was established in 1802. At present there are 280 beet sugar factories and refineries, which in 1908 produced 1,300,000 tons. There are 294 oil factories, where oil is extracted from sunflower seed, linseed, and hempseed. There are 827 workshops where industrial machinery is made, the value of their annual products being estimated at 208,000,000 roubles. Fourteen large establishments in the Governments of St. Petersburg, Livonia, Moscow, and Nizhni-Novgorod construct locomotives and railway cars, of a value of 92,000,000 roubles. The goldsmith's industry, which flourishes in the Governments of Warsaw, St. Petersburg, and Moscow, yields an annual income of 5,500,000 roubles. Electrical works, of which there are 50 in the Government of St. Petersburg, have made their appearance within recent years; their annual product is valued at 8,000,000 roubles. The paper industry is an ancient one in Russia, dating from the sixteenth century. There are at present 451 factories. The wood industry is represented in the first place by 956 saw-mills, the yearly products of which are estimated at 70,000,000 roubles; and secondly by 250 furniture factories, with a yearly output of 14,000,000 roubles. The yearly production of the 174 chemical factories in Russia is estimated at 32,000,000 roubles. Tanning, which was practised in Russia as far back as the ninth and tenth centuries, is now carried on in 641 tanneries that produce a yearly output of 55,000,000 roubles. The glass industry also is important in Russia, where it made its appearance in the seventeenth century, under the Tsar Michael Theodorovitch (212 factories, and a yearly output of 26,000,000 roubles). The material and the moral conditions of the working people leave a great deal to be desired. The wages are low in proportion to the cost of living in Russian cities, and the law does not give the workman sufficient protection against exploitation by his employer. It may be said that there are no sanitary laws with regard to workers in factories, although this matter has been considered by various commissions, established by the Government in 1859, 1870, 1874, and 1892. Sickness and accidents are frequent among the workmen: in 1871 in 17,533 establishments, employing 1,700,000 workers, there were 24,744 accidents, of which 385 were fatal. To these may be added 23,360 injuries through accident in the mines, making a total of 48,104; these official figures seem too low to represent the facts. The insurance societies have only 600,000 workers inscribed on their lists; and in case of accident it is very difficult to obtain payment from those companies. There is want of medical assistance. The moral standard is very low. It is therefore no wonder that the working class takes an active part in revolutionary movements and furnishes a large percentage of highway robbers. INTELLECTUAL RUSSIA Intellectual culture is of recent date, and was first developed in Southern and Western Russia under Polish influence. The first Russian academy was established at Kieff in the seventeenth century. In Muscovite Russia intellectual culture began under Peter the Great, who gave much attention to the education of the people. Catherine II established the first school for girls. Under Alexander II a great number of schools and of establishments for higher education were opened, and this intellectual development was carried to Siberia by the foundation of the University of Tomsk under Alexander III. Higher education is represented by ten universities: St. Petersburg, Moscow, Kieff, Odessa, Kharkoff, Warsaw, Kazan, Yurieff (Dorpat), Helsingfors, and Tomsk. Two other universities are about to be established by the Government, at Saratoff and Tobolsk. In 1909 the ten universities just named were attended by 36,890 students, those having the greatest number of students being the Universities of St. Petersburg (8805), Moscow (8698), Kharkoff (4048), and Kieff (4230); on the other hand, Warsaw has only fifteen students, being boycotted by the Poles on account of the exclusive use of the Russian language. The most frequented courses are those of law (13,970 students), physics and mathematics (8778 students), and medicine (7068 students). There is a notable attendance of women (500) at the University of Helsingfors. The nine Russian universities are maintained by the State at an expense of 5,405,660 roubles a year, to which should be added other amounts of regular receipts, making a sum total of 7,684,000 roubles. The University of Helsingfors is supported by Finland at a cost of 806,700 roubles, of which 173,700 roubles are furnished by the public treasury. Russian universities, some of which date from the eighteenth or even the seventeenth century, received their first impetus from Alexander I (1801-25), who founded the Universities of Kharkoff, Kazan, and St. Petersburg. Under Nicholas I (1825-55), they ran the risk of being closed, and were subjected to a rule of superintendence and severe discipline. In 1863 the minister Golovin introduced important reforms into the organization and administration of the universities, and conferred many privileges upon the professors and students, which privileges were limited by the law of 23 Aug., 1884. The regular professors receive a salary of 3000 roubles a year; the supplementary professors receive 2000 roubles, and the dozents 1000 roubles. The various universities have in their faculties men of superior attainments, who are an honour to science. Those institutions are distinguished also for their Liberal sentiments, which in 1905-07 degenerated into excesses, and on various occasions transformed the universities into hotbeds of political agitation. The intellectual culture of women has its centres in the so-called "Superior Course" (Vysshie kursy) of St. Petersburg (2396 students) and of Moscow (2177 students), and in the women's medical school of St. Petersburg (1635 students). In the "Superior Courses", the greater portion of the women students take up the study of history and of philosophy. The one at St. Petersburg is maintained at a cost of 217,530 roubles a year; the corresponding one at Moscow at 153,000 roubles a year, and the women's school of medicine at a cost of 573,926 roubLes. There are many scholarships for poor students, men and women. The Russian women who frequent the "Superior Courses" are, as a rule, from eighteen to twenty-five years of age, and are distinguished by their quickness of intellect and energy of character, and also by a decrease of womanly qualities. According to the statistics of 1907, secondary instruction for men is given in 246 gymnasia and 37 pro-gymnasia, having 2912 classes, 4668 masters, and 107,296 students; for women, in 433 gymnasia and 172 pro-gymnasia, with 5432 classes, 10,272 teachers, and 200,761 students, and in 178 Realschulen, 1590 classes, 2538 teachers, and 55,499 students. In the gymnasia, the course lasts seven years; Greek, Latin, French, and German are taught at these institutions, as also the natural sciences, history, geography, Russian literature, and the catechism. The pro-gymnasia teach the same subjects, with the exception of the dead languages. The Realschulen impart a practical education. In the gymnasia for girls, the course is six years. To the number of these schools must be added the institutes and the seminaries for the education of teachers (utchitel'skie instituty, utchitel'skija seminarii), there being 10 of the former, with 143 professors, and 1738 students; and 73 of the latter, with 909 professors, and 12,355 students. There are in the whole of Russia, including Finland, 111,427 schools for primary instruction, attended by 6,875,765 scholars, of whom 4,691,691 are boys. To this class belong the parochial schools that were instituted 13 July, 1884, and were placed under the direct control of the Synod. The scope of these schools is chiefly religious; they teach the law of God, reading, writing, and arithmetic; some of them have only one class; some two; in the second class, when there is one, ecclesiastical and national history are taught. The remuneration received by the teachers of parochial schools is often as low as 150 roubles a year. In the schools that depend upon the Ministry of Public Instruction, the salaries of teachers are 500 or 600 roubles a year. In 1909 the ministry spent 54,000,000 roubles for the schools of primary instruction, while the Holy Synod spent 14,000,000 for the schools dependent upon it, a sum that is increased to 89,000,000 roubles by the contributions of other ministries or institutions. The primary schools nevertheless are insufficient in number, and the progressive element in Russia calls for the establishment of 500,000 additional schools. Russia has also professional schools: an institute of forestry (liesnoi institut), attended by 460 students; 142 commercial institutes, with 2775 professors and 33,397 students; 87 commercial schools, with 1040 professors and 12,510 students; and 37 professional schools and institutes, with 717 professors and 4270 students. Among the scientific institutions, the Imperial Academy of Sciences of St. Petersburg stands in the first place. It was instituted by Peter the Great in 1724, and was opened by Catherine I in 1726, and has various museums, libraries, laboratories, and observatories. Its literary activity is intense, its numerous scientific publications already forming a vast library. There are also: the Imperial Archæographica1 Commission of St. Petersburg, famous for its splendid editions of Russian national chronicles; the Imperial Archæological Commission of St. Petersburg; the Imperial Archæological Society of Moscow, which publishes learned and artistic volumes on the sacred and profane monuments of Russia; the Society of Oriental Studies, at St. Petersburg (Vostotchnoviedienija Obshshestvo), the scientific researches of which deal especially with Siberia and China; the Society of Naturalists of St. Petersburg (Obshshestvo estestvoispytatelei), which was founded in 1868; the Society of Geographical Studies (Obshshestvo zemleviedienija), established at St. Petersburg in 1903; the Imperial Institute of Experimental Medicine; the philologico-historical societies of Odessa and of Kharkoff; the Imperial Historical Society of St. Petersburg, which has published 130 volumes of historical documents and the Russian biographical lexicon; the Archæological, Historical, and Ethnological Society of Kazan; the Society of the Friends of Ancient Literature of St. Petersburg, which has published numerous and valuable copies of ancient texts; the Historical and Ancient Literature Society, connected with the University of Moscow, whose Tchtenija (lectures) constitute the richest and most valuable historical collection of Russia; the Imperial Mineralogical Institute of St. Petersburg; the Slav Society of Moscow, which publishes the periodical "Slavianski Viek"; the Polytechnical Institute of Moscow; the Imperial Archæological Society of St. Petersburg, with classical, Oriental, Russo-Slavic, and numismatical sections; the Imperial Geographical Society of St. Petersburg, famous for its publications; the Juridical Institute of St. Petersburg; the Lazareff Institute of Moscow, famous for its learned publications on Oriental and other subjects. All of these institutions, to which many of secondary importance, existing in all Russian cities, are to be added, furnish a notable contribution to the activities of Russian science, which in reality are very considerable. These institutions are also endowed with very fine libraries. The most important Russian library is the Imperial Public Library, which is divided into thirteen sections, and is rich in bibliographical treasures, among them the famous Codex Sinaiticus of the Bible. The second is the library of the Academy of Sciences, which is growing richer from year to year, and with which is connected the library of the Asiatic Museum of St. Petersburg, where there are many Oriental manuscripts of value. Two famous libraries at Moscow are: that of the Holy Synod, where there is a very large collection of Greek codices; and the library of the Rumianzoff Museum. In the Caucasus there are: the library of the Ecclesiastical Museum of Tiflis, which is rich in ancient Georgian codices; and the library of the monastery of Etchmiadzin, which has a valuable collection of Armenian codices. ECONOMICS AND FINANCE It was only towards the end of the nineteenth century that the budget began to free itself from its continuous fluctuations. In view of the disorder that obtained in its finances during that century, the Government was compelled continually to increase the compulsory acceptance of bank-notes which, from a total of 568 million roubles in 1857, increased to 1100 million roubles by 1883. To meet its obligations, it was obliged to resort to loans which, from 2537 million roubles in 1856, increased to 5424 million roubles in 1883. The Russian budget, both in receipts and in expenses, increases continually: the highest budgets, for receipts and for expenses, were those of 1905 (receipts, 2989 million roubles; expenses, 3194 million roubles); 1906 (receipts, 3423 million roubles; expenses, 3212 million roubles); and 1907 (receipts, 2195 million roubles; expenses, 2582 million roubles). The increased receipts are due to loans, and the increased expenses to the war with Japan. The expenses of the war from 1904 to 1909 amounted to 2,414,923,194 roubles. The budget that was submitted to the Duma and to the Council of the Empire for 1908 fixed the receipts at 2,478,677,241 roubles, and the expenditure at 2,631,495,495 roubles. That for 1909 fixed both the receipts and the expenditure at 2,595,049,000 roubles. Of the receipts 193,882,000 roubles are derived (Statute of 1909) from direct taxation; 523,758,000 from indirect taxation; 140,709,000 from the customs; 806,488,000 from the rights of the State (regalii); 685,670,000 from the properties and capitals of the State; and the remainder from other sources. Of the expenditure, 473,919,000 roubles are for the account of the Ministry of Marine; 393,363,000 roubles are absorbed by the payment of coupons of the Russian Rentes; 89,353,000 roubles are assigned to the Ministry of the Navy; 452,117,000 to the Ministry of Finance; 553,156,000 to the Ministry of Railways and Communications; 154,378,000 to the Ministry of the Interior; 63,937,000 to the Ministry of Public Instruction; 31,663,000 to the Holy Synod, and 71,488,000 to the Ministry of Justice. Among the direct taxes are those upon alcoholic liquors (34,172,000 roubles), upon tobacco (49,028,582 roubles), on sugar (75,541,747 roubles), and on petroleum (31,967,500 roubles). The monopoly of alcoholic drinks yields to the State the enormous sum of 542,288,341 roubles. The Government receives 36,500,000 roubles from the postal service, 21,500,000 roubles from the telegraphs, and 453,500,000 roubles from the railways. Russia has the largest budget in the world, but not in proportion to the number of its inhabitants. A great portion of the resources of Russia is absorbed by the interest on its debt, which in 1907 amounted to 8,625,560,215 roubles. Of this sum, 3,155,641,839 roubles were on account of the railways. In 1908 the debt amounted to 8,725,523,210 roubles. During 1903-07, on account of the war with Japan, the Russian debt increased by a sum of 2,081,596,540 roubles. For the payment of its foreign Rentes, the Russian Government needs several hundred millions in gold, wherefore its financial policy tends to increase exportations, to favour home industries, and to augment the metallic supply. The law of 29 Aug., 1897, put gold into circulation in Russia; and that of 28 April, 1900, guaranteed the payment in gold of notes of credit. In 1908 the bank notes in circulation aggregated a sum of 1200 million roubles; and the gold 578,200,000 roubles, a decrease of 19,400,000 roubles from the preceding year. The principal establishment of credit in Russia is the state bank (gosudarstvennyi bank), which has 8 agencies and 107 branches. Its gold reserve in 1908 amounted to 1200 million roubles, in Russian and in foreign coin, and in bars. Its deposits in precious metals and in securities amounted to 8286 million roubles. In 1862 there were only 2 savings banks in Russia; in 1880 their number had increased to 76, and in 1890 to 1826; in 1900 to 5145, and in 1908 to 6710, with an aggregate of 6,210,238 depositors, and of 1,149,243,581 roubles of deposits. Other important banks are: the Agricultural Bank of the Nobility, the assets of which, on 1 Jan., 1909, amounted to 808,000,000 roubles; the Agricultural Bank of the peasants, which on the same date had assets of 1134 million roubles; the agricultural stock banks (akcionernye zemel'nye banki), which were established between 1871 and 1873 in the Governments of Kharkoff, Pultowa, St. Petersburg, Tula, Bessarabia, Taurida, Nizhni-Novgorod, Samara, Kieff, Vilna, Yaroslaff, Kostroma, and the Province of the Don Cossacks, the aggregate assets of which, on 1 Jan., 1909, amounted to 1164 million roubles. The first mutual credit society was established at St. Petersburg in 1864; at the present time there are 401 of them, 13 of which are at St. Petersburg. In 1909 there were 368 of these associations, with an aggregate of 208,914 members, and assets of 403 million roubles. Insurance societies are of long standing in Russia. One of them, the Russian Fire Insurance Society, was established in 1827. In 1907 there were 13 fire insurance societies in the empire, the aggregate receipts of which in 1907 amounted to 107,000,000 roubles, as compared with 99,000,000 in 1906, and 91,000,000 in 1905. The most important of these companies is the Salamandra, which was established in 1846. Life insurance policies are issued also by the State savings banks, which in 1907 issued 1653 policies for the total sum of 3,018,929 roubles. There are 7 Russian and 3 foreign life insurance companies, the first having a combined capital of 90,000,000 roubles, and the second 20,000,000 roubles. In 1907 there were 125 insurance societies in operation in the various cities of Russia. After the law of 2 July, 1903, which provided for indemnity to workmen in case of accident at work, nine accident insurance societies appeared, at the industrial centres of Riga, Ivanovo, Warsaw, Moscow, Kieff, Odessa, St. Petersburg, Tchernomorna, and Bielostok. These societies have a combined capital of 1,700,000 roubles, but the number of workers insured is small (290,775). Besides the establishments that have been mentioned above, there are in Russia 34 commercial banks, 407 mutual credit societies, and 86 pawn offices (monts de piété). In all, there are 1502 institutions of credit in Russia. MORALITY: STATISTICS OF CRIME Statistics show a continual increase of criminality in Russia, due to the increase of the population, the dissemination of socialistic and of revolutionary ideas among the lower classes, the want of culture, and the lack of moral influence of the Orthodox religion. From a total of 266,261 crimes punished by the law in 1901, the figures increased to 271,360 in 1902; 292,907 in 1903; 299,968 in 1904, and 351,710 in 1905. Thefts and crimes against the person represent the greatest number of these crimes. The number of homicides increased considerably in 1905-07, and likewise offences by the Press. In 1905 there were 141,847 arrests (129,275 men). In the same year 3622 men and 720 women were condemned for homicide. The highest percentage of criminals is furnished by the peasants. In 1906 there were 111,403 arrests; in 1907, 138,501; and to 1 Jan., 1908, 160,025. In 1907 there were 903 prisons. Criminality has assumed great proportions, especially in the Caucasus and Poland, where, on account of political as well as of economic causes, outlawry has increased its numbers to a considerable extent. Political criminality has increased there to an alarming degree. In Poland in 1904-06 760 civil, military, and police employees died by violence, and 864 were wounded; 142 suffered from the explosion of bombs. In Warsaw alone, from 1904 to 1907, 236 police were killed, 179 of them in 1906. The Russian Government has answered these assaults by a multiplication of death sentences, the number of which from 1905 to the present time amounts to several thousand. HISTORY A. The Epoch of the Princes Nestor, the Russian chronicler, speaks of the Drevliani, Radimitchi, Viatitchi, Severiani, and of the primitive races of Russia as of beasts, and assails their polygamy, indecency, and the roughness of their ways. A few families would collect to form a village, and a few villages would constitute a voolst governed by a prince; their attempts at cities were few and far between, and the little states, devoid of a central Government, were the prey of internal discord, and too weak to resist the attacks of external enemies. The Slavs of the south were tributaries of the Khazari; and according to Nestor, those of the Ilmen, torn by dissensions, sent messengers to the Vareghi, or Variaghi, inviting the latter to the country of the Slavs of the Ilmen, which was a land of plenty, but devoid of order and of justice. Russian historians do not agree upon the ethnological relations of the Vareghi, who, according to some authorities, were Scandinavians, and according to others, Slavs; while yet others regard them as adventurers made up of both of those races; more frequently however they are recognized as Normans. Be that as it may, the Vareghi accepted the invitation to establish themselves in the country of the Slavs of the Ilmen, and opened the era of the national history of Russia — of the Russia of the heroic period; and the region of Kieff, according to ancient chronicles, received the name of Russ. The first to establish themselves in the territory of the Russian tribes were the three Vareghian brothers, Rurik, Sineus, and Truvor, who came with their druzhine, or bands of warriors. Rurik pitched his tents on the shores of Lake Ladoga; Sineus on the shores of the White Sea; while Truvor established himself at Isborsk. After the deaths of Sineus and Truvor, Rurik took up his abode at Novgorod, where he built a castle. Two other Vareghians, Askold and Dir, installed themselves at Kieff, and reigned over the Poliani; with their fleets of small vessels, they crossed the Bosphorus and attacked Constantinople, which city, according to the Byzantine chroniclers, owed its safety on this occasion to the intercession of Our Lady of the Blachernæ. Rurik was succeeded by Oleg, who treacherously murdered Askold and Dir, made himself master of Kieff, to which he gave the name of Mother of Russian Cities, collected a great fleet in 906 to attack Byzantium, and died in the height of his glory, leaving the kingdom to a son of Rurik, Igor. The latter turned his arms unsuccessfully against Byzantium, and died the victim of a barbarous assassination at the hands of the Drevliani in 945. The widow of Igor, Queen Olga, assumed the regency in the minority of her son Sviatoslaff, and cruelly punished the Drevliani for their crimes. Under Prince Sviatoslaff (964-72), the Khazari were completely defeated, the Petcheneghi put the city of Kieff in danger of destruction, and the Russians, after an heroic resistance, were defeated at Silistria by the Byzantine army under Joannes I Zimiskes. On his return to Russia the Petcheneghi prepared an ambuscade for Sviatoslaff, and killed him and the survivors of his defeated army. The kingdom of Sviatoslaff was inherited by his sons Jaropolk, Oleg, and Vladimir. Jaropolk, who received the Province of Kieff, killed Oleg, who reigned over the Drevliani, and in turn was killed by Vladimir, who had inherited the Province of Novgorod. Before his conversion to Christianity, this prince gave himself up to the most unbridled dissipation. Fortunate in war, he fought successfully against the Poles, the Viatitch, the Radimitchi, the Letts, and the Petcheneghi, and owing to his military successes became the hero of Russian popular songs. His reign lasted from 972 to 1015. Upon the death of Vladimir, his dominions were divided among many heirs, and there were consequent disputes and civil wars. Two of the sons of Vladimir, the princes Boris and Gliebe, were assassinated by Sviatopolk, Prince of Turoff. Yaroslaff, Prince of Novgorod, another son of Vladimir, succeeded in avenging the death of his innocent brothers, and driving Sviatopolk from his throne, he united all Russia under his own sceptre and established his seat of government at Kieff. His reign was long and glorious. He inflicted terrible defeats upon the Petcheneghi, the Lithuanians, and the Finnish tribes, but sought in vain to take Constantinople. His far-sighted policy led him to seek intermarriages with the Kings of Poland, Norway, France, and Hungary. Kieff (adorned with its splendid Cathedral of St. Sophia) became the artistic and intellectual centre of Russia. From 1054, however, the political conditions of Russia went from bad to worse, and the want of political unity remained a constant cause of internal weakness. In less than two centuries, according to Pogodin, there were sixty-four independent principalities, 293 princes, and 83 civil wars, to which must be added the continual incursions of the barbarians. The history of Russia during this period is a mass of discordant notices. The chief principalities of that time were Smolensk, Tehernigoff, Northern Novgorod, Ryazan, Murom, Tver, Suzdal, Rostoff, Vladimir, Yaroslaff, Pereiaslaff-Zalieski, Volhynia, Galicia, and others; and these states, upon the death of each of their respective princes, were subdivided into new fiefs. Yaroslaff was succeeded upon the throne of Kieff by his son Iziaslaff, who died in 1078. The son of Iziaslaff, Sviatopolk reigned from 1093 to 1113, during which period questions of the succession to the Principalities of Tchernigoff and Volhynia brought the horrors of civil war upon Russia. Sviatopolk was succeeded by the prudent Vladimir Monomacus (1113-25), who obtained important victories over the Polovey, Petcheneghi, and Tcherkessi. When he died he left as his testament to his sons an instruction, which is to some extent an autobiography, and which contains wise advice for government. His sons and his grandsons, however, did not profit by it, for their rivalry contributed to the decadence of Kieff, which in 1169 was besieged and taken by the armies of Rostoff, Vladimir, and Suzdal, commanded by Mstislav, son of Andrew Bogoljubski. The city was sacked and its churches profaned. In 1203 it was again sacked by the Polovcy, and Kieff ceased to be the political centre of Russia. After the fall of Kieff, the Principalities of Suzdal, Galicia, Novgorod, and Pskof had a rapid but ephemeral development. The most famous of the princes of Suzdal was Andrew Bogoljubski (1157-74), who owed his fame to his ambition, his military enterprises, his love for the fine arts, and his attachment to the Orthodox Church. The city of Vladimir owes to him the splendid monuments that place it in the front rank of the cities of Russia from an archæological standpoint. Autocracy found in him its staunchest supporter, which, however, cost him his life, for he was assassinated by the boyars at Bogoljubovo, where he had built a monastery. His death was followed by turbulence, caused by the rivalry of the cities of Rostoff, Suzdal, and Vladimir, the last of which was victorious, and developed its power still more under Prince Vsevolod (1176-1212). Further wars of succession led in 1215 to the terrible battle of Lipetsk, in which the troops of Novgorod, Pskof, and Smolensk massacred the army of Suzdal and Murom. Their prince, George II, at the death of his brother Constantine, Prince of Vladimir, fought furiously against the Bulgarians of the Volga, and in 1220, at the confluence of the Oka with the Volga, laid the foundation of Nizhni-Novgorod. In Galicia, Romano, Prince of Volhynia (1188-1205), assisted by the Poles, established himself at Galitch, became famous through his cruelty and his military enterprises, and died in battle against the Poles. He was succeeded by his son Daniel (1205-1266); this prince allowed the Jews, the Armenians, and the Germans to enter his dominions, and thereby greatly promoted industry and commerce. During this period the free cities of Novgorod, Pskof, and Vyatka, like the Italian republics of the Middle Ages, reached a high degree of splendour, and of economic and artistic development; but, torn by internal dissensions, their power waned, while the power of the German military order, of the Brothers of the Militia of Christ, or Sword-Bearers, and that of the Teutonic Order increased; these two orders were formed into a single society in 1237, and subjected the Letts, the Livonians, and the Finns to their influence. B. Russia under the Tatars After uniting all the Tatar tribes under his sceptre, Jenghiz Khan (1154-1227) extended his conquest to China, Turkestan, Great Bokhara, and the plains of Western Asia as far as the Crimea; and his successors, continuing the advance, with their hordes crossed the steppes of Southern Russia, and reached the frontiers of the Polovcy; these turned to the Russian princes for assistance. The latter responded to that appeal, and met the Asiatic hordes (1224) at the Kalka, a rivulet that flows into the Sea of Azoff. The princes Mstislav the Rash, Daniel of Galitch, and Oleg of Kursk performed prodigies of valour at the head of their troops; but the numerical superiority of the Tatars and the cowardice of the Polovcy brought defeat upon the Russians, costing them the lives of six princes and seventy boyars. In 1237, led by Baty, the Tatars returned to Russia, burned and destroyed the capital of the Bulgarians in the region of the Volga, and assailed Ryazan, whose princes opposed a desperate resistance, without however being able to save the city from pillage and ruin. Having secured the possession of Ryazan, the Tatars invaded the Principality of Suzdal (1238), and burned Suzdal, Rostoff, Yaroslaff, and many other cities and villages. The Prince of Suzdal, George II, died on the battlefield. In 1239-40, the Tatars continued their devastations through Southern Russia, took Pereiaslaff, Tchernigoff, and Kieff, sowed death and ruin broadcast, and entered Volhynia and Galicia, Novgorod alone escaping the fate of the other Russian cities. In the region of the lower course of the Volga, Baty established his residence (Sarai, the castle), which became the capital of a great Tatar empire, called the Kingdom of the Golden Horde, extending from the Urals and the Caspian Sea to the mouth of the Danube. About 1272 the Tatars of Russia embraced Mohammedanism, became its fanatical preachers, and on this account refrained from mixing with the Russians. At the death of George II his dominions, devastated and pillaged, were inherited by Yaroslaff (1238-46), who was forced to traverse the whole of Russia and Asia to pay homage to the Grand Khan of the Tatars, Oktai. He died of want in the desert, and was succeeded by his son Alexander Nevski, whose name is famous in the national history of Russia on account of his victories over the Teutonic Knights, the Swedes, and the Finns (1246-52). Following a policy of toleration the very opposite of the Turkish policy towards Christian peoples, the Tatars respected the dynasties and the political institutions of the Russian principalities. Suzdal, Galicia, Volhynia, Tchernigoff, Polotsk, and Novgorod continued to live and to govern themselves as in the past. The Russians were not tatarized, chiefly because differences of religion raised insurmountable barriers between them and the Tatars. The khans of the Golden Horde limited themselves to requiring the external homage of the Russian princes, to acting as arbiters in their quarrels, to imposing a poll-tax, to exacting a military contingent, to reserving the right of investiture over them, and to forbidding them to carry on war without permission. This subjection of the Russians to the Tatars exercised a great influence on Russia. For several centuries the Russians had no contact with Western civilization, and were subjected more directly to the weakening influence of the Byzantine civilization. In their military, economic, and political organization the Russians adopted a great many Tartar institutions. The autocratic government of the Tatar helped to consolidate the autocracy of the Russian princes, which was derived from Byzantium. The Orthodox Russian Church grew in power under the rule of the Tatars, on account of the privileges and exemptions accorded to it. Monasteries were multiplied throughout Russia and through the donations of the faithful acquired enormous riches. On the other hand, there are Russian writers who believe that they discern Tatar influence in the condition of the women in Russia. Besides the Tatars, in the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries the Russians had to struggle in the western provinces against the aggressive ambition of the Lithuanians, the political union of which people had been established by Prince Mindvog, assassinated in 1263. The territorial expansion of the Lithuanians reached its culmination under Prince Gedimin (1315-40), who extended his conquests to Southern Russia, and subjected to his rule Grodno, Pinsk, Brest, Polotsk, Tchernigoff, Vladimir, and finally Kieff, which had entirely lost its prestige. At his death, his son Olgerd (1345-77) led his victorious armies into the territory of Novgorod, adding to his father's conquests Vitebsk, Mohileff, Bryansk, northern Novgorod, Kamenetz, and Podolia, and reached the shores of the Black Sea. He would have established his power at Moscow also, if the Teutonic Knights and the Poles had not opposed his ambitious projects. His successor Jagellon (1377-1434) married Hedwig, Queen of Poland, converted the Lithuanians to Catholicism, and established his capital at Cracow. But the conversion of the Lithuanians displeased the obstinate pagans and the members of the Orthodox Church, and these two united under the flag of Vitovt (1392-1430), upon whom Jagellon was obliged to confer the title of Grand Prince of Lithuania. Vitovt, like his predecessors, continued his conquests in Russia, and took and pillaged Smolensk. He also conceived the design of bringing the Tartar domination to an end, and in 1399 at the head of an enormous army of Lithuanians, Poles, and Russians, he gave battle to the Tatars, who routed him completely. Vitovt, however, was not disheartened. In 1410 with a large army of Poles and Lithuanians, to which 40,000 Tartars and 20,000 mercenaries were added, he assailed the army of the Teutonic Knights at Tannenberg, and, notwithstanding their desperate efforts, destroyed their power, while they left the flower of their order on the battlefield. C. The Principality and the Grand Princes of Moscow The name of Moscow appears for the first time in Russian chronicles in 1147. Its founder is said to have been Prince George Dolgoruki, who raised it from a humble village to a city that was destined to become the heart of the great Russian empire. In 1237 it was burned by the Tatars; but having arisen again under Prince George Danilovitch (1303-26), it began its political development. The means adopted for their aggrandizement are certainly not creditable to the princes of Moscow, who according to Rambaud, used intrigue, corruption, the purchase of consciences, servility toward the Tatars, assassination, and delation. George Danilovitch used the Tartars to destroy the power of the princes of Tver. He was assassinated in 1325 by Prince Demetrius of Tver, and Was succeeded by Ivan Kalita, who turned his efforts to transforming Moscow into the metropolis of Russia; he built the Cathedral of the Assumption (Uspenski Sobor) within the enclosure of the Kremlin; and he destroyed the power of the princely dynasty of Tver. His two sons, Simon the Superb (1340-53) and Ivan the Good-Natured (1353-59), continued the policy of their father, the former holding the Russian princes in submission and taking the title of Grand Prince of all the Russians; and the latter showing himself gentle towards his rivals and towards the Lithuanians when they attempted to encroach upon his rights; he was supported by faithful and intelligent men, among them the metropolitan Alexis, who preserved the throne for Demetrius Ivanovitch, son of Ivan. Demetrius Ivanovitch made the first decisive step towards liberating Russia from the Tartar yoke. After carrying on war with the princes of Suzdal, of Tver, and of Ryazan, he crossed the Don, with a large army and the contingents of many Russian princes subject to him, and on the plain of Kulikovo inflicted a bloody defeat upon Mamaï, Khan of the Golden Horde, who had led against the Russians an immense multitude of Tatars, Turks, Polovcy, Tcherkeesi, etc. His victory won him the epithet of Donskoi, but his success was not lasting, for the Tatars, assisted by Tokhtamitch, one of the generals of Timur, laid waste Moscow, Vladimir Mozhaisk, and Yurieff. At the death of Demetrius the Grand Principality of Moscow and Vladimir was inherited by Vassili-Dmitrievitch (1389-1425), was extended by new conquests in the territory of Tchernigoff, Vyatka, and Novgorod, and thereafter consolidated more and more its supremacy over the Tatars, whose empire was wasting away in consequence of internal quarrels. During the reign of his successor, Vasili the Blind (1425-62), a civil war that lasted twenty years desolated the Grand Principality of Moscow, the political development of which was thereby arrested. Nevertheless Muscovite supremacy was established over Novgorod and Ryazan. From 1449 Vasili had associated with himself in the government his son Ivan who was destined to acquire the epithets of "Great" and "Consolidator of Russia". Ivan the Great (1402-1505) found the territory that he inherited at the death of his father surrounded by the Tatar conquests, the Lithuanian Empire, and Sweden. Among the first events of his reign should be mentioned the complete submission of Novgorod to his rule: the ancient and free city retained only the name of republic; in 1495 Ivan destroyed its commerce also, and reduced it to the status of a city of his dominions. At the same time Russian armies were penetrating the north of Russia, conquering the Province of Perm and the city of Vyatka, marching to the shores of the Petchora, and reaching the coast of the White Sea. The Principality of Tver was annexed to that of Moscow, as were also the cities of Bielozersk, Dmitroff, Mozhaisk, and Serpukhoff. The political unity of Russia was being consolidated in proportion as the Tatar empire of the Golden Horde crumbled. In 1480 two great armies of Russians and Tatars almost decided the fate of Russia in open battle. In 1487 the troops of Moscow entered the Tatar city of Kazan, and took its king, Alegam, prisoner to Moscow. Kazan, however, did not become Russian territory, for Ivan the Great rightly feared that a general uprising of the Mussulman Tatars would follow if he annexed it. From 1492 Ivan turned his arms against Lithuania. The Lithuanians were supported by the Poles, the Teutonic Knights, and the Mussulman Tatars; but many princes among the vassals of the Grand Prince of Lithuania passed to the side of the Muscovites. The war was prolonged for many years, until a truce was brought about by the mediation of Pope Alexander VI and the King of Hungary in 1503. The most important event of the reign of Ivan the Great was his marriage to Sophia Palæologus, daughter of Thomas Palæologus, a brother of the last Emperor of Byzantium. This marriage was concluded by Paul II and Cardinal Bessarion, and served as the pretext for the tsars to declare themselves heirs of the Byzantine basileis, to take as their arms the two-headed eagle, and to assume the rôle of defenders and champions of the Orthodox Church. With Sophia Palæologus there went to Moscow the surviving representatives of Byzantine culture, and some Italian artists, among whom were the famous architects Aristotele Fioravanti and Pietro Antonio. Ivan the Great then entered into relations with Venice. Through the Princess Sophia, Humanism and the Renaissance flourished for a period at the court of Moscow. Under Basil Ivanovitch (1505-33), Muscovite Russia grew by the annexation of the Republic of Pskof, the Principalities of Ryazan and Novgorod-Seversk, and the Territory of Smolensk. The political prestige of Russia increased in Europe, and Basil Ivanovitch had diplomatic relations with the pope, France, Austria, Sweden, Turkey, and Egypt. The court of Moscow displayed Asiatic luxury in its feasts. The Tatars, who had again invaded Russian territory, and had reached the walls of Moscow, were met by new campaigns against Kazan (1523 and 1524), which, however, were not successful. In 1533 Ivan IV, a son of Basil, ascended the throne. Posterity has given to him the name of "Terrible" on account of his cruelty, although noted Russian historians like Soloveff and Zabielin have sought to clear his memory and to proclaim his great services to Russia. After freeing himself from the tutelage of the boyars, who lorded it according to their pleasure, in 1547 as heir of the House of Palæologus he caused himself to be crowned at Moscow as Tsar of all the Russias, conquered Kazan (1552), and Astrakhan (1556), subjugated the Tchermisi, Mordvy, Tchiuvashi, Votiaki, Bashkiri, and Nogais; he fought with varied fortunes against the Teutonic Order in Livonia and against the Poles, and through the daring exploits of Gregory Strogonoff and of the Cossack Irmak Timotheevitch he conquered Siberia. He had the misfortune of seeing his capital burned by the Tatar Khan Devlet Ghirei, and of killing his eldest son Ivan in one of his violent excesses of rage. He died in 1584 and was succeeded by his son Feodor (1584-98), who was born the son of Ivan and Anastasia Romanoff. He married Irene, sister of Boris Godunoff, who coveted the throne, and who became the true tsar in the reign of Feodor. The young prince Demetrius, son of the seventh wife of Ivan the Terrible, was relegated to the city of Uglitch. To the advice of Boris Godunoff also were due the two most important measures of this reign, the institution of serfdom, and of the patriarchate. To satisfy his thirst for power, Godunoff had the young brother of Feodor, the Tsarevitch Demetrius, and his relations put to death, and made the city of Uglitch pay for having given them hospitality. At the death of Feodor, Boris Godunoff, whose name was to be immortalized by the beautiful tragedy of Pushkin, placed the crown of the tsars upon his own head. He worked to introduce Western civilization into Moscow, and died in 1605. He wished to leave the crown to his son, Feodor Borisovitch; in 1603 however a man, whose identity is still shrouded in mystery, had presented himself to the court and to the Polish nobility as the son of Ivan the Terrible, the young Demetrius whom Boris Godunoff had attempted to murder, but whom his relatives had saved. With the aid of the Polish nobility, Demetrius, known to posterity as Pseudo-Demetrius, succeeded in entering Moscow, where Feodor Borisovitch and his mother paid with their lives for the short reign of Boris Godunoff. But a year later Demetrius died, the victim of a conspiracy, at the head of which was Prince Vasili Shuiski, who then ascended the throne of the tsars. Russia then entered upon a period of troubles (smutnoe vremia) that nearly brought about its political dissolution. New false Demetriuses appeared. The serfs and the peasants, led by Bolotnikoff, menaced Moscow. The nobles wished to drive the usurper Vasili from the throne. The Poles fomented troubles, and sought to establish their supremacy at Moscow. A Polish army under the orders of the waywode John Sapieha and of Lissowski for sixteen months besieged the shrine of the Holy Trinity and St. Sergius, forty miles from Moscow. But the monks defended themselves so resolutely that they compelled the enemy to raise the siege. Tsar Vasili Shuiski called the Swedes to his assistance, but the King of Poland, Sigismund III, casting aside all pretence, entered upon the conquest of Russia. The inhabitants of Moscow revolted, and compelled Shuiski to abdicate (1610). Menaced from many quarters, they elected Vladislaff, son of Sigismund, to be their tsar, on condition that he would adopt the Orthodox religion. The Polish troops, commanded by the hetman Tolkiewski, entered Moscow. But soon a popular revolt that cost thousands of lives obliged the Polish army to shut itself up in the Kremlin and to set fire to the capital. Sigismund was victorious: Smolensk, after a heroic defence, fell into his hands, and the Tsar Vasili Shuiski died at Warsaw. Russia seemed destined to disappear as a political entity. The people, however, saved her: a butcher of Nizhni-Novgorod instigated his fellow-citizens to give their wealth and their sons to free their country from the foreigner; and the Russian monks and bishops were ardent supporters of this struggle for the defence of Russian orthodoxy and of the power of the tsars. A Russian army was formed at Yaroslaff, and under the command of Prince Demetrius Pozharski marched against Moscow, where the Polish troops, decimated by hunger, capitulated at the moment when Sigismund was drawing near with an army to assist them (1612). A great national assembly convened at Moscow, and elected Michael Romanoff tsar. He was a son of the metropolitan Filarete, who was held a prisoner at Marienburg by the Poles. Under the new tsar (1613-45), Russia strove to heal its wounds. With Sweden in 1617 the peace of Stolbovo was concluded; but the Poles continued their hostilities, and Vladislaff was ready to march on Moscow. In 1618 however a truce was concluded. Filarete then returned to Moscow, where he became the counsellor of his son, and was associated with him in the empire. At the death of Sigismund III (1632), Vladislaff, having ascended the throne of Poland as Wladislaw IV, took up arms against Russia once more. The war, which was fought with varied fortunes, terminated in the truce of Deulin, by the terms of which Wladislaw recognized Michael Romanoff as tsar. The successor of Michael was Alexis Mikhailovitch (1645-76). His first action was directed against Poland, which, by its political and religious persecution of the Orthodox of Little Russia, had lost the good will of the Cossacks and of the lower classes. A Cossack leader, Bogdan Khelmnicki, raised the banner of revolt, and after several battles the tsar also took up arms in 1654. The Russian armies marched against the Poles, and in a short time invaded the whole of Little Russia and Lithuania. A treaty of peace which was concluded in 1667 made Russia mistress of Kieff, Smolensk, and the right bank of the Dnieper, but re-established Polish rule in Lithuania. This peace was made necessary by the Cossacks, who, unwilling to submit to authority, menaced the interior tranquillity of Russia. One of them, Stenko Razin, put himself at the head of a large band of Cossacks of the Don, passed to the region of the Volga, caused peasants, Tatars, Tchiuvashi, Mordvy, and Tchermisi to revolt, and desolated eastern Russia. His hordes were routed by George Bariatinski near Simbirsk, and he was decapitated at Moscow in 1670. Under the Tsar Feodor Alexievitch (1672-82) the Ukraine and the territory of the Zaporoghi Cossacks definitively became Russian possessions, by the treaty of 1681 with Turkey. D. Reforms of Peter the Great Modern Russia and its political greatness as a European state really begin with Peter the Great. Without him Russia would probably have remained an Asiatic power. Peter I the Great was the son of Alexis Mikhailovitch and his second wife Natalia Naryshkin. He was proclaimed tsar at the age of nine years, and his youth was threatened by the gravest perils. The ambitious Sophia, daughter of Alexis Mikhailovitch and his first wife, Maria Miloslavska, taking advantage of the minority of Peter, succeeded, by intrigue and cunning beyond her age, in holding the regency of the empire for seven years (1682-89), until she was driven from the throne and locked up in the Devici monastery, while her favourites and partisans died on the scaffold or in exile. Sole and absolute sovereign, Peter the Great wished to begin his reign with some great victory. Accordingly, he rapidly built a fleet, with which he compelled the capitulation of Azoff in 1696. This splendid success gave him great prestige. In 1697 he undertook a journey to Western Europe, where he visited Holland, England, and Austria, becoming a mechanic, visiting industrial establishments, and taking workmen and engineers into his employ, while at the same time he busied himself with politics. This voyage to Europe had disastrous effects upon internal order in Russia, for the clergy and the lower classes, with superstitious terror, believed that it would establish foreign influence in Russia, that is to say, would destroy the ancient religious customs of the land. The lower classes considered it sacrilegious to shave off the beard, just as the raskolniki, who were very numerous, regarded it as a crime to use tobacco. Both of these customs Peter the Great had brought to Russia; reports were spread that he was not of royal birth, but was the child of adultery, and that he was the Antichrist who was to be born in those times. Peter the Great returned to Moscow, and quenched the revolution in blood, causing a thousand people to be put to death amid tortures in a single week, and not hesitating to wield the axe himself to decapitate rebels. Two other military revolts, that of the Don Cossacks (1706) and the Cossacks of the Ukraine, which was brought about by the hetman Mazeppa, who had allied himself to Charles XII of Sweden, were crushed by Peter's generals. The conquest of the Baltic led Peter the Great to make war on Sweden. The Russian troops were defeated in 1700 under the walls of Narva; but in. 1701 Prince Seremeteff inflicted a severe defeat upon the Swedish general Slipenbach, near Ehresfer, and a more severe one in 1702 near Hümmelsdorf, after which he took the fortress of Nienschantz which the Swedes had built at the mouth of the Neva. Narva fell into the hands of Peter the Great in 1704. In 1708 Charles XII of Sweden invaded Russia at the head of an army of 43,000 veterans, and took the way to Moscow through Lithuania; but a most severe winter and the want of provisions decimated his troops. On 8 July, 1709, under the walls of Pultowa, a Russian army of 60,000 men attacked the Swedes, who were reduced to extremes by hunger and sickness. Both sides fought heroically, but the Swedish army was destroyed and Charles XII was compelled to seek refuge in Turkey. By this victory, which has remained famous in history, Russia raised her flag on the shores of the Baltic, while Sweden fell from the rank of a great European power. Crowned with the halo of victory, Peter the Great displayed greater energy in his purpose to combine Western civilization with the ancient Russian life, preserving however those Russian customs that seemed to him to be useful to his empire. For example, the serfdom of the agricultural classes was sanctioned by laws, and all the peasants were bound to fixed residence and to per capita taxation. The inhabitants of the cities were divided into guilds, according to trades or professions; foreigners were authorized to carry on commerce and to devote themselves to the industries in Russia; women were taken from their isolation and from the retirement of the terem; he instituted the directing senate to take the place of the ancient duma of the boyars; the provincial administration was reorganized; many abuses of the bureaucracy were rooted out; the army received a European organization, and was increased to 210,000 men; the ancient organization of the Russian Church was destroyed by the institution of the Holy Synod; religious tolerance was established; commerce and industry were developed; a great number of schools and printing-houses were founded; and at the mouth of the Neva he built his capital, St. Petersburg, the "window opened towards the West"; the head of Russia, as Moscow is its heart. And in order to reduce so many reforms to practice in the face of the hostility, sometimes open, sometimes covert, of his subjects, Peter the Great used all the resources of his iron will, all the arms that autocracy placed in his hands, not excluding violence and cruelty. The work of these reforms did not take the mind of the great reformer from his military enterprises. In 1711 he crossed the Dniester at the head of 30,000 men, bent on the conquest of Constantinople; but an army of 200,000 Turks and Tatars on the banks of the Pruth compelled him to abandon his ambitious dream and to restore Azoff to Turkey. In 1713 the Russian fleet, under the direction of Admiral Apraxin and of Peter the Great himself, took possession of Helsingfors and Abo in Finland, and drew near to Stockholm. After a pause of a few years, war with Sweden was renewed in 1719 and continued until the peace of Nystad put an end to it in 1721, securing to Russia the possession of Livonia, Esthonia, Ingermanland, a part of Finland, and a part of Karelia. In the following year Russian troops marched to the frontier of Persia, invaded Daghestan, Ghilan, and Mazandaran, and took possession of Derbent. But the military and political successes of Peter the Great were embittered by domestic tragedies. His first wife, Eudocia Lapukhina, was opposed to the reforms, and was therefore compelled to lock herself up in the Pokrovski monastery at Suzdal. The son of Eudocia, Alexis, held to his mother's ideas, and hated his father's reforms. He left Russia while Peter the Great was travelling in the West, and sought refuge at Vienna and Naples. Having been discovered, he returned to St. Petersburg, where his father subjected him to torture, and thereby discovered that Alexis and his mother were the soul of a conspiracy to destroy Peter's work. Eudocia was beaten with rods; the counsellors and partisans of Alexis died amid the most dreadful sufferings; and Alexis himself, having been subjected to torture several times, died in consequence, or was executed, in 1718. By his ukase in 1723, Peter the Great declared Catherine empress. She was a native of Livonia who, after being the mistress of Sheremeteff and Menshikoff, had become the mistress of Peter, who had married her in 1712. The great reformer died in 1725. However historians may differ in their opinions of him, Peter was certainly the founder of modern Russia. E. The Successors of Peter the Great The brief reigns of Catherine I (1725-27) and of Peter II Alexeievitch, son of Alexis and Charlotte of Brunswick, offer nothing of interest, except the struggle for political influence between the Menshikoffs and the Dolgorukis. At the death of Peter II, Anna Ivanovna, Duchess of Courland, became Empress of Russia, and an attempt by the aristocracy to establish a supreme council to limit the autocratic power cost the lives of its authors, among whom were several of the Dolgoruki. The empress surrounded herself with Germans; and among them, a Courlander of low extraction, named Biren, became very influential. On his account the reign of Anna Ivanovna received the name of Bironovshshina. Very many nobles paid with their lives for the antipathy they felt towards the new regime, and measures of public finance reduced the peasants to extreme poverty, while Anna indulged in unheard-of luxury, and her court distinguished itself for its immorality and dissipation. At the death of Anna in 1740 the regency passed to Anna Leopoldovna of Mecklenburg, who continued the German regime and gave to Elizabeth, daughter of Peter the Great, timely occasion to drive her from the throne and to imprison her with her husband and her children at Kholmogory, while Elizabeth proclaimed herself Empress of all the Russias. Elizabeth Petrovna (1756-1762), notwithstanding her dissolute habits, continued the traditions of her father: the senate was re-established; industry was developed; great impulse was given to commerce; the severity of corporal punishment was mitigated; the University of Moscow was established; St. Petersburg was embellished with splendid buildings designed by the Italian architect Rastrelli; the Academy of Sciences, founded by Peter the Great and Catherine I, began its period of fruitful literary work; while the Russian armies conquered southern Finland and weakened the power of Prussia, which suffered the disasters of Grossjägernsdorf (1757) and Kunersdorf (1759). In 1760 the armies of Elizabeth made their triumphal entrance into Berlin. Elizabeth was succeeded by Peter III, a son of Anna Petrovna and Charles Frederick, Duke of Holstein. His reign was very short, for his ambitious consort, Princess Sophia of Anhalt-Zerbst, who became celebrated under the name of Catherine II, compelled him to abdicate, leaving her to reign alone in 1762. The first great events of her government were the war with the Turks and the partition of Poland. Against the Turks, Catherine sent Prince Galitzin, who in 1769 near Chotin defeated a Turkish army three times larger than his own. In the following year (1770), Rumiantzeff obtained a still more decisive victory at Kagul, where with 17,000 Russians he defeated a Turkish army of 150,000 men. In 1771 Prince Dolgoruki took possession of the whole of the Crimea, from which he drove the Turks. At the same time, the Russian Baltic fleet annihilated the Turkish fleet in the roads of Chios and in the port of Tchesme. Hostilities were resumed in 1772, and culminated in the treaty of Kutchuk-Kainardii (1774), by which the independence of the Tatars of the Crimea was recognized, while Azoff, Kinburn, and the strongholds of the peninsula were ceded to Russia, which received a war indemnity of 4,500,000 roubles. The treaty of 15 Jan., 1772, between Russia and Prussia sanctioned the iniquitous division of Poland, which was desired by Frederick II and was hastened by the policy of the Polish nobility and, to a great extent, of the clergy. By this division Russia added to her dominions White Russia (Polotsk, Vitebsk, Orsha, Mohileff, Mstislavl, and Gomel), with 1,600,000 inhabitants; Austria received eastern Galicia and Ruthenia (or Red Russia), with 2,500,000 inhabitants; and Prussia received the provinces of western Prussia (except Thorn and Danzig), with 900,000 inhabitants. To these victories and conquests Catherine added her efforts to give to Russia a good internal government: she established a commission, a species of national representation of the different peoples of Russia, to frame a new code of laws (1766-68); she suppressed the revolt of Emilius Pugatcheff, a Raskolnik Cossack, who, pretending to be Peter III, escaped from his butchers, carried fire and sword through the region of the Volga, stirred the serfs and the Cossacks to revolt, and massacred many nobles (1773); by a ukase in 1775 she divided Russia into fifty governments, and the governments into districts; she reorganized the administration of justice, and established a better apportionment of the rights and privileges of the various social classes; she secularized the property of the clergy, and founded at Moscow the Vospitatelnyi dom for orphans, gave efficient aid to the literary movement of her age, and became famous also as a writer; she corresponded with learned Europeans (especially with the French Encyclopædists), promoted the arts, and enriched the museums. Meanwhile skilful generals, among whom was Catherine's favourite, Potemkin, added new glories to the military history of Russia. Gustavus III of Sweden, notwithstanding the naval victory of Svenska-Sund (9 July, 1790), was unable to take land from Russia. Rumiantzeff, Potemkin, Suvaroff, and Soltikoff, one after another, defeated the Turkish armies, took Otchakoff and Ismail by assault, and compelled Turkey, at the Peace of Jassy (1792), to make new cessions of territory (Otchakoff and the coast between the Bug and the Dnieper) and to grant independence to the principalities of the Danube. Under Catherine II there took place the third Partition of Poland, which the heroism of Kosciuszko was not able to avert. By this partition Russia added Volhynia, Podolia, Little Russia, and the remainder of Lithuania to her empire (1795). Catherine died 17 Nov., 1796, at the age of 67 years. Thanks to her policy and to the victories of her generals she had greatly increased the territory of Russia, extending its frontiers to the Niemen, the Dniester, and the Black Sea. Paul I (1796-1801) at first followed a policy of peace; he introduced wise economic reforms, and re-established the principle of succession to the throne in the male line. But the French Revolution compelled him to enter an alliance with Turkey, England, and Austria against France. The Russian troops, under the orders of Rimsky-Korsakoff, entered Switzerland, and under Suvaroff they marched into upper Italy. The campaign was not a successful one for the Russians, but their retreat under Suvaroff through the Alps, where they were shut in by the French armies (1799), has remained famous. Paul I was assassinated by a palace conspiracy on the night of 23-24 March, 1801, and Alexander I (1801-25) ascended the throne. The new emperor took part in the epic struggle of Europe against Napoleon. On 2 Dec., 1805, was fought the battle of Austerlitz, which cost Russia the flower of her army and very nearly the life of Alexander himself. On 6 Feb., 1807, at Eylau, the Russian troops under Bennigsen, after a bloody battle in which they lost 26,000 men killed and wounded, were compelled to retreat. On 25 April, 1807, Russia and Prussia signed the convention of Bartenstein, by which those two powers became allied against France; and on 14 June of the same year the decisive defeat of Bennigsen at Friedland led Alexander to conclude with Napoleon the treaty of Tilsit, which was ratified 12 Oct., 1808, at Erfurt. At peace with France, Russia turned her arms against Turkey, whose armies were defeated at Batynia by Kamenski (1810), and at Slobodsia by Kutuzoff (1811). The congress of Bukarest (1812) insured to Russia the possession of Bessarabia. At the same time Russia was at war with Persia. The Polish question and the Russian national sentiment, which was excited to a high degree against the French, brought about the great war between Russia and France, a war that led to the ruin of the Napoleonic empire. The French army, consisting of 600,000 men of the various European nationalities, crossed the Russian frontiers, entered Vilna, and on 18 Aug., 1812, fought the Russians in a bloody battle at Smolensk. The battle of Borodino was fought on 7 Sept., and cost the Russians 40,000 men, while the French lost 30,000. On 14 Sept. Napoleon entered Moscow to the sound of the Marseillaise. The city was set on fire. On the other hand an exceptionally severe winter set in. After a stay of thirty-five days at Moscow, Napoleon began the retreat, during which he was obliged to defend himself, not only against the regular Russian troops, but also against the Cossacks and the peasants in search of booty. Between 26 and 29 Nov., on the right bank of the Beresina, near Studienka, 40,000 men of the Grand Army held 140,000 Russians in check, and with Napoleon succeeded in making a safe retreat. On 30 Dec., after Homeric struggles, Marshal Ney recrossed the Niemen with the remnant of the army. The Grand Army of Napoleon had left 330,000 men killed and wounded in Russia. Russia had repelled the invader from her soil, and on 28 Feb., 1813, allied herself to Prussia by the Treaty of Kalish. The military genius of Napoleon and his victories were unable to save his throne. On 31 March, 1814, Alexander I and the allied armies entered Paris. The Congress of Vienna (1815) placed the Kingdom of Poland again under the sceptre of the Tsars, and withdrew that unhappy nation from the number of the free peoples. Its autonomy, however, remained to it under Alexander I, who also organized Finland as an independent grand duchy. That prince had a mind that was open to Liberal ideas, which found a convinced promoter in the minister Speransky (1806-12); but the intrigues of Speransky's enemies undermined the influence that he exercised with Alexander, and his place was taken by Araktcheyeff, a man whose name in Russia is synonymous with blind reaction and ferocity. The reformist policy of Speransky ceased, and measures of the severest intolerance were adopted in politics, and even in the sciences and literature. Alexander I was becoming more and more of a mystic, when death overtook him at Taganrog on 1 Dec., 1825. The popular imagination transformed him into a legendary hero, into a sovereign who, to expiate his faults, adopted the garb of a muzhik, and lived and died unknown among his most humble subjects. Alexander was succeeded on 24 Dec., 1825, by Nicholas I, third son of Paul I. The beginning of his reign was marked by a revolution that broke out in December, and brought to its authors the name of Dekabristi or Decembrists. The most cultured and eminent men of Russia were engaged in this conspiracy, among them Pestel, Ryleeff, Muravieff-Apostol, and Bestuzheff-Riumin, who sought to establish a constitutional regime. Nicholas was most severe. The Decembrists ended their lives in Siberia or on the scaffold. They are regarded as the most illustrious martyrs of liberty in Russia. In his domestic policy Nicholas I continued the work of his predecessors with regard to the codification of the Russian laws. In 1830 there appeared the "Complete Collection of Russian Laws"; in 1838 the "Collection of Laws in Force", and in 1845 the penal code. The work of canal-making was continued, and the first railways in Russia were built; but every literary or political manifestation of Liberal ideas found in Nicholas I a fierce and inexorable adversary. In his foreign policy Nicholas continued the war with Persia, which by the treaty of 22 Feb., 1828, was compelled to cede the Provinces of Erivan and Nakhitchevan, to pay a war indemnity, and to grant commercial concessions. The Russian fleet, together with the French and the English fleets, took part in the Battle of Navarino (20 Oct., 1827), in which the Turkish fleet was destroyed, and by which the independence of Greece was established. Russia continued the war against Turkey in 1828 and 1829, until the Treaty of Adrianople (1829) secured to her the gains which she expected from her victories: the acquisition of Turkish territory and commercial advantages. After a series of military expeditions, the Khan of Khiva finally became a vassal of the tsar (1854). The Polish insurrection of 1830, which was desired by the people rather than by the cultured and leading classes, put Poland and Lithuania at the mercy of fire and sword in 1830 and 1831, and cost Poland her autonomy, brought on her the policy of russianization, and led to the exile of thousands of victims to Siberia. Austria and Germany gave to Russia their moral support in her severe repression of the Polish revolution, which on the other hand found many sympathizers in France. Nicholas I was the most determined enemy of the European revolution of 1848. In 1849 the Russian army suppressed the Hungarian revolution, and saved the throne of Francis Joseph. In 1853 the question of the Holy Places, the antagonism of France and Russia in the East, and the ambition of Nicholas for a Russian protectorate over all the Orthodox states of the Balkans brought about the war between Russia and Turkey, and in 1854 the Crimean War. Turkey, England, and France, and later Piedmont allied themselves against Russia. The allied fleets burned or bombarded the maritime strongholds of Russia, and in 1854 the allied armies invaded the Crimea, where on 20 Sept. the battle of the Alma opened to them the way to Sebastopol. The Russians had prepared to make a desperate defence of that city, under one of the most daring and talented generals of the Russia of our day, Todleben. But the fortunes of the Crimean campaign now appeared disastrous for Russia. Nicholas I was heartbroken by it, and unable to withstand the blow that it dealt to his pride, he died of a broken heart 3 March, 1855, while the star of Russian power in the East waned. The first care of his successor, Alexander II (1855-1881), was to bring the Crimean War to an honourable termination, and to prevent the political and economic ruin of Russia. Sebastopol had fallen on 8 Sept., 1855. The war had cost Russia 250,000 men, and the Government had not funds to continue it. The Congress of Paris, on 25 Feb., 1856, obliged Russia to accept terms of peace by which all the efforts and sacrifices of Peter I, Catherine II, and Alexander I to establish their power at Constantinople came to naught. The Black Sea was opened to all nations, and Russia was refused the protectorate over Christians in the East. Alexander II understood that, to remedy the evil results of the Crimean War, it was necessary to establish great social reforms, and to curtail the power and limit the abuses of the bureaucracy. On 19 Feb., 1861, an imperial decree proclaimed the end of the serfdom of the rural classes, and restored to freedom 23,000,000 serfs. Important reforms were introduced into the administration of justice and that of the provincial governments; corporal punishment was abolished; the censorship of the Press was made less severe; foreigners were granted the same privileges enjoyed by Russians, and the privileges of the universities that Nicholas I had abolished were restored. By all of which Alexander II acquired the good will of his people, who gave to him the title of Tsar Liberator. Other reforms were intended to mitigate the painful conditions of the Poles, whom the iron hand of Nicholas I had despoiled of their autonomy. But the imprudence of the Nationalist parties provoked the new Polish insurrection of 1863, which, notwithstanding the pacific remonstrances of France Austria, and England, brought its deathblow to Polish free government, cost Poland thousands of victims, and transformed that land into a field open to all the abuses of russianization. The Polish language was officially replaced by the Russian. Finland on the contrary was confirmed in all its privileges by Alexander II, who was exceptionally favourable to the German nobility of the Baltic provinces. During the reign of Alexander II, Russia took an active part in the affairs of Asia and Europe. The Russian troops continued their slow, but persevering, invasion of Asia. The Kirghiz and the Turkomans became the vassals of Russia; the Khanates of Khokand and Samarkand were annexed to Russian territory, while those of Khiva and Bokhara were declared vassals; the influence of Russia over Persia was firmly established; the treaty of Tientsin (1858), and that of Peking (1860), secured to Russia the possession of all the left bank and of part of the right bank of the Amur; in all, 800,000 sq. miles. In 1867 Russia sold her American possessions to the United States. In 1875 Japan ceded the island of Sakhalin. In Europe, under the guidance of the imperial chancellor, Prince Alexander Gortchakoff, Russia recognized the unity of Italy, and remained indifferent to the aggrandizement of Prussia and the crushing of France in 1870. On 21 Jan., 1871, she recognized the German Empire. As the price of her neutrality, Russia demanded the abrogation of the clause of the treaty of 1856 which limited her military power on the Black Sea. A convention with Turkey (18 March, 1872) stipulated that Russia and Turkey could erect fortifications on the coasts of the Black Sea, and maintain fleets on its waters. The insurrection of Bosnia and Herzegovina, the war of Servia and Montenegro against Turkey (1876), the Bulgarian massacres (1875), and the victory, and later the defeat, of the Servian army at Djunis (1876) provoked a new crisis in the affairs of the East. Russia took up arms again in defence of the Slavs of the Balkans. In April, 1878, the Russian armies crossed the Pruth and entered Rumania. The war was a bloody one. The Turkish generals, Suleiman Pasha, Osman Pasha, and Mukhtar Pasha, fought with great bravery; but the tenacity of the Russians, their enthusiasm for a war that seemed sacred to them, from the national and from the religious point of view, and the valour and military genius of the Russian generals, especially of Todleben and Skobeleff, triumphed. The most important episodes of the campaign were the repeated battles in the Shipka Pass (16 Aug.-17 Sept.) and the taking of Plevna (10 Dec.), when the Russians themselves expressed their admiration of the heroism of Osman Pasha and his troops. The Rumanians, Servians, and Montenegrins fought beside the Russians, and with equal valour. From victory to victory the Russians marched with rapid strides along the road to Constantinople, and established themselves at San Stefano. Russia's ideal would have been attained if England had not stood in her way. On 3 March, 1878, the Russian ambassador, Ignatieff, signed with the Sublime Porte the Treaty of San Stefano, by which the Balkan States were organized. Russia received a war indemnity of 310,000,000 roubles, the Armenian districts of Batum, Kars, Ardahan, and Bayazid, and the part of Bessarabia that was united to the Danubian Principalities in 1856. But the advantages that Russia obtained by the Treaty of San Stefano were revoked in great measure by the Treaty of Berlin (13 July, 1878). The map of the Balkans was remodelled so as to make Russia lose the influence that she had acquired over the Balkan States by her victories, while she saw the appearance in the East of a dangerous competitor, Austria, who had become the protector, and later the master, of Bosnia and Herzegovina. Russia surrendered Bayazid, and the course of the Danube from the Iron Gates to the Black Sea was declared neutral and closed to ships of war. The victories obtained over the Turks had not been sufficient to destroy the germs of revolution in Russia, fomented by the Nihulists. Alexander II was preparing to give a constitution to his people when the Nihilist plot of 13 March, 1881, put a tragic end to his life. He was succeeded by his son, Alexander III (1881-94). The constitutional projects of Alexander II were entirely abandoned; the counsellors of the tsar, and especially Ignatieff and Katkoff, bitter enemies of Liberalism, induced the emperor to give to the principle of autocracy his strongest sanction. This reign was marked by the terrible massacres of the Jews in 1881 and 1882; by the disorders of the universities in 1882 and 1887, which led the government to subject the universities to severe supervision; by the rigorous censorship of the Press; by the promulgation of a collection of laws that were intended to complete the work of liberation of the serfs and to better the economic condition of the rural classes and lastly, by the great economic and military development of Russia. The work of russianization was continued with activity, even with ferocity. The Caucasus lost its administrative autonomy; cruel and inhuman laws were framed against the Poles; the Jews were reduced to despair and hunger; the German Protestants of the Baltic provinces were treated like the Poles; and the autonomy of Finland lacked little of being destroyed by force. Alexander III continued with the greatest success the Russian invasion of Asia. Russian territory, notwithstanding the opposition of England, grew at the expense of Afghanistan, China, and Korea; the building of the Trans-Caspian Railway opened to Russia the strategic ways of Persia, Afghanistan, and India; the Trans-Siberian Railway was to endow Russia with an open sea, and to open a way of communication between Moscow and the Pacific Ocean. The influence of Russia in the Balkans waned under Alexander III. The severity of the court of St. Petersburg towards Prince Alexander of Battenberg, and towards the national sentiment of the Bulgarians, and the tenacity with which Stambuloff conducted the campaign against the Russian policy in his country, greatly diminished the gratitude and good will of the Bulgarians towards Russia. The most important event in the foreign relations of Russia during the reign of Alexander III was the understanding with France. Russia at first leaned towards Germany; but after the German conventions with Austria (1879 and 1882) and the formation of the Triple Alliance, she turned to France; for her friendly relations with this power Russia had also financial reasons, because she needed funds for the construction of her railways, especially the Trans-Siberian; and as the money market of Berlin had been closed to Russia by Bismarck, the French had lent her, in the years 1887, 1889, 1890, and 1891, more than 3,000,000,000 francs. In 1891 the French fleet, commanded by Admiral Gervais, visited Kronstadt, where the French sailors were received with an enthusiastic welcome. In June, 1893, a commercial treaty created more intimate relations between the two powers. F. The Reign of Nicholas II The successor of Alexander III is Nicholas II, born 6 May, 1868, and married 14 Nov., 1894, to the daughter of Louis IV, Grand Duke of Hesse, the Empress Alexandra Feodorovna. The reign of Nicholas II has been unfortunate for Russia. He was crowned at Moscow in May, 1896, in the presence of delegates of nearly all the civilized nations and of a special mission of the Holy See, at the head of which was Cardinal Agliardi; and a few days after his coronation, on the occasion of a feast given in his honour, a thousand people were crushed to death by crowding. In 1898 a convention between China and Russia placed Port Arthur under the control of the latter power for a space of twenty-five years, granted the right to connect that port with the Trans-Siberian Railway, and secured to the Russians a free way to the Pacific Ocean. By this convention Russia took a preponderant position in the Far East, and already contemplated the conquest of Korea, to the detriment of Japan. In 1896 China had already granted to Russia the right of way for the prolongation of the Trans-Siberian Railway as far as Mukden. The domestic policy, thanks especially to the inspirations of de Plehve and of Constantini Pobiedonostseff, was one of fierce repression and russianization. It was intended to crush the Polish element and to deprive Finland of its autonomy. To carry out this policy, General Bobrikoff was appointed governor of Finland. He fell in 1898 a victim of the exasperated patriotism of a student. The Jews especially were made objects of legal as well as illegal persecutions, which led to the massacres of Gomel and Kishineff in 1903. This policy of russianization brought about a renewal of the activities of the terrorists, who in 1901 and 1902 murdered the ministers of public instruction, Bogoliepoff and Sipiagin, and in 1904 de Plehve. In 1899 at the initiative of Nicholas II the conference of the Hague was convoked, to consider the question of disarmament and the maintenance of universal peace. How commercial this initiative was, Russia herself soon showed, for in 1904 she broke off diplomatic negotiations with Japan. The Japanese demanded that Russia should evacuate Manchuria and give up her project of conquering Korea. The war was fought with equal valour by both combatants on land and sea; but the Russians lost Port Arthur, were driven from Korea, and saw their fleet annihilated at Tsushima. Russia could have continued her disastrous war, but the growth of the revolution at home compelled her to consent to the proposals of peace that were made by President Roosevelt of the United States. On 16 Aug., 1905, there was concluded at Portsmouth, New Hampshire, U. S., a peace that was ratified on 1 Oct. of the same year. Meanwhile Russia was in the throes of the revolution, in Jan., 1905, the troops fired upon thousands of workmen who were making a demonstration and there were several hundred victims. In February the Grand Duke Sergius was torn to fragments by a bomb. A man-of-war of the Black Sea fleet mutinied: a military revolt broke out at Viborg. The tsar, to stop the revolutionary flood, in October granted a constitution by an imperial decree in which he proclaimed liberty of conscience, of the Press, and of association, re-established the ancient privileges of Finland, and promised to alleviate the conditions of the non-Russian subjects of the empire. On 27 April, 1906, the Duma, which consisted in great part of Liberal members, was opened. It lasted two months. The right of suffrage was limited; nevertheless, the second Duma, which lasted a hundred days, had a revolutionist and socialist majority. The government reformed the electoral laws, and in that way was able to secure the election of a Duma that was more in accord with its wishes, containing among its members forty-two priests and two bishops of the Orthodox Church. Notwithstanding the proclamation of liberty of conscience and of the Press, there was a return to the oH policy, recourse being had to the most severe methods of repression to put down revolutionary movements and the ferocious banditism of Poland and the Caucasus. Exceptional laws against the Poles and Finns were revived. From 1907 to 1911 the Russian Government, though constitutional in appearance, has endeavoured to strengthen its autocratic regime and to render illusory all its promises of constitutional liberty. During this period, the reins of government were in the strong and energetic hands of Peter Arkadevitch Stolypin, born at Srednikovo near Moscow, 1862, and governor of Saratoff in 1906. Appointed to the Ministry of the Interior 26 April, 1906, and premier on 8 July, 1906, he applied himself with unshaken purpose to re-establish internal order in Russia. In the beginning he seemed to be animated by Liberal sentiments, but pressure from the court party and on the other hand the crimes of the Terrorists led him to ally himself with that faction of the Duma which opposed the constitution as harmful to the solidarity of Russia. In internal politics he sought to limit the powers of the Duma, to maintain in all their vigour the laws against the Jews, to crush the obstinacy of the Finns by transforming the Government of Viborg into a Russian province and impeding in every way the Diet of Helsingfors, to suppress the Polish national movement by limiting the number of Polish deputies in the Zemstva of western Russia, and by dividing administratively the Province of Chelm from the Kingdom of Poland. In foreign politics Russia has suffered from its defeat in the war with Japan. The annexation of Bosnia and Herzogovina came near precipitating a conflict between Austria and Russia, almost involving all the Slavs of the Balkan states, but Austria's military superiority, in addition to the support of the German Emperor, induced Russian diplomacy to moderate its demands. In the meantime, Russia has been preoccupied in reorganizing its own military and naval forces, in efficaciously directing colonizations in Siberia, in penetrating tentatively into Persia, and in agitating its own political propaganda in the Austrian provinces of Galicia and Bukovina. The revolution seemed to have been suppressed when, in Sept., 1911, Stolypin, in the Imperial Theatre of Kieff, fell under the dagger of a Jewish lawyer called Bogroff. He expired exclaiming that he was always ready to die for the tsar. The tsar selected as his successor Kokovtzoff, an economist of European fame, who entertains the same political ideas as Stolypin and continues his methods of government. Geography and Statistics: — BUHLE, Versuch einer kritischen Literatur der russichen Geschichte (Moscow, 1810); Russkaja istoritcheskaja bibliografija (Russian Historical Bibliography) (St. Petersburg, 1861-72), 77; BESTUZHEFF-RIUMIN, Quellen und Litteratur zur russichen Geschichte von der ältesten Zeit bis 1825 (Mitau, 1876); IKONNIKOFF, Opyt russkoi istoriografii (Essay on Russian Historiography), t. I (1-2) (Kieff, 1891); t. II (1-2) (Kieff, 1908), a monumental work, of incalculable bibliographical value. HEYM, Versuch einer vollständigen geographisch-topographischen Encyklopädie des russischen Reichs (Göttingen, 1796); VSEVOLOJSKIJ, Dictionnaire géographique-historique de I'empire de Russie (2 vols., St. Petersburg, 1833); SEMENOFF, Dictionnaire géographique et statistique de l'empire de Russie (5 vols., St. Petersburg, 1863-1873); KEUCK AND STACKELBURG, Ortsverzeichniss von Russland (Leipzig, 1903); STRAHLENBERG, Description historique de l'empire russien (2 vols., Amsterdam, 1757); BÜSCHING, Neue Beschreibung des russischen Reichs (Hamburg, 1763); D'ANVILLE, L'empire de Russie (Paris, 1772); GEORGI, Beschreibung aller Nationen des russischen Reichs (3 vols., St. Petersburg, 1776-77); SONNTAG, Das russische Reich (2 vols., Riga, 1791-1792); COMEIRAS, Tableau général de la Russie moderne (2 vols., Paris, 1807); DE RAYMOND, Tableau historique, géographique, militaire et moral de l'empire de Russie (2 vols., Paris, 1812); SCHÄFFER, Beschreibung des russischen Reichs (Berlin, 1812); VON BRÖMSEN, Russland und das russische Reich (2 vols., Berlin, 1819); HASSEL, Vollständige und neueste Erdbeschreibung des russischen Reichs in Europa (Weimar, 1821); BULGARIN, Russland in historischer, statistischer, geographischer und litterarischer Beziehung (3 vols, Riga, 1839-41); POSSART, Das Kaiserthum Russland (Stuttgart, 1840); OLDEKOP, Geographie des russischen Reichs (St. Petersburg, 1842); VON REDEN, Das Kaiserreich Russland: statistischgeschichtliche Darstellung (Berlin, 1843); REYNELL, Russia as it is (London, 1854); LE DUC, La Russie contemporaine (Paris 1854); VÖLTER, Das Kaiserthum Russland in Europa, Asien und Amerika (Esslingen, 1855); SCHNITZLER, L'Empire des Tzars (Paris 1856); JOURDIER, Des forces productives, destructives et improductives de la Russie (Paris, 1860); BUSCHEN, Bevölkerung des russischen Kaiserreichs (Gotha, 1862); PAULY, Description ethnographique des peuples de la Russie (St. Petersburg, 1862); WAHL, The Land of the Czar (London, 1875); ROSKOSCHNY, Russland: Land und Leute (Leipzig, 2 vols., 1882-83); PYPIN, Istorija russkoi etnografii (St. Petersburg, 4 vols., 1891-1892); BIGELOW, The Borderland of Czar and Kaiser (London. 1895); KOWALEWSKY, La Russie à la fin du XIX siècle (Paris, 1900); SEMENOFF AND LAMANSKY, Polnoe geografitcheskoe opisanie nashego otestchestva (Complete geographical description of our country) (16 vols., St. Petersburg, 1899-1907); KUPCZANKO, Russland in Zahlen (Leipzig, 1902); BONMARIAGE, La Russie d'Europe: topographie, relief, géologie, hydrologie, climatologie, régions naturelles (Brussels, 1903); DRAGE, Russian Affairs (London, 1904): SCHLESINGER, Russland im XX. Jahrhundert (Berlin, 1908); BOUSTEDT, Das russische Reich in Europa und Asien (Berlin, 1910); works on the geography of the Russian Empire by JANSON (St. Petersburg, 1878); by VORNECKIJ (St. Petersburg, 1905); ELISIEEFF (Moscow, 1905), JANTCHIN (Moscow, 1905), LIMBERT (St. Petersburg, 1906), BIELOKH (St. Petersburg, 1907), BARANOFF (St. Petersburg, 1907), SPIRIDONOFF (St. Petersburg, 1907), MATTCHENKO (Kieff, 1907). and TIMKHOVSKIJ (Moscow, 1908). Commerce, Industry, Agriculture and Finance: — MARBAULT, Essai sur le commerce de Russie (Amsterdam, 1777); FREIBE, Ueber Russlands Handel, Industrie und Produkte (3 vols., St. Petersburg, 1796--98); PELTCHINSKY, De l'état des forces industrielles de la Russie (St. Petersburg, 1834); DEDE, Der Handel des russischen Reichs (Mitau, 1844); STEINHAUS, Russlands industrielle und commercielle Verhältnisse (Leipzig, 1852); TEGOBORSKI, Etudes sur les forces productives de la Russie (4 vols., Paris, 1852--55); ARISTOFF, Promyshlennost drevnei Rusi (The commerce of Ancient Russia) (St. Petersburg, 1866); MATTHÄI, Der auswärtige Handel Russlands (St. Petersburg, 1874); IDEM, Die Industrie Russlands in ihrer bisherigen Entwickelung und gegenwärtigen Zustande (2 vols., Leipzig, 1872--73); GROTHE, Die Hauptmomente der wirthschaftlichen Entwickelung Russlands (Berlin, 1884); KOWALEVSKY, The Industries of Russia (5 vols., St. Petersburg, 1893); TUGAN-BARANOWSKY, Geschichte der russischen Fabrik (Berlin, 1900); WITTSCHEWSKY, Russlands Handels, Zoll und Industriepotitik von Peter dem Grossen bis auf die Gegenwart (Berlin, 1905); ZWEIG, Die russische Handels-Politik seit 1877 (Leipzig, 1906); LANWICK, L'industrie dans la Russie méridionale, sa situation, son avenir (Brussels, 1907); SVIATLOVSKIJ, Professionalnoe dvizhenie v Rossii (Professional movement in Russia) (St. Petersburg, 1907); RUBINOFF, Russia's Wheat Trade (Washington, 1908); IDEM, Russian Wheat end Wheat Flour in European Markets (Washington, 1908); LOVJAGIN, Otetchestvoviedienie: prirodnyja uslovija, narodnoe khozjaistvo, duhovnaja kultura i gosudarstvennyi stroj rossiiskoi imperii (Notes of the fatherland: natural Conditions, national economy, intellectual culture, and political constitution of the Russian Empire) (St. Petersburg, 1901); MOREFF, Otcherk kommertcheskoi geografii i khozjaistvennoi statistiki Rossii (Essay on Russian commercial geography and economic statistics) (St. Petersburg, 1907); SOBOLEFF, Kommertcheskaja geografija Rossii (Moscow, 1907); STORCH, Der Bauernstand in Russland (St. Petersburg, 1850); Etudes sur la question de l'abolition du servage en Rassie (Paris, 1859); VON HAXTHAUSEN, Die landliche Verfassung Russlands (Leipzig, 1866); VON WURSTEMBERGER, Die gegenwärtiger Agrarverhältnisse Russlands (Leipzig, 1873); VON KEUSSLER, Zur Geschichte und Kritik des bäuerlichen Gemeindebesitzes in Russland (2 Vols., Riga, 1876, 1882--83); SEMENOFF, Krestjane v carstvovanie imperatricy Ekateriny II (The peasants during the reign of Catharine II) (2 vols., St. Petersburg, 1881, 1901--03); YERMOLOFF, Mémoire sur la production agricole de la Russie (St. Petersburg, 1878); SEMENOFF, Osvobozhdenie krestjan (The emancipation of the Russian peasants) (3 vols., St. Petersburg, 1889--1892); STEPNIAK, Der russische Bauer (Stuttgart, 1893); SIMKHOVITCH, Die Feldgemeinschaft in Russland (Jena, 1898); KATCHOROVSKIJ, Russkaja obshshina (The Russian mir) (Moscow, 1906); BRAUDE, Zur Agrarbewegung in Russland (Leipzig, 1907); MASSLOFF, Die Agrarfrage in Russland (Stuttgart, 1907); LJASHSHENKO, Otcherki agrarnoj evoljucii Rossii (Essays on the agrarian evolution of Russia) (St. Petersburg, 1908); MEYENDORFF, Otcherki pozemelnago zakonodatestva (Essay on the agrarian legislation of Russia) (St. Petersburg, 1909). HAGEMEISTER, Rozyskanija o finansakh drevnei Rossii (Researches on the finances of ancient Russia) (St. Petersburg, 1833); WOLOWSKI, Les finances de la Russie (Paris, 1864); RAFFALOVITCH, Les finances de la Russie depuis la dernière guerre d'Orient (Paris, 1883); LE CLERCQ, Les finances de l'empire de Russie (Amsterdam, 1886); KRÜGER, Russlands Finanzlage (Berlin, 1887); RAFFALOVITCH, Les finances de la Russie 1887--1889 (Paris, 1889); SKALKOWSKY, Les ministres des finances de la Russie (1802--1890) (Paris, 1891); HOSKIER, Les finances de la Russie (Paris, 1892); MOOS, Die Finanzen Russlands (Berlin, 1896); MIGULIN, Russkij gosudarstvennyi kredit (Public credit in Russia) (3 Vols., Kharkoff, 1899--1907); DE BLOCH, Les finances de la Russie au XIX ^e siècle (2 vols., Paris, 1899); GOLOVIN, Russlands Finanzpolitik und die Aufgaben der Zukunft (Leipzig, 1900); DAVIDSON, Die Finanzwirtschaft Russlands (Leipzig, 1902); FRIEDMANN, Die russischen Finanzen (Berlin, 1906). Army and Navy: — VON PLOTHO, Ueber die Entstehung, die Fortschritte und die gegenwärtige Verfassung der russischen Armee (Berlin, 1811); TANSKI, Tableau statistique, politique et moral du système militaire de la Russie (Paris, 1833); VON HAXTHAUSEN, Die Kriegsmacht Russlands in ihrer historischen, statistischen, ethnographischen und politischen Beziehung (Berlin,1852); Fr. tr. (Berlin, 1853); BRIX, Geschichte der alten russischen Heereseinrichtungen (Berlin, 1867); VON SARAUW, Die russische Heeresmacht (Leipzig, 1875); WEIL, Les forces militaires de la Russie (2 vols., Paris, 1880); VON DRYGALSKI, Die russische Armee in Kreig und Frieden (Berlin, 1882); VON STEIN, Geschichte des russischen Heeres (Hanover, 1885); DRYGALSKI, Beiträge zur Orientierung über die Entwicklungsgeschichte der russischen Armee von ihren Anfängen bis auf die neueste Zeit (Berlin, 1892); IDEM, Russland, Das Heer (Berlin, 1898); MOURIN, Essai historique sur l'armée russe (Paris, 1899); DRYGALSKI, Die Organisation der russischen Armee (Leipzig, 1902); CLARKE, Russia's Sea Power, Past and Present; or, the Rise of the Russian Navy (London, 1898); BRIDGE, History of the Russian Fleet During the Reign of Peter the Great (London, 1899); JANE, The Imperial Russian Navy, Its Past, Present, and Future (London, 1899); OGORODNIKOFF, Istoritcheskij obzor razvitjia i diejatel'nosti morskogo ministerstva, za sto liet ego sushshestvovanja (1802--1902) (An historical essay on the progress and work of the ministry of the Russian navy during the first century of its existence) (St. Petersburg, 1902); KLADO, Die russische Seemacht (Berlin, 1905). Customs, and Morality in Russia: — MICHALO, De moribus Tartarorum, Lithuanorum et Moschorum (Basle, 1615); I. C. M. D., The ancient and present staete of Muscowy (London, 1698); ALGAROTTI, Saggio di lettere sopra la Russia (Paris, 1763); MEINERS, Vergleichung des ältern, und neuen Russlands (2 vols., Leipzig, 1798); DE RECHBERG, Les peuples de la Russie (2 Vols., Paris, 1812--13); Russland, oder Sitten der Bewohner der sämmtlichen Provinzen dieses Reichs (Schweidnitz, 1828); DUPRÉ DE ST. MAURE, Observations sur les mœurs et les usages russes (3 vols., Paris, 1829); Ger. tr. (2 vols., Leipzig, 1830); Russlands inneres Leben (3 vols., Brunswick, 1846); TURGENIEFF, La Russie et les Russes (3 vols., Paris, 1847); VON HAXTHAUSEN, Etudes sur la sitution intérieure, la vie nationale, et les institutions rurales de la Russie (Hanover, 1847--48; 3 vols., Berlin, 1853): DOLGOROUKOFF La vérité sur la Russie (Paris, 1860); LESTRELLN, Les paysans russes, leurs usages, mœurs, caractère (Paris, 1861); GRENVILLE--MURRAY, The Russians of To-Day (Leipzig, 1878); LEROY-BEAULIEU, L'empire des Tzars et les Russes (3 vols., Paris, 1881, 1882, 1889); Ger. tr. (Berlin, 1884--90); KOVALEVSKY, Modern Customs end Ancient Laws of Russia (London, 1891); HEHN, De moribus Ruthenorum (Stuttgart, 1892); BRANDES, Charakterbilder aus Leben, Politik, Sitten Russlands (Leipzig, 1896); VON BRÜGGEN, Das heutige Russland (Leipzig, 1902); POINSARD, La Russie: le peuple et le gouvernement (Paris, 1904); ANFITEATROFF, Die Frau in den gesellschaftlichen Kreisen Russlands (Geneva, 1905); STERN, Geschichte der öffentlichen Sittlichkeit in Russland (2 vols., Berlin, 1908); HAUMANT, La culture française en Russie (Paris, 1910); SCHLESINGER, Land und Leute in Russland (Berlin, 1909). Form of Government and Political lnstitutions: — DE MÜNNICH, Ebauche pour donner une idée de la forme du gouvernement de l'empire de Russie (Copenhagen, 1774); PURGOLD, De diversis imperii rossici ordinibus eorumque juribus atque obligationibus (Halle, 1786); HUPEL, Versuch die Staatsverfassung des russischen Reichs darzustellen (2 vols., Riga, 1791--93); PELTSCHINSKI, Système de législation, d'administration, et de politique de la Russie en 1844 (Paris, 1845); WALCKER, Die gegenwärtige Lage Russlands (Leipzig, 1873); KOVALEWSKY, Le régime économique de la Russie (Paris, 1898); KORF, Istorija russkoi gosudarstvennosti (History of the form of government in Russia) (St. Petersburg, 1908); MUKHANOFF AND NABOKOFF, Pervaja gosudarstvennaja duma (The first Imperial Duma) (3 vols., St. Petersburg, 1907); SALKIND, Die russische Reichsduma, ihre Geschäftsordnung mit den Geschäftsordnungen anderer Volksvertretungen (Vienna, 1909); CHASLES, Le Parlement russe: son organisation, ses rapports avec l'empereur (Paris, 1910). General Political History of Russia; Collections of Documents; Chronicles and Manuals of General History; Ancient History; Monographs: — Rerum moscovitarum auctores varii: unum in corpus nunc primum congesti (Frankfort, 1600); SCHETELIG, Rerum russicarum scriptores aliquot (Hamburg, 1768); WICHMANN, Sammlung bisher ungedruckter kleiner Schriften zur älteren Geschichte und Kenntniss des russischen Reichs (Berlin, 1820); STARCZEWSKI, Historiœ ruthenici scriptores exteri sœculi XVI (2 vols., Berlin, 1841--42); TURGENIEFF, Historica Russiœ monumenta (Scripta varia e secreto archivo Vaticano) (St. Petersburg, 1842); THEINER, Monuments historiques relatifs aux règnes d'Alexis Mikhailovitch, Féodor III et Pierre le Grand (Rome, 1859); BODENSTÄDT, Beiträge zur Kenntniss des Staats- und Volkslebens in seiner historischen Entwickelung (2 vols., Leipzig, 1862); Documents servent à éclaircir l'histoire des provinces orientales de la Russie et de la Pologne (St. Petersburg, 1865); MENAGIOS, Répertoire des traités, conventions et autres actes principaux de la Russie avec les puissances étrangères depuis 1474 jusqu'à nos jours (Paris, 1874); MARTENS, Recueil des Traités et conventions conclus par la Russie avec les puissances étrangères (15 vols., St. Petersburg, 1874--1909); the numerous publications of the IMPERIAL HISTORICAL SOCIETY and of the ARCHEOGRAPHIC COMMISSION of St. Petersburg, and the tchtenja (lectures) of the SOCIETY OF RUSSIAN HISTORY AND ANTIQUITIES of Moscow; REUTENFELS, De rebus moschoviticis ad magnum Etruriœ ducem Cosmum tertium (Padua, 1680); LACOMBE, Histoire des révolutions de l'empire de Russie (Amsterdam, 1760); Ger. tr. (Leipzig, 1761); continued by JOACHIM (Halle, 1764); LOMONOSOFF, Histoire de la Russie depuis l'origine de la nation jusqu'à la mort du grand-duc Jaroslaw I (2 vols., Paris, 1769); SCHMIDT, Versuch einer neuen Einleitung in die russische Geschichte (2 vols., Riga, 1773--74); WAGNER, Geschichte des russischen Reiches von den ältesten bis auf die neuesten Zeiten (6 vols., Hamburg, 1810); SHSHERBATOFF, Russische Geschichte von den ältesten Zeiten (2 vols., Danzig, 1779); LEVESQUE, Histoire de Russie (5 vols., Paris, 1782); LE CLERC, Histoire physique, morale, civile, et politique de la Russie ancienne (3 vols., Paris, 1783--84); MERKEL, Geschichte des russischen Reichs (3 vols., Leipzig, 1795); LESUR, Des progrès de la puissance russe depuis son origine jusqu'au commencement du XIX siècle (Paris, 1812); EWERS, Geschichte der Russen (Dorpat, 1816); KARAMSIN, Histoire de l'empire russe (11 vols., Paris, 1819--26; 10 vols., Riga, 1820--33; 12 vols., Athens, 1856--59); WICKMANN, Chronologische Uebersicht de russischen Geschichte von der Geburt Peters des Grossen bis auf die neuesten Zeiten (2 vols., Leipzig, 1821--25); DE SÉGUR, Histoire de la Russie et de Pierre le Grand (Paris, 1829); STRAHL, Geschichte des russischen Staates (2 vols., Hamburg, 1832--39); HERRMANN, Geschichte des russischen Staates (4 vols., Hamburg, 1846-49); USTRIALOFF, Die Geschichte Russlands (2 vols., Stuttgart, 1840--43); DE CAULAINCOURT, Das russische Reich (Leipzig, 1854); Histoire pittoresque, dramatique, el caricaturale de la Sainte-Russie (Paris, 1854); DE GEREBTZOFF, Essai sur l'histoire de la civilisation en Russie (Paris, 1858); KOSTOMAROFF, Russische Geschichte in Biographien (Leipzig, 1888); KLEINSCHMIDT, Russlands Geschichte und Politik dargestellt in der Geschichte des russischen hohen Adels (Cassel, 1877); RAMBAUD, Histoire de la Russie (Paris, 1884, 1900); Ger. tr. (Berlin, 1886); VON GOLOWIN, Die geschichtliche Entwickelung des russischen Volkes (Leipzig, 1887); BRÜCKNER, Geschichte Russlands bis zum Ende des X VIII. Jahrhunderts (Gotha, 1896); KLEINSCHMIDT, Drei Jahrhunderte russischer Geschichte (Berlin, 1898); MUNRO, The Rise of the Russian Empire (London, 1899); MORFILL, A History of Russia from the Birth of Peter the Great to the Death of Alexander II (London, 1902); SKRINE, The Expansion of Russia (Cambridge, 1903); WALISZEWSKI, Les origines de la Russie moderne (Paris, 1904); PANTENIUS, Geschichte Russlands von der Entstehung des russischen Reiches bis zur Gegenwart (Leipzig, 1908); FRÄHN, Ibn-Foszlan's und anderer Araber Berichte über die Russen alterer Zeit (St. Petersburg, 1823); SCHÖLZER, Russiche Annalen in ihrer slavonischen Grundsprache (3 vols., Göttingen, 1802--09); the Chronicle of Nestor has been translated into French also, by LOUIS PARIS (2 vols., Paris, 1834-35), and by LÉGER (Paris, 1884); and into Latin by MIKLOSICH (Vienna, 1860); SCROETTGENIUS, De originibus russicis dissertationes (Leipzig, 1731); POTOCKI, Histoire primitive des peuples de la Russie (St. Petersburg, 1802); LEHRBERG, Untersuchungen zur Erläuterung der älteren Geschichte Russlands (St. Petersburg, 1816); EWERS, Studien zur gründlichen Kenntniss der Vorzeit Russlands (Dorpat, 1830); SCHLOEZER, Les premiers habitants de la Russie (Paris, 1846); KRUG, Forschungen in der älteren Geschichte Russlands (2 vols., St. Petersburg, 1848); THOMSON, The Origin of the Russian State (Oxford, 1877); ZABIELIN, Istorija russkoi zhizni s drevnieishikh vremen (History of Russian Life from the Remotest Times) (Moscow, 1908). On the Varangians: — HELSINGIUS, De Varegis (Upsala, 1734); BIOERNER, Schediasma historico-geographicum de Varegis, heroibus scandianis el primis Russiœ dynastis (Stockholm, 1743); KRAHMER, Die Urheimath der Russen in Europa (Moscow, 1862); GRDEONOS, Varjagi i Rus (2 vols., St. Petersburg, 1876). Invasions of the Tatars: — HAMMER-PURGSTALL, Geschichte der goldenen Horde, das ist, der Mongolen in Russland (2 vols., Budapest, 1840); EXEMPLARSKIJ, Les grands-princes de la Russie septentrionale durant la période tatare depuis 1238 jusqu'à 1505 (2 vols., St. Petersburg, 1889), in Russian. Monographs: — GONSIOROVSKIJ, Boleslav Jurij II, kujaz vsej Maloj Rusi (Boleslaw George II, Prince of all Little Russia) (St. Petersburg, 1907); NOWAKOWSKI, De Demetrio I, Magnœ Russiœ duce, Ivani filio (Berlin, 1839); PIERLING, La Russie et l'Orient: mariage d'un tzar au Vatican: Ivan III et Sophie Paléologue (Paris, 1891); ODERBORNIUS, Johannis Basilidis Magni Moscoviœ ducis vita (Wittenberg, 1585); WALISZEWSKI, Ivan le Terrible (Paris, 1904); IDEM, La crise révolutionnaire (Paris, 1906); La légende de la vie et de la mort de Démétrius l'imposteur (Amsterdam, 1606; Moscow, 1839); CLAMPI, Esame critico dei documenti inediti della storia di Demetrio di Ivan Vasiljevitch (Florence, 1827); MÉRIMÉE, Les faux Démétrius (Paris, 1853); LORENTZ, Der falsche Demetrius (Berlin, 1862); HIRSCEBERG, Dymitr Samoswaniec (Lemberg, 1898); PANTENIUS, Der falsche Demetrius (Bielefeld, 1904); SUVORIN, O Dimitrii Samozvancie (St. Petersburg, 1906); HIRSCHBERG, Marina Mñiszchówna (Lemberg, 1906); SOKOLOFF, Rossija pod skiptrom doma Romanovykh (Russia under the Sceptre of the House of Romanoff) (St. Petersburg, 1891); BAIN, The First Romanoffs: a History of Muscovite Civilization and the Rise of Modern Russia under Peter the Great (London, 1905); WALISZEWSKI, Le berceau d'une dynastie: les premiers Romanov (Paris, 1909); BERCK, Carstvovanie Carja Mikhaila Romanova (The reign of Michael Romanoff) (2 vols., St. Petersburg, 1832); IDEM, Carstvovanie Carja Aleksieja Mikhailovitch (St. Petersburg, 1830); GALITZIN, La Russie du XVII siècle dans ses rapports avec l'Europe occidentale (Paris, 1855); IDEM, La rébellion de Stenko-Razin contre le grand duc de Moscovie (Paris, 1856); SHSHEBALSKIJ, La régence de la tzarine Sophie (Karlsruhe, 1857); NESTESURANOI (JEAN ROUSSET), Mémoires du règne de Pierre le Grand, empereur de Russie (4 vols., Amsterdam, 1725--26); The History of the Life of Peter the Great, Emperor of All Russia (London, 1740); DR MAUVILLON, Histoire de Pierre I ^er surnommé le Grand (Amsterdam, 1742); CATIFORO, Vita de Pietro il Grande imperatore della Russia (Venice, 1748); GORDON, The History of Peter the Great (2 vols., Aberdeen, 1755); VOLTAIRE, Histoire de Russie sous Pierre le Grand (1759); CLAUDIUS, Peter der Grosse (Leipzig, 1805); BERGMANN, Peter der Grosse als Mensch und Regent (6 vols., Königsberg, Riga, Mitau, 1823--29); PELZ, Geschichte Peters des Grossen (Leipzig, 1848); DE VILLEBOIS, Mémoires secrets pour servir à l'histoire de la cour de Russie sous les règnes de Pierre le Grand et de Catherine I ^ere (Paris, 1853); USTRJALOFF, Istorija carstvovanija Petra Velikago (History of the reign of Peter the Great) (3 vols., St. Petersburg, 1858); GOLOVIN, Histoire de Pierre appelé le Grand (Leipzig, 1861); BRÜCKNER, Peter der Grosse (Berlin, 1879); SCHUYLER, Peter the Great, Emperor of Russia (2 vols., London, 1884); WALISZEWSKI, Pierre le Grand, l'éducation, l'homme, l'oeuvre (Paris, 1897); TCHISTJAKOFF, Istorija Vetra Pelikago (History of Peter the Great) (St. Petersburg, 1903); KNJAZHKOFF, Otcherki iz istorii Petra Velikago i ego vremeni (Essays on the History of Peter the Great and on his Times) (Moscow, 1909); ROUSSET, Mémoires du règne de Catherine, impératrice de toute la Russie (Amsterdam, 1728); MOTTLEY, The History of the Life and Reign of the Empress Catharine (2 vols., London, 1744); WALISZEWSKI, L'Héritage de Pierre le Grand (1725--1741) (Paris, 1900); BARTHOLD, Anna Johannovna (Leipzig, 1836); DE MAUVILLON, Histoire de la vie, du règne, et du détronement d'ivan III, empereur de Russie (London, 1766); BAIN, The Daughter of Peter the Great (Westminster, 1899); WALISZEWSKI, La dernière des Romanov, Elizabeth I ^ere impératrice de Russie (Paris, 1902); MOLLOY, The Russian Court in the Eighteenth Century (2 vols., London, 1905); LAVEAUX, Histoire de Pierre III empereur de Russie (3 vols., Paris, 1799); DE SALDERN, Histoire de la vie de Pierre III, empereur de toutes les Russies (Frankfort, 1802); SCHUMACHER, Geschichte der Thronensetzung und des Todes Peter des Dritten (Hamburg, 1858); BAIN, Peter III, Emperor of Russia (Westminster, 1902); CASTERA, Vie de Catherine II impératice de Russie (2 vols., Paris, 1797); tr. (3 vols., London, 1798); TOOKE, The Life of Katherine II, Empress of Russia (3 vols., London, 1800); Fr. tr. (Paris, 1801); BRÜCKNER, Katherine die Zweite (Berlin, 1883); BILDASOFF, Istorija Ekateriny vtoroi (History of Catharine II) (2 vols., St. Petersburg and London, 1890, 1895); Ger. tr. (4 vols., Berlin, 1891--93); WALISZEWSKI, Le roman d'une impératrice: Catherine II de Russie (Paris, 1893); IDEM, Autour d'un trône: Catherine II de Russie (Paris, 1894); DE LARIVIÉRE, Catherine la Grande d'après sa correspondance (Paris, 1895); SCHILDER, Imp. Pavel pervyi (The Emperor Paul I) (St. Petersburg, 1901); GOLOVKINE, La cour et le règne de Paul I ^er (Paris, 1905); MORANE, Paul I ^er de Russie (Paris, 1907); RAPPOPORT, The Course of the Romanovs (London, 1907); RABBE, Histoire d'Alexandre I ^er, empereur de toutes les Russies (2 vols., Paris, 1826); SCHNITZLER, Histoire intime de la Russie sous Alexandre et Nicholas I ^er (Paris, 1847); JOYNEVILLE, Life and Times of Alexander I, Emperor of All the Russias (3 vols., London, 1875); SCHILDER, Imperator Aleksandr Pervyj ego zhizn i carstvovani (The Emperor Alexander I, His Life and his Reign) (4 vols., St., Petersburg, 1897--98); SCHIEMANN, Kaiser Alexander I und die Ergebnisse seiner Lebensarbeit (Berlin, 1904); GOLOVINE, La Russie sous Nicholas I ^er (Leipzig, 1845); LACROIX, Histoire de la vie et du règne de Nicolas I ^er, empereur de Russie (Paris, 1864); SCHILDER, Imperator Nikolaj pervyi, ego zhizn i carstvovanie (2 vols., St. Petersburg, 1903); GOLOVIN, Russland unter Alexander II (Leipzig, 1870); KOSMA, La Russie et l'oeuvre d'Alexandre II (Paris, 1882); JOYNEVILLE, Life of Alexander II, Emperor of All the Russias (London, 1883); TATISHSHEFF, Imp. Alexander II, ego zhizn i carstvovanie (2 vols., St. Petersburg, 1903); SAMSON, Russland unter Alexander III (Leipzig, 1891); FLOURENS, Alexandre III, sa vie, son œuvre (Paris, 1894); NOTOVITCH, L'empereur Nicolas II et la politique russe (Paris, 1895); LEUDET, Nicolas II intime (Paris, 1898); PRINCE U., Leben und Thaten Nikolaus II (Berlin, 1910); LÖFFLER, Der russisch-japanische Krieg (Leipzig, 1907); TRAPANI, La guerra russo-giapponese (Rome, 1908); BOUJAC, La guerre russo-japonaise (Rome, 1908); CULMANN, Etude sur les caractères généraux de la guerre em Extrème-Orient (Paris, 1909); From the literary point of view, the best history of Russia in the Russian language is the Istorija gosudarstva rossiiskago (12 vols., St. Petersburg, 1897); from the standpoint of biography the best is that of KOSTOMAROFF, Russkaja istorija v jizneopisanijakh eja glavniejshikh diejatelej(2vols., St. Petersburg, 1903--07); but for the wealth of its documentation and for the interest of its recital, none is as good as the Istorija Rossii s drevniejshikh vremen (History of Russia Since the Remotest Ages) (2nd ed., 29 vols., St. Petersburg); unfortunately it is brought down only to the end of the seventeenth century. A. PALMIERI The Religion of Russia The Religion of Russia A. The Origin of Russian Christianity There are two theories in regard to the early Christianity of Russia; according to one of them, Russia was Catholic from the times when she embraced Christianity until the twelfth century; the other holds that Russia was always Orthodox, i. e., an adherent of the Greek schism, from the time when Christian missionaries first crossed her frontiers. The first of these theories is held by Catholics, whose arguments were condensed and developed by Vizzardelli ("Dissertatio de origine christianæ religionis in Russia", Rome 1826), and, more amply, by Father Verdière, S.J. ("Origines catholiques de l'Eglise russe jusqu'au XII ^e siècle", Paris, 1856). Russian Orthodox writers unanimously reject the conclusions that Verdière demonstrated in the form of theses, which, to us, appear to be without solid foundations. The history of Russian Christianity dates from the ninth century; by which it is not implied that Christianity was entirely unknown to the Russians before that period, for the merchants of Kieff were in frequent communication with Constantinople: one of the quarters of the flourishing metropolis, St. Mamante, was inhabited by them, and there is no doubt that there were Christians among them. On the other hand, some nucleus of Christianity must have existed at Kieff before Photius, as he himself relates in his encyclical letter to the Patriarchs of the East, sent a bishop and missionaries to that city. On account of this action, Photius is considered to have introduced Christianity into Russia. His testimony is repudiated by Catholic writers, who claim for St. Ignatius the glory and the initiative of this evangelical mission to Russia. There are no valid arguments, however, to throw doubt upon the authenticity of the information that has been handed down by Photius, as is proved in the present writer's work "La conversione dei Russi al cristianesimo, e la testimonianza di Fozio", in "Studii religiosi", t. I, 1901, pp. 133-61. According to the national chronicler Nestor, many Russians were Christians in 945, and had at Kieff the Church of St. Elias ("La chronique de Nestor", t. I, Paris, 1834, p. 65). In 955 Olga, widow of Igor, went to Constantinople, where she was baptized by the Patriarch Poliutus (956-70), and, loaded with rich gifts that she received from Constantine Porphyrogenitus (912-59), she returned to Kieff, and devoted herself to the conversion of her fellow-countrymen. The schism between the Churches of the East and of the West was not yet accomplished; and therefore Olga, who received in baptism the name of Helen, is venerated as a saint also by the United Ruthenians. Western chroniclers relate that Olga sent an embassy to the Emperor Otto I, to ask for Latin missionaries, and that Otto charged Adaldag, Bishop of Bremen, to satisfy that request. Adaldag consecrated as bishop of the Russians Libutius, a monk of the Convent of St. Albano, who died before entering Russia. He was succeeded by Adalbertus, a monk of the convent of St. Maximinus, at Trier. The Russians, however, received the Latin bishop badly, killed several of his companions, and constrained him to return to Germany. It may be observed that Assemani and Karamzin do not admit that Latin missionaries came to Russia with Adalbertus. The efforts of Olga to convert her son Sviatoslaff to Christianity were unsuccessful. Vladimir, son of Sviatoslaff, has the glory of having established Christianity as the official State religion in Russia. According to the legend, Vladimir received Mohammedan, Latin, and Greek legates, who urged him to adopt their respective religions. The Greeks finally triumphed. Vladimir marched with an army towards the Taurida, and in 998 took Kherson; then he sent ambassadors to the Emperors Basilius and Constantine, asking for the hand of their sister Anna, which he obtained on condition that he would become a Christian. He was baptized by the Bishop of Kherson, who, according to Russian chroniclers, made Vladimir read a profession of faith that was hostile to the "corrupt" doctrine of the Latins. Thereafter, taking with him the relics of Pope St. Clement and of that pope's disciple, Phebus, as well as sacred vessels and images, Vladimir returned to Kieff, accompanied by his consort, and by some Greek missionaries. Once there he caused the idol of Perun to be thrown into the Dnieper, and on the site that it occupied built a Christian church, also commanding that all his subjects, without distinction of age, should be baptized. The inhabitants of Kieff yielded before his threats; but those of Novgorod resisted and suffered severe treatment. The Russians were baptized, but they did not receive Christian instruction and education; the ancient beliefs and habits of Paganism endured, and survived for many centuries; consequently the moral influence of Christianity was not efficiently exercised upon the Russian people. Vladimir erected a church in honour of the Assumption of the Blessed Virgin Mary, under the direction of Grecian artists. Thanks to his solicitude, the Russian Church was endowed with a hierarchy, a metropolitan, bishops, and priests. At first this hierarchy was Greek; the metropolitans were appointed and consecrated by the Patriarch of Constantinople, went to Russia as foreigners,and remained such. They succeeded, however, in inspiring the Russians with hatred for the Latin Church. The metropolitans Leontius (dead in 1004), George (1072), Ivan II (dead in 1089), and Nicephorus I (1103-21) wrote the first polemical works of Russian literature against the Latins. B. Catholicism in Russia, from the Twelfth Century to the Council of Florence Although the Russian Church in its earliest periods was completely dominated by the clergy of Constantinople who made the schism, the relations between Russian princes and the Holy See, begun under Vladimir, subsisted for several centuries. Russian documents testify that Vladimir in 991 sent an embassy to Rome, and that three embassies went from Rome to Kieff, sent by John XV (985-96), and by Sylvester II (999-1003). A German chronicler, Dithmar, relates that a Saxon missionary, consecrated archbishop by the Archbishop of Magdeburg, went to Russia, where he preached the Gospel, and was killed with eighteen of his companions on 14 Feb., 1002. At about that time Reinbert, Bishop of Kolberg, went to Russia with the daughter of Boleslaus the Intrepid, bride of Sviatopolk, the son of Vladimir. He strove to diffuse Catholicism in Russia, and died a prisoner. Other missionaries continued their Apostolic efforts; but Russia was already lost to Catholicism. The Metropolitan Nicephorus I (1103-21) regarded the Latin Church as schismatic, and reproached it with a long list of errors. Russian canonical documents of the twelfth century refer to the Latins as pagans, and prohibit all relations with them. The most virulent calumnies against the Roman Church were inserted in the "Kormtchaia kniga"; and Russian metropolitans down to Isidor (1437) had no relations with the Holy See. This does not mean to say, however, that the Catholic Church neglected Russia as a field for its apostolate; for the popes always tried to lead her back to the centre of unity, and to enter into relations with her princes. The prince Iziaslaff Yaroslavitch (1054-68; 1069-73; 1076-78) sent his son to Gregory VII, asking the assistance of that pontiff, and promising to make Russia a vassal of the Holy See. Gregory answered him by letter of 17 April, 1075. Under the Grand Duke Vsevolod Yaroslavitch (1078-93) there was established the feast of the translation of the relics of St. Nicholas of Bari, approved by Urban II (1088-99), who in 1091 sent to the same prince Bishop Teodoro, with relics. In 1080 the antipope Clement III sent a letter to the Metropolitan Ivan II (dead in 1089), proposing to the latter the union of the Russian Church; Ivan answered, however, enumerating the heresies of the Latins (Marcovitch attributes this letter to the Metropolitan Ivan IV, who, according to Golubinsky, died in 1166). Clement III (1187-91) sent a letter to the Grand Prince Vsevolod and to the Metropolitan Nicephorus II (1182-97), inviting them to take part in the Crusade, but in vain. Innocent III (1198-1216) sent two legations to the princes of Russia, exhorting them to be reunited to Rome. Under Honorius III (1216-1227) St. Hyacinth, with other religious of the Order of St. Dominic, preached the Catholic faith in southern Russia, and founded a convent at Kieff, while a religious of the same order in 1232 was appointed bishop of that city, out of which, however, the Dominicans were driven in 1233. Another letter of Honorius III, and one of Gregory IX (1227-41) encouraged the Russians of Pskof to realize their intention of embracing Catholicism. All of these efforts were in vain, it was only in Galicia that the solicitude of the popes was attended with some favourable results. Innocent IV (1243-54) had continuous relations with the Grand Prince Daniel Romanovitch (1229-64), who hoped for the assistance of the West to throw off the Tatar yoke; the pope's nuncio to the King of Poland in 1254 crowned the grand prince as king at the city of Dorogtchin. But through dissension among the princes of the West the assistance that the pope promised to Daniel was not given, and in 1256 the latter repudiated his union with Rome. The same pope made efforts to convert to Catholicism the national hero, Alexander Nevski, whose father had abjured the errors of the schism before the pontifical legate Giovanni da Pian Carpino. In 1248 Innocent IV wrote to the Prince Alexander Nevski, exhorting the latter to embrace Catholicism; and in another letter the same pope asserts that the conversion of that prince took place. Russian writers however are unanimous in considering their national hero a champion of the Orthodox faith, who refused to submit to Rome. Under John XXII (1316-34) Catholicism was propagated in Lithuania, where it had its martyrs. Gedimin (1315-45), although a pagan, wrote a letter to John XXII, declaring that Franciscans and Dominicans were authorized to preach in his principality. Paganism was firmly rooted in the people, and in 1332 fourteen Franciscans were massacred at Vilna. In 1323 the same pope re-established the Latin Diocese of Kieff, to which he appointed a Dominican. Catholicism became preponderant in Lithuania, when Hedwig, Queen of Poland, married Jagello, and the two states were united into a single kingdom. Jagello embraced Catholicism in 1386, called Polish priests to Lithuania, and, like Vladimir the Great, resorted to violence to convert his subjects. Many Russians were converted to Catholicism, and Vilna became the see of a Latin bishop. In 1436 the Russian Church, which was still dependent upon Constantinople, had as metropolitan Isidor (1436-41), a Greek, native of Thessalonica, and staunch adherent of the cause of the union. This prelate on 8 Sept., 1437, with Avraam, Bishop of Suzdal, and many clergymen and laymen, went to the Council of Florence, where he ardently defended the union; and by a Brief of 17 Aug., 1438, Eugene IV named him legate a latere for Lithuania, Livonia, and Russia. Avraam of Suzdal, however, was not a partizan of the union; and leaving Isidor, returned alone to Russia. Isidor sent an encyclical letter to the Russians (5 March, 1440), extolling the union that had been concluded at Florence. Upon his return to Moscow, however, Prince Vasili Vasilevitch convened a council, condemned the work of the metropolitan, and imprisoned the latter in the Monastery of the Miracles (Tchudoff); but Isidor succeeded in making his escape, and found asylum in Italy. Wherefore, Russia did not accept the decree of union of the Council of Florence; on the contrary, she drew from it arguments to proclaim the superiority of her Orthodox faith over the pliant faith of the Greeks, and to prepare the way for her religious autonomy. C. Catholicism in Russia from the Council of Florence to the Present Time Isidor resigned the Metropolitan See of Kieff about 1458, and in the same year Pius II appointed Gregor the Bulgarian, who was a disciple and companion of the former metropolitan, and who, according to the historian Golubinski, remained united to Rome until 1470, after which he became Orthodox, and died in 1472. Among his successors who were friendly to the union were Mikhail Drucki (1475-80), Semion (1481-88), Jonah Glezna (1492-94), Makap (1495-97), and Josef Soltan, who in 1500 wrote a letter to Alexander VI asking for papal confirmation of his metropolitan dignity. At the death of Josef II, which according to Stroeff was in 1519, the Metropolitanate of Kieff became again wholly Orthodox. After the Council of Florence, the fanaticism of the Russians in regard to the Latin Church increased. The Latins were not even considered citizens. They were not allowed to build churches in Russian cities. The popes, however, did not cease their efforts to effect a reconciliation between Russia and the Roman See. An event that should have hastened the attainment of that end served only to widen the breach between Orthodoxy and Catholicism. There lived at Rome under the tutelage of the popes and the spiritual guidance of Cardinal Bessarion the Greek Princess Zoe, daughter of Thomas Palæologus, Despot of Morea; and Paul II, wishing ardently to induce the Russians to join the princes of the West in a crusade against the Turks, proposed to offer the hand of Zoe to Ivan Vasilevitch III (1462-1505); but death overtook him before he was able to bring about the realization of his purpose. Sixtus IV (1471-84) continued the policy of his predecessor. Ivan III received the proposal with enthusiasm. On 12 Nov., 1472 Zoe with a numerous suite arrived at Moscow, and the Metropolitan Philip I (1464-73) united her in marriage with Ivan. But the hopes of union to which this marriage had given rise vanished. Ivan would not hear the propositions of the Bishop Antonio, who as legate of the Holy See had accompanied Zoe; while the latter passed over to the schism. Ivan III and the Russians thought only of drawing profit from the good will of the popes. The grand prince, having married a princess of the imperial house of Palæologus, formulated claims to the throne of Byzantium; while the Russians began to regard Moscow as the third Rome, which should inherit the prerogatives of the first and of the second. Several embassies of Leo X and of Clement VII to the Prince Basil Ivanovitch (1505-33) were without favourable results for the union. Julius III and Pius IV invited Ivan the Terrible to send delegates to the Council of Trent; while Pius V in his turn invited him to join a crusade against the Turks but Sigismund, King of Poland, and Maximilian II, Emperor of Germany, prevented the legates of the pope from crossing the Russian frontiers, or rendered their missions fruitless. In 1580 Ivan the Terrible, menaced by the victorious arms of Báthori, King of Poland (1576-86), and of the Swedes, sent to Gregory XIII an embassy at the head of which was Leontius Tchevrigin. The Holy See, although placing little faith in the promises of the tsar, sent to Moscow one of the most eminent men of his day, the Jesuit Antonio Possevino, who, on 22 Feb., 1582, had a theological disputation with the tsar. Possevino was well received at the Court of Moscow, but his apostolic efforts were without result. He returned on 15 March, 1582, in company with Jacob Molvianinoff, legate of the tsar, and bearer of a letter to Gregory XIII. In that letter Ivan the Terrible did not refer to the union. Possevino had relations also with the successor of Ivan, Feodor Ivanovitch, and with Constantine II, Prince of Ostrog, the great champion of Orthodoxy in the sixteenth century; always, however, with unfavourable results. The advent of the False Demetrius and his marriage with the heiress of the Waywodes of Sandomir gave hopes that Russia would see a Catholic dynasty on its throne. Demetrius, indeed, had been converted to Catholicism in 1604, and had entered into relations with the Holy See, which, through its nuncios in Poland, proceeded to confirm him in the Catholic faith, and to maintain his devotion to the Roman Church. Demetrius gave to the Holy See the happiest hopes for the conversion of Russia; but through a conspiracy on 27 May, 1606 he lost the crown and his life. Fanatical Russian writers charge the popes with responsibility for the turbulence that followed the advent to the throne of the False Demetrius; but the letters of the Roman pontiffs refute that calumny decisively. In 1675 the Tsar Alexis (1645-76) sent, as ambassador to Clement X, General Paul Menesius, a Catholic. The object of this embassy was to promote an alliance of the Christian princes against the Turks. The Russian legate was received with great distinction. No happy results, however, attended his mission from a religious point of view. During the reign of Alexis, strenuous efforts were made to draw Russia towards Catholicism by a famous Croatian missionary, George Krizhanitch, a student of the Propaganda, on whose life and works Professor Bielokuroff recently wrote several valuable volumes rich in documents. Krizhanitch is regarded as one of the pioneers of Panslavism; but his efforts to bring Russia to the Catholic Church cost him, in 1661, an exile to Siberia, whence he was unable to return to Moscow until 1676, after the death of Alexis. In 1684 the Jesuit Father Schmidt established himself at Moscow as chaplain to the embassy from Vienna. In 1685 another Jesuit, Father Albert Debois was the bearer of a letter from Innocent XI to the Tsar; and in 1687 Father Giovanni Vota, also of the Society of Jesus, advocated at Moscow the need of Russia to unite herself to the Church of Rome. The Emperor of Germany, Leopold I (1657-1705), obtained permission for the Jesuits to open a school at Moscow, where they established a house. Their work would have been very favourable for the Church, for under the influence of Catholic theology a band of learned Orthodox theologians, led by the hiqumeno Sylvester Medvedeff, supported certain Latin doctrines, especially the Epiklesis. Unfortunately however two fanatical Greek monks, Joannikius and Sophronius Likhudes, excited the fanaticism of the Russians against the Latins at Moscow, and when Peter the Great freed himself of the tutelage of his sister Sophia in 1689, the Jesuits were expelled from Moscow. The schismatic Patriarch Joachim, a man actuated by hatred for foreigners, and in particular for Catholics, had much to do with that expulsion. The reforms of Peter the Great did not better the condition of Catholicism in Russia. In the first years of his reign he showed deference to the Catholic Church; he granted permission to the Catholics in 1691 to build a church at Moscow, and to summon Jesuits for its service; in 1707 he sent an embassy to Clement XI, to induce that pontiff not to recognize Stanislaus Leszczynski as King of Poland, to which dignity the latter had been elected by the Diet of Warsaw on 12 July, 1704; he promised the pope to promulgate a constitution that would establish, in favour of Catholicism, the freedom of worship that had been promised, but never maintained. During his sojourn at Paris in 1717 he received from various doctors of the Sorbonne a scheme for the union, to which he caused Theophanus Prokopovitch and Stepan Gavorski to reply in 1718. In order to captivate the Russians, the doctors of the Sorbonne had worked Gallican ideas into that scheme, regarding the primacy of the pope and his authority. Peter the Great, however, was inimical to Catholicism. His religious views were influenced by Prokopovitch, a man of great learning, but a courtier by nature, and a bitter enemy of the Roman Church. Peter the Great revealed his anti-Catholic hatred when, at Polotsk in 1705, he killed with his own hand the Basilian Theophanus Kolbieczynski, as also by many other measures; he caused the most offensive calumnies against Catholicism to be disseminated in Russia; he expelled the Jesuits in 1719; he issued ukases to draw Catholics to Orthodoxy, and to prevent the children of mixed marriages from being Catholics; and finally, he celebrated in 1722 and in 1725 monstrous orgies as parodies of the conclave, casting ridicule on the pope and the Roman court. From the time of Peter the Great to Alexander I, the history of Catholicism in Russia is a continuous struggle against Russian legislation: laws that embarrassed the action of Catholicism in Russia that favoured the apostasy of Catholics, and reduced the Catholic clergy to impotence were multiplied each year, and constituted a Neronian code. In 1727, to put a stop to Catholic propaganda in the Government of Smolensk, Catholic priests were prohibited from entering that province, or, having entered it, were prohibited from occupying themselves with religious matters; the nobility was forbidden to leave the Orthodox communion, to have Catholic teachers, to go to foreign countries, or to marry Catholic women. In 1735 the Empress Anna Ivanovna prohibited Catholic propaganda among Orthodox Russians under the severest penalties. Illustrious converts, like Alexei Ladygenski and Mikhail Galitzin, were treated with the most inhuman barbarity on account of their conversion. In 1747 the government expelled from Astrakhan the Capuchins who were making many conversions to Catholicism among the Armenians. Under Catharine II (1762-96) the condition of Catholics became worse than before, notwithstanding the ukases of religious tolerance that the empress promulgated. The ukase of 22 July, 1763 authorized the Catholics to build chapels and churches of stone. Another ukase of 23 Feb., 1769 promulgated the ecclesiastical constitution of the Catholics. This constitution established two parishes, at St. Petersburg and Moscow, and placed them in charge of the Reformed Franciscans and the Capuchins. It provided that the number of parishes should not be greater than nine; and it strictly prohibited Catholic priests, residing in Russia, from proselytizing among Orthodox Russians. The first dismemberment of Poland (1772) brought a strong body of Catholics to Russia, and Catharine II proposed to make of them a national Church, independent of Rome. Unfortunately an ambitious Polish bishop, Stanislaus Siestrzencewicz, entered into her views, and a ukase of 23 May, 1774 established the Diocese of White Russia, with its episcopal see at Mohileff, its first bishop being Siestrzencewicz, Vicar-General of Vilna. This personage is judged variously by historians. Pierling, Zalenski, and Markovitch treat him as an ambitious man who sought to become patriarch of all the Catholics in Russia, and who in his heart hated the Roman See. Godlewski on the contrary is inclined to excuse him, and to believe that the difficult conditions of Catholicism in Russia, possibly led him to adopt measures that appear to have been injurious to Catholic interests. According to Markovitch, during his long episcopate (1774-1826), Siestrzencewicz was the scourge of the Catholic Church of both rites in Russia. By her manifestos of 1779 Catharine II began the systematic destruction of the religious orders, withdrawing them from the authority of their religious superiors, and putting them under the jurisdiction of the Bishop of Mohileff. The latter in 1782 was raised to the archiepiscopal dignity, and in 1784 received the pallium from the Apostolic Legate, Mgr. Giovanni Andrea Archetti, Archbishop of Chalcedon. He assumed episcopal jurisdiction over all the Catholics of the Russian Empire, and acted as if he were independent of the Holy See. The sound principles of Catholicism, however, were maintained and propagated by the Jesuits who, suppressed by the Holy See and exiled from the Catholic nations, found an asylum and the centre of their future revival in Russia. In 1779 Catharine II invited the Jesuits to exercise their ministry in White Russia, and in 1786 they had in Russia six colleges and 178 members. Their number increased so much that Pius VII re-established their order for Russia, where it returned to life under Father Gruber. In 1801 the society had 262 members, and 347 in 1811. The Jesuits retained a lively gratitude for the hospitality that they had received in Russia, and worked with zeal to convert it to Catholicism. The Second and Third Partitions of Poland (1793-94) considerably increased the number of Catholics in Russia; Catharine II promised them the free exercise of their religion, their rights of property and those of their Church, and their complete independence of the civil power. These promises were deceptive, as was shown by the destruction of the Ruthenian Church, accomplished by her order. The Catholics of the Latin Rite also soon had cause to remember that they were under the domination of implacable enemies. The Catholics had awaited the death of Catharine and the advent to the throne of Paul I (1796-1801), to better their condition. In 1797 Archbishop Lorenzo Litta, legate a latere of the Holy See, arrived at St. Petersburg, where he was received with great honours. The Catholics who had been exiled to Siberia were recalled; the Sees of Lutzk, Vilna, Kamenetz, Minsk, and Samogitia (the ancient Diocese of Livonia) were created; the archiepiscopal See of Mohileff was declared metropolitan, which it still is; and the government granted an indemnity to the clergy for the property that had been taken from them. In 1802 the number of the faithful amounted to 1,635,490, of adults alone. Paul I showed a special predilection for the Jesuits, and reposed great confidence in Father Gruber; he called them to St. Petersburg, where he authorized them to open schools and seminaries, while he obtained from Pius VII a Brief (7 March, 1801), re-establishing the society in Russia. Under Alexander I diplomatic relations were established between the Holy See and the Russian Government. In 1802 a Russian legation was established at Rome, while Pius VII on his part named an Apostolic nuncio to St. Petersburg, Mgr. Arezzo, Archbishop of Seleucia. The affairs of the Catholic Church in Russia were to be administered by the Roman Catholic Ecclesiastical College, created in imitation of the Synod of St. Petersburg. This college had been approved by Alexander I, through his ukase of 21 Nov., 1801. Siestrzencewicz of course was selected as its president; and the Russian Government, in its Note of 13 Dec., 1803, asked of the Holy See such powers for him as would have rendered him independent. The Sovereign Pontiff opposed a determined resistance to these demands, and the Ecclesiastical College was henceforward merely a name. In 1804 Mgr. Arezzi, the Apostolic nuncio, in view of the disagreements between the Russian Government and the Holy See, left St. Petersburg; whereupon Siestrzencewicz had a free hand, and devoted himself to discrediting Catholicism by proposing as bishops of the vacant sees men who were corrupt or allied to the government, by persecuting the religious orders, by granting divorces arbitrarily, by favouring the English Bible Society, and finally, by surrounding himself with assistants of evil mind and heart. Diplomatic relations between the Holy See and Russia were resumed in 1815. The Russian plenipotentiary, Baron de Tuyll, had colloquies with Cardinal della Somaglia in regard to the union of the two Churches, which, however, were without result, for the Russian Government declared that the union was impossible so long as the Holy See wished to impose its dogmatic teachings and its disciplinary practices upon the Russians. Meanwhile, Siestrzencewicz made use of the renewal of relations between Rome and St. Petersburg to seek through the Russian Government new favours and concessions, e. g. the nomination of episcopal candidates by the tsar, the title of Primate, matrimonial dispensations, etc. In other words, it was a question of imitating the canonical legislation of the Orthodox Church, and of harnessing Catholicism to the car of the State. The Holy See merely granted to the Metropolitan of Mohileff the honorary title of primate, without any additional jurisdiction, and authorized a small number of priests to administer the Sacrament of Confirmation with oil blessed by the bishop. The various efforts of the Russian Government to establish a primate, with patriarchal, almost I independent powers in Russia were always thwarted by the determined resistance of the Holy See. The most painful occurrence in the history of Catholicism during the reign of Alexander I was the expulsion of the Jesuits from Russia, the pretext for which was the conversion of Prince Alexander Galitzin to the Catholic faith. The Jesuits were expelled from St. Petersburg during the night of 22-23 Dec., 1815, and the Catholic parish church of St. Catharine was given to the Dominicans. The Jesuits were relegated to Polotsk; later, however, by the ukase of 25 March, 1820, they were exiled from Russian territory. On the other hand, as many nobles of the former Polish provinces, subjects of Russia, sent their children abroad to be educated by the Jesuits, the government provided that young Catholics should not leave Russia. In the last years of his reign Alexander I showed more sympathy for Catholicism, and the relations of the Holy See with the Russian Government were cordial during the pontificate of Leo XII and the sojourn of the Chevalier Italinski at Rome as Russian minister. The Holy See obtained the concession that the Russian Government would pay to the Datary 1000 scudi for the Bulls of Catholic archbishops in Russia, and 800 scudi for those of bishops; Alexander I also allowed a Catholic chapel to be erected at the imperial residence of Tsarskoye Selo, and gave 40,000 roubles for its construction. He proposed to visit Rome, and, according to an unauthenticated historical report, to abjure Orthodoxy. There are Catholic writers who affirm that Alexander I and his consort became Catholics; but there is no documentary evidence in support of this. The reign of Nicholas I was a long period of persecution and suffering for Catholics in Russia. In 1826 the Holy See sent Mgr. Bernetti to St. Petersburg, to be present at the coronation. He was well received by the tsar, and thereafter wrote optimistically to Rome. Soon, however, the trials of the Catholics began. By two ukases in 1828 the admission of novices in the religious orders, and of clerics in the seminaries, was made very difficult, if not quite impossible; and in the following year all the novitiates were closed. In 1830 other ukases encouraged divorce among Catholics, prohibited Catholic religious propaganda among the Orthodox, the hearing the confessions of foreigners, and changes of residence among the clergy. The Polish insurrection of 1830 and 1831 intensified the persecution against the Latin Catholics. In 1832 the Russian Government asked of the "Roman Ecclesiastical College" that the number of convents be diminished. Of 300 monasteries in the Diocese of Mohileff 202 were closed; while the administrator of that diocese, Bishop Szczyt, who had opposed this reduction was sent to Siberia. In the same year the publication of Papal Bulls in Russia was prohibited. In June and September, 1832 respectively the Holy See addressed two notes to the Russian Government, lamenting the disabilities to which Catholics were subjected in Russia, and the innovations which had been introduced into ecclesiastical discipline. The government blamed the Polish revolutionists for its severity. On 9 June, 1832, yielding to the Russian Government, Gregory XVI addressed his Encyclical to the Polish clergy, urging obedience to the civil power in civil matters. The encyclical aroused great discontent among the Poles, and did not deter the Russian Government from its purpose of annihilating Catholicism. The Government directed its blows against Catholics, more especially by laws concerning mixed marriages, by preventing Catholic priests from ministering to the United Catholics, and by calling to the episcopal sees men who were devoted to its policy, e. g. Mgr. Pawlowski, who was named Archbishop of Mohileff in 1841. The Holy See could no longer remain silent in the presence of this violence, and in his Allocution to the solemn Consistory of 22 July, 1842, Gregory XVI called the attention of the Catholic world to the painful oppression to which Catholicism was subjected in Russia; and his protests were more serious and energetic, when in 1845, upon the occasion of the visit of the tsar to Rome, he had an interview with the latter which resulted in the concordat of 3 Aug., 1847, by which there were established in Russia an archbishopric and six episcopal sees, and in Poland, the same number of dioceses that had been established by the Bull of Pius VII of 30 June, 1818. The concordat repealed several iniquitous laws that had been promulgated against Catholics, placed the seminaries and the ecclesiastical academy of St. Petersburg under the jurisdiction of the ordinary, and recognized to a somewhat greater degree the authority of the Holy See over the bishops. The Tsar Nicholas, by a letter of 15 Nov., 1847, ratified the concordat of 3 Aug., which, like so many other Russian laws, was destined to remain a dead Letter. Obstacles were placed to the determination of the boundaries of dioceses; 21 convents were suppressed by a ukase of 18 July, 1850; while Catholics were prohibited from restoring their churches and from building new ones; from preaching sermons that had not previously been approved by the government, and from refuting the calumnies of the Press against Catholicism. It is not necessary for us to recur to the authority of Catholic writers, like Lescœur, to prove how odious this violence was; we may be satisfied with a mere glance at the immense collection of laws and governmental measures concerning the Catholic Church, from the times of Peter and of Ivan Alexeievitch to 1867 ("Zakonopolozhenija i pravitelstvennyia rasporjazhenija do rimsko-kato litcheskoi cerkvi v Rossii otnosjachtchijasja so vremeni carstvovanija Tzarei Petra i Ioanna Aleksieevitchei, 1669-1867", Vienna, 1868). It is not without reason that a Catholic writer has said that the laws of Nicholas I against Catholicism constitute a Neronian code. The first years of the reign of Alexander II were not marked by anti-Catholic violence. The Russian Government promised the Holy See that the concordat would be scrupulously observed, and in 1856 the episcopal sees of Russia and Poland were filled. Soon however there was a return to the methods of Nicholas I, notwithstanding the fact that Pius IX wrote to the tsar, imploring liberty for Catholics of both rites in Russia. In another letter, addressed in 1861 to Mgr. Fialkowski, Archbishop of Warsaw, Pius IX referred to the continual efforts of the Holy See to safeguard the existence of Catholicism in Russia, and to the difficulties that were opposed to all measures of his and of his predecessors in that connection. Encouraged by the words of the pope, the Polish bishops presented a memorandum to the representative of the emperor at Warsaw, asking for the abrogation of the laws that oppressed Catholics and destroyed their liberty. A similar memorandum was presented to the tsar by the Archbishop of Mohileff and the bishops of Russia. Upon the basis of these memoranda, the government accused the Catholic clergy of promoting the spirit of revolution and of plotting revolts against the tsar. Most painful occurrences ensued; the soldiery was not restrained from profaning the churches and the Holy Eucharist, from wounding defenceless women, or from treating Warsaw as a city taken by storm. One hundred and sixty priests, and among them the vicar capitular Bialobrzeski, were taken prisoners, and several of them were exiled to Siberia. Mgr. Deckert, coadjutor of the Archbishop Fialkowski, died of the sufferings that these events caused him. The condition of the Poles were becoming intolerable, and Catholicism suffered proportionately. Amid the general indifference of Europe, one voice, that of Pius IX, was raised, firm and energetic, in favour of an oppressed people and of a persecuted faith. On 12 March, 1863, in his Allocution to the Consistory, and on 22 April, 1863, in a letter to the tsar, Pius IX demanded that justice and equity be no longer violated. The tsar Alexander II wrote to the pope expressing regrets that the Polish clergy should ally itself with the authors of civil disorder and should disturb the public peace. The Polish revolution of 1863 furnished the government with a pretext for inhumanity towards the Catholic clergy, both regular and secular. There is no doubt that some priests and religious, moved by patriotic ardour, committed the error of taking part in an insurrection which was opposed by the more cultured and reasonable portion of the nation. The Russian Government, however, did not take pains to punish only the guilty, but dealt with all the Catholic clergy alike. In 1863 the Archbishop of Warsaw, Mgr. Felinski, was confined at Yaroslaff, as was his coadjutor Mgr. Rzaewuski at Astrakhan in 1865; while their successors, the canons Szczygielski and Domagolski, were exiled to Siberia in 1867. Mgr. Krasinski, Archbishop of Vilna, was confined at Vyatka. Several priests in 1863 were either hanged or shot, as implicated in the revolt, while others were sent to the interior of Russia, or were deported to Siberia. The Poles and the Catholics in their distress received consolation only from Pius IX, who distinguished between the right of a government to punish an unjust revolt and the right of subjects to profess their Faith freely. In the encyclical "Ubi Urbaniano" of 30 July, 1864, addressed to the bishops of Russia and Poland, he enumerated the grievous evils that the Russian Government had inflicted on Catholicism. The letters and the protests of the pope however were of little avail. On 8 Nov., 1864 the government suppressed the convents and religious orders of Russian Poland; and a ukase of 16 Nov., 1866 abolished the concordat of 1847. Another ukase, on 22 May, 1867, made the "Roman Catholic College" the intermediary between the Catholic bishops of Russia and the Holy See. Unfortunately some prelates allowed themselves to be led astray by the promises or by the threats of the Russian Government, which sought the ruin of Catholicism in Russia through the establishment of a Polish national church. We may cite Mgr. Staniewski, administrator of the Diocese of Mohileff, Mgr. Constance Lubienski, Bishop of Augustowo, who nobly expiated his mistake, and died in exile at Dünaburg; and Mgr. Sosnowski, administrator of the Diocese of Lublin. A series of curious revelations and documents, concerning the incredible abuses of Russian legislation against Catholicism, is contained in the work "Das polnisch-russische Staatskirchenrecht auf Grund der neuesten Bestimmungen und praktischer Erfahrungen systematisch erzählt von einem Priester", Posen, 1892. Under Alexander III (1881-94) negotiations between the Holy See and the Russian Government were renewed, and Russia maintained a legation at the Vatican. In 1882 Archbishop Felinski was recalled from exile, and, instead of his See of Warsaw, received the title of Archbishop of Tarsus. The See of Warsaw was given to Mgr. Vincent Theophilus Popiel, who had energetically resisted the efforts of the Russian Government to establish an independent ecclesiastical college for the government of the Catholic Church in Russia. A new concordat was concluded in 1882, but its clauses were nullified by new laws. It should not be forgotten that, during the entire reign of Alexander II, the religious policy of Russia was inspired by Konstantin Pobiedonostseff, Procurator General of the Holy Synod, who, for political rather than religious motives, was a fierce adversary of Catholicism. The Catholic clergy continued to endure the severest oppression, abandoned to the caprices of the police, greatly reduced in numbers, and trammelled by a thousand obstacles in the exercise of its apostolic ministry. This condition of things was prolonged into the reign of Nicholas II, during which Pobiedonostseff exercised his dictatorship until 1905. After the war with Japan, however, and in consequence of internal political troubles, Nicholas II promulgated the constitution in 1905, and published the edict of religious toleration. Two years of liberty were sufficient to reveal the great vitality of Catholicism in Russia, for the number of conversions to the Catholic faith, in so short a lapse of time, amounted to 500,000, including over 300,000 Uniate Catholics whom the Russian Government had compelled to declare themselves Orthodox; 100,000 of these, known in Russian as Obstinates (uporstvujushshie) had not received the sacraments for more than thirty years, during which time they frequented no church, in order not to be reckoned among the Orthodox. The Catholic clergy developed the greatest activity in social and educational work, in the Press, and in the awakening of Christian piety; and the reactionary party of the Orthodox Church, centred in the Synod, cried out against the danger, and called for new laws to protect Orthodoxy against the assaults of militant Catholicism. These protests and lamentations were heard; the laws relating to liberty of conscience were submitted to revision, abolished, or modified; the government refused to recognize as legitimate the conversions to Catholicism of the former Uniate Catholics; the priests who baptized children of mixed marriages were punished with fines and imprisonment; the parochial schools were closed; the confraternities and the Catholic social organizations were dissolved, and the former severity against the Catholic Press was resumed. The government directed its action especially against the re-establishment of the United Church in Russia, and in 1911 closed two Russo-Catholic chapels that had been erected at St. Petersburg and Moscow. Denunciations against a zealous Jesuit, Father Werczynski, who had established himself at Moscow in 1903, and had converted a thousand Russians to Catholicism, furnished the government with pretexts for renewed severity: Father Werczynski was exiled; the suffragan Bishop of Mohileff, Mgr. Denisewicz, was deposed (1911) without the previous consent of the Holy See, and was deprived of his stipend; and another most zealous prelate, Baron von. Ropp, Bishop of Vilna, was obliged to resign his see and to retire to the Government of Perm. Nevertheless Catholicism continues to exercise a great influence upon the cultured classes of Russia, a fact due in great measure to Vladimir Soloveff, the greatest of Russian philosophers, who has rightly been called the Russian Newman; and from these classes there have always been conversions that have brought to the fold of the Catholic Church noble and exalted souls, as, for example, Princess Narishkin, Princess Bariatinski, Princess Volkonski, Countess Nesselrode, Miss Ushakova, Prince Gagarin, Prince Galitzin, Count Shuvaloff, and many others. Khomiakoff, the legislator and apostle of Slavophilism, said that if liberty of conscience were established in Russia the upper and the cultured classes would embrace Catholicism, which seems to be justified by the facts. D. Statistics of the Catholic Dioceses of Russia The basis for the diocesan and clerical statistics of Russia is furnished by the very useful "Elenchi omnium Ecclesiarum et universi cleri" which is published every year by the various dioceses as an appendix to the "Directorium divini officii". These "Elenchi" are useful not only for their statistics but also for their historical data, because they sometimes contain documents and historical notes concerning the dioceses. From the ecclesiastical point of view, the Catholic dioceses of Russia are divided into two classes: the dioceses of the Kingdom of Poland, and those of Russia. The Kingdom of Poland, or Russian Poland, has seven sees: + (1) Archdiocese of Warsaw; + (2) Diocese of Kielce; + (3) Diocese of Lublin (with administration of Podlachia); + (4) Diocese of Plock; + (5) Diocese of Sandomir; + (6) Diocese of Sejny and Augustowo; + (7) Diocese of Wladislaw. In Russia there are: + (1) Archdiocese of Mohileff (with administration of Minsk); + (2) Diocese of Lutzk, Zhitomir, and Kamenetz; + (3) Diocese of Samogitia; + (4) Diocese of Tiraspol; + (5) Diocese of Vilna. These are all treated under separate heads. In 1866 the Russian Government suppressed the Diocese of Podlachia in Poland, and Minsk and Kamenetz in Russia; the Holy See, however, did not sanction these arbitrary acts, and therefore the three dioceses in question exist canonically, although they have no bishops, and have been incorporated into other dioceses. There are in the Russian Empire more than 13,000,000 Catholics, of whom more than 5,000,000 are in Russia; there are approximately 2900 parishes, 3300 churches, 2000 chapels, and 4600 priests. According to the illustrative tables of Father Urban, S.J., there may be reckoned an average of more than 3000 Catholics for each priest. In some dioceses, as for example in Podlachia, there is 1 priest for each 4800 Catholics; and in the Diocese of Minsk 1 priest for each 4670 Catholics. The division into parishes is irregular, and some of the parishes have a very large population; that of Holy Cross at Lodz has a population of 142,000 Catholics with only 10 priests; and Praga, near Warsaw, has 82,000 Catholics, with only 4 priests. In Siberia the parishes have an enormous extent. According to the convention between the Holy See and the Government, the diocesan bishops should have 22 auxiliaries: 3 for the metropolitanate of Mohileff; 3 for the Diocese of Kovno; 3 for Lutzk, Zhitomir, and Kamenetz; 3 for Vilna; 2 for Tiraspol; 2 for Warsaw; and 1 each for Kielce, Lublin, Wladislaw, Sandomir, Plock, and Sejny and Augustowo. Unfortunately however the convention is not observed by the Russian Government: in 1911 there were only four suffragan bishops; and it should be added that the dioceses remain vacant for long periods. The Diocese of Vilna has been vacant since 1905. There follows consequently great disorganization and many abuses in the ecclesiastical administration, which cannot be remedied for lack of competent authority. Each diocese has its cathedral and its collegiate chapters. A ukase of 1865 fixed 12 as the number of canons of a cathedral. Each diocese has also its consistory; and to the twelve diocesan consistories, should be added the consistories of Kalish, Piotrkow, and Pultusk. The consistories are composed of "Officers", "vice-officers", assessors, visitors of monasteries, and also lay members in the Russian dioceses. The efforts of the Russian Government to make autonomous the consistories of the various dioceses and the ecclesiastical college at St. Petersburg have failed, for the Catholic hierarchy in Russia, taught by experience, remains faithful to the Roman See, and accepts no innovations contrary to Catholic canon law. E. Religious Orders In the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries there were in Russian Poland many monasteries, and several thousand religious of the various orders. Among the latter the Jesuits and the Piarists (founded by St. Joseph Calasanctius) distinguished themselves by their services to education; but the iniquitous laws of Catharine II and Nicholas I, and the measures adopted by the Russian Government in 1864 after the Polish insurrection, almost extirpated Western monachism from Russia. In 1864 it was provided that the monasteries of Russia should be divided into two classes, those approved kind recognized by the state, and those not approved or recognized. The monasteries of the first of these two classes were allowed to have novices, and to be inhabited each by 14 religious; those of the second class were allowed to remain in existence until the number of religious in each should be reduced to 7, when the monastery was to be suppressed. The opening of the novitiates of the recognized monasteries was deferred to the time when the non-approved monasteries should have ceased to exist. The number of the Paulist monks of the monastery of Czenstochowa was fixed at twenty-four. Even these restrictive laws, however, were not observed. Only three or four of the recognized monasteries were allowed to receive novices, and the members of religious orders were prohibited from having relations with their religious superiors outside of Russia. It is therefore not astonishing that the religious orders should have nearly disappeared from that country. The Sisters of Charity alone have been able to develop their organization; and, as elsewhere, they have won the admiration of all, even of the Orthodox. The greater part of the religious are in Russian Poland. The Archdiocese of Warsaw has a Capuchin monastery at Nowe Miasto, with 15 religious, and the convents of the Visitation (14 religious), the Perpetual Adoration (13 religious), and the Sisters of the Immaculate Conception (36 religious). The Sisters of Charity, 382 in number, have under their charge there 34 hospitals or philanthropic institutions. In 1905 the Redemptorists, five in number, had established themselves at Warsaw; but the Russian Government expelled them in 1910. There are remnants of the old orders that were suppressed in 1864, but their number is reduced from year to year. The Diocese of Wladislaw has the celebrated monastery of Czenstochowa, belonging to a congregation of cenobites called Paulists (from St. Paul I the hermit). There are about forty religious, priests and laymen, in the convent. A grievous crime that was committed in the convent in 1909 led the diocesan authorities to adopt the severest measures for the re-establishment of religious discipline there. In the same diocese there are two convents of Friars Minor, at Kolo and at Wladislaw, with 10 religious; one convent of Dominican Tertiaries, at Przyrów, with 12 religious; and one convent of Franciscan Tertiaries, with 13 religious, at Wielun. There are 49 Sisters of Charity, who have charge of 13 philanthropic establishments. In the Diocese of Plock there are: a convent of Carmelites, at Obory, with 6 religious; a monastery of Felician Sisters, at Przasnysz, with 9 religious; and 5 charitable institutions, in the care of the Sisters of Charity. In the Diocese of Sejny, besides a Benedictine monastery, with 10 religious, there are two hospitals and one asylum, under the care of 13 Sisters of Charity. In the Diocese of Sandomir there is a Franciscan convent for women, with 13 religious; and 6 charitable institutions, under the care of 29 Sisters of Charity. The Diocese of Kielce has 35 Sisters of Charity, and that of Lublin 44. who are in charge of 8 charitable establishments. In the Archdiocese of Mohileff there are no convents, properly so called. At St. Petersburg and Moscow there live some Dominicans of different nationalities, and it is by priests of that order that the French parishes of those two cities are served. In 1907 eight Franciscan Sisters, Missionaries of Mary, established themselves at St. Petersburg with the consent of the government. They direct a house of work. There are also in the archdiocese a few Sisters of French and of Polish congregations. The Diocese of Vilna has a Benedictine monastery at Vilna, with 6 religious, and a Franciscan monastery, with 3 religious, at Slonim. In the Diocese of Kovno there is: a Franciscan monastery, with 3 religious, at Kretinga; one Benedictine monastery at Kovno, with 9 religious; and a convent of Sisters of St. Catharine, with 9 religious, at Kroki. At Zaslaff, in the Diocese of Lutzk, Zhitomir, and Kamenetz, the Franciscans have a monastery with 4 resident religious; and there are about 10 religious of various other orders scattered throughout the diocese. There are no religious in the Diocese of Tiraspol. In all, therefore, of the 13,000,000 Catholics in Russia, 150 men and 550 women are religious, and of the women 450 are Sisters of Charity. The Catholic Church in Russia, therefore, is deprived of an important part of its militia, and there is small hope that religious life will flourish in that country. The small monasteries that remain depend on the bishops, and have, instead of provincials, visitors who are chosen from among the secular clergy. The several attempts of the Polish religious of Galicia (Augustinians, Franciscans, Bernardists, Piarists, Redemptorists) and others to establish themselves in Russia since 1905 have been futile. F. Moral and Intellectual Life of the Catholic Clergy in Russia From the moral and intellectual points of view, in Russia, as in all Orthodox countries, the Catholic clergy is very superior to that of other denominations, according to the confession even of the Orthodox writers themselves. Any shortcomings which may occur in the lives of the Catholic clergy arise out of circumstances beyond the control of the ecclesiastical authority. The Holy See cannot exercise in Russia a more efficacious vigilance than it exercises in other countries; but even if it were in a position to do so, it would find an obstacle to its efforts in the laws of the country. On the other hand, the clergy is too scattered, its work too great, and the civil offices imposed upon it by the bureaucracy too arduous. Nevertheless, in the difficult circumstances in which it is placed, its zeal has succeeded in working marvels, in holding its fold firmly bound to the Faith, and in conciliating the esteem of the Orthodox and the affection of Catholics. The generosity of the Catholics, especially Poles and Lithuanians, is considerable, and therefore the financial circumstances of the Catholic clergy are of the best, notwithstanding the fact that the stipends which it receives from the Russian Government are exceedingly small: parish priests receive from 230 to 600 roubles a year, and canons have the same stipend. The people are very pious, and their pilgrimages to the sanctuaries are frequent. At the Feast of the Assumption, the sanctuary of Czenstochowa is visited at times by as many as 1,000,000 pilgrims. The sanctuary of Our Lady of Ostrabrama, at Vilna, is also a centre of many pilgrimages, and the streets that lead to it are always crowded with people on their knees. The Catholic clergy in Russia is unable to contribute efficiently to the propagation of the Faith, for its zeal is trammelled by very severe laws. In 1908-1911 many priests were fined, imprisoned, and even exiled for having baptized children of mixed marriages; nevertheless the clergy contributes in some measure to the work of the union. There had been hopes of restoring the Uniate Church in Russia through the agency of three or four Russian priests who were converted to Catholicism; and two chapels of the Slav Rite sprang up, at St. Petersburg and Moscow. In 1911, however, the Russian Government closed the two chapels, and forbade the exercise of their ministry by the converted priests, one of whom returned to the schism. The Catholic clergy, and Catholics in general, abstain from taking part in polities; but they do a great deal for the moral and intellectual development of their fellow-countrymen. The Poles are the staunchest supporters of Catholicism and Polish nationalism in Russia. The Lithuanian clergy has taken a very active part in the awakening of Lithuanian nationalism, the restoration of the Lithuanian language to the churches of Lithuania, and the development of Lithuanian literature. From these points of view, therefore, both the Polish and Lithuanian clergy have rendered great service to their respective nationalities. It is to be regretted, however, that there should frequently arise at Vilna, between the Polish and the Lithuanian clergy, disputes that are at variance with Catholic interests. The intellectual development of the clergy, as yet, is not all that might be desired. The seminaries, in all that concerns the admission of young men, are at the mercy of the government, which, possibly, prevents the more desirable youths from entering those establishments. For the rest, the course of studies in those seminaries is not very complete. At present, however, an intellectual and moral reform in these establishments is being sought: a considerable number of Catholic priests go to foreign countries to complete their studies in Catholic universities, and upon their return to Russia teach in the seminaries. The Catholic Press, also, which had been kept at a low standard by the Russian censorship, has improved greatly of recent times. In 1909 the seminary of Wladislaw began the publication of the "Duchowni Kaplan", a monthly periodical that is on a level with the most learned Catholic publications of Europe. Other Catholic periodicals are published at Warsaw, Vilna, Sandomir, etc., and seek to neutralize the anticatholic propaganda, and the propaganda of atheism, which latter has its centre at Warsaw, where it publishes its organ the "Mysl Nepolegla" (Independent Thought). The chief centre of Catholic study in Russia is the Roman Catholic Ecclesiastical Academy of St. Petersburg, established in 1833, in place of the seminary of Vilna, which was considered the university of the Catholic clergy in Russia. The academy has a rector, an inspector, a spiritual director, 15 professors, and a librarian. The dioceses send to this establishment their best students, who after a course of four years receive the Degree of Master of Theology. It has 60 students. Among its professors mention should be made of Mikhail Godlewski, author of important publications on the history of Catholicism in Russia; and Stanislaus Trzeciak, the author of an important work on the literature and religion of the Jews at the time of Christ ("Literatura i religija u zydów za czasów Chrystusa Pana", Warsaw, 1911). The sect of the Mariavites is treated in the article POLAND. THE ORTHODOX CHURCH OF RUSSIA Russian writers ordinarily divide the history of their national church into five periods. The first, from 989 to 1237, was the period of the diffusion of Christianity in Russia. Christianity was spread slowly, but the want of culture among the people caused pagan superstitions to be maintained under the external appearances of Christian rites. The conditions of the lower clergy, both as to culture and to apostolic spirit, were wretched. Monastic life began to flourish in Russia, when the monk Anton, coming from Mount Athos in 1051, established himself in a grotto near Kieff, and collecting about him various followers, among them the famous Blessed Theodosius Petcherski, laid the foundation of the great monastery called Kievo-Petcherskaja. This monastery became a focus of culture in the development of Russia, and is rightly considered a national monument of that country. Monasticism was so generally spread in the twelfth century that in the city of Kieff alone there were seventeen monasteries. During this first period the Russian Church was totally dependent upon the Church of Constantinople, and was governed by the Metropolitans of Kieff, the list of which opens with Leo (dead in 1004) and closes with the Metropolitan Josef in 1237. According to Golubinski this first list contains twenty-four names. Some of them, Mikhail, Ilarion, Ivan II, Ephraim, and Konstantin were placed upon the calendar of the saints. One of the most famous saints of this first epoch was St. Cyril of Turoff. The second period, from 1237, in which year begin the Mongolian invasions and the progressive development of the power of northern Russia extends to 1461, when Orthodox Russia was divided into two metropolitanates. During this period, Russia was governed by the Metropolitans of all Russia, the list of whom begins with Cyril III (1242-49), and closes with St. Gona (1448-61). Among these metropolitans, St. Pioter (1308-26), St. Alexei (1354-78), and St. Gona (1448-61) were raised to the honours of the altar of the Russian Church. The latter fought against the Tatars; while several Russian princes suffered martyrdom for their Faith and were canonized. Some few missionaries attempted to spread Christianity among the Tatars. In 1329 two Russian monks, Sergei and Germanus, founded the famous monastery of Balaam, on an islet of Lake Ladoga. In the second half of the fourteenth century St. Stephen, Bishop of Perm (died 1396), preached Christianity to the Zyriani. The efforts of the Russians, however, to win Lithuania over to the schism were not crowned with success. During this period, there were eighteen eparchies in Russia. The Russian bishops gradually leaned towards Moscow, which had aspirations to spiritual supremacy. The moral and intellectual conditions of the clergy were very low. Towards the latter end of the fourteenth century, there arose the heresy of the Strigolniki, who rejected the hierarchy. Monasticism attained its highest development, there appearing 180 new monasteries. St. Sergei Radonejski (dead in 1392), a saint whom popular legends represent as endowed with supernatural powers, became the legislator of the new monasticism. At Sergievo, 40 miles from Moscow, he founded the celebrated monastery of the Most Holy Trinity, a great religious and national monument of Russia. The monasteries at this epoch contained possibly 300 religious. The third period is from 1461 to 1589, when the Russian Church was divided into the two metropolitanates of Moscow and Kieff. The former was bounded by the frontiers of Great Russia, and was strictly Russian and Orthodox. That of Kieff attempted to assimilate the culture of the West, and developed great literary activity. In the metropolis of Moscow, Tihon of Vyatka (dead in 1612) worked for the conversion of the Voguli and of the Ostiaki of of the Government of Perm. The monks of the monastery of Solovka evangelized the Lopari, in which efforts the Blessed Theodoretus (dead in 1577) and the Blessed Tihon Petchengski (1495-1583) distinguished themselves. In the work of the conversion to Christianity of the Tatars of Kazan, the higumeno George (Gurij) Rugotin became famous. He died 4 Dec., 1563, and was canonized by the Russian Church; so also was the archimandrite Barsonofius (dead in 1576, and Germanus (died 1567). Other Russian monks devoted their energies to the conversion of the pagans of Astrakhan and of the Caucasus. The Russian Church became more and more separated from the Greek Church, and towards the end of the fifteenth century refused to receive Greek metropolitans and bishops. Among the metropolitans of this time, Macarius (1542-63), and the energetic Philippus II, who was slain by order of Ivan the Terrible in 1473, were distinguished by the extent of their learning. In the Metropolitanate of Moscow there were ten eparchates. The clergy was very numerous, and many of its members, unable to subsist in the villages, lived a vagabond life at Moscow, to the detriment of discipline. With a view to reforming the clergy there was convened at Moscow in 1551 the famous Council of the Hundred Chapters (Stoglav). Monasticism spread more and more. From the fifteenth to the seventeenth century there appeared three hundred new monasteries, which accumulated enormous wealth. The Blessed Nil Sorski (1433-1508) made himself the champion of a reform among the monks, which implied on their part the renunciation of all real property and seclusion in the monasteries. His doctrines found numerous adversaries, among whom was the Blessed Josef of Volock (1440-1515). Many monks and ascetics of this time were venerated as saints. Among the more famous of these, were Alexander Svirski (dead in 1533) and Daniel of Pereiaslaff (died 1540). The want of religious instruction favoured superstition and the germination of heresies. In the fifteenth century there broke out, at Novgorod and its surroundings, the heresy of the Judaizers (zhidovstvujushshie), against which the Archbishop Gennadius (a saint who died in 1505) and the Blessed Josef of Volock struggled with much energy. In the sixteenth century Matwei Baksin and Theodosius Kosoi taught rationalist doctrines, abjuring the sacraments and ecclesiastical government, which evoked refutations and anathemas from Maxim the Greek, and from the monk Zinovii Otenski. The Protestants established themselves at Moscow. There were fifteen metropolitans of Kieff, from Gregor the Bulgarian (1458-73), who, according to Golubinski, after embracing the union, returned to the Orthodox Church, to Onisiphorus Dievotchak (1579-89), who was succeeded by Mikhail Ragosa — the latter having embraced the Union. The Orthodox of the metropolitanate, after the Union of Brest, fanatically opposed the progress of the Unionists. Russian writers mention with praise, among these champions of Orthodoxy against the Union, Prince Andrei Kurbski and Prince Konstantin of Ostrog. The followers of Orthodoxy also established confraternities for the printing and dissemination of polemical works, and to oppose Catholic influence through the schools. For want of bishops and priests of their own, members of the Orthodox Church passed over to the Union. In 1620, however, Theophanus, Patriarch of Jerusalem, consecrated Job Borecki Metropolitan of Kieff, and six members of the Orthodox Church as bishops respectively of Polotsk, Vladimir, Lutzk, Przemysl, Chelm, and Pinsk; and thus the Orthodox hierarchy was reestablished. In the domain of theology the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries were prolific of works, written by Orthodox theologians, to combat the arguments of the Catholics and Uniates. The most salient personality of the Orthodox hierarchy of Kieff during this period was the Metropolitan Peter Moghila (died 1646). The fourth period of the Russian Church is that of the Patriarchate of Moscow (1589-1700). The Patriarchate of Moscow was created in 1589 by Jeremias II, Patriarch of Constantinople. The first patriarch was Job (1589-1605); he was succeeded by Ignatei (1605-06), Hermogenes (1606-11), Filarete Romanoff (1619-33), Joshaphat (1634-40), Josef (1642-52), Nikon (1652-66), Joshaphat (1667-72), Pitirim (1672-73), Joachim Saveloff (1674-90), and Adrian (1690-1700). Among the most famous of these mention should be made of Filarete and Joachim, bitter enemies of Catholicism; and of Nikon, who with uncurbed energy upheld the rights of his Church against the usurpations of the civil power, on which account he was deposed in 1666. The patriarchs formed at Moscow a court, which, especially under Filarete Romanoff, was a rival of that of the tsars, both as to wealth and authority, and which for these reasons was suppressed by the tsars. The patriarchs exercised superintendence over the metropolitans and over the bishops, the number of whom was increased and diminished by turns. After the establishment of the patriarchate, Novgorod, Kazan, Rostoff, and Kruticki became metropolitanates, and Suzdal, Ryazan, Tver, Vologda, and Smolensk were made archiepiscopal sees. The number of dioceses was fixed at eight. In 1620 Siberia was given an episcopal see at Tobolsk. In 1682 the Tsar Feodor Alexeievitch proposed the establishment of 12 metropolitanates and 72 dioceses; but a council of bishops reduced the latter number to 34, later to 22, and thereafter to 14. There was a lack of funds for the support of the new dioceses, and at the end of the seventeenth century the patriarchate of Moscow had 13 metropolitanates, 7 archbishoprics, and 2 dioceses. Meanwhile the tsars, seeing the growth of the influence and power of the Church under the rule of the patriarchs, adopted the policy of diminishing the prerogatives of the clergy. The Tsar Alexis Mikhailovitch published a statute (ulozhenie) which prohibited the further acquisition of property by the clergy. The judicial position of the clergy received another blow by the promulgation of the so-called monastyrskij prikaz (monasterial ordinance). The clergy received this diminutio capitis with evident displeasure; and when Nikon, Metropolitan of Novgorod, was raised to the patriarchal dignity in 1652, protests were redoubled, and the conflict between the patriarch and the tsar became acute. The bishops, who were partisans of the tsar, had the support of the Greek hierarchy. The Council of Moscow, to please the tsar, deposed the patriarch, who died after a long captivity, at Bielo-ozero, in 1681. With the death of Nikon the Russian Church was yoked to the chariot of the State. Peter the Great found that the patriarchate was useless, and in fact an obstacle in the way of the realization of his purposes; and accordingly, at the death of Adrian in 1700, he suppressed it. The Patriarchate of Moscow had succeeded in unifying the Orthodox Church of Russia. After the convention of 1686 between Russia and Poland, which made the tsars of Moscow masters of Kieff and Little Russia, the Patriarch Joachim named Gedeon Tchetvertinski metropolitan of Kieff, and in 1687 Dionysius, Patriarch of Constantinople, recognized the dependency of the Metropolitanate of Kieff upon the Patriarchate of Moscow. In the seventeenth century under the Patriarch Nikon a great schism broke out in the Orthodox Church, called the Schism of the Old Believers. The liturgical books in use in the Russian Church were replete with errors. Their correction was an urgent necessity, and had been undertaken in the sixteenth century. The fanatics opposed this "corruption" of the sacred texts, and Maxim the Greek, who had worked upon it, paid for his participation in the work with a long imprisonment. Under Nikon in 1654 a council held at Moscow recognized the necessity of the reform in question. Accordingly the liturgical books were corrected, but many Russians, influenced by the monks, refused to accept the corrected versions. It began to be rumoured that Antichrist, personified by the pope, had in view the destruction of the Orthodox Russian Church, through the Latin Catholics of western Russia. But a council held at Moscow in 1666 approved the reform of Nikon, and pronounced its anathema against those who had not accepted his decisions. Anathemas, were however, like the severity of the government, without effect against these deserters from the official Church. The monks who were averse to the reform withdrew to solitary places, and founded clandestine monasteries, among which those of Vyg, Starodub, and Vyatka became famous. The more violent schismatics were burnt alive or decapitated. But persecutions invigorated the schism, called in Russian raskio, whence the name of its adherents, Raskolniki. The fifth, called the synodal, period begins with 1700, and extends to the present time. At the death of Adrian (1700), Stepan Tavorski, Metropolitan of Ryazan, and a learned theologian, was appointed patriarchal vicar, and charged to reform the entire constitution of the Russian Church. Tavorski found an excellent co-operator in Theophanus Prokopovitch, who was Bishop of Pskof in 1718, and who, although educated at Lemberg, Cracow, and Rome, and according to some, a convert to Catholicism, nourished a bitter hatred for Catholics. Peter the Great gave to Prokopovitch the task of preparing the "Ecclesiastical Regulations" which became the Magna Carta of the Russian Church. This code was finished in 1720. It is divided into three parts, concerning respectively the functions of the synod, the matters put under its jurisdiction, and the duties of its members. The synod was solemnly opened on 14 Feb., 1721. By the "Ecclesiastical Regulations", the tsar is the supreme judge of the ecclesiastical college. His representative in that capacity was a layman, who in a document of 1722 is called the eye of the tsar. This functionary, bearing the title of Ober-Prokuror, was to be chosen preferably from the military class. The synod in the early period of its existence had ten members, besides the president, and maintained its ecclesiastical character. After the death of Peter the Great, however, that ecclesiastical character was lost by degrees, and the synod became a vast political bureaucracy. The bishops were at the mercy of the procurators-general, who at times, as in the case of Prince Sharkhovski, regarded the synod as a political institution, and sometimes maltreated the prelates who formed that body. There were procurators-general who made public profession of atheism, as Tchebysheff (1768-74), or of rationalism, as Prince A. Golycin (1803). The Russian Church suffered humiliation under the lay rule of the synod (see the important work of Blagovidoff, an ex-professor of the Ecclesiastical Academy of Kazan, on "The Procurators of the Holy Synod"). In 1881 there was called to the government of the synod Konstantin Pobiedonostseff, a man of great culture but of reactionary ideas, who wished to unite all the religions professed in Russia in the Orthodox Church. The epoch of Pobiedonostseff was one of complete thraldom for the Russian Church. His dictatorship however came to an end in 1905, when the edict of toleration was promulgated. The Liberal Russian clergy attacked the synod and the anti-canonical constitution of the Russian Church in the Press, and demanded the reestablishment of the patriarchate. The Government proposed the convocation of a great national synod, to return its liberties to the Church of Russia and to give it a new constitution, but this purpose was frustrated by the friction between the "white" (secular) and the "black" (regular) clergy, by the triumph of the revolutionary parties, and by the outbreak of the revolution. The synod continued to exercise its deleterious authority under various procurators: Prince Obolenski, Izvolski, Lukianoff (a mental specialist), and finally, in 1911, Carolus Viadimirovitch Sabler, a former associate of Pobiedonostseff, but a man of broader and more liberal ideas. Other changes were made in the eparchies. When the synod was established, there were 18 eparchies and 2 vicariates in Russia; in 1764, the number of the former had increased to 29, and to 36 at the beginning of the nineteenth century; which latter number was increased under Nicholas I, and became 65 in our day. The eparchies are ruled by metropolitans (St. Petersburg, Moscow, and Kieff), archbishops, and bishops. According to the most recent statistics, there were 133 Russian bishops, including the bishop-vicars of the eparchies, and the bishops without a charge. In regard to the moral character of the Russian episcopate, and concerning the various institutions of the Russian dioceses, see the present writer's work "La Chiesa russa", pp. 105-160. The Russian clergy, which is divided into two castes, the "white" clergy, or seculars, and the "black" clergy, or regulars, has not acquired, among the Russians, the moral prestige that the Catholic clergy has acquired in Catholic countries. According to the latest statistics, there are in the "white" clergy 45,000 priests, 2400 archpriests, 15,000 deacons, and 44,000 singers, while there are 60,000 churches and chapels in the country. This clergy exercises its ministry over more than 90 millions of Orthodox faithful; but it is rendered incapable of accomplishing its mission by poverty, want of education, the lack of sound vocations, the oppression of the Government, contempt and social isolation, family cares, and not infrequently by drink. Only in the cities are there to be found priests of culture and in comfortable circumstances; those who work in the rural parishes are deserving of pity and compassion. In the eighteenth century, the "black" clergy suffered vicissitudes that greatly reduced the number of monasteries and monks. Peter the Great especially and Anna Ivanovna treated the monks with the greatest severity. Nevertheless the "black" clergy preserved the moral and economic superiority in Russia; bishops, rectors, and inspectors of academies and seminaries are taken from the ranks of the "black" clergy, and the monasteries still possess immense riches. According to the most recent statistics there are 298 monasteries that are recognized and subsidized by the Government, while there are 154 not subsidized (zastatnij). There were 9317 monks and 8266 novices. There were 400 religious houses of women, inhabited by 12,652 nuns and 40,275 novices. Many of these religious houses are of the Russian Sisters of Charity, who maintain 184 hospitals, and 148 asylums. The life of the regular clergy, except in a few monasteries of strict observance, is very lax. The Orthodox clergy receives its education in the ecclesiastical schools, preparatory for the seminaries (dukhovnyja utchilishsha) of which there are 185, with 1302 instructors, and which are maintained at an expense to the state of 6,153,353 roubles yearly; in the ecclesiastical seminaries, of which there are 57, with 866 instructors and 20,500 students; and also in the ecclesiastical academies of St. Petersburg, Moscow, Kieff, and Kazan, in which there are 120 instructors and 862 students; these academies possess very valuable libraries, and have professors of great scientific merit. The seminaries both morally or intellectually are in a wretched condition; from these seminaries the moral and intellectual shortcomings of the Russian clergy are derived, their students, as a rule, entering the priesthood without the least vocation. In 1906-08 these institutions became hotbeds of revolutionists, and even of anarchists. The ecclesiastical sciences are cultivated in the academies, which publish periodicals of great merit as the "Khristianskoe Tchtenie" (Christian Reading) at St. Petersburg; the "Bogoslovski Viestnik" (Theological Messenger) at Sergievsk Posad; the "Trudy" (Works) of the Ecclesiastical Academy of Kieff, and the "Pravoslavnyi Sobesiednik" at Kazan. Other important periodicals are the "Strannik" (St. Petersburg Traveller), the "Tcherkovnij Viestnik" (Ecclesiastical Messenger), the "Cerkovnija Viedomosti" (Ecclesiastical News), the organ of the synod at St. Petersburg; "Dushepoleznoe Tchtenie" (Edifying Reading), at Moscow, and the "Khristianin" (The Christian), at Sergievsk Posad. Among the most famous professors of the ecclesiastical academies of the present day, mention should be made of the great exegete Nikolai Glubokovski, the canonists Zaozerski and Berdnikoff, the historian Znamenski, etc. The most famous of them all, at present, is the archpriest Malinovski. A comprehensive study on the Russian seminaries and academies may be found in the work "La Chiesa russa", pp. 541-679. The educating influence of the Russian clergy upon the people is very slight. On the other hand the bureaucracy would suppress any effort of the clergy to give to the people a higher sense of its rights. The clergy maintains a great many elementary schools, the number of which was much increased in the time of Pobiedonostseff. These establishments are divided into schools of two classes, and schools of one class; of the former there are 672, with 77,000 students of both sexes; while there are 25,425 one-class schools, with 1,400,000 students of both sexes; and in addition 13,650 schools in which reading is taught, with 436,000 pupils. There are 426 secondary schools, with 22,300 students, the yearly maintenance of which costs a sum of 17,000,000 roubles. The apostolic work of the Russian clergy has small result. The internal missions are against the Raskolniki, the mystic and the rationalist sects, the Mohammedans, the Catholics, the Lutherans, and the Jews. The missionaries direct their efforts towards the conversion of dissidents to Orthodoxy rather by the assistance of the police and by human means than by a supernatural spirit and by convincing arguments. All efforts, not excluding deportation to Siberia, have failed to secure the conversion of the Raskolniki, who since 1905 have enjoyed a certain liberty, and at the present time maintain a great propaganda. Their number is estimated at 15,000,000. Among Catholics and Lutherans the Russian missions are without effect; in fact since 1905 many of the Orthodox have embraced Catholicism or Lutheranism. For three centuries Russian missionaries have worked for the conversion of the Mohammedan Tatars; but the trivial nature of the propaganda among that people was shown in 1905, when 500,000 Christian Tatars returned to the faith of Islam. The foreign missions of Russia are in North and South America, Japan, Corea, and Persia. In North America the efforts of the Orthodox missionaries are directed to the conversion of the Uniate Ruthenians who emigrate to that continent. In other countries their efforts are almost without result, with the exception of Japan, where Ivan Kasatkin, who is now an archbishop, and who went to those islands in 1860, succeeded in establishing a Japanese branch of the Orthodox Church, Which numbers about 30,000 adherents and about 40 native priests (cf. "La Chiesa russa", pp. 397-539). The Church of Russia is the support and strength of Orthodoxy, which, counting Russians, Greeks, and Rumanians, has more than 110 millions of adherents. The conversion of Russia to Catholicism, therefore, would end the Eastern Schism. But the hour of a reconciliation between the East and the West is yet far distant, however much desired by Catholics and also by Russians, such as Vladimir Soloveff. There is no doubt that among the cultured classes of Russia there are to be found persons who desire this union, and who readily recognize the defects of their national Church; but there is no movement towards union with Catholicism. As a rule, the cultured classes of Russia are contaminated with the poison of infidelity; while the lower classes are slaves of superstition or ignorance, and most attached to the formalities of their rite. They are the easy prey of the rationalist or mystic Russian sects. Possibly Russia would have been Catholic if, after the Union of Brest, politics and human passions had not rendered the condition of the Uniates most unhappy, and placed obstacles in the way of the development of the Ruthenian clergy. But it is useless to lament the past; and every effort should be made that the latent religious forces of Russia may some day find their full development in union with Catholicism under a single shepherd. THE RELIGION OF RUSSIA: Catholicism; Orthodox Church; Protestantism:-- EUCÆIUS, Aulœum Dunaidum, continens seriem ac successiones archiepiscoporum Rigensium in Livonia (Wittenberg, 1564); POSSEVINUS, Lettera alla Duchessa di Mantova sopra le cose pertinenti alla religone cattolica, le quali desiderava intendere di Livonia, di Suetia, et di Transilvania (Mantua, 1580); IDEM, Livoniœ commentarius (Riga, 1852); BELLETTUS, Visitationis apostolicœ sanctœ Ecclesiœ Vendensis et Livoniœ, constitutiones (Vilna, 1611); OKOLSKI, Russia florida rosis et lilius (Lemberg, 1646); IDEM, Chioviensium et Czernichoviensium episcoporum ordo et numerus (Lemberg, 1646; Cracow, 1853); KOJALOWICZ, Miscellanea rerum ad statum ecclesiasticum in magno Lithuaniœ ducatu pertinentium (Vilna, 1650); SCARIN, Dissertatio historica de Sancto Henrico, Fennorum Apostolo (Abo, 1737); ORLOWSKI, Defensa biskupstva ij dyecezyi kiowskiej (Lemberg, 1748); FRIESIUS, De episcopatu kioviensi cuius sedes olim fuit Kioviœ, nunc vero Zytomiriœ in Ukraina eiusque prœsulibus brevis commentatio (Warsaw, 1763); CZARNEWSKI, De Semgalliœ episcopatu nec non de episcopis Semgalliœ seu Selburgensibus (Mitau, 1790); MACIEJOWSKI, Essai historique sur l'Eglise chrêtienne primitive des deux rites chez les Slaves (Leipzig, 1840); THEINER, Die neuesten Zustände der katholischen Kirche beider ritus in Polen und Russland (Augsburg, 1841); SZANTYR, Zbior wiadomosci o kosciele i religii katolickiej w cesarstwie rossyiskiem (Collection of Data on the Catholic Church and the Catholic Religion in the Russian Empire) (Posen, 1843); TOLSTOI, Le catholicism romain en Russie (2 vols., Paris, 1863-64); LESCŒUR, L'Eglise catholique et le gouvernement russe (Paris, 1903); RÖTTINGER, Leiden und Verfolgungen der katholischen kirche in Russland und Polen (Ratisbon, 1844); KRASINSKI, Histoire religeuse des peuples slaves (Paris, 1853); LESCŒUR, Le schisme moscovite et la Pologne catholique (Paris, 1859); IDEM, L'Eglise catholique en Pologne sous le gouvernement russe (Paris, 1860); IDEM, L'Eglise catholique et le gouvernement russe (Paris, 1903); GAGARIN, Tendances catholiques dans la société russe (Paris, 1860); SLECZKOWSKI, Wiadomosci niektóre do dziejöw kosciola katolickiego w polsko-rossyiskikh prowincyakh od rozbioru Polski az do najnowszuch czasów (Jaslo, 1861); TOLSTOI, Le catholicisme romain en Russie (2 vols., Paris, 1863-64); PIERLING, Rome et Demetrius d'après des documents nouveaux (Paris, 1878); IDEM, Antonii Possevini missio moscovitica ex annuis litteris S. J. excerpta et adnotationibus illustrata (Paris, 1882); IDEM, Rome et Moscou (1883); IDEM, Un nonce du Pape en Moscovie (Paris, 1884); IDEM, Le Saint-Siège, la Pologne, et Moscou (Paris, 1885); IDEM, Papes et Tzars (Paris, 1890); IDEM, Lettre de Dmitri, dit le faux, à Clément VIII (Paris, 1898); IDEM, Les relations diplomatiques entre le Saint-Siège et la Russie (24 vols., Paris, 1890-1907); SERPIGNY, Un arbitrage pontifical au XVI siècle (Possevin) (Paris, 1886); VANNUTELLI, La Russia e la Chiesa cattolica (Rome, 1895); HILDEBRAND Sveriges ställning till Antonio Possevinos fredsemdling mellan Polen och Russland (Stockholm, 1897); MARCOVITCH, Roma ed i Papi (2 vols., Zagabria, 1902); ABRAHAM, Powstanie organizacyi koaciola lacinskiego na Rusi (Lemberg, 1904); CARYKOFF, Posolstvo v Rim i sluzhba v Moskvie Pavla Menezija (The Embassy to Rome, and the Acts of Paolo Menesio at Moscow) (St. Petersburg, 1906). CHYTRÆUS, De Russorum religione (Leipzig, 1586); PRYTZ, Utrum Moscovitœ sint christiani (Stockholm, 1620); SCHWABE, De religione ritibusque ecclesiasticis moscovitarum (Jena, 1665); VON OPPENBUSCH, Religio Moscovitarum (Strasburg, 1667); WAHRMUND, La religion ancienne et moderne des Moscovites (Cologne, 1698); KROOK, Exercitatio historico-theologica de statu Ecclesiœ et religionis moscoviticœ (Leipzig, 1722); FENERLIN, Dissertatio historica de religione Ruthenorum hadierna (Göttingen, 1745); BELLERMANN, Kurzer Abriss der russischen. Kirche (Erfurt, 1788); STRAHL, Zustand der griechisch-russischen, Kirche in ältester und neuester Zeit (Tübingen, 1823); IDEM, Geschichte der Gründung und Ausbreitung der christlichen Lehre unter den Völkern, des ganzen russischen Reiches (Halle, 1827); IDEM, Beyträge zur russischen Kirchengesch (Halle, 1827); IDEM, Geschichte der russischen Kirche (Halle, 1830); MURAVEFF, Istorija rossiiskoi cerkvi (History of the Russian Church) (St. Petersburg, 1845); Ger. tr. (Karlsruhe, 1857); PHILARÈTE, Istorija russkoi cerkvi (Tchernigoff, 1862); Ger. tr. (Frankfort, 1872); BOISSARD, L'Eglise de Russie (2 vols., Paris, 1867); HEARD, The Russian Church (London, 1887); FRANK, Russisches Christentum (Paderborn, 1889); VANNUTELLI, Studio religioso sopra la Russia (2 vols., Rome, 1892); RUNKEVITCH, Istorija russkoi cerkvi pod upravlemiem sv. synoda (History of the Russian Church under the Government of the Holy Synod) (St. Petersburg, 1900); DENISOFF, Pravoslavnye monastyri rossiiskoi imperii (The Orthodox Monasteries of the Russian Empire) (Moscow, 1908). The most complete history of the Russian Church is that of the Metropolitan MACARIUS, Istorija russkoi cerkvi (12 vols., St. Petersburg, 1883-1903). A complete bibliography of the Orthodox Russian Church is to be found in PALMIERI, La Chiesa russa (Florence, 1908), and IDEM, Theologia dogmatica orthodoxa, I (Florence, 1911). SEMLER, De primis initiis christianœ religionis inter Russos (Halle, 1762); Dissertatio de origine christianœ religionis in Russia (Rome, 1826); GOETZ, Staat und Kirche in Altrussland (Berlin, 1908); BOTCHKAREFF, Stoglav i istorija sobora (The Council of the Hundred Chapters and its History) (Jukhnoff, 1906); KAPTEREFF, Kharakter otnoshenii Rossii ko pravoslavnomu vostoku v XVI i XVII stolietijakh (Nature of the Relations of Russia with the Orthodox East in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries) (Moscow, 1885); BACMEISTER, Beyträge zur Lebensgeschichte des Patriarchen Nikon (Riga, 1788); HÜBBENET, Istoritcheskoe izsliedovanie diela patriarkha Nikona (Historical Researches on the Case of the Patriarch Nikon) (2 vols., St. Petersburg, 1882-84); PALMER, The Patriarch and the Tsar (London, 1871), 73, 76; KAPTEREFF, Patriarkh Nikon i car Aleksiej Mikhailovitch (Sergievo, 1909); BLAGOVIDOFF, Ober-prokurory Svj. Synoda v XVIII i v pervoi polovinie XIX stoljetija (The Procurators General of the Holy Synod in the eighteenth and the first part of the nineteenth centuries) (Kazan, 1900); TITLINOFF, Pravitelstvo imperatricy Anny Joannovny v ego otnoshenjiakh k dielam pravoslavnoi cerkv (The Government of the Empress Anna Joannovna and her relations with the Orthodox Church) (Vilna, 1905); THEINER, Die Staatskirche Russlands im J. 1839 (Schaffhausen, 1844); GOLOVINE, Mémoires d'un prêtre russe ou la Russie religeuse (Paris, 1849); LENZ, De Duchoborzis (Dorpat, 1829); IGNACE, ARCHBISHOP OF VORONEZH, Istorija o reaskolakh v cerkvi rossiiskoi (History of the sects of the Russian Church) (St. Petersburg, 1849); Le raskol: essai historique et critique sur les sectes religieuses en Russie (St. Petersburg, 1859); ORLOF, Quelques réflexions sur les sectes religieuses en Russie (Paris, 1858, 1882); PFIZMAIER, Die Gottesmenschen. und Skopzen in Russland (Vienna, 1883); IDEM, Die Gefühlsdichtungen der Chlysten (Vienna, 1885); VON GERBEL, EMBACH, Russische Sektirer (Heilbr nn, 1883); TSAKNI, La Russie sectaire (Paris, 1887); DALTON, Der Stundismus in Russland (Gütersloh, 1896); GEHRING, Grundzüge zur Geschichte der russischen Sekten (Leipzig, 1898); IDEM, Die Sekten der russischen Kirche (Leipzig, 1898); BOROZDIN, Protopop Avvakum (St. Petersburg, 1898); GRASS, Die geheime heilige Schrift der Skopzen (Leipzig, 1904); IDEM, Die russischen Sekten (Leipzig, 1905); SÉVÉRAC, La secte russe des hommes de Dieu (Paris, 1906); ANDERSON, Staroobrjadtchestvo i sektantsvo (The Old Believers and the Russian Sectarians) (St. Petersburg, 1908). The best historical works on the Russian Raskol are those of SMIRNOFF (St. Petersburg, 1882); IVANOVSKIJ (Kazan, 1905); and PLOTNIKOFF (St. Petersburg, 1905). BÜSCHING, Geschichte der evangelisch-lutherischen Gemeinen im russischen Reich (2 vols., Altona, 1766); GROTS, Beytrag zur Geschichte der evang.-lutherischen Kirchen in Russland (1772); JUNGBLUT, Die Gründung der evangelisch-luterischen Kirchen in Russland (St. Petersburg, 1855); FROMMANN, Die evangelische Kirche im Russland (Berlin, 1868); HUNNIUS, Die evangelisch-lutherische Kirche Russlands (Leipzig, 1877); DALTON, Beyträge zur Geschichte der evangelischen Kirche in Russland (Gotha, 1887, 1889, 1905); CVIETAEFF, Protestanty i protestantsvo v Rossii (Moscow, 1890); DALTON, Zur Geschichte der evangelischen Kirche in Russland (Leipzig, 1903); EGGERS, Die evangelisch-lutherischen Gemeinden. in Russland (St. Petersburg, 1909); GERNET, Geschichte der allerhöchst bestätigten Unterstützungskasse für evangelisch-lutherische Gemeinden in Russland (St. Petersburg, 1909). A. PALMIERI. Russian Language and Literature Russian Language and Literature The subject will be treated under the following heads, viz. I. RUSSIAN LANGUAGE; II. ANCIENT POPULAR LITERATURE; III. FIRST MONUMENTS OF RUSSIAN LITERATURE; IV. LITERATURE FROM THE ELEVENTH TO THE THIRTEENTH CENTURIES; V. LITERATURE FROM THE FOURTEENTH TO THE SIXTEENTH CENTURIES; VI. LITERATURE OF LITTLE RUSSIA AND GREAT RUSSIA IN THE SEVENTEENTH CENTURY; VII. RUSSIAN LITERATURE OF THE TIME OF PETER THE GREAT; VIII. LITERATURE OF RUSSIA IN THE EIGHTEENTH CENTURY; IX. LITERATURE OF RUSSIA IN THE NINETEENTH CENTURY; X. CONTEMPORARY RUSSIAN LITERATURE. I. RUSSIAN LANGUAGE Russian is a Slav language belonging to the Indo-European family. The dispersion of the Slav tribes in prehistoric times resulted in the formation of various Slav dialects, of which Shafarik counted twelve, although other writers recognize only six or seven. The Slav dialects are divided into the South-Eastern dialects and the Western dialects. To the former, which culminate in the Bulgarian, belongs the Russian, or rather the three Russian dialects of Great Russia, Little Russia, and White Russia. Russian has many affinities with the Bulgarian and Servian languages, because Russia received her primitive literature from the Bulgarians and Servians. The absence of documents, however, makes it impossible to define with precision the character of the primitive language of Russia, or rather the relations between that language and the Russian of literature. According to Sreznevski and Lavroff, the similarity between the two languages was almost complete, and consisted in turns of expression rather than in grammatical forms. Before the thirteenth century, the literary, ecclesiastical, and administrative language was one. But in the fourteenth century the ecclesiastical language began to differ from the literary language and this difference grew considerably in the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries. The Palæoslavic or ecclesiastical language, however, varied little in either case from the language of the people. In time Russian underwent local changes of form that gave rise to the dialects of Kieff, Novgorod, Vladimir, and Moscow. The Vareghi, the Greeks, the Tatars, the Lithuanians, and the Poles left traces of their political domination on the language of Russia, and in the time of Peter the Great many words were added from German, French, and English. The question of the primitive language of Russia is connected with the ethnological question, and in the nineteenth century gave rise to lengthy and spirited polemics which, however, led to no definite results. A leading work for the study of this controversy is Buslaeff's "Historical Grammar of the Russian Language" (1858). Political and nationalist questions also enter into the philological researches concerning the primitive language of Russia. The Ruthenians, or Little Russians, claim that their language was the original Russian, and therefore that primitive Russian literature should rather be called Ruthenian. On the other hand Sobolevski and the nationalists of Great Russia declare that the present Ruthenian is not the primitive language of Kieff. This philological controversy between the nationalists of Little Russia and those of Great Russia has not yet terminated. II. ANCIENT POPULAR LITERATURE From its earliest history Russia has possessed a literature that was handed down by tradition from generation to generation. It was not before the seventeenth century that this literature took a written form. The collection of Russian proverbs was begun: in the eighteenth century Daniloff published the first collection of Russian byline: at the end of the same century and at the beginning of the nineteenth, Tchulkoff, Popoff, and Macaroff published the first collections of popular songs. Upon this literature, which conveys so much information on the religious, civil, and social life of primitive Russia, great light was thrown by the studies of Kalaidovitch, Snegireff, Sakharoff, Kirieevski, Bielinski, Athanasieff, Kostomoroff, Maikoff, Buslaeff, Bezsonoff, and Vselovski. The popular Russian songs are divided into several classes. There are the mystic or ritual songs (obriadnyia piesni), which were sung in the sacred games, and on other solemn occasions; they contain many memories of the ancient pagan feasts, celebrating the glories of Dazh-Bog (the sun-god), of Koliada (traced by Russian writers to the Latin Calendœ), and of Ovsen. Others, illustrating the promiscuity of pagan tradition, celebrate the birth of Jesus Christ (sviatotchnyja piesni); others relate to the spring feasts (vesnianki), or accompany the dance (khorovodnyja). To this same class belong the nuptial songs (svadebnyja), the kupal'skija (literally, songs of the baths), the rusal'nyja, in honour of the Rusalke, a term that probably served to designate the souls of the departed. The byline are the most beautiful treasures of this popular literature, of which they form the heroic cycle. The term byline is derived from the verb byl (it was), and etymologically signifies the recital of that which happened in times gone by. They tell of the deeds of the legendary heroes of primitive Russia. History, legend, and mythology together furnish the matter of these epic songs. In them the Russian heroes are called bogatyr, a name that some believe to be derived from Bog (God), as if they were demigods; others believe that the term is derived from Tatar or Mongolian; and yet others from the Sanskrit (bhaga, force, happiness). The heroes who are immortalized in the byline belong to the epoch of Vladimir the Great, or to more ancient times, and partake of a mythological character. These heroes, who act together with those of the time of Vladimir the Great, but nevertheless are endowed with a mythological character, are Sviatogor, Mikula Selianinovitch, Volga Sviatoslavitch, Sukhman Odikhmantévitch, and Don Ivanovitch; the historians of Russian literature designate them by the epithet of starshie ("ancient heroes"). The "young heroes" (mladshie) belong historically to the epoch of Vladimir; their names are Elia Muromec, Dobrynja Nikititch, Alesha Popovitch, Solovei Budimirovitch, etc. Kieff is so to speak, their geographical centre, and Vladimir their star. In the Russian chronicles they are mentioned between the eleventh and thirteenth centuries. Elia of Murom lived at the end of the twelfth century, and his remains rest in the grotto of the sanctuary of Petcherskaia at Kieff. They combat the monsters that assail Russia from within or from without, that is, paganism and thieves among the first, and the Petchenegi, the Polovcy, and the Chozari among the second. The historical, philological, and poetical importance of these ancient monuments of literature is very great. Other byline of later date, more commonly called historical songs, refer to the Tatar invasions, to the period of Ivan the Terrible, and also to that of Peter the Great. The songs and legends of Little Russia are called dumy (elegies, ballads), and celebrate the struggles of the Cossacks and Little Russians against the Turks or Tatars and the Poles, and the union of Little Russia with Great Russia. The songs that refer to domestic life are called bytovyja piesni. They sing the popular feasts and games, and the sad as well as happy events of domestic life, while they preserve many traces of paganism. The best collections of them are those of Tchulkoff (St. Petersburg, 1770-74); Novikoff (Moscow, 1780-81); and Sakharoff (St. Petersburg, 1838-39). To popular literature belong the fanciful novels called skazki, which resemble somewhat the stories of the Fates. Their protagonists are strange beings created by the ardent popular fancy, Baba-Iaga, serpents with six or twelve heads, stags, horses, etc. The forces of nature are personified. At times the mythological element predominates in them entirely; and again it is blended with Christianity. The oldest novels are characterized by their simplicity and by the repose of their recital. Some of them, like the one entitled "The Judgment of Shemjaka", are satirical compositions. Others are derived from Western novels, especially the Italian. The proverbs also belong to popular literature. They are called poslovicy, and are very abundant, the first complete collection of them having been made by D. Kniazhevitch in 1822. They are the spontaneous product of the wisdom, caustic spirit, and rudimentary culture of the Russian people, and reflect the various historical ages of Russia. Some of them date from pagan times, others emanate from the people's knowledge of Holy Scripture, and others originate in the events that produced the greatest impressions on the popular imagination. To popular literature belong also the enigmas or riddles (zagadki), collected by Khudiakoff (Moscow, 1861) and by Sadovinikoff (St. Petersburg, 1876); the incantations (zagovory), the conjurations (zakliatia), and the lullabies (platchi), which are most useful for the study of Russian folk-lore and primitive Russian life. III. FIRST MONUMENTS OF RUSSIAN LITERATURE The first written literature of Russia is coincident with the conversion of Russia to Christianity. Bulgaria was the first Slav educator of Russia, and the first translations of the Scriptures and the liturgies were Bulgarian. The most ancient monument of Russian literature, and at the same time of the ecclesiastical Palæoslavic language common to the primitive Slav Christians, is the Gospel called "Ostromirovo", written at Novgorod in 1056-57 by the Deacon Gregor, by order of Ostromir, first magistrate (posadnik) of the city. This valuable document was published by Vostokoff in 1843. Ancient Russian literature is of an eminently religious character. The greater portion of its monuments are sermons, homilies, letters, lives of saints, pilgrimages; even the profane works, as chronicles and voyages, have a religious tone. On the other hand, owing to the fact that the Russians received their Christianity from Byzantium, their literature was openly Byzantine in character, the early Russians either translating the Byzantine works, or being inspired by the spirit of those works, and writing as if they were Byzantines. Primitive Russian literature, however, was subject also to other influences. The Slav influence was due to the Bulgarians and Servians, who, until the fifteenth century, gave many cultured men to Russia, e. g., the Metropolitan Cyprian and Gregor Camblak. Greek influence lasted a longer time, and flourished in the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries. Russian literature in the beginning consisted of translations from the Greek and of original works. Its development was very slow, because the prices of codices were very high. The copying of books was considered not only a useful contribution to culture, but a supernatural work. The Princess of Polotsk, St. Euphrosyne (twelfth century), copied books, a work to which monks, and even bishops, devoted themselves. Russian monks were wont to go to Constantinople, or to Mount Athos, and there to become amanuenses and enrich the first Russian libraries by their work. The first books that were translated were those of the Holy Scriptures that were most used by the people (Psalms, the Gospels, Proverbs, Wisdom of Solomon, Ecclesiastes, Wisdom of Jesus the son of Sirach). There were also collections of extracts from the Holy Scriptures, called Paremii. The translation of all the books of the Holy Scriptures in a single codex was made in 1499, by order of Gennadius Gonzoff, Archbishop of Novgorod (1484-1504). Simultaneously with the Holy Scriptures, the writings of the Fathers of the Church were greatly in vogue, especially those of St. John Chrysostom. Highly esteemed also were the doctrinal explanations of St. Cyril of Jerusalem, the canons of St. Basil, the homilies of St. Theodore the Studite, the discourses of St. Athanasius against Arianism, the discourses of St. Gregory of Nazianzus, the "Klimax" of St. John Climacus, and the works of St. Isaac the Syrian, St. Ephraem the Syrian, and St. John Damascene. Until the seventeenth century, the theological writings of St. John Damascene were the sources of Russian Orthodox theology. The great popularity of the works of the Fathers gave rise to the formation of collections of extracts from their discourses, and to annotated copies, with explanations, for the study of their writings, called sborniki, of which there are several: "Zlatoust", a collection of moral sermons and homilies (112), mostly from St. John Chrysostom; "Margarit", another collection from St. John Chrysostom, included in the monologue of the Metropolitan Macarius, and published for the first time at Ostrog in 1596; "Izmaragd", a collection of sermons and homilies from St. Basil, St. John Chrysostom, St. Ephraem, St. Gregory the Great, and St. Cyril of Alexandria; "Andriatis", a collection of the homilies recited by St. John Chrysostom at Antioch; "Zlataia ciep" (golden chain), a collection of discourses on the moral virtues, taken from the Fathers of the Church and from Russian writers; the "Ptchely" (bees), a collection of the literary flowers of St. Maximus the Confessor. The famous "Sbornik" of Sviatoslaff Yaroslaffitch, Prince of Tchernigoff, which was translated in Bulgaria from the Greek, for the Tsar Simeon, in 1073, also has texts from the Fathers and from profane writers. The Greek synaxaria, the Patereka of Sinai and Jerusalem, translated in the twelfth and thirteenth centuries, and the "Patericon" of the Petcherskaia Shrine of Kieff, which is very valuable for the study of primitive Russian hagiology, are of a sacro-historical character. The Greek synaxaria took in Russian the name of Prologos. Collections of discourses in honour of the feasts of Our Lord, of the Blessed Virgin, and of the saints received the name of "Torzhestvenniki". An historical compendium of the Old Testament, called "Palei", from palaia diatheke, dates from the earliest times of Russian Christianity. The oldest codices of the "Palei" are of the fourteenth century, but their origin is much older. To sacred and profane literature belong the so-called chronographoi, collections and transformations of writings of Byzantine chroniclers, especially of Malala, Amartolos, Manasses, and Zonaras, as also the Slav version of the "Christian Topography" of Cosmas Indicopleustes. Partly to sacro-profane and partly to profane literature belong many novels and stories translated from Byzantine, Servian, and Bulgarian writings, in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries. One of the most famous novels, taken from the literature of Constantinople, is the history of Barlaam and Josaphat. At the end of the sixteenth century, the influence of Polish literature helped to spread in Russia two works that were much in vogue in the West, the "Gesta Romanorum", and the "Speculum Magnum." The apocryphal books of the Old Testament (story of Adam and Eve; story of the Tree of the Cross; story of the Just Enoch, etc.), and those of the New Testament (story of Aphroditian on the miracles in Persia; dispute of Christ with the Devil; conversation of Adam and Lazarus in Limbo, etc.) were also widely disseminated in the literature of that time. There were also translated into Palæorussian the "Elucidarium sive dialogus de summa totius religionis christianæ", attributed to Honorius of Autun by Migne; books of magic and books of astrology ("Gromnik", "Molnianik", "Koliadnik", etc). Under the influence of this literature, religious songs were created that became very popular with the people (Dukhovnye stikhi). These little poems or songs treat of the most varied subjects, and it is very difficult to divide them into different classes. They are of a moral and religious character, referring to the Creation, to St. Michael the Archangel, to the sufferings of the damned, to the birth or passion of Jesus Christ, to the Russian saints, etc. And beside these poetical productions sprang up the hagiological legends, of which the best known refer to St. Nicholas of Myra, St. Parasceve, and St. Cassian. The deep researches of Arkhangelski and Sobolevski throw a great deal of light on the Russian versions of the Fathers and of the Byzantine writings. IV. LITERATURE FROM THE ELEVENTH TO THE THIRTEENTH CENTURIES Russian literature, properly so called, from the period of the advent of Christianity in Russia to the time of Peter the Great, comprises discourses, instructions, and letters that are intended to infuse Christian sentiments, and to draw the people from pagan practices; polemical works, directed at first against the Latins, and later against the first Russian heresies; lives of saints, chronicles, and historical Works, pilgrimages and voyages, and juridical monuments. There is almost a total absence of poetry. The first centres of culture were Kieff and Novgorod; in the sixteenth century, Moscow. Among the writers who left a name for sacred eloquence in the period from the eleventh to the thirteenth centuries, mention is made of Luke Zhidiata, Archbishop of Novgorod (1035-59), whose discourse is a brief recapitulation of the truths of the Faith; St. Hilarion, Metropolitan of Kieff in 1051, whose discourses contain very valuable data for the early history of Russian Christianity; the Blessed Theodosius Petcherski, who wrote discourses for the people and the monks; Nicephorus, Metropolitan of Kieff (1104-20), whose discourses and letters, written in Greek were translated later into Russian; Cyril of Turoff (1171-82), a brilliant writer who, on account of his natural and vigorous eloquence, resembling that of St. John Chrysostom, is called the Chrysostom of Russia. His discourses, homilies, writings on monastic life, and prayers are among the most important monuments of the ancient ecclesiastical literature of Russia. The polemics against the Latins found almost their only exponents among the Greeks who in the beginning governed the Russian dioceses. Leontius, metropolitan (992-1008), wrote against the Arians; George, metropolitan (1065-73), wrote a "Dispute with a Latin", in which the various pretended innovations of the Roman Church are attacked; Ivan II (1186-89) is the author of a letter to Clement III, in which the Latins are reproved only on account of the insertion of the Filioque in the Creed. The letter on the Faith of the Vareghi (or Variazhskoi vierie), which by some is attributed, although without strong arguments, to St. Theodosius Petcherski, is believed by some to be of Russian origin. Among the first Russian hagiologists mention should be made of Jacob, a monk of the Petcherskaia hermitage, who wrote an account of the martyrdom of Sts. Boris and Glieba, and the panegyric of St. Vladimir; of Nestor, the most famous of the ancient Russian writers, a monk of the hermitage of Kieff, who died in 1114. He is the author of the lives of Boris and Glieba of the Blessed Theodosius, and of a chronicle ("Lietopis") The original of the chronicle of Nestor has not come down to us; the most ancient copy of it is that of the monk Lawrence, made in 1377 for Demetrius Constantinovitch, Prince of Suzdal. Nestor was not the first Russian chronicler. Other chroniclers, whose names and works have not been handed down to our times, wrote before him at Novgorod. The national and literary importance of the chronicle of Nestor is very great. The Russians rightly consider it as an epic history, warm with the love of country. It finishes with the year 1110, but was continued by other writers, under various names, as "Chronicle of Kieff", "Chronicle of Volhynia", "Chronicle of Suzdal", etc. They are of an eminently religious character, and abound in texts from the Scriptures and in ascetic considerations. Another important work in which the Russian national sentiment predominates is the journey of the higumeno Daniel (thirteenth century) to the Holy Places: before the Holy Sepulchre he prays "for all the land of Russia". Anthony, Archbishop of Novgorod, visited Constantinople four years after the taking of that city by the Latins (1204), and left a short but very important description of its churches and monasteries. To profane literature belong the "Testament" Vladimir Monomachus, written in 1099, in which its author gives a recital of his enterprises; and the celebrated account of the battle of Igor ("Slovo" or "Polku Igorevie"), which was found in 1795 in the library of Count Musin Pushkin. It is the only poetical work of the Russia of the princes, and relates the military expedition of Igor Sviatoslavitch, Prince of Novgorod-Sieverski, against the Polovcy (1185). It is characterized by the grandeur of its poetical sentiment, the beauty of its descriptions, and love of country. In the twelfth century was written the discourse of Daniel Zatotchnik (Captivus), who, imprisoned in the Government of Olonetz, writes to a prince to ask for his liberty, making a great display of his learning. Among the juridical monuments of that age we may cite the "Russkaia Pravda" (Russian code) of Prince Yaroslaff I, and the Greek Nomocanon, translated in the earliest times of Russian Christianity, and qualified with the epithet of Kormtchaia kniga, corresponding to the Greek pedalion. To the nomocanon were added the "Ecclesiastical Regulations" ("Cerkovnye ustavy") of Vladimir and Yaroslaff, which however are not of those princes, at least in the form in which they have been transmitted to us in codices of the thirteenth century. The monasteries were centres of the literary culture of Russia in the eleventh and twelfth centuries; and the Greco-Russian clergy laboured for the diffusion of it. From the Greek clergy came the polemical works, and the hatred of the Latins that became fixed in the hearts of the Russian people. The first Greek polemics who lived in Russia spread the most absurd calumnies against the Latins, and anathematized as heretical the most simple liturgical customs: the Metropolitan George enumerated twenty-seven points of divergence between the Greeks and Latins. The thirteenth century is very poor from the standpoint of literature. The Tatar invasions stopped the progress of culture, and prevented intellectual work. Among the literary monuments of that century are cited a letter of Simon, Bishop of Vladimir (1215-26), to Polycarp, a monk of the Petcherskaia hermitage; the life of Abraham of Smolensk, a most important historical document; the sermons of Serapion, Bishop of Vladimir (1274-75), and a synodal and canonical decision of Cyril II, Metropolitan of Kieff (1243-80), which is inserted in the Kormtchaia kniga. V. LITERATURE FROM THE FOURTEENTH TO THE SIXTEENTH CENTURIES In the period from the fourteenth to the sixteenth centuries, literary culture, paralyzed by Tatar oppression in the region of Kieff, continued to flourish at Novgorod and Pskof, and from there was carried to other centres, viz., Vladimir, Rostoff, Murom, Yaroslaff, Tver, Ryazan, and finally Moscow, which received the name of the Third Rome. In the fourteenth century sacred sermons were written by various authors, among whom were Peter, Metropolitan of Moscow; Alexei, another metropolitan of Moscow (1293-1377) who, in a codex of the Gospel which he transcribed, corrected the ancient Slav version in many points, by the Greek original; Matvei, Bishop of Sarai; the metropolitan Cyprian (1376-1406), a Servian by birth, who also left various letters and translated the Psalter, the Missal (Sluzhebnik), the Nomocanon, etc.; the Blessed Cyril, founder of the monastery of Bielozero, the author of several letters to the sons of Prince Demetrius Donskoi; Basil, Archbishop of Novgorod (1331-1352), who wrote a letter to Feodor, Bishop of Tver, to convince him of the existence of a terrestrial paradise. Brief descriptions of Constantinople and its churches in the fourteenth century were left by Stephen, a monk of Novgorod, by Ignatius, a deacon of Smolensk, and by Alexandr D'jak ("judge", "magistrate"). Among the novels special mention should be made of the "Zadonshina", written by Sofronio or Sofonio of Ryazan, an epic story that relates the military acts of Prince Demetrius Donskoi, who vanquished the Tatars at Kulikovo (1380). In the fifteenth century the beginning of heresies in Russian Christianity, which originated in the decadence of monastic asceticism as well as in the gross ignorance of the clergy and laity, opened up new fields to Russian religious polemics. Photius, Metropolitan of Moscow (1410-31) and Gregor Camblak, Metropolitan of Kieff (1416) composed letters and moral sermons; Gennadius, Archbishop of Novgorod (1485-1504), wrote against the sect of the Judaizers, which originated in that city about 1471; the higumeno Josef Sanin of Polotsk assailed the same sect in his tedious work "Prosvietitel" ("the illuminator"). Nil Sorski (1433-1508), founder of a hermitage on the banks of the Sora River, is the author of writings that were directed towards the reformation of the ideals and the life of Russian monasticism. Among the travellers of this period Zosimus, hiero-deacon of the hermitage of St. Sergius, and a merchant, Basil, left accounts of their pilgrimages to the Holy Land. Simeon, hiero-monk of Suzdal, accompanied Isidore, Metropolitan of Moscow, to the Council of Florence, and left an interesting recital of his voyage to Italy, and a short but important account of the council, which is one of the monuments of the Russian polemics against the Latins. Anthony Nikitin, a merchant of Tver, went to India through Persia in 1466, returned to his country in 1472, and in the account of his travels gave important information on the religious beliefs of the people of India. In historical literature, besides the valuable sketch of the Council of Florence, there should be mentioned the account of the foundation and the taking of Constantinople, which was very popular among the Russians. The sixteenth century, as Porfiréff rightly states, was one of criticism and restoration. Its literature, always eminently religious, proposed to revive the ancient customs, and the ancient traditions, and to restore religion and the family. The most famous and most learned champion of these reforms was Maximus the Greek, born at Arta, in Albania, and educated in Italy. He entered monastic life on Mount Athos, and in 1518 repaired to Russia, where he took an active part in the religious life of the country, and in the correction of the liturgical books; he suffered a painful imprisonment in various monasteries, from 1525 to 1553, and died at the hermitage of St. Sergius in 1556. A most learned theologian, he wrote polemical works against the Gentiles, the Jews, the Judaizers, the Mohammedans, and the Latins, especially in opposition to the supremacy of the pope and to the Filioque; he combatted astrology, and wrote short works and discourses on moral subjects. Among the Russian prelates of the sixteenth century, Daniel, elected Metropolitan of Moscow in 1522, acquired fame. He was the author of sixteen discourses that prove him to have read assiduously, and to have had a profound knowledge of patristic literature. The most important monument of the literature of the sixteenth century is the "Domostroi", attributed to Sylvester, a priest who was the contemporary of Ivan the Terrible; Sylvester was, however, the compiler rather than the author of the work. It is a book of a moral character, in which are propounded the rules for living according to the precepts of the Faith and Christian piety, the duties of man as a member of the family, and the way to govern the home well and to care for domestic economy. The "Domostroi", therefore, is a compendium of the duties of a Christian man, and at the same time a true picture of the social and domestic organization of Russia in the sixteenth century. Another great work, which had remained unpublished until now but which the Archæographical Commission of St. Petersburg is now bringing to light, is the "Tchet'y Minei" of the Metropolitan Macarius of Moscow (1542-64). From the beginnings of its literature, Russia possessed lives of saints, the number which increased from century to century. The Metropolitan Macarius collected into a vast work the lives of all the saints of the Greco-Russian Church, adding panegyrics and discourses in their honour, and also whole books of Scripture, with commentaries, writings of the Fathers, and synaxaria, so that his menologies are almost a complete répertoire of the ancient literature of Russia, rather than a simple hagiological collection. To the same century belong the hagiological legends, which are lives of the saints, or episodes in them, embellished by popular fancy, examples of which are the legends of the Tsarevitch Peter (thirteenth century), of St. Mercurius, of Martha and Mary, of Prince Peter of Murom, and of his consort, Febronia. Prince Andrew Kurbski, a warm defender of the Orthodox Church, translated the dialectics and the Pege gnoseos of St. John Damascene, and wrote a brief history of the Council of Florence and a history of Ivan the Terrible, with whom he was in correspondence; these letters are preserved to our day. An important work of religious polemics was written by the monk Zinovii of Otna, who refuted the heretical and Judaistic doctrines of Kosoi. The title of the work is "Istiny pokazanie" (demonstration of the truth), and it consists of fifty-six chapters. Of the sixteenth century there are also two small works, written in refutation of Protestantism, which at that time was beginning to spread in Russia. Among the Russian pilgrims who visited the Holy Places and who wrote an account of their travels the most distinguished are Trifon Korobeinikoff and George Grekoff, who went to Jerusalem in 1583. VI. LITERATURE OF LITTLE RUSSIA AND GREAT RUSSIA IN THE SEVENTEENTH CENTURY The seventeenth century witnessed the Renaissance of Little Russia, which became the instructor of Great Russia. Under Catholic and Polish influence Little Russia drew near to the West, assimilated Western science, and modelled its schools upon those of the Latins. The "Union" of Brest in 1596 gave an efficient impulse to Orthodox culture. Confraternities were established to open schools and printing-offices for the publication and dissemination of polemical works; among them those of Lemberg, Vilna, and Kieff were famous. Scholastic theology and philosophy entered into and dominated the Russian academies and seminaries. Latin became the official language in the teaching of theology. Peter Mogilas, Metropolitan of Kieff, transformed into a superior school of theology the school established by the Confraternity of the Church of the Apparition of the Lord. The works of St. Thomas Aquinas exercised a great influence on Orthodox theology, and in the academy of Kieff the Immaculate Conception was upheld. The literature of the religious polemics against the Latins, to which the Union of Brest gave rise, is very rich. In 1597 was published the "Ekthesis", or Orthodox history of the Union of Brest; Kristofor Bronski, under the pseudonym of Filalete, wrote the "Apokrisis" against Peter Skarga, and later the "Perestroga" (admonishment). Meletius Smotricki, Archbishop of Polotsk (died 1633), wrote the "Threnos" and other works of religious polemic, and finally embraced Catholicism; in 1622 Zacharias Kopystenski wrote the "Palinodia", the most important work in this polemical literature. The writings of Meletius Smotricki in defence of Catholicism, which he had on other occasions so strenuously opposed, were confuted by Andrew Muzkilovski, by Job Borecki, Metropolitan of Kieff, and by Gelasius Diplic. Joannikius Galiatovski, rector of the academy of Kieff (died 1688), wrote several works against the Catholics, one of them against the Filioque, confuted the Hebrews in his work "The True Messias", and also wrote several works in refutation of the Koran. Another polemic against the Latins was Lazarus Baranovitch, Archbishop of Tchernigoff (died 1694); in a work that was directed against the Jesuit Boyme, he opposed the supremacy of the pope and the Procession of the Holy Ghost from the Son. The first Orthodox catechisms appeared in the seventeenth century, written by Laurence Zizanii and by Peter Mogilas; the latter, in the work Lithos (attributed to him), defends the Orthodox Church against the charge of Protestantism; he is considered to be the author of the famous Orthodox Confession of the Eastern Church, approved by the special Council of Jassy in 1643. Among the preachers whom the sacred orators of the East sought to imitate, mention may again be made of Joannikius Galiatovski, who wrote a treatise on the art of oratory, entitled "Kliutch razumienia"; Anthony Radivilovski, higumeno of the hermitage of Kieff; and Lazarus Baranovitch. In 1591 there was published at Lemberg the first Slavo-Greek grammar; Lawrence Zizanii wrote a Slav grammar in 1596, and the grammar of Meletius Smotricki was published in 1619. Zizanii added a small Slav dictionary to his grammar, but the first Slavo-Russian lexicon was published by Berynda, hiero-monk of Kieff, in 1627. Western influence is revealed also in the poetry of the academy of Kieff. Besides the sacred cantata, the "Mysteries" were introduced to the schools and colleges; these "Mysteries" were sacred plays, modelled upon those of the Jesuit colleges. Among the historical works of Little Russia, mention should be made of the "Synopsis" of the history of Russia by Innocent Gizel, Archimandrite of Kieff, the "Enegesis" or history of the school of Kieff, and the"Paterikon" of the Petcherskaia hermitage by Sylvester Kossoff, Metropolitan of Kieff (died 1657). From Kieff Western culture was carried to Moscow, to which city masters and learned men of Little Russia were called to organize schools, compose works, and print books; but they did not receive a friendly welcome. Their orthodoxy was suspected; the more so since several of the most illustrious theologians of Kieff admitted with the Latins the dogmatic truth of the Immaculate Conception, and the efficacy of the words of consecration alone to effect Transubstantiation. The suspicion against the purity of their theological teachings became so strong that the Russians turned to the Greeks for masters. In 1685 the Greek school was established at Moscow, and in time took the name of Greco-Slav-Latin Academy. Its first masters were the Greek hieromonks Joannikius and Sophronius Likhudes, who had studied in Italy, and who taught Greek literature at Moscow from 1685 to 1694. They wrote many polemical works against the Latins, against Protestants, and against the theologians of Little Russia who leaned towards the Latins, especially against Sylvester Medviedeff. In ecclesiastical literature the most distinguished authors were Epiphanius Slavinecki, the first of Russian bibliographers; Arsenius Sukhanoff, author of "A Voyage to the Holy Land" ("Proskynitarion"); Simon Polocki (of Polotsk), author of one of the first systematic treatises on Orthodox theology ("Vienec viery"), and also of sermons that are highly prized, of sacred poems, and of sacred plays; St. Demetrius of Rostoff (1651-1709), one of the most illustrious bishops of the Russian Church, a theologian, historian, poet, polemic, and hagiologist. He was the author of two Orthodox catechisms, of a very strong work against the Raskolniki ("Rozysk"), of a diary of his life, the "Tcheti minei" (menologies), a work upon which he spent twenty years; many sacred discourses that are appreciated for the simplicity of their style and for their depth of religious sentiment, and, finally, of several sacred plays, one of the most interesting of which is the "Birthday". Epiphanius Slavinecki and an unnamed priest of Orel were also distinguished as sacred orators. The former rendered a great service to Patristic literature by translating into Russian a great many of the writings of the Fathers (St. Justin, St. Gregory of Nazianzus, St. Basil, and St. John Damascene). One of his scholars, Eutimius, wrote a polemical work, called "Osten", against the theories of Sylvester Medviedeff, who sided with the Latins in the question of the Epiklesis. Against the Raskolniki, besides St. Demetrius of Rostoff, there wrote Simeon of Polotsk in 1666 ("Zhely pravlenija"); in 1682 the Patriarch of Moscow, Jacob ("Uviet dukhovnii"); likewise, the Metropolitan of Siberia, Ignatius, and George Krizhanitch. The latter, who was a student of the Greek College of St. Athanasius at Rome (1640), became famous on account of his theories of the cause of the schism between East and West, which he attributed to politics and the antagonism between Greeks and Latins, due to Panslavist ideas and political doctrines. The Learned Sergius Bielokuroff devoted four volumes to the life and works of Krizhanitch. In the seventeenth century there began to be published the first Greco-Latin lexicons, and also the first scientific books, arithmetics and geographies. Historical literature is represented by the chronicle of the Patriarch Nicomachus, which is brought down to 1631; by the chronicle called "Voskresenski", after the monastery where it was written, of which the relation finishes with the year 1560; and by several special chronicles, as the account of the siege of the Shrine of St. Sergius by the Poles in 1610, by Abraham Polycin, and by others of the diak Feodor Griboiedoff, of the deacon Timothy Kamevevitch Rvovski, of Andrew Lyzloff, a priest of Smolensk, and of Sergius Kubasoff. VII. RUSSIAN LITERATURE OF THE TIME OF PETER THE GREAT Under Peter the Great there began a new period in Russian literature. The foundation of St. Petersburg put Russia in more direct contact with the West. Peter the Great, by violence and absolutism, dragged Russia out of her isolation, and directed her upon a new way. A new and more simple alphabet took the place of the old Slav alphabet, the new characters being adapted from the Latin. The first book that was printed with the new characters is a treatise on geometry (1708). In arithmetical books, Arabic figures were substituted for the Slav letters that represented numerals (1703). Schools of navigation, of military science, and of medicine were established. Peter the Great determined to establish an academy of sciences at St. Petersburg, and Catherine I carried out his project in 1726. Many foreign books were translated into Russian, and the most intelligent students were sent to foreign countries to complete their studies. Russian literature lost its ecclesiastical character and assumed a lay form; and in ecclesiastical literature itself there was effected a transformation towards the modern, due to the reforms of Peter the Great. The first period of this new literature begins with Peter the Great, and closes with Lomonosoff and Sumarokoff. In the realm of sacred literature there became famous Stephen Javorski (1658-1723), patriarchal vicar and Metropolitan of Ryazan, and Theophanus Procopovitch, Archbishop of Novgorod. (1681-1736). The former, in his "Kamen viery" (Rock of Faith), wrote a most learned refutation of Protestantism, taking much from Bellarmine; the second, who was the author of the "Ecclesiastical Regulations" of Peter the Great, wrote a voluminous course of Orthodox theology in Latin, and acquired fame as a man of letters and orator. In profane literature the influence of the French entirely predominated. There began the period of the new Russian poetry, the rules of which were propounded by Tredianovski (1703-69), who translated into Russian the "Ars Poetica" of Horace, and the work bearing the same title by Boileau. Prince Antiochus Dmitrievitch (1708-44), a Rumanian in the service of Russia, inaugurated the era of classicism in Russian poetry with his satires, which are often servile imitations of Horace, Juvenal, and Boileau. Michael Vasilevitch Lomonosoff (1711-65) deserves to be called the Peter the Great of Russian literature on account of his versatility, of the multiplicity of his works, and of his great literary influence: he wrote a treatise on Russian poetry (1739), on rhetoric (1748), on grammar (1755); he composed an epic poem on Peter the Great, two tragedies (Tamira and Salim, and Damofonte); he translated the Psalms into verse and wrote lyric poems, among which the ode to the Empress Elizabeth has remained famous. Alexander Petrovitch Sumarokoff composed many tragedies, some of them with Russian subjects (Yaropolk and Dimisa, Vysheslaff, Demetrius, Mstislav); he founded the national Russian drama, wrote the comedies "Opekun" (The Tutor), and "Likhoimec" (The Concussionist), composed satires, and in 1759 established the first Russian literary periodical, the "Trudoliubivaia Ptchela" (The Working Bee). Among the prose writers, Ivan Pososhkoff (1670-1725), in his "Zavieshanie otetcheskoe" (testament of the Fatherland), shows the necessity of well-ordered reforms in Russia, and in his book on poverty and wealth ("Kniga o skudosti i bogatstvie") he develops in an original way his theories on political and social economy. Basil Nikititch Tatishsheff (1685-1750) gathered the chronicles, the synaxaria, and the historical documents, and subjecting them to critical analysis, wrote the "History of Russia". The academician Schlötzer spent forty years elucidating the origin and the historical problems of the primitive national chronicles of Russia. In 1728 the Academy of Sciences began the publication of the "S. Petersburgskija Viedomosti", under the direction of the academician Müller, who in 1755 also founded the first scientific-literary periodical, called the "Ezhemiesatchnyja sotchinenia". VIII. LITERATURE OF RUSSIA IN THE EIGHTEENTH CENTURY During the reign of Catherine II French influence upon Russian literature became greater instead of decreasing. The writings of the French Encyclopedists and materialist philosophy became popular; Voltaire and Rousseau were much esteemed, and Catherine II became entirely imbued with a Voltairean spirit. She did not limit herself to favouring scientific institutions, and to creating new ones, but aspired to literary laurels. She wrote spelling-books,, stories for children, letters on education, comedies, newspaper articles, and several volumes of memoirs in French, in which, with a cynical simplicity of style, she relates some of the ugliest episodes of her unchaste life. During her reign many literary publications were established. The empress herself did not disdain to contribute to the "Vsiakaja vsiatchina" (General Miscellany). Dionysius Ivanovitch Fonvizin (1744-92) wrote comedies which, like the "Brigadier", and the "Nedorosl" (Pupil), became popular in Russia. Gabriel Romanovitch Derzhavin (1743-1816), of Tatar origin, assimilated the classical and modern Literatures, and as a lyric poet sought to rise to the height of Horace and Pindar. His encomiastic odes are an apotheosis of the reign of Catherine II. In his religious songs, with his "Ode to God" (1784), which the Russians regard as the most beautiful monument of their national poetry, he perhaps attains sublimity of inspiration. His moral and philosophical odes and his Anacreontic verses reveal in him a great poetical genius. His tragedies "Pozharski", "Tiemnji" and "Euprassia" do not join dramatic quality to their elegance of form. Mikhail Matveievitch Kheraskoff, of Wallachian origin, by his poems "Rossiada" and "Vladimir", which have been forgotten, deserves the title of the Virgil or the Homer of Russia. Ippolit Feodorovitch Bogdanovitch (1743-1803), in his poem "Dushenka", imitated La Fontaine's "Amours de Psyché et de Cupidon". Basil Ivanovitch Maikoff (1728-78) distinguished himself as a writer of comic poetry; Kniazhnin (1742-91) wrote tragedies and comedies; "Iabeda" (The Calumny), a comedy by Kapnist (1757-1828), was also among the plays that became popular. The scientific movement was greatly promoted by the Academy of Sciences of St. Petersburg, by the University of Moscow, and by the Russian Academy, which was opened in 1783. Among those who distinguished themselves in historical work or in the study of the social and political conditions of Russia were Shsherbatoff (1733-90), who wrote six volumes of a "History of Russia"; Boltin (1735-92), whose learned volumes of "Observations on the History of Russia", edited by Leclerc, were much praised by Soloveff; Radishsheff (1749-1802), whose "Journey from St. Petersburg to Moscow", describing the miseries of the peasants and the abuses of the Russian bureaucracy cost its author an exile of ten years in Siberia. The archpriest of Moscow, Alekseieff, wrote the first ecclesiastical encyclopedia, while the Bishop Damascenus Rudneeff, who died in 1795, published his "Russian Library", which contains an account of Russian literature, from its origin to the eighteenth century. Tchulkoff and Mikhail Popoff collected the monuments of the popular literature of their country. IX. LITERATURE OF RUSSIA IN THE NINETEENTH CENTURY In the nineteenth century, Russian literature freed itself little by little from the yoke of foreign imitation, perfected the language, making it a most adequate means for the expression of the highest conceptions of the mind and the most delicate affections of the heart, and through a number of men of genius, won a place of honour in the history of universal literature. The merit of this transformation, of this new direction of Russian thought, is in great measure due to Nikolai Mikhailovitch Karamzin (1766-1826), who acquired a great fame in his country through his letters on travels that he made in Europe, his novels, and the part that he took in the establishment of the periodicals "Moskovski Zhurnal" and the "Viestnik Europy" (Courier of Europe). But his greatest claim to glory is the "Istorija gosudarstva rossiiskago" (History of the Russian Empire), a masterpiece of style, exposition, and eloquence, which contributed more than anything else to the formation of Russian prose. Historical criticism may find more to say of this work, but the literary merit of it will never be eclipsed. The work formed a literary school, to which belong Ivan Ivanovitch Dmitrieff (1760-1837), an exponent of elegance in poetry, author of poetical stories, satires, and fables; and Izmailoff, who became famous through his "Journey in Southern Russia" etc. In the realm of dramatic poetry, there became famous Ozeroff, by his tragedy "Œdipus in Athens" (1804); "Fingal" (1805); "Dmitri Donskoi" (1807), and "Polissena" (1809); the most noted satirists were Gortchakoff and Nakhimoff. But the greatest poetical glory of this period was Vassili Andreievitch Zhukovski (1783-1852), the master of romanticism in Russia, author of the Russian national hymn "Bozhe, carja Khrani", and an indefatigable translator of Homer, Schiller, Goethe, Bürger, Uhland, Rükkert, Byron, and Scott. His elegies are full of passion and sentiment; his ballads, imitations of the German, became popular; they reveal in him a vivid poetical imagination. Ivan Andreievitch Kryloff (1768-1844) owes his celebrity rather to his comedies than to his fables, which, it is true, are imitations of La Fontaine, but are written with so much simplicity, elegance, and richness of style, with such variety of rhythm and expression, that they form a veritable literary jewel, the value of which can be appreciated only by those who have a thorough knowledge of Russian. His comedies, "Modnaja lavka" (The Custom Shop) and "Urok dotchkam" (A Lesson to Girls), are of less literary merit. As a writer of comedy, Alexander Sergeievitch Griboiedoff (1790-1829) rose to the pinnacle of the art in a play that is the masterpiece of Russian theatrical composition, "Gore ot uma" (The Misfortune of Having Talent), a work which is full of pessimism on the social conditions of Russia and civilization generally; many of its verses have become proverbs. The epoch of Nicholas I, which was one of fierce absolutism, was nevertheless one of glory in the development of Russian literature. Russian genius being oppressed, withdrew within itself, and revealed to the world the treasures of the æsthetic sentiments of the Russian soul. Among the greatest poets of this period there stands pre-eminent Alexander Pushkin (1799-1837), whose career was brought to an end in a duel, when his genius was at its height. Melchior Vogüé rightly considers him one of the greatest poets that ever lived. He began his literary career at the age of fifteen, when he was a student in the lyceum of Tsarskoye Selo. His first lyric poems bear the date of 1814, and are a revelation of his genius. He adopted Byron and Zhukovski for his models. Among those lyric poems his invective against the calumniators of Russia ("K klevetnikam Rossii"), written in 1831, is famous. Of his epic works we may cite the famous "Rusalka, the Prisoner of the Caucasus" ("Kavkazski pliennik") in 1821; the "Fountain of Bakhtchiserai" (1822-23); the "Tzigani" (1824); "Poltava" (1828), one of Pushkin's most perfect poems, written in glorification of Peter the Great; "Eugene Oniegin" (1823-31), an original imitation of Byron's "Childe Harold", admirable on account of the freshness of its inspiration and of its exquisite versification; and finally "The Hussar" (1833). Among his romances, three became popular at once, the "Dubrovski (1832-33), "The Daughter of the Captain" (1833-36), and "Pikovaja dama" (The Queen of Spades), a work that is admirable on account of the subtility of its psychological analysis. In the realm of dramatic poetry Pushkin gave to his country a great masterpiece, the tragedy "Boris Godunoff" (1825-31), and in that of drama, "Skupoi rycar" (The Avaricious Knight), "Mozart and Saléry", and "Rusalka". Among his works in prose, mention should be made of the "Outlines of the History of Peter the Great", and of the "History of the Sedition of Pugatcheff". Pushkin was the first great original poet of Russia, and the one who excelled in classic style. At the same time he was the author of a school that has among its members Ivan Ivanovitch Kozloff, author of two most touching poems, "Tchernec" (The Monk) and "Natalia Dolgorukaja"; Delvin (1798-1831); Jazykoff (1803-46), and Eugene Baratynski (1800-44). Nikolai Vassilievitch Gogol (1808-52), a native of Little Russia, was another genius of the Russian literature of the nineteenth century. His comedy, "The Reviser", published in 1836, is one of the masterpieces of the Russian theatre, a true portrait of the malversations of the bureaucracy. Among his romances and novels, he acquired merited fame through "Taras Bul'ba", an historical romance of Southern Russia, "The Dispute between Ivan Ivanovitch and Ivan Nikiforovitch", "The Portrait", "The Arabesques", "Koliaska" (The Calash), "Zapiski sumasshedshago" (Memoirs of a Madman), and lastly "Mertvyja dushi" (The Dead Souls), in two parts, a masterpiece in the romantic literature of Russia, which makes its author the rival of Cervantes and Lesage. It is a suggestive and faithful picture of Russian society: a vast theatre in which the most varied types of the Russian people are in action. Mikhail Yurievitch Lermontoff (1814-41) is also of the school of Pushkin and Byron. He was one of the most delicate lyric poets of modern Russia, whose lyric poetry, tinged with sadness, touches the deepest chords of the heart, and exhibits the soft melody of the literary language of Russia in its fullness. The most famous of his epic poems are "The Demon", which is based upon a Georgian legend, and in which the beauties of the Caucasus are described in admirable verses "Ismail Bey"; "Khadzhi-Abrek, the Boyard Orsha", an episode of the times of Ivan the Terrible; "Mcyr", a legend of the Caucasus. Lermontoff is the author of the very popular romance "Geroi nashego vremeni" (A Hero of our Times), which reveals him as one of the masters of Russian prose, and as having a profound knowledge of the human heart. He died at the age of twenty-seven years, and like Pushkin, in the plenitude of his intellectual activity. Alexei Vasilievitch Kolcoff (1809-42) also distinguished himself as a lyric poet of the school of Pushkin and Lermontoff. He was the poet of the peasants and of nature, and the inventor of a special kind of poems (Dumy), in which a question to be resolved is proposed and is answered. Other poets who also were ornaments of Russian literature, although they did not attain the height of those already mentioned, were Odoevski, Count Sollogub, Marlinski, Weltmann, Polevoi, and Kukolnik, a prolific writer of historic dramas. History, philology, and critical studies had a period of growing prosperity during the reign of Nicholas I. Pogodin, Butkoff, Ivanoff, Venelin, Grigor'eff, and Muravieff worked to defend the Russian chronicles against the charge of lack of authenticity, to throw light on the origin of the Russian nation, and to investigate the historical past of Russia and the various European nations. In the study of the ancient Slav language, and of the primitive literature of Russia, and in the collection of ancient texts, fundamental works that are yet esteemed were written by Kalaidovitch, Vostokoff, Undolski, Kliutchareff, Maximovitch, Certeleff, Snegireff, Sakharoff, and Bodianski. This class of studies were greatly promoted by the Society of Russian History and Antiquities, established at Moscow in 1814 and still flourishing. Eugene Bolkhovitinoff, Metropolitan of Kieff, prepared two historical lexicons of the clerical and lay writers of Russia; Polevoi, Shevyreff, and Nikitenko wrote histories of Russian literature; while Prince A. Viazemski, Nadezhdin, and especially Bessarion Grigorievitch Bielinski (1810-48) were the chief literary critics. Literary and scientific progress was assisted by the periodicals "Viestnik Evropy", "Russki Viestnik", "Syn Otetchestva" (The Son of the Fatherland), "Sievernaja Ptchela" (The Bee of the North), "Russki Invalid", and "Otetchestvennyja zapiski" (Memoirs of the Fatherland). During the reign of Alexander II the literary genius of Russia continued to shine brightly, and to assume always a more national character, although the influence of foreign writers, especially of Dickens, George Sand, and Balzac, was felt. There appeared the school of Slavophils, the most illustrious representatives of which are the two Kireievski (Ivan and Peter), Khomiakoff, Valueff, Konstantin and Ivan Aksakoff, Kosheleff, Elagin, Tiuttcheff, Grigorieff, Strakhoff, and Danilevski. This school was dominated by a spirit of stingy patriotism; it invaded the domain of theology, preached the superiority of Orthodoxy over Catholicism, and in the person of their theological legislator, Alexei Khomiakoff, a genial poet, historian, and philosopher, it proclaimed that Orthodoxy is the expression of the religious ideal of Christianity. The religious and political paradoxes of the Slavophils found their opponents in the school of the Occidentalists (Zapadniki). The philosopher Tchaadaeff, in his philosophical letters published in 1836, wrote of Russian barbarity, and proclaimed Catholicism to be the only means of bringing Russia into the civilization of the nations of the West. The most illustrious representatives of this school, which had not many followers, were Hercen (1812-70), who became one of the leaders of Nihilism; the poet Ogareff, Granovski, Soloveff, Kavelin, Kalatchoff, and Pavloff, illustrious names in the realms of Russian history and Russian philosophy. The most famous writer of the time of Alexander II was Ivan Sergeievitch Turgenieff (1818-83), the magician of Russian prose. As a poet his title to fame rests on the poems "Parasha", "Yakoff Pasynkoff", "Rudin", "Faust", "Asja", "A Nest of Nobles". In 1862 he published one of the most famous of Russian novels, "Otcy i dieti" (Fathers and Sons). Among the other novels of Turgenieff, the most successful were "Zapiski Okhotnika" (Memoirs of a Huntsman), rich in admirable descriptions of nature; "Dym" (Smoke); "Nov" (Virgin Soil); and among his stories: "Lear of the Steppe", "Waters of Spring", "The Brigadier", "The Dream", "The Story of Father Alexis", "The Song of Triumphant Love", "The Desperado" etc. He enriched Russian literature with several plays, among which the most beautiful is called "Zavtraku predvoditelja" (The Collation with the Marshal of the Nobility). Ivan Alexandrovitch Gontcharoff (1812-91) acquired no less fame as a novelist through his novels "Obyknovennaja istorija" (A Simple Story), "Oblomoff", which personifies the want of initiative and semi-fatalism of the Russian character, and "Obryff" (The Precipice), which was considered a decadent production. Greater fame was acquired by Feodor Mikhailovitch Dostoievski (1822-81), whose first novel, "Biednye liudi" (Poor People), published in 1846, made its author famous, at once, by the depth of its psychological analysis. After four years of a most painful imprisonment and exile to Siberia, he wrote the "Zapiski iz Mertvago Doma" (Memoirs of the House of the Dead), in which he describes the tortures of the exiles with a most effective vigour of style; the famous novel "Prestuplenie Nakazanie" (Crime and Punishment), a psychological masterpiece, "The Idiot", "Biezy" (The Possessed), and "The Brothers Karamazoff". To romantic literature also belong Dimitri Vassilievitch Grigorovitch, an imitator of George Sand, and a faithful portrayer of the sufferings of the lower classes, in his romances and novels, among which we will mention "Derevnia" (The Village), "Anthony Goremyka", "The Valley of Smiedoff", "The Fishermen", and "The Colonists". In other novels he described the life and condition of the middle and higher classes, as in "Neudavshaajasja zhizn" (An Uneventful Life), "Suslikoff the Kapelmeister", "The School of Hospitality", etc. The naturalist school was represented by Alexei Teofilaktovitch Pisemski (1820-81). In the novel "Bojarshshina" (The Time of the Boyars), he preached free love: the censorship prohibited the circulation of the book. In another novel, "Tiufiak" (The Plaster), his realism goes beyond that of Zola. His best novel is "Tysjatcha dush" (A Thousand Souls), a gloomy but faithful picture of the corruption of Russian society, which is portrayed also in his novel "Vzgalamutchennoe More" (Tempestuous Sea); his novel "Liudi sokorovykh godoff" (Men of Forty Years) deals with the agrarian question. His play "Gorkaja sudhina" (Bitter Destiny) places him in a high position among Russian dramatists. Other writers proposed to scourge the corrupters of society, to pierce them with the arrows of their satire. They form a literary school known in Russia as oblitchitel naja (accusing, refuting). The master of this school was Mikhail Evgrafovitch Saltykoff (1826-88), better known by the pseudonym of Shshedrin. The characters in his novels recall those of Gogol, but his pessimism is much more bitter and exaggerated. Among the best-known of his novels and other writings are "Protivorietckia" (Contradictions), "Gubernskie otcherki" (Sketches of Government Personages), "Tashkency" (The Lords of Tashkend), and "The Brothers Golovieff", a novel that is considered the best work of Saltykoff, but is displeasing on account of the cynicism of its characters. Other writers worked with the same end of laying bare the moral and social defects of the Russian people; the most famous among them are Pomialovski (1835-63), whose novel "Otcherki bursy" is famous; it describes in dark colours the methods of education that obtain in the ecclesiastical seminaries of Russia; A. Sliepcoff, author of the novel "Trudnoe Vremja" (Difficult Times); A. Mikhailoff, the pseudonym of Scheller, who wrote the novels "Gnilyja bolota" (Putrid Swamps), and "The Life of Shupoff"; Zasodimski; Bazhin; Thedoroff; Staniukovitch; and Girs. More moderate in their criticism of Russian society were the novelists Boborykin, Markoff, Nemirovitch-Dantchenko, and Terpigoreff (better known by his pseudonym of Atava), Saloff, Akhsharumoff, Leikin, Kliushnikoff, Lieskoff, Krestovski, Prince Meshsherki, Markevitch, Avsieensko, Golovin, and Avenarius. The most noted authors of lyric and satirical poetry were: Nikolai Alexeievitch Nekrasoff (1821-76), whose muse, as he himself wrote, was one of sobs and pains, the muse of the hungry and the mendicant; of his songs, there became famous "Moroz Krasnyi Noz" (Red-nosed Frost), a personification of the Russian winter, "Troika", and "The Sons of the Peasants"; in his poems he has a predilection for popular types; A. Pleshsheeff, who to his lyric poems added beautiful translations of the principal German and English lyric poets; Kurotchkin, who translated Béranger, and Minaeff. The most noted of the dramatists was Alexander Nicolaevitch Ostrovski (1823-86), whose theatrical compositions, admirable for the richness of their language, are partly original, and partly imitations of Shakespeare and Goldoni. The best known one is "Groza" (The Tempest), which describes the dissolution of the Russian family; it was written in 1860. Two of his comedies that obtained great success are "We will agree among ourselves", and "Each one in his place". The number of his theatrical works is very great. Another among the best of Russian dramatists was A. Palm (1822-85), author of the drama "Alexis Slobodin", and of the comedies "Staryi barin" (The Old Lord), and "Our Friend Nekliuzheff". Mention should be made also of A. Potiekhin, N. Tchernysheff, N. Soloveff, Sukhovo-Kobylin, Sollogub, Diakonoff, Ustrialoff, Mann, Diatchenko, Shpazhinski, and Kryloff. Women also distinguished themselves in the literary life of the nineteenth century. The best known among those who wrote poetry and novels were Elizabeth Kulmann, Countess Rostoptchina, N. Khboshshinska (1825-89), who under the pseudonym of Krestovski wrote many novels to describe provincial life; Sokhanska (1825-84), who under the pseudonym of Kokhanovska acquired celebrity through her novels "After Dinner Among the Guests" and "Provincial Portrait Gallery". Among the writers who became distinguished in the realm of historical fiction were N. Kostomaroff, whose story "The Son" (1865) presents a vigorous picture of the agrarian revolt of Stenko Razin; Count Alexi Tolstoi (1817-75) achieved fame with his novel "Prince Serebrany", and his trilogy "Ivan the Terrible" (1858), "Tsar Feodor Ivanovitch" (1868), and "Tsar Boris" (1869); G. Danilevski, author of the novels "Mirovitch" (1879), "The Fire of Moscow" (1885-86), and "Tchernyi god" (The Black Year); Mordovceff, whose novels "Demetrius the Tsarevitch" and "Fall of Poland" deal with the history of Little Russia; Karnovitch, Salias-de-Tournemir, Mei (1822-62), author of several historical dramas based upon the primitive history of Russia; and finally Averkieff. Among the lyric poets who did not treat of the social conditions of their country, who loved their art for its own sake, the most famous are A. Tolstoi, an imitator of Dante, Heine, and Goethe; Maikoff, a passionate admirer of ancient Rome, the struggle of which with Christianity he essayed to depict in his tragedy "Dva mira" (Two Worlds); A. Feth, author of light poems and madrigals; Polonski, whose poem "Kuznievitch-Muzykant" (The Musical Cricket) became popular, and whose poetry is distinguished by the beauty of its style and the harmony of its verse; Zhadovski, Shsherbin, Herbel, Weinberg, and Nadsohn. X. CONTEMPORARY RUSSIAN LITERATURE The literature from the death of Alexander II to the present day is essentially one of novels. The novel, in view of the severity of Russian censorship, seems to be the most adequate literary channel for the diffusion of political, social, and moral theories. The most salient character of all the writers of the reign of Alexander II, and of more recent times by the force of his genius and the sharpness of his psychological analysis, was Count Lyeff (Leo) Tolstoi, born at Yasnaja Poliana, 28 Aug., 1828; died at Astapovo, 20 Nov., 1910. He inaugurated his literary career by the publication of his autobiographical memoirs, which appeared in the "Sovremennik" of St. Petersburg in 1852; they are a masterpiece of psychological analysis of the mind of a child. This work was followed by "Adolescence", "Youth"," The Cossacks", and "Recollections of Sebastopol", all of which are filled with horror of the sights he beheld at Sebastopol. But the masterpieces among his novels are "War and Peace", a powerful romance that for all its apparent confusion and disorder is an epic and imposing picture of the Napoleonic war in Russia; "Anna Karenina", a profound analysis of the feminine soul that, led astray by passion, forgets dignity and family for adultery, and finds its punishment in its sin; "Resurrection", a novel that is a study of the rehabilitation of the culprit. There is also the play "The Power of Darkness", strong in its vigour and dramatization. And yet this genius, who made Russian literature popular all over the world, attained religious, ethical, and political nihilism: in the "Kreutzer Sonata" he preaches the abjection of woman; "The Gospels" is a criticism of dogmatic theology, while "My Religion", "The Church and the State", and "The Theories of the Apostles" strip Christian revelation from its base, and forswear the Divinity of Jesus Christ, His Church, and His sacraments; in the book "What is Art?", he disparages the most illustrious intellects of the human race; his work "The Kingdom of God Is within you" preaches non-resistance to evil. Political and religious conceptions took Tolstoi out of his orbit, and transformed him into a visionary, an incendiary, so to speak, of all institutions, Divine and human. Among the other modern novelists, mention should be made of: A. Novodvorski, author of "Ni pavy, Ni Vorony" (Neither Peacock nor Crow), and of other stories; B. Garshin, who in his principal novels is sometimes a follower of Tolstoi and sometimes of Turgenieff. Those works are "Tchetyre dnja" (The Four Days), "Trus" (The Coward), "Krasnyj cvietok" (The Red Flower), "Attalea princeps", "Vstrietcha" (The Encounter), and "Nadezhda Nikolaevna"; I. Yasinski was famous under the pseudonym of Maxim Bielinski; his most important works are "The City of the Dead", and "The Guiding Star"; M. Alboff; K. Barantchevitch; A. Ertel; Matchtet; Korolenko, a beautiful story-teller, who reminds his readers of Dostoievski and Tolstoi in his novels "The Dream of Macarius" (a fantastic story), "The Sketches of a Tourist in Siberia", "Easter Night," "The Old Music Player", and "S dvukh storon" (Two Points of View); Ignatius Potapenko, who views life in the light of optimism, and not with the pessimism so much in vogue among Russian writers; one of his novels, "Sviatoe iskusstvo", describes the Bohemia of the students of St. Petersburg; Demetrius Mamin, under the pseudonym of Siberian, describes the customs of Western Siberia; and finally Prince Galitzin. Among novelists of the new school are Anton Pavlovitch Tchehoff (1860-1904), whose novel "Skutchnaja istorija" had a great success. He is without a superior in the narrative of his novels; the heroes of his stories are always morally corrupt, and of distracted minds. Alexei Maksimovitch Pieshkoff, better known by the pseudonym of Maxim Gorky (born 1869); he is the novelist of the beggars and the populace, whose works contain pages of nauseating naturalism, and shameful immorality. Vincent Smidlvski, born at Tula, 1867; under the pseudonym of Veresaeff he came to celebrity through his work "Zapiski vratcha" (Memoirs of a Doctor), which elicited violent recriminations in the medical profession. One of the most famous of the Russian writers of the present day is Leonid Andreeff, born at Orel in 1881. He is the novelist of the degenerate. His novels "The Red Laughter", "The Thought", "The Cloud", "Silence", etc. are to be condemned from every point of view, religious and moral, and the Russian religious press has blamed him for them in vehement language. Among writers of the present day mention should be made of Sofija Ivanovna Smirnova, who wrote the novels "Salt of the Earth" and "Force of Character"; Valentine Dmitrieva, writer of stories; Olga Andreevna Shapir, who wrote "Without Love", and "Tinsel"; Lydja Veselitskaja, Alexandra Shabelskaja, Anastasia Verbickaja, who wrote "The History of a Life". Among those who achieved fame as lyric poets are Simon Frug (of Jewish origin), Nikolai Maksimovitch Vilenkin, famous under the pseudonym of Minski, Dimitri Merezhkovski, whose poems have the defect of too much rhetorical effort; Alexei Apukhtin, Konstantin Rozanoff, Arsenius Golenishsheff-Kutuzoff, Sergei Andreevski, etc. These poets, however, are not original; their works recall too much the great poets who preceded them. The fiction of Russia generally uses, as a channel of publication, the literary periodicals, among which some that were famous in the nineteenth century have now disappeared, as the "Sovremennik" (The Contemporary), the "Otetchestvennyja Zapiski", and the "Moskvitjanin". The best-known of those that are yet published are the "Viestnik Evropy", and the "Pycck mysl". The historical literature of Russia in the second half of the nineteenth century furnishes illustrious names. Sergei Soloveff is the author of a "History of Russia", in thirty volumes, which begins with the most ancient times, and terminates with the reign of Alexander I; it is a work of greater historical than literary merit; Zabielin devoted his studies by preference to the Russia of the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries; A. Nikitski wrote on the historical past of Novgorod and Pskof; Kostomaroff wrote on Little Russia; the historical monographs of this author are held in high esteem, as also his "History of Russia", composed of biographical narratives. Pypin devoted his researches to the reign of Alexander I; Shsapoff studied the social and educational development of Russia; Brückner dealt with the life of Peter the Great; Bestuzheff-Riumin wrote a classic history of Russia, and Biblasoff a life of Catharine II. We cannot name the great number of historians who, like Ilovaiski, Lambin, Kliutchevski, Golubinski, etc. have thrown light on the history of Russia, but we cannot omit to mention the Imperial Historical Society of St. Petersburg, the Archeographic Commission, and the Society of Russian History and Antiquity of Moscow, which, with hundreds of learned publications, and especially of the Russian chronicles, have greatly facilitated the task of the student. Yushkevitch, Yakushkin, Metlinski, Ribnikoff, Khudiakoff, and Barsoff distinguished themselves in the collection of ancient Russian literary documents, upon which light was thrown by Buslaeff, Miller, Stasoff, Maikoff, Kolosoff, Rozoff, Dashkevitch, Vselovski, and above all Sreznevski, who for several years edited the "Izviestija", and the "Utchenyja Zapiski" of St. Petersburg (Academy of Sciences). Buslaeff, with his "Historical Chrestomathy", wove together the literary annals of Russia. Pekarski related the scientific and literary transactions of Peter the Great, Pypin and Porfireff wrote full and classic histories of the literature of Russia. Special works on the greatest Russian writers are so numerous that the "Bibliography of the Russian Literature of the Nineteenth Century", ed. Mezier, St. Petersburg, 1902, devotes 650 octavo pages to the titles of those works alone. In philosophy Russian works until now have not been original. They have been produced under the supreme influence of German philosophy, inspired by Kant, Hegel, and Schelling. Positivism, Materialism, and Spiritualism have succeeded each other without developing originality. Galitch, professor of philosophy at St. Petersburg (died 1848), was an atheist; Davidoff (died 1862) reduced philosophy to psychology alone. The philosophy of Schelling influenced even ecclesiastical writers, as Skvorcoff and the archimandrite Theophanus Avseneff. Orest. Novicki is a convinced partisan of the system of Fichte; he was a professor of the University of Kieff. Hegelianism, however, was the most popular of all, and was at once accepted by the Occidentalists Stankevitch, Granovski, Bielinski, and Ogareff, and by the Slavophiles Kirieevski, Khomjakoff, Samarin, and Aksakoff. Between 1859 and 1873 Professor Gogocki of the ecclesiastical academy of Kieff published his philosophical dictionary. The materialist theories of Moleschott and Büchner were defended by M. Antonovitch and D. Pisareff, and refuted by Yurkevitch, Strakhoff, Kudriavceff, Samarin, and Viadislaveff. Darwinism found defenders in Timiriazeff. and Famincyn, and opponents in Troicki, Dokutchaeff, Guseff, Popoff, and Strakhoff. The Positivism of Comte was upheld by de Roberti and Mikhailovski. The most original philosophers of Russia were: Kavelin (1818-85), who dealt more especially with psychological problems, an historian and profound psychologist, to whom Russia owes the establishment of the "Voprosy filosofii i psikhologii", a periodical devoted to philosophy, which is held in very high esteem; Kudriavceff-Platonoff, who excels in religious philosophy, and whose studies in apologetics are admirable for their vigour and power of argument; Vladimir Soloveff, an ardent defender of Catholic principles in Russia, and a spiritual philosopher, the most eminent that Russia has produced. His extensive treatise on ethics, "Opravdanie dobra" (Justification of the Good), is a masterpiece of speculation; Prince Troubetzkoi, a follower of Soloveff; and finally, Nesmieloff, professor of the ecclesiastical academy of Kazan, whose work "The Science of Man" gives to him the first place among the Christian philosophers of Russia at the present time. OTTO, Lehrbuch der russischen, Litteratur (Leipzig, 1837); POLEVOI, Otcherki russkoi literatury (Essays on Russian Literature) (2 vols., St. Petersburg, 1839); NEVEROFF, Blick auf die Geschichte der russischen Literatur (Riga, 1840); JORDAN, Geschichte der russischen Literatur (Leipzig, 1846); SHEVIREFF, Istorija russkoi literatury (4 vols., Moscow, 1858-60); MINZLOFF, Beiträge zur Kenntniss der poetischen und wissenschaftlichen Literatur Russlands (Berlin, 1854); PÉTROFF, Tableau de la littéature russe depuis ses origines jusqu'à nos jours (Paris, 1872); HONEGGER, Russische Literatur und Kultur (Leipzig, 1880); WISKOWATOFF, Geschichte der russischen Literatur (Dorpat, 1881); HALLER, Geschichte der russischen Literatur (Riga, 1882); SMITH, Russisk Literaturhistorie (Copenhagen, 1882); VON REINHOLDT, Geschichte der russischen Literatur (Leipzig, 1885); MAIKOFF, Otcherki iz istorii russkoi literatury XVII i XVIII stoliettii (Essay on the History of the Russian Literature of the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries) (St. Petersburg, 1889); WALISZEWSKI, Littérature russe (Paris, 1900); tr. (London, 1900); WOLYNSKIJ, Die russische Literatur der Gegenwart (Berlin, 1902); PETROFF, Russlands Dichter und Schriftsteller (Halle, 1905); BRÜCKNER, Geschichte der russischen Literatur (Leipzig, 1005); tr. (London, 1908). The best histories of Russian literature in Russian are those of PYPIN Istorija russkoi literatury (4 vols., St. Petersburg, 1908-1910) PORFIREFF, Istorija russkoi slovesnosti (4 vols., Kazan, 1898, 1904, 1907); POLEVOI (12 vols., St. Petersburg, 1903). Monographs: — WOELFFING, Stricturœ de statu scientiarum et artium in imperio russico (Tübingen, 1766); KÖNIG, Literarische Bilder aus Russland (Berlin, 1840); VAKCEL, Quadros da litteratura, das sciencias e artes na Russia (Funchal, 1868); COURRIÈRE, Histoire de la littéature contemporaine en Russie (Paris, 1875); EVSTRAFIEFF, Novaja russkaja literatura (St. Petersburg, 1877); PALANDER, Uebersicht der neueren russischen Literatur (Tavastehus, 1880); ZABEL, Literarische Streifzüge durch Russland (Berlin, 1885); STRAKHOFF, Iz istorii literaturnago nihilisma (St. Petersburg, 1890); BAUER, Naturalismus, Nihilismus, Idealismus in der russischen Dichtung (Berlin, 1890); SKABITCHEVSKIJ, Istorija noviejshej russkoi literatury (History of Contemporary Russian Literature) (St. Petersburg, 1891); SOLOVEFF, Otcherki po istorii russkoi literatury XIX vieka (St. Petersburg, 1902); VENGEROFF, Kritiko-biografitcheskij slovar russkih pisatelej (Critico-Biographical Dictionary of Russian Writers) (7 vols, St. Petersburg, 1889-1903); DOBRYV, Biografii russkih pisatelej (Biographies of the Russian Writers) (St. Petersburg, 1900); OSSIP-LOURIÉ, La psychologie des romanciers russes du XIX siècle (Paris, 1905); SIPOVSKIJ, Istorija novoi russkoi literatury (History of the New Russian Literature) (St. Petersburg, 1907); SAVODNIK, Otcherki po istorii russkoi literatury XIX vieka (Essays on the History of the Russian Literature of the nineteenth century) (Moscow, 1908). POKROVSKIJ, Nikolaj Vasilevitch Gogol (Moscow, 1908); FLACH, Un grand poète russe: Alexandre Pouchkine (Paris, 1894); DUCHESNE, Michel Jouriévitch Lermontov; sa vie et ses œuvres (Paris, 1910); POKROVSKIJ, Ivan Alexandrovitch Gontcharoff (Moscow, 1907); BRANDES, Dostojewski: ein Essay (Berlin, 1889); SAITSCHIK, Die Weltanschauung Dostojewski's und Tolstoi's (Leipzig, 1893); HOFFMANN, Eine biographische Studie (Berlin, 1899); MÜLLER, Dostojewski, Ein Charakterbild (Munich, 1903); LOYGREE, Un homme de génie; Th.-M. Dostojewski (Lyons, 1904); POKROVSKIJ, Theodor Mikhailovitch Dostoevskij (Moscow, 1908); ZAVITNEVITCH, Aleksiej Stepanovitch Khomjakoff (2 vols., Kieff, 1902); LÖWENTHAL, Anton Schehoff (Moscow, 1906); POKROVSKIJ, Anton Pavlovitch Tchehoff (Moscow, 1907); ERNST, Leo Tolstoi und der slavische Roman (Berlin, 1889); MEREZHKOVSKIJ, Tolstoi i Dostojevskij (St. Petersburg, 1901-02); Ger. tr. (Leipzig, 1903); BERNEKER, Graf Leo Tolstoj (Leipzig, 1901); ZABEL, L. N. Tolstoi (Leipzig, 1901); BITOVT, Graf. L. Totstoj v literaturie i iskusstve (Count L. Tolstoi in literature and in art) (Moscow, 1903); CROSBY, Tolstoi and His Message (New York, 1903); BIRJUKOFF, Leo N. Tolstoi: Biographie und Memoiren (Vienna, 1906); LÜBBEN, Leo Tolstoi: der Führer von Jung-Russland (Berlin, 1907); STAUB, Graf L. N. Tolstois Leben und Werke (Kempten, 1908); MAUDE, The Life of Tolstoi (2 vols., London, 1908-10); PERSKY, Tolstoi intime (Paris, 1909); ISAEFF, Graf N. Tolstoi kak myslitel (Count N. Tolstoi as a thinker) (St. Petersburg, 1911); GLAGAU, Die russische Literatur und Ivan Turgueniev (Berlin, 1872); JOUSSOUPOFF, Ivan Tourguéniev et l'esprit de son temps (Paris, 1883); ZABEL, Ivan Tourguéniev (Leipzig, 1884); KÜHNEMANN, Tourguenev und Tolstoi (Berlin, 1893); BORKOVSKIJ, Tourgeniev (Berlin, 1903); GUTJAHR, Ivan S. Turgenev (Jurev, 1907); SPLETTSTÖSSER, Maxim Gorki: eine Studie über die Ursachen seiner Popularität (Charlottenburg, 1904); OSTWALD, Maxim Gorki (Berlin, 1904); USTHAL, Maxim Gorki (Berlin, 1904); MEINCKE, Maxim Gorki, Seine Persönlichkeit und seine Schriften (Hamburg, 1908); BARANOFF, Leonid Andreev, kak khudozhnik i myslitel (Leonidas Andreeff, as an artist and as a thinker) (Kieff, 1907); REJSNER, L. Andreev i ego socialnaja ide ologija (Leonidas Andreeff and his social ideology) (St. Petersburg, 1909); MARTYNOFF AND SNEGIREFF, Russkaja starina v pamjatnikakh cerkovnago igrazhdanskago zodtchestva (Russian antiquity in the monuments of civil and religious architecture) (Moscow, 1851-57); ROVINSKIJ, Istorija russkikh shkolikonopisanija do konca XVII C (History of the Russian schools of iconography to the end of the seventeenth century) (St. Petersburg, 1856); PETROFF, Sbornik materialov dija istorii imp. akademii khudozhestv (Collection of materials for the history of the Imperial Academy of Arts) (St. Petersburg, 1864-66); VIOLLET LE DUC, L'art russe, ses origines, ses éléments constitutifs, son apogée, son avenir (Paris, 1877); HASSELBLATT, Historischer Ueberblick der Entwickelung des kaiserlich-russischen Akademie der Künste (St. Petersburg, 1886); PRAKHOFF, Kiev, skie pamjatniki vizantiisko-russkago isskistva (The Russo-Byzantine monuments of arts at Kieff) (Moscow, 1887); BULGAKOFF, Nashi khudozhniki (Our Artists) (St. Petersburg, 1890); PAVLINOFF, Drevnosti jaroslavskija i rostovskija (The Antiquities of Yaroslaff and Rostoff) (Moscow, 1892); IDEM, Istorija russkoj arkhitektury (Moscow, 1894). EVDOKIMOFF, Russkaja zhivopis v XVIII viekie (Russian Painting in the eighteenth century) (St. Petersburg, 1902); WRANGEL, Podrobnyi illjustrirovannyi Katalog vystavski russkoi portretnoj zivopisi za 150 liet (Complete and illustrated catalogue of the Expositions of Russian portraits from 1700 to 1850) (St. Petersburg, 1902); ROVINSKIJ, Obozrienie ikonopisanija v Rossii do konca XVII vieka (Sketch of the painting of icons in Russia to the end of the seventeenth century) (St. Petersburg, 1903); USPENSKIJ, Carskie ikonopiscy v XVII v. (The Imperial painters of icons in the seventeenth century) (St. Petersburg, 1906). A. PALMIERI St. Rusticus of Narbonne St. Rusticus of Narbonne Born either at Marseilles or at Narbonnaise, Gaul; died 26 Oct., 461. According to biographers, Rusticus is the one to whom St. Jerome (about 411) addressed a letter, commending him to imitate the virtues of St. Exuperius of Toulouse and to follow the advice of Procule, then Bishop of Marseilles. When he had completed his education in Gaul, Rusticus went to Rome, where he soon gained a reputation as a public speaker, but he wished to embrace the contemplative life. He wrote to St. Jerome, who advised him to continue his studies. Thus Rusticus entered the monastery of St. Vincent of Lérins. He was ordained at Marseilles, and on 3 Oct., 430 (or 427) was consecrated Bishop of Narbonne. With all his zeal, he could not prevent the progress of the Arian heresy which the Goths were spreading abroad. The siege of Narbonne by the Goths and dissensions among the Catholics so disheartened him that he wrote to St. Leo, renouncing the bishoporic, but St. Leo dissuaded him. He then endeavoured to consolidate the Catholics. In 444-448, he built the church in Narbonne; in 451, he assisted at the convocation of forty-four bishops of Gaul and approved St. Leo's letter to Flavian, concerning Nestorianism; he was present also at the Council of Arles, with thirteen bishops, to decide the debate between Theodore, Bishop of Fréjus, and the Abbey of Lérins. A letter from Ravennius, Bishop of Arles, sent to Rusticus, proves the high esteem in which he was held. His letters are lost, with the exception of the one to St. Jerome and two others to St. Leo, written either in 452 or 458. His feast is celebrated on 20 October. JOSEPH DEDIEU Book of Ruth Book of Ruth One of the proto-canonical writings of the Old Testament, which derives its name from the heroine of its exquisitely beautiful story. I. CONTENTS The incidents related in the first part of the Book of Ruth (i-iv, 17) are briefly as follows. In the time of the judges, a famine arose in the land of Israel, in consequence of which Elimelech with Noemi and their two sons emigrated from Bethlehem of Juda to the land of Moab. After Elimelech's death Mahalon and Chelion, his two sons, married Moabite wives, and not long after died without children. Noemi, deprived now of her husband and children, left Moab for Bethlehem. On her journey thither she dissuaded her daughters-in-law from going with her. One of them, however, named Ruth, accompanied Noemi to Bethlehem. The barley harvest had just begun and Ruth, to relieve Noemi's and her own poverty, went to glean in the field of Booz, a rich man of the place. She met with the greatest kindness, and following Noemi's advice, she made known to Booz, as the near kinsman of Elimelech, her claim to marriage. After a nearer kinsman had solemnly renounced his prior right, Booz married Ruth who bore him Obed, the grandfather of David. The second part of the book (iv, 18-22) consists in a brief genealogy which connects the line of David through Booz with Phares, one of the sons of Juda. II. PLACE IN THE CANON In the series of the sacred writings of the Old Testament, the short Book of Ruth occupies two different principal places. The Septuagint, the Vulgate, and the English Versions give it immediately after the Book of Judges. The Hebrew Bible, on the contrary, reckons it among the Hagiographa or third chief part of the Old Testament. Of these two places, the latter is most likely the original one. It is attested to by all the data of Jewish tradition, namely, the oldest enumeration of the Hagiographa in the Talmudic treatise "Baba Bathra", all the Hebrew MSS. whether Spanish or German, the printed editions of the Hebrew Bible, and the testimony of St. Jerome in his Preface to the Book of Daniel, according to which eleven books are included by the Hebrews in the Hagiographa. The presence of the Book of Ruth after that of Judges in the Septuagint, whence it passed into the Vulgate and the English Versions, is easily explained by the systematic arrangement of the historical books of the Old Testament in that ancient Greek Version. As the episode of Ruth is connected with the period of the judges by its opening words "in the days. . .when the judges ruled", its narrative was made to follow the Book of Judges as a sort of complement to it. The same place assigned to it in the lists of St. Melito, Origen, St. Jerome (Prol. Galeatus), is traceable to the arrangement of the inspired writings of the Old Testament in the Septuagint, inasmuch as these lists bespeak in various ways the influence of the nomenclature and grouping of the sacred books in that Version, and consequently should not be regarded as conforming strictly to the arrangement of those books in the Hebrew Canon. It has indeed been asserted that the Book of Ruth is really a third appendix to the Book of Judges and was, therefore, originally placed in immediate connection with the two narratives which are even now appended to this latter book (Judges, xvii-xviii; xix-xxi); but this view is not probable owing to the differences between these two works with respect to style, tone, subject, etc. III. PURPOSE As the precise object of the Book of Ruth is not expressly given either in the book itself or in authentic tradition, scholars are greatly at variance concerning it. According to many, who lay special stress on the genealogy of David in the second part of the book, the chief aim of the author is to throw light upon the origin of David, the great King of Israel and royal ancestor of the Messias. Had this, however, been the main purpose of the writer, it seems that he should have given it greater prominence in his work. Besides, the genealogy at the close of the book is but loosely connected with the preceding contents, so it is not improbably an appendix added to that book by a later hand. According to others, the principal aim of the author was to narrate how, in opposition to Deut., xxiii, 3, which forbids the reception of Moabites into Yahweh's assembly, the Moabitess Ruth was incorporated with Yahweh's people, and eventually became the ancestress of the founder of the Hebrew monarchy. But this second opinion is hardly more probable than the foregoing. Had the Book of Ruth been written in such full and distinct view of the Deuteronomic prohibition as is affirmed by the second opinion, it is most likely that its author would have placed a direct reference to that legislative enactment on Noemi's lips when she endeavoured to dissuade her daughters-in-law from accompanying her to Juda, or particularly when she received from Ruth the protestation that henceforth Noemi's God would be her God. Several recent scholars have regarded this short book as a kind of protest against Nehemias's and Esdras's efforts to suppress intermarriage with women of foreign birth. But this is plainly an inference not from the contents of the book, but from an assumed late date for its composition, an inference therefore no less uncertain than that date itself. Others finally, and indeed with greater probability, have maintained that the author's chief purpose was to tell an edifying story as an example to his own age and an interesting sketch of the past, effecting this by recording the exemplary conduct of his various personages who act as simple, kindly, God-fearing people ought to act in Israel. IV. HISTORICAL CHARACTER The charming Book of Ruth is no mere "idyll" or "poetical fiction". It is plain that the Jews of old regarded its contents as historical, since they included its narrative in the Septuagint within the prophetic histories (Josue- Kings). The fact that Josephus in framing his account of the Jewish Antiquities utilizes the data of the Book of Ruth in exactly the same manner as he does those of the historical books of the Old Testament shows that this inspired writing was then considered as no mere fiction. Again, the mention by St. Matthew of several personages of the episode of Ruth (Booz, Ruth, Obed), among the actual ancestors of Christ (Matt., i, 5), points in the same direction. Intrinsic data agree with these testimonies of ancient tradition. The book records the intermarriage of an Israelite with a Moabitess, which shows that its narrative does not belong to the region of the poetical. The historical character of the work is also confirmed by the friendly intercourse between David and the King of Moab which is described in I Kings, xxii, 3, 4; by the writer's distinct reference to a Jewish custom as obsolete (Ruth, iv 7), etc. In view of this concordant, extrinsic and intrinsic, evidence, little importance is attached by scholars generally to the grounds which certain critics have put forth to disprove the historical character of the Book of Ruth. It is rightly felt, for instance, that the symbolical meaning of the names of several persons in the narrative (Noemi, Mahalon, Chelion) is not a conclusive argument that they have been fictitiously accommodated to the characters in the episode, and more than the similar symbolical meaning of the proper names of well known and full historical personages mentioned in Israel's annals (Saul, David, Samuel, etc.). It is rightly felt likewise that the striking appropriateness of the words put on the lips of certain personages to the general purpose of edification apparent in the Book of Ruth does not necessarily disprove the historical character of the work, since this is also noticeable in other books of Holy Writ which are undoubtedly historical. Finally, it is readily seen that however great the contrast may appear between the general tone of simplicity, repose, purity, etc., of the characters delineated in the episode of Ruth, and the opposite features of the figures which are drawn in the Book of Judges, both writings describe actual events in one and the same period of Jewish history; for all we know, the beautiful scenes of domestic life connected in the Book of Ruth with the period of the judges may have truly occurred during the long intervals of peace which are repeatedly mentioned in the Book of Judges. V. AUTHOR AND DATE OF COMPOSITION The Book of Ruth is anonymous, for the name which it bears as its title has never been regarded otherwise than that of the chief actor in the events recorded. In an ancient Beraitha to the Talmudic treatise "Baba Bathra" (Babylonian Talmud, c. i), it is definitely stated that "Samuel wrote his book, Judges, and Ruth"; but this ascription of Ruth to Samuel is groundless and hence almost universally rejected at the present day. The name of the author of the book of Ruth is unknown, and so is also the precise date of its composition. The work, however, was most likely written before the Babylonian exile. On the one hand, there is nothing in its contents that would compel one to bring down its origin to a later date; and, on the other hand, the comparative purity of its style stamps it as a pre-exilic composition. The numerous critics who hold a different view overrate the importance of its isolated Aramaisms which are best accounted for by the use of a spoken patois plainly independent of the actual developments of literary Hebrew. They also make too much of the place occupied by the Book of Ruth among the Hagiographa, for, as can be easily realized, the admission of a writing into this third division of the Hebrew Canon is not necessarily contemporary with its origin. But, while the internal data supplied by the Book of Ruth thus point to its pre-exilic origin, they remain indecisive with regard to the precise date to which its composition should be referred, as clearly appears from the conflicting inferences which have been drawn from them by recent Catholic scholars. Commentaries.--Catholic: CLAIR (Paris, 1878); VON HUMMELAUER (Paris, 1888); FILLION (Paris, 1889); VIGOUROUX (Paris, 1901); CRAMPONI. Protestant: WRIGHT (London, 1864); KEIL (Leipzig, 1874): BERTHEAU (Leipzig, 1883); OETTLE (Nordlingen, 1889); BERTHOLET (Freiburg, 1898); NOWACK (Goettingen, 1902). FRANCIS E. GIGOT Ruthenian Rite Ruthenian Rite There is, properly speaking, no separate and distinct rite for the Ruthenians, but inasmuch as the name is often used for the modifications which the Ruthenians have introduced in the Byzantine or Greek Rite as used by them, a brief description is proper. These modifications have come about in two ways. In the first place, the ancient Slavonic missals used in Russia and in Little Russia (Ruthenia) differed in many instances from the Greek as used at Constantinople, and the correction of these differences by the Pariarch Nikon gave rise to the Old Ritualists (see RASKOLNIKS). When, therefore, the Ruthenians came into union with the Holy See in 1595, they brought with them in their liturgical books several of the usages and formulae which Nikon afterwards corrected at Moscow in the Orthodox Church. Where these differences presented no denial or contradiction of the faith the Holy See allowed them to remain, just as they have allowed the rites of many religious orders. In the second place, after the union had become a fixed fact, numbers of the Polish Latin clergy and laity seemed to find in the Greek ceremonies and forms of language some apparent contradictions of the faith as more fully elaborated in the Roman Rite. This seemed to them to indicate a lack of unity of the faith, and the Greek Ruthenian clergy in the Synod of Zamosc (1720) made a number of changes in the Byzantine Rite, particularly that of the Mass, so as more clearly to express the unity and identity of their faith with that of their brethren of the Roman Rite. These changes are sometimes bitterly spoken of by Russian authors as "latinizing", and the majority of them were probably unnecessary. When we consider that the Melchites, Rumanians, and Italo-Greeks have kept the old forms thus unchanged, it does not seem that they were required in order to express the complete unity of the faith. Nevertheless they were sufficient to cause them to be spoken of as the Ruthenian Rite, as distinguished from the older form of the Byzantine Rite (See CONSTANTINOPLE, RITE OF; GREEK CATHOLICS IN AMERICA; GREEK CHURCH). The chief modifications introduced were the addition of the Filioque (i ot Syna) to the Creed, and the commemoration of "the holy universal Chief Bishop N. the Pope of Rome", in the Ektene and in the general commemoration at the Great Entrance; while the emphasis laid on the Epiklesis (invocation) may be said to also constitute a difference from the Orthodox Rite. The addition of the Filioque is not required even in Italy, for at Rome the Creed is still said in Greek without it; but there it is simply an ancient custom and no indication of any difference in doctrine. As to the prayers for the pope, the various Orthodox Churches of Russia and Eastern Europe have never hesitated to change the Byzantine liturgy in order to insert prayers for the Holy Synod, imperial family, etc., even carrying them out to great length. The Ruthenians however differ from the other Greek Catholic nationalities and from the Orthodox churches in many other peculiarities of rite. In the Proskomide of the Divine Liturgy the Ruthenians are allowed to prepare for Mass with one altar-bread (prosphora) or with three, or even with the dry Agnetz (the square Greek host) if no prosphorae can be had, instead of requiring five prosphorae. Then too the Ruthenian priest may omit the full number of particles to be placed on the paten, and may place only one for the various ranks he is required to commemorate, or in exceptional cases where there are no particles "the priest may celebrate with the Agnetz alone" (Decretum Syn. Leopoliensis, p. 83). The number of the saints to be commemorated has also been cut down to a few principal names. When the Mass of the Catechumens or public part of the Divine Liturgy begins, the Royal Doors of the Iconostasis are thrown wide open and continue so during the entire Mass. There are no rubrics directing them to be open and shut during the service, nor is there any veil to be drawn. Formerly this was the practise in the old Slavonic Churches and Missals, and is still followed in the Court Church until after the Great Entrance is completed. The custom of reverencing during the singing of the Edinorodny Syne (Filius unigenitus) and the Creed at the word voheloviechshasia (Homo factus est) and the addition of the i ot Syna (Filioque) were adopted to conform to the practice of the Roman Rite. The same may be said of the practice of covering the chalice while on the altar, and this in turn has made the ripidia or fans disappear as altar utensils. In the prayer of contrition before communion the Ruthenian priest strikes his breast three times as in the Roman Rite. Among the special modifications in the Liturgy by the Ruthenians is the order of the antiphons. The three week-day antiphons, Psalms xci, xcii, xciv, are introduced directly into the text of the Missal, while on Sundays in their stead (when there is no feast-day having special antiphons) Psalms lxv, lxvi, and xciv take their place. The Typika, Psalms cii and cxlv, as well as the Blazhenni (beatitudes) are not said except in monasteries and monastic churches. At the recital of the Creed the priest holds up the aër without moving it to and fro. Just before the ante-communion prayer the priest performs an ablution of the tips of his fingers. The Ruthenians do not add hot water to the chalice after the Fraction, as all other Greeks do, for this was abolished by the Synod of Zamosc (tit. iii, sec. iv). They have also abolished the use of the sponge in purifying the paten and chalice, and use instead the finger for the paten and a veil on the chalice. A final ablution is introduced, and the holy vessels remain on the altar until the Mass is finished, instead of being carried to the side altar (prothesis) as in the Byzantine Rite. The absence of the deacon or deacons in the Ruthenian Mass will be particularly noticed, for that is the rule except in cases of cathedral Masses or pontifical Masses, corresponding to the usages of the Roman solemn high Mass, and then the deacon is usually a priest who reverts to his former order. The diaconate among the Ruthenians is now chiefly a grade to the priesthood, and not a permanent order for parochial work. There is no distribution of the antidoron or blessed bread at the end of Mass in the Ruthenian Rite. Nor do they have the custom of giving communion (by a tiny drop from the chalice) to infants and children under four years, as in the Russian Orthodox Church. The clergy among the Ruthenians usually follow the Roman rule and are shaven, unlike the general rule among the Greek clergy of other countries, whether Catholic or Orthodox. They do not wear the kamilafka or straight cylindrical Greek biretta, but have invented for themseoves a round headpiece or crown, something like the mitre of a Greek bishop, and they also wear the close-fitting cassock of the Roman Rite, instead of the loose robe with flowing sleeves used by the Greeks of other countries. BOCIAN, "De modificationibus apud Ruthenos subintroductis" in "Chrysostomika" (Rome, 1908); 929-69; KHOINATSKI, "Zapadno-Russkaya Tserkovnaya Unia v yeya Bogosluzhenii i Obriadakh" (Kieff, 1871); PELESZ, "Geschicte der Union", II (Vienna, 1880); Liturgia Sv. Ioanna Zlatoustaho" (Zolkeieff, 1906). ANDREW J. SHIPMAN Ruthenians Ruthenians (Ruthenian and Russian: Rusin, plural Rusini) A Slavic people from Southern Russia, Galicia and Bukowina in Austria, and North-eastern Hungary. They are also called in Russian, Malorossiani, Little Russians (in allusion to their stature), and in the Hungarian dialect of their own language, Russniaks. They occupy in Russia the provinces or governments of Lublin (Poland), Volhynia, Podolia, Kieff, Tehernigoff, Kharkoff, and Poltava, in Russia, and number now about 18,000,000. In Austria they occupy the whole of Eastern Galicia and Bukowina, and in Hungary the northern and north-eastern counties of Hungary: Szepes, Saros, Abauj, Zemplin, Ung, Maramaros, and Bereg, and amount to about 4,500,000 more. The Ruthenians along the borderland of the ancient Kingdom of Poland and the present boundary separating Austria from Russia proper are also called Ukrainians (u, at or near, and krai, the border or land composing the border), from the Ukraine, comprising the vast steppes or plains of Southern Russia extending into Galicia. In the Austro-Hungarian Empire the Ruthenians are separated from one another by the Carpathian Mountains, which leave one division of them in Galicia and the other in Hungary. The Ruthenians or Little Russians in Russia and Bukowina belong to the Greek Orthodox Church, whilst those of Galicia and Hungary are Greek Catholics in unity with the Holy See. For this reason the word Ruthenian has been generally used to indicate those of the race who are Catholics, and Little Russian those who are Greek Orthodox, although the terms are usually considered as fairly interchangeable. It must be remembered that in the Russian and Ruthenian languages (unlike in English) there are two words which are often indiscriminately translated as Russia, but which have quite different meanings. One is Russ, which is the generic word denoting an abstract fatherland and all who speak a Russo-Slavic tongue, who are of Russo-Slavic race and who profess the Greek-Slavonic Rite; it is of wide and comprehensive meaning. The other word is Rossia, which is a word of restricted meaning and refers only to the actual Russian Empire and its subjects, as constituted to-day. The former word Russ may be applied to a land or people very much as our own word "Anglo-Saxon" is to English or Americans. It not only includes those who live in the Russian Empire, but millions outside of it, who are of similar race or kin, but who are not politically, religiously, or governmentally united with those within the empire. From the word Russ we get the derivative Russky, which may therefore be translated in English as "Ruthenian" as well as "Russian", since it is older than the present Russian Empire. From Rossia we have the derivative Rossiisky, which can never be translated otherwise than by "Russian", pertaining to or a native of the Russian Empire. Indeed the word "Ruthene" or "Ruthenian" seems to have been an attempt to put the word Rusin into a Latinized form, and the medieval Latin word Ruthenia was often used as a term for Russia itself before it grew so great as it is to-day. The name Ruthenian (Rutheni) is found for the first time in the old Polish annalist, Martinus Gallus, who wrote towards the end of the eleventh and the beginning of the twelfth century; he uses this name as one already well known. The Danish historian, Saxo Grammaticus (1203), also uses it to describe the Slavs living near the Baltic Sea. These Slavs were already converted to Christianity and the name was probably used to distinguish them from the pagans. The term Ruthenian was well known in the eleventh century and its origin seems to be considerably older. It is said to have really originated in the southern part of Gaul in the time of Charlemagne. When the Huns overran Europe in the fifth century, they subdued the Slavic tribes with whom they came in contact and made them a part of their victorious army. Under Attila's leadership they pressed still farther west, devastating everything in their path, and penetrated into Northern Italy and the south-eastern part of Gaul. In the great battle at Châlons the Christian armies overcame them; a portion of the Huns' forces was slaughtered, but other portions were divided and scattered in small detachments throughout the country, and the greater part of these were the Slavs who had been made captive and forced to join the army. After the death of Charlemagne they had settled largely throughout the land, and their names are still retained in various Latin names of places, as Rouerge (Provincia Ruthenorum), Rodez (Segdunum Rutheni), and Auvergne (Augusta Ruthenorum). As these Slavic tribes furnished the name for the Latin writers of Italy and France, this same word was also used later in describing them in their native land, where descriptions came to be written by western writers who first came in contact with them. Indeed the word "Ruthenian" is considerably older than the word "Russian", in describing Slavic nationality; for the term Russia (Rossia), indicating the political state and government, did not come into use until the fourteenth or fifteenth century. The Ruthenians may well claim to be the original Russians. Theirs was the land where Sts. Cyril and Methodius converted the Slavic peoples, and that land, with Kieff as the centre, became the starting point of Greco-Slavic Christianity, and for centuries that centre was the religious and political capital of the present Russia. Great Russia was then merely a conglomerate, of Swedish, Finnish, and Slavic tribes, and although it has since become great and has subdued its weaker brethren, it does not represent the historic race as does the Ruthenian in the south. They were never so thoroughly under the rule of the conquering Tatar as the Great Russians of Moscow, Vladimir, and Kazan. Besides, Little Russia was separated from Great Russia and was for nearly five centuries subject to Poland and Lithuania. Yet Great Russia has become in Russia the norm of Russian nationality, and has succeeded largely in suppressing and arresting the development of the Little Russians within the empire. It is no wonder that the old dreams of Mazeppa, Chmielnicki, and Shevchenko of Little Russia, independent both of Russia and Poland, have found a lodgment in the hearts of the Southern Russians; the same feeling has gained ground among the Ruthenians of Galicia and Hungary, surrounded as they are by the German, Polish, and Hungarian peoples. However, the milder and more equitable rule of Austria-Hungary has prevented direct political agitation, although there is occasional trouble. The resultant of such forces among the Ruthenians of Galicia and Hungary has been the formation of political parties, which they have brought to America with them. These may be divided into three large groups: the Ukraintzi, those who believe in and foster the development of the Ruthenians along their own lines, quite independent of Russia, the Poles or the Germans, and who actually look forward to the independence of Little Russia, almost analogous to the Home Rulers of Ireland; the Moscophiles, those who look to present Russia as the norm of the Russo-Slavic race and who are partisans of Panslavism; these may be likened to the Unionists of Ireland, in order to round out the comparison; the Ugro-Russki, Hungarian Ruthenians, who while objecting to Hungary, and particular phases of Hungarian rule, have no idea of losing their own peculiar nationality by taking present Russia as their standard; they hold themselves aloof from both the other parties, the ideas of the Ukraintzi being particularly distasteful to them. (See GREEK CATHOLICS IN AMERICA.) In Russia all political agitation for Little Russia and for Little Russian customs and peculiarities is prohibited; it is only since 1905 that newspapers and other publications in the Little Russian language have been permitted. It was Little Russia which united with the Holy See in 1595, in the great reunion of the Greek Church; and it was in Little Russia where the pressure of the Russian Government was brought to bear in 1795, 1839, and 1875, whereby the Greek Catholics of Little Russia were utterly wiped out and some 7,000,000 of the Uniats there were compelled, partly by force and partly by deception, to become part of the Greek Orthodox Church. In some indefinable manner the Ruthenian or Little Russian speech is considered as leading away from Russian unity, whether of State or Church; the prompt return of a quarter of a million of Little Russians to Catholicism in 1905-06, at the time of the decree of toleration, perhaps lends countenance to the belief in Russian minds. The Ruthenian language is very close to the Russian and both are descendants of the ancient Slavonic tongue which is still used in the Mass and in the liturgical books. The Ruthenian, however, in the form of its words, is much nearer the Church Slavonic than the modern Russian language is. Still it does not differ much from the modern Russian or the so-called Great Russian language; it bears somewhat the same relation to the latter as the Lowland Scotch does to English or the Plattdeutsch to German. The Ruthenians in Austria-Hungary and the Little Russians in Russia use the Russian alphabet and write their language in almost the same orthography as the Great Russian, but in many cases they pronounce it differently. It is almost like the case of an Englishman and a Frenchman who write the word science exactly alike, but each pronounces it in a different manner. Many words are unlike in Ruthenian and Russian, for example, bachiti, to see, in Ruthenian, becomes videt in Russian; pershy, first, in Ruthenian, is pervy in Russian. All this tends to differentiate the two languages, or extreme dialects, as they might be called. In late years a recession of the Russian alphabet in Galicia and Bukowina has provoked much dissension. For the purpose of more closely accommodating the Russian alphabet to the Ruthenian, they added two new letters and rejected three old ones, then spelled all the Ruthenian or Little Russian words exactly as they are pronounced. This "phonetic" alphabet differentiates the Ruthenian more than ever from the Russian. It has divided Ruthenian writers into two great camps: the "etymological", which retains the old system of spelling, and the "phonetic", which advocates the new system. It has even been made a basis of political action, and the phonetic system of orthography is still strongly opposed, partly because it was an Austrian governmental measure and partly because it is regarded as an effort to detach the Ruthenians from the rest of the Russian race and in a measure to Polonize them. The phonetic system of writing has never been adopted among the Hungarian Ruthenians, and it is only within the last two or three years that anyone has dared to use it in Little Russian publications issued in the Russian Empire. Yet in many parts of Hungary the Ruthenian language is printed in Roman letters so as to reach those who are not acquainted with the Russian alphabet. The language question has led to many debates in the Austrian parliament and has been taken up by many Ruthenian magazines and reviews. The Ruthenians have also brought their language and political difficulties with them to America (see GREEK CATHOLICS IN AMERICA, under subtitle Ruthenian Greek Catholics), where they encounter them as obstacles to racial progress. Not only in history but in literature have the Ruthenians or Little Russians held an honourable place. Their chief city, Kieff, was the capital of the country before Moscow was founded in the middle of the twelfth century. A portion of them led the wild, stirring life of the Cossacks, painted in Gogol's romance of "Taras Bulba"; their revolt under Chmielnicki in 1648 is pictured by Sienkiewicz in his historical romance "With Fire and Sword"; that of half a century later under Mazeppa is made known to most of us by Byron's verse. They had free printing presses for secular as well as religious literature in the sixteenth century; still many of their best writers, such as Gogol, have used the Great Russian language even when their themes were Little Russian, just as so much of the text of Scott's Scotch novels is pure English. The Ruthenian language, however, has been employed by authors of international repute, the greatest of whom is the poet Shevehenko. Other authors of widening reputation have followed in the present century, and some like Gowda have transferred their literary efforts to American soil. The Ruthenian Greek Catholic Church in Austria-Hungary is represented by one province in Galicia, Austria, and three dioceses in Hungary. The former is composed of the Greek Archdiocese of Lemberg with the two subordinate dioceses of Przemysl and Stanislau. In Hungary there are the separate dioceses of Eperies and Munkacs in the north and the Diocese of Kreutz (Crisium, Krizevac) in the south. These northern two are subject to the Latin Archbishop of Gran, and the southern one to the Latin Archbishop of Agram. The Ruthenian immigration to America comes almost wholly from these dioceses, and their efforts and progress in solidly establishing themselves in the United States and Canada have been described. They have built many fine and flourishing churches, have established schools and now have a bishop here of their own rite (see GREEK CATHOLICS IN AMERICA). Some of them are becoming wealthy, and in some places in Pennsylvania are reckoned as a factor in American politics. Nevertheless, they have been subjected in America to strenuous proselyting, both on the part of the Russian Orthodox mission churches, which preach Panslavism in its most alluring forms, and which are at times bitterly hostile to Catholicism (see GREEK ORTHODOX CHURCH IN AMERICA, under Russian Orthodox), and on the part of various Protestant missionary activities, which have succeeded in establishing in many localities "independent" Ruthenian communities apparently practising the Greek Rite in connexion with the Presbyterian, Baptist, and other churches. Much has been effected by both proselyting parties because of a lack of a suitable Ruthenian Catholic press and literature, and of sufficient priests. For instance, there is a Protestant catechism using the name of the Catholic Church and teaching the seven sacraments, and there are Protestant so-called evangelical missionaries who use vestments, candles, censers, crucifixes, and holy water, with apparently all the Greek Catholic ritual, having even the official Greek Catholic mass-books on the altar. The Russian Orthodox clergy find the task even easier, for they appeal to the Slavic national feeling and adopt the usual religious practices of the Greek Catholic clergy, and are thus enabled to win over many an immigrant by offering sympathy in a strange land. HRUSZEWSKI, Gesch. des Ukrainischen (Ruthenischen) Volkes (Leipzig, 1906); ROMANCZUK, Die Ruthenen u. ihre Gegner in Galizien, (Vienna, 1902); JANDAUREK, Das Königreich Galizien u. Lodomeriem, u. das Herzogthum Bukowina (Vienna, 1884); PELESZ, Gesch. der Union, I (Vienna, 1878); SEMBRATOWICZ, Das Zarenthum im Kampfe mit der Civilisation (Vienna, 1905); FRANZOS, Aus Halb-Asien; Culturbilder aus Galizien, der Bukowina u. Süd Russland (Berlin, 1878); Charities, XIII (New York, Dec., 1904); The Messenger, XLII, Sept.-Dec. (New York, 1904); GRUSHEVSKY, Istoria Ukraini-Rusi (Lemberg, 1904-11). ANDREW J. SHIPMAN. Henry Rutter Henry Rutter ( vere BANISTER) Born 26 Feb., 1755; died 17 September, 1838, near Dodding Green, Westmoreland. He was the son of Adam Banister of Hesketh Bank and Agnes, daughter of Richard Butler, of Mawdesley (Lancashire). On 26 Sept., 1768, he went to Douai College, where he found his uncle, Rev. Robert Banister. In May, 1781, he became professor at St. Omer's College for the secular clergy. On the English mission, he served several places in the north before his appointment in 1817 to Yealand (Lancashire), where he remained till Jan., 1834. The rest of his life was spent at Dodding Green. The "Orthodox Journal" (VII, 223) gives a sympathetic notice of this sterling priest, characterized by his old-world learning and solid piety. Rutter wrote an "Evangelical Harmony", re-edited (1857) by Husenbeth. His other works, chiefly scriptural exegeses and devotional translations, are enumerated and described by Gillow. The "Answer to Dr. Southey" (the poet-laureate) is a contribution to the controversy provoked by Southey's "Book of the Church," (1824), in which Charles Butler (q.v.) was the Catholic protagonist. PATRICK RYAN Diocese of Ruvo and Bitonto Ruvo and Bitonto (RUBENSIS ET BITUNTINENSIS) Diocese in the Province of Bari, Aquileia, Southern Italy. Ruvo, the ancient Rubi, situated on a calcareous hill, contains a fine Norman cathedral of the eleventh century. Outside of the city are the ruins of a more ancient cathedral, possibly of the late fourth or early fifth century. According to a legend St. Peter preached the Faith here and appointed to the see as its first bishop St. Cletus, later pope. We read also of a St. Procopius, Bishop of Ruvo, of unknown date; Bishop Joannes, spoken of in 493, is the first prelate of the city known with certainty; of the others mention may be made of Pietro Ruggieri (1759-1804); Bishop Anderano (about 734) belonged either to Bitonto or Bisignano; Arnolfo (1087), the first undoubted Bishop of Bitonto; Enrico Minutolo (1382), later cardinal; Cornelio Musso (1544), a Conventual, distinguished at the Council of Trent; Fabrizio Carafa (1622), founder of a literary academy; Alessandro Crescenti (1652), later cardinal. In 1818 the Diocese of Ruvo, which comprised only the commune of Ruvo, was united æque principaliter to the See of Bitonto, which included only the commune of Bitonto. It has a fine cathedral with four rows of beautiful marble columns. The chief historic events relating to the dioceses are the capture of Ruvo in 1503 by Gonsalvo di Cordova, who defeated the French, and the battle of Bitonto (1734) in which the Austrians were defeated by the Spaniards. The united dioceses contain 25,000 inhabitants, a Franciscan friary, 7 houses of religious, 3 of which are enclosed, 2 having hospitals attached, and 2 others charitable establishments. CAPPELLETTI, Le Chiese d'Italia, XVI (Venice, 1857). U. BENIGNI Blessed John Ruysbroeck Blessed John Ruysbroeck Surnamed the Admirable Doctor, and the Divine Doctor, undoubtedly the foremost of the Flemish mystics, b. at Ruysbroeck, near Brussels, 1293; d. at Groenendael, 2 Dec., 1381. He was blessed with a devout mother, who trained him from infancy in the ways of piety and holiness. Of his father we know nothing; John's only family name, van Ruysbroeck, is taken from his native hamlet. At the age of eleven he forsook his mother, departing without leave or warning, to place himself under the guidance and tuition of his uncle, John Hinckaert, a saintly priest and a canon of St. Gudule's, Brussels, who with a fellow-canon of like mind, Francis van Coudenberg, was following a manner of life modelled on the simplicity and fervour of Apostolic days. This uncle provided for Ruysbroeck's education with a view to the priesthood. In due course, Blessed John was presented with a prebend in St. Gudule's, and ordained in 1317. His mother had followed him to Brussels, entered a Béguinage there, and made a happy end shortly before his ordination. For twenty-six years Ruysbroeck continued to lead, together with his uncle Hinckaert and van Coudenberg, a life of extreme austerity and retirement. At that time the Brethren of the Free Spirit were causing considerable trouble in the Netherlands, and one of them, a woman named Bloemardinne, was particularly active in Brussels, propagating her false tenets chiefly by means of popular pamphlets. In defence of the Faith Ruysbroeck responded with pamphlets also written in the native tongue. Nothing of these treatises remains; but the effect of the controversy was so far permanent with Ruysbroeck that his later writings bear constant reference, direct and indirect, to the heresies, especially the false mysticism, of the day, and he composed always in the idiom of the country, chiefly with a view to counteracting the mischief of the heretical writings scattered broadcast among the people in their own tongue. The desire for a more retired life, and possibly also the persecution which followed Ruysbroeck's attack on Bloemardinne, induced the three friends to quit Brussels in 1343, for the hermitage of Groenendael, in the neighbouring forest of Soignes, which was made over to them by John III, Duke of Brabant. But here so many disciples joined the little company that it was found expedient to organize into a duly-authorized religious body. The hermitage was erected into a community of canons regular, 13 March, 1349, and eventually it became the motherhouse of a congregation, which bore its name of Groenendael. Francis van Coudenberg was appointed first provost, and Blessed John Ruysbroeck prior. John Hinckaert refrained from making the canonical profession lest the discipline of the house should suffer from the exemptions required by the infirmities of his old age; he dwelt, therefore, in a cell outside the cloister, and there a few years later happily passed away. This period, from his religious profession (1349) to his death (1381), was the most active and fruitful of Ruysbroeck's career. To his own community his life and words were a constant source of inspiration and encouragement. His fame as a man of God, as a sublime contemplative and a skilled director of souls, spread beyond the bounds of Flanders and Brabant to Holland, Germany, and France. All sorts and conditions of men sought his aid and counsel. His writings were eagerly caught up and rapidly multiplied, especially in the cloisters of the Netherlands and Germany; early in the fifteenth century they are to be found also in England. Among the more famous visitors to Groenendael mention is made of Tauler, but though the German preacher certainly knew and appreciated his writings, it is not established that he ever actually saw Ruysbroeck. Gerard Groote in particular venerated him as a father and loved him as a friend. And through Groote, Ruysbroeck's influence helped to mould the spirit of the Windesheim School, which in the next generation found its most famous exponent in Thomas a Kempis. Just now strenuous efforts are being made to discover authentic Flemish MSS. of Blessed John Ruysbroeck's works; but up to the present the standard edition is the Latin version of Surius, all imperfect and probably incomplete as this is. Of the various treatises here preserved, the best-known and the most characteristic is that entitled "The Spiritual Espousals". It is divided into three books, treating respectively of the active, the interior, and the contemplative life; and each book is subdivided into four parts working out the text; Ecce Sponsus venit, exite obviam ei, as follows: (1) Ecce, the work of the vision, man must turn his eyes to God; (2) Sponsus venit, the divers comings of the Bridegroom; (3) exite, the soul going forth along the paths of virtue; and finally (4) the embrace of the soul and the heavenly Spouse. Literally, Ruysbroeck wrote as the spirit moved him. He loved to wander and meditate in the solitude of the forest adjoining the cloister; he was accustomed to carry a tablet with him, and on this to jot down his thoughts as he felt inspired so to do. Late in life he was able to declare that he had never committed aught to writing save by the motion of the Holy Ghost. In no one of his treatises do we find anything like a complete or detailed account of his system; perhaps, it would be correct to say that he himself was not conscious of elaborating any system. In his dogmatic writings he is emphatically a faithful son of the Catholic Church, explaining, illustrating, and enforcing her traditional teachings with remarkable force and lucidity; this fact alone is quite sufficient to dispose of the contention, still cherished in certain quarters, that Ruysbroeck was a forerunner of the Reformation, etc. In his ascetic works, his favourite virtues are detachment, humility, and charity; he loves to dwell on such themes as flight from the world, meditation upon the Life, especially the Passion of Christ, abandonment to the Divine Will, and an intense personal love of God. But naturally it is in his mystical writings that the peculiar genius of Ruysbroeck shines forth. Yet here again it is the manner rather than the matter that is new, and it is especially in the freshness, originality, boldness, variety, detail, and truth of his imagery and comparisons that the individuality of Ruysbroeck stands out. Students of mysticism from the pages of the Areopagite onwards will scarcely discover anything for which they cannot recall a parallel elsewhere. But there are many who maintain that Blessed John stands alone, unrivalled, in his grasp of what we may term the metaphysics of mysticism, in the delicateness and sureness of his touch when describing the phenomena and progress of the mystic union, and in the combined beauty, simplicity, and loftiness of his language and style. In common with most of the German mystics Ruysbroeck starts from God and comes down to man, and thence rises again to God, showing how the two are so closely united as to become one. But here he is careful to protest: "There where I assert that we are one in God, I must be understood in this sense that we are one in love, not in essence and nature." Despite this declaration, however, and other similar saving clauses scattered over his pages, some of Ruysbroeck's expressions are certainly rather unusual and startling. The sublimity of his subject-matter was such that it could scarcely be otherwise. His devoted friend, Gerard Groote, a trained theologian, confessed to a feeling of uneasiness over certain of his phrases and passages, and begged him to change or modify them for the sake at least of the weak. Later on, Jean Gerson and then Bossuet both professed to find traces of unconscious pantheism in his works. But as an offset to these we may mention the enthusiastic commendations of his contemporaries, Groote, Tauler, a Kempis, Scoenhoven, and in subsequent times of the Franciscan van Herp, the Carthusians Denys and Surius, the Carmelite Thomas of Jesus, the Benedictine Louis de Blois, and the Jesuit Lessius. In our own days Ernest Hello and especially Maeterlinck have done much to make his writings known and even popular. And at present, particularly since his beatification, there is a strong revival of interest in all that concerns Ruysbroeck in his native Belgium. A word of warning is needed against the assumption of some writers who would exalt the genius of Ruysbroeck by dwelling on what they term his illiteracy and ignorance. As a matter of fact the works of Blessed John manifest a mastery of the sacred sciences, and a considerable acquaintaince even with the natural science of his day. His adaptation of the slender resources of his native tongue to the exact expression of his own unusual experiences and ideas is admirable beyond praise; and though his verse is not of the best, his prose writings are vigorous and chaste, and evidence not only the intellect of a metaphysician, but the soul also of a true and tender poet. Blessed John's relics were carefully preserved and his memory honoured as that of a saint. When Groenendael Priory was suppressed by Joseph II in 1783, his relics were transferred to St. Gudule's, Brussels, where, however, they were lost during the French Revolution. A long and oft-interrupted series of attempts to secure official acknowledgement of his heroic virtues from Rome was crowned at length by a Decree, 1 Dec., 1908, confirming to him under the title of "Blessed" his cultus ab immemorabili tempore. And the Office of the Beatus has been granted to the clergy of Mechlin and to the Canons Regular of the Lateran. No authentic portrait of Ruysbroeck is known to exist; but the traditional picture represents him in the canonical habit, seated in the forest with his writing tablet on his knee, as he was in fact found one day by the brethren—rapt in ecstasy and enveloped in flames, which encircle without consuming the tree under which he is resting. ARTHUR, The Founders of the New Devotion (London, 1905); BAILLIE, Reflections from the Mirror of a Mystic (London, 1905); SCULLY, Life of Bl. John Ruysbroeck (London, 1910); STODDART, Ruysbroeck and the Mystics by Maurice Maeterlinck (London, 1894); UNDERHILL, Mysticism (London, 1911); AUGER, Etudes sur les Mystiques des Pays-Bas au moyen age in Acad. Roy. de Belg., tom. xlvi; AUGER, De doctrina et meritis Joannis van Ruysbroeck (Louvain, 1892); BOURGIGNON, Le b. Jean Rusbrok (Liege, 1910); ENGELHARDT, Richard von St. Victor und Joannes Rusbroek (Erlangen, 1838); FOFI, Vita e Dottrine del B. G. Rusbrochio (Rome, 1909); GERSON, Opera (Antwerp, 1708); GRUBE, Gerhard Groot und seine Stiftungen (Cologne, 1883); HELLO, Ruysbroeck l'Admirable (Paris, 1902); MAETERLINCK, L'ornement des noces spirituelles de Ruysbroeck l'Admirable (Brussels, 1908); MIERLO, articles in Dietsche Warande en Belfort, Feb.-Nov. (Antwerp, 1910); MULLER, Jan van Ruysbroeck, Van den VII Trappen (Brussels, 1911); PENNOTTUS, Ordinis canonicorum historia tripartita (Cologne, 1630); POMERIUS, in Bollandists, tom. IV; SURIUS, Opera (Cologne, 1692); THOMAS A KEMPIS, Opera (Freiburg, 1901); ULLMANN, Reformatoren vor der Reformation (Hamburg, 1842); VREESE, Jean de Ruysbroeck (Brussels, 1909); Processus, anno 1624. . .de vita et miraculis Ruysbrochii, in Mechlin archives; Decretum Mechlin confirmationis cultus (Rome, 1909). VINCENT SCULLY Ruysch, John John Ruysch Astronomer, cartographer, and painter, born at Utrecht about 1460; died at Cologne, 1533. Little is known of his early life. He became a secular priest, but joined the Benedictine Order in the monastery of St. Martin's at Cologne, where he made his profession in 1492. He devoted himself to the study of astronomy and painting, in which art he acquired much skill. He gave proof of his talent by decorating the refectory of the monastery with artistic designs, representing the lunar month and the signs of the zodiac. He went to Rome about 1508 and received a post in the pontifical palace. While here he published his famous map of the world entitled "Nova et universalior orbis cogniti tabula". It contains in particular the new Spanish and Portuguese discoveries in America. He assisted Raphael in his great paintings at the Vatican. Leaving Rome he journeyed to Portugal, where he became known to the king, who esteemed him highly on account of his knowledge of astronomy and cosmography, and made him astronomer to the fleet. He finally returned to Cologne and spent his last years in the monastery of his profession. He possessed considerable mechanical skill, and left a number of astronomical instruments of his own construction. He was also the author of the "Admonitiones ad spiritualia trahentes", which he wrote in 1494, and of a treatise on the mixing of colours and on painting on canvas. Notes HOLTHAUSEN, Chronicon Breve Sti Martini apud Ubios (about 1556); HARTZHEIM, Bibliotheca Coloniensis (1746) HENRY M. BROCK Father Abram J. Ryan Father Abram J. Ryan The poet-priest of the South, born at Norfolk, Virginia, 15 August, 1839; died at Louisville, Kentucky, 22 April, 1886. He inherited from his parents, in its most poetic and religious form, the strange witchery of the Irish temper. Fitted for the priesthood by a nature at once mystic and spiritual, be was ordained just before the beginning of the Civil War, entered the Confederate army as a chaplain, and served in this capacity until the end of the war. In the hour of defeat he won the heart of the entire South by his "Conquered Banner," whose exquisite measure was taken, as he told a friend, from one of the Gregorian hymns. The Marseillaise, as a hymn of victory, never more profoundly stirred the heart of France than did this hymn of defeat the hearts of those to whom it was addressed. It was read or sung in every Southern household, and thus became the apotheosis of the "Lost Cause". While much of his later war poetry was notable in its time, his first effort, which fixed his fame, was his finest production. The only other themes upon which he sang were those inspired by religious feeling. Among his poems of that class are to be found bits of the most weird and exquisite imagery. Within the limits of the Southern Confederacy and the Catholic Church in the United States, no poet was more popular. After the war he exercised the ministry in New Orleans, and was editor of "The Star," a Catholic weekly; later he founded "The Banner of the South" in Augusta, Georgia, a religious and political weekly; then he retired to Mobile. In 1880 he lectured in several Northern cities. As a pulpit orator and lecturer, he was always interesting and occasionally brilliant. As a man he had a subtle, fascinating nature, full of magnetism when he saw fit to exert it; as a priest, he was full of tenderness, gentleness, and courage. In the midst of pestilence he had no fear of death or disease. Even when he was young his feeble body gave him the appearance of age, and with all this there was the dreamy mysticism of the poet so manifest in the flesh as to impart to his personality something which marked him off from all other men. His "Poems, Patriotic, Religious, and Miscellaneous" have reached dozens of printings. HANNIS TAYLOR Patrick John Ryan Patrick John Ryan Sixth Bishop and second Archbishop of Philadelphia, b. At Thurles, County Tipperary, Ireland, 20 February, 1831; d. At Philadelphia; 11 February, 1911. His early education was received at the school of the Christian Brothers in his native town. In his twelfth year he entered the select school of Mr. J. L. Naughton, Richmond Street, Dublin, where he began his Classical studies. In 1844, while a pupil at Mr. Naughton's school, he headed a delegation of students, and in their name made an address to Daniel O'Connell, then a prisoner in Richmond Bridewell Prison. It is said that the great Liberator complimented the young speaker, and predicted a brilliant future for him. In 1847 he was adopted for the Diocese of St. Louis in the United States by Archbishop Peter Richard Kenrick and entered St. Patrick's College, Carlow. In 1852 he finished his course and was advanced to deacon's orders, but being too young to be ordained priest, he set out for St. Louis with Rev. Patrick Feehan, a subject of the same diocese, and afterward Archbishop of Chicago, and on his arrival was appointed to teach in the Diocesan Seminary at Carondelet. On account of his exceptional ability as a public speaker, Archbishop Kenrick permitted. the young deacon to preach frequently in the cathedral. His fame went forth at once, and he drew large audiences, made up not only of the regular members of the congregation, but of the most prominent people of all denominations from various parts of the city and more distant points. On 8 September, 1853, by special dispensation, he was ordained priest and was appointed assistant rector at the cathedral. He served there as assistant and as rector until 1861, when he was appointed to build the Church of the Annunciation at St. Louis. Having completed this task promptly and successfully, he was transferred to the rectorship of St. John's parish, at St. Louis. During all these years he was noted for his zeal in the work of the ministry, for his faithfulness in attending the military prisoners in Gratiot Street Prison during the Civil War, for the frequency and effectiveness of his sermons, and for the large number of converts, many of them persons of note, who by his influence were brought into the Church. In 1866 he attended the Second Plenary Council of Baltimore as one of Archbishop Kenrick's theologians, and was one of three priests chosen to preach on that occasion, the others being Archbishop John Lancaster Spalding, and the late Rev. Isaac Hecker, C.S.P. In 1868 he spent a year in Europe with Archbishop Kenrick. His fame as an orator had preceded him, and he received calls from all sides. At Rome, at the request of Pope Pius IX, he delivered the English Lenten course for that year. Archbishop Kenrick appointed him vicar-general and administrator of the diocese, during his attendance at the Vatican Council. On 14 February, 1872, he was consecrated titular Bishop of Tricomia, and Coadjutor Bishop of St. Louis with right of succession. After serving faithfully and successfully in this capacity for twelve years, he was made titular Archbishop of Salamis on 6 January, 1884. In the meantime the See of Philadelphia had become vacant by the death of Archbishop Wood, and on 8 June, 1884, Archbishop Ryan was appointed to succeed him. During his reign in Philadelphia the Church grew rapidly, as can be seen by the following table: + Churches — 127 in 1884; 297 in 1911 + Priests — 260 in 1884; 582 in 1911 + Nuns — 1020 in 1884; 2565 in 1911 + Schools — 59 in 1884; 141 in 1911 + Pupils — 22,000 in 1884; 66,612 in 1911 + Orphans supported — 998 in 1884; 3,230 in 1911 + Catholic population — 300,000 in 1884; 525,000 in 1911 During that time also the Roman Catholic High School for Boys, which was endowed by Mr. Thomas Cahill, was built, and put in operation; high school centres for girls taught by the different communities were established; a new central high school for girls was partly endowed and begun; St. Francis' Industrial School for Boys was endowed and successfully operated, the Philadelphia Protectory for Boys was erected: it has since been enlarged, at a cost of over half a million dollars and with capacity for six hundred; St. Joseph's Home for Working Boys was founded; a new foundling asylum and maternity hospital was built; a new St. Vincent's Home for younger orphan children was purchased with the archbishop's Golden Jubilee Fund of $200,000; a third Home for the Aged was erected; a Memorial Library Building, dedicated to the Archbishop, was begun at St. Charles' Seminary, Overbrook; and the three Catholic hospitals of the city doubled their capacity. The extent of the archbishop's zeal is shown by his care for the emigrants who came into the diocese during his time. In 1884 there were very few foreign churches in the diocese; now there are 20 for the Italians, 23 for the Poles, 18 for the Greeks, 15 for the Slovacs, 6 for the Lithuanians, and several for other nationalities. The archbishop took special interest in the Indians and negroes. He established two congregations for the latter in Philadelphia, and invited the Holy Ghost Fathers to build their college and mother-house at Cornwells, near the city. Under his direction Mother Katharine Drexel founded the Sisters of the Blessed Sacrament, who devote themselves entirely to the Indians and negroes, with their mother-house, novitiate and orphan asylum at Cornwells and several convents and schools in the West and South. Another proof of this interest is found in the archbishop's attendance at the Lake Mohonk conferences, and at the meetings of the U. S. Indian Commission, to which he had been appointed by President Roosevelt. By his prudence and tact he removed much prejudice against the Church, and obtained special privileges for Catholics in public institutions. His great reputation as an orator brought him invitations to speak, not only at the most important ecclesiastical functions, but also on secular occasions. In addition to his monthly sermons, in St. Louis on the first Sunday, and in Philadelphia on the second, he preached frequently at the laying of corner-stones, at the consecration of bishops, and churches, and at funerals. Some of the more remarkable instances were the dedication of St. Patrick's Cathedral, New York, the conferring of the pallium on Archbishop Corrigan, and his funeral sermon; the consecration and funeral of Archbishop Hennessy of Dubuque, and the funeral of Archbishop Kenrick of St. Louis. He addressed the St. Louis Legislature twice; opened the St. Louis University on two occasions; spoke before the Committee of the United States Senate on Indian affairs; opened the Republican National Convention in Philadelphia in 1900, and was the principal speaker at the McKinley Memorial service in Philadelphia, after the president's assassination. He lectured on various occasions, the most important of his lectures probably being on "What Catholics do not believe", St. Louis, 1877, and on "Agnosticism", Philadelphia, 1894. He received the degree of Doctor of Laws from the University of St. Louis and from the University of Pennsylvania. Under his guidance the Catholic "Standard and Times" of Philadelphia, his official organ, obtained a reputation unexcelled in Catholic journalism; and under his editorial direction the "American Catholic Quarterly Review" preserved and extended the reputation which it had already made as a leading exponent of Catholic thought. The celebrations of the Silver Jubilee of the archbishop in the episcopacy, 1897, and of his Golden Jubilee in the priesthood, 1903, proved the esteem in which he was held by the whole community, irrespective of creed, because the whole city rejoiced; while his death showed how universally he was loved, for the whole city wept. The archbishop was best known as an orator and a wit. He was adorned most by strong faith and piety, by great meekness and humility, and by a prudence that was far-reaching and admirable. He has left no published works except some lectures. These are: "Modern Religious Skepticism"; "What Catholics do not Believe"; "Christian Civilization", and "Agnosticism": all are published by the Catholic Truth Society of San Francisco as well as by similar organizations in this country and London. There is a fifth lecture on "Religion and the Fine Arts". O'HANLON, Life and Scenery in Missouri (Dublin, 1890); COWLEY, The Episcopal Silver Jubilee of the Most Rererend Patrick John Ryan, D.D., LL.D. (Philadelphia, 1897); KIRLIN, Life of Most Rev. P.J. Ryan, D.D., LL.D. (Philadelphia, 1903); TURNER, The Late Archbishop Ryan in The Catholic World (April, 1911); HALVEY, Bas Le Mor Mor Cluidh, Personal Reminiscences of Archbishop Ryan in Good Counsel Magazine (Philadelphia, March, 1911). JAMES P. TURNER Henry Ignatius Dudley Ryder Henry Ignatius Dudley Ryder English Oratorian priest and controversialist, b. 3 Jan., 1837; d. at Edgbaston, Birmingham, 7 Oct., 1907; was the eldest son of George Dudley Ryder, one of the numerous clergymen of the Established Church of England who followed in the steps of Newman. He was received into the Catholic Church at Rome in 1846. The grandfather, Henry Dudley Ryder, a son of the first Lord Harrowby, was a prominent Evangelical in the early years of the last century, and was the first of the party to be raised to the episcopate. He was successively Bishop of Gloucester and Lichfield and Coventry. His kneeling statue by Chantrey will be remembered by all visitors of Lichfield cathedral. Newman, in his "Apologia", speaks of the veneration in which he held Bishop Ryder. George Ryder married Sophia, a daughter of the Rev. John Sargent. The three other Misses Sargent married respectively Samuel Wilberforce, who became Bishop, first of Oxford, and then of Winchester; Henry Wilberforce; and Henry Edward Manning, the future cardinal and Archbishop of Westminster. Father Ryder's lifelong connection with Newman and the Oratory began as a private pupil, when he was about twelve years old. The only interruption was a year at the English College at Rome and a few months at the Catholic University at Dublin, of which Newman was rector, before he began in December, 1856, his Oratorian novitiate. In 1863 he was ordained priest. After Cardinal Newman's death he was elected superior of the Birmingham Oratory and held this office till his health gave way. He was the last survivor of "my dearest brothers of this House, the Priests of the Birmingham Oratory" to whom Newman dedicated his "Apologia". His grave is with theirs and Cardinal Newman's at Rednal, a small country house belonging to the Birmingham Oratory, about seven miles from Birmingham. His life was uneventful. He cared little for notoriety or even fame. Once only did he push himself forward, and then it was to incur obloquy rather than applause. This was in 1867-8, when he attacked W. G. Ward, at that time editor of "The Dublin Review", and a leading spirit among an influential section of English Catholics who were singularly intolerant towards those who differed from them. Ward seemed to think of the pope as unceasingly exercising his very highest prerogative. All doctrinal instructions contained in papal documents, such as encyclicals and the like were infallible utterances. The Syllabus, together with all the documents which it quotes, was certainly infallible. So also, most probably, were the doctrinal Decrees of the Index and the Holy Office, when sanctioned by the pope and promulgated by his order. These opinions were put forward not tentatively, but as the only possible ones for a loyal Catholic. In other words, the doctrine of Infallibility was caricatured by its would-be defender in almost exactly the same way that it was caricatured a few years later by the Old Catholic Schulte (see FESSLER). Against these extravagances Ryder delivered his protest in three pamphlets, remarkable both for their literary style and the theological knowledge they displayed. He earned for his reward, as he himself in later years expressed it, "the prophet's portion of stones"; but time has shown that he was mainly in the right; within a very few years his opponent had to retract many of his more pronounced opinions in deference to the teaching of Roman theologians. It should be added that Ryder fully believed in the doctrine of Papal Infallibility before it was defined His literary output was small. Apart from a number of articles in American and English magazines, he published "Idealism in Theology, a Review of Dr. Ward's scheme of Dogmatic Authority" (London, 1867); "A letter to W.G. Ward on his theory of Infallible Instruction" (London, 1868); "Postscriptum to Letter, etc." (London, 1868); "A critique upon Mr. Foulkes' Letter" (London, 1869); "Catholic Controversy", a reply to Littledale's "Plain Reasons" (London, 1880); "Poems Original and Translated" (Dublin, 1882). There is besides "Essays of the Rev. H. I. D. Ryder, edited by Francis Bacchus" (London, 1911). "His literary ideal", writes Mr. Wilfrid Ward, "was so high; his self-criticism so unsparing, that much which might have secured him a wider reputation was set aside. Quantify was sacrificed in preference to letting the world see anything which he himself felt to fall short of his own high standard in quality." WILFRID WARD, Father Ignatius Ryder in The Dublin Review (January, 1898), republished in IDEM, Ten Personal Studies (London, 1908); CHAPMAN, Dr. Ryder's Essays in the Dublin Review (April, 1911). J.F. BACCHUS Theodore James Ryken Theodore James Ryken Known as Brother Francis Xavier, founder of the Xaverian Brothers. b. at Elshout, North Brabant, Holland, 30 August, 1797, d. at Bruges, 1871. His parents, who were devout Catholics, died while he was yet a child, and a pious uncle reared him. Even in youth he loved works of charity and zeal, and at nineteen he became a catechist. At twenty-five he became secretary to a well-known convert, M. Le Sage-ten-Broek, and acted in that capacity for four years, until cholera broke out at Groningen. While helping to nurse the patients, he caught the infection, and came near to death. In 1826 he made a pilgrimage to Rome, and Leo XII gave him a medal in commemoration. He made a second visit in 1838, and had an audience with Gregory XVI. In 1827 he entered a Trappist monastery in Germany but, as his confessor told him that God had other designs for him, his stay was short. Ryken came to America in 1831, and remained for three years. His observations in the United States convinced him that Catholic teachers were needed, and, returning to Europe, he planned to establish a teaching institute. In 1837 he returned to America and obtained written approval from seven bishops. Thereupon he asked permission from Bishop Boussen, of Bruges, to found a congregation. The bishop consented, but, before the actual foundation, required Ryken to pass a year's novitiate, which he fulfilled with the Redemptorists. The Xaverian Brothers (q. v.) were established at Bruges in 1839 The beginning was hard, the founder having, with two or three companions, to struggle against disheartening obstacles. Courage and energy prevailed, and after a few years came brighter days. Brother Francis pronounced the vows of religion in 1846. In 1860, after holding the office of Superior General of the Xaverians for twenty-seven years, he was relieved of his duties on account of failing strength. At the time of his death the Xaverians were firmly settled in Belgium, England, and the United States. In Ryken's character the conspicuous traits were optimistic faith, rigor towards self, and zeal for the observance of the rule. BROTHER FRANCIS XAVIER (Theodore James Ryken): A Life Sketch (Baltimore, 1904); VAN TOURNHOUT, Fragments from the History of the Xaverian Brothers (Baltimore, 1911). BROTHER ISIDORE _________________________________________________________________ Manoel de Sa (Saa) Manoel de Sa Portuguese theologian and exegete, b. at Villa do Conde (Province Entre-Minho-e-Douro), 1530; d. at Arona (Italy), 30 Dec., 1596. He distinguished himself as a student at the University of Coimbra, and at the age of fifteen joined the Society of Jesus. He soon afterward taught philosophy, first at Coimbra, and next at Gandia, where he also acted as tutor to St. Francis Borgia, then Duke of Gandia. In 1557, he became one of the early professors of the Roman College, and commented for two years on the prophecies of Osee and the "Summa" of St. Thomas. Exhausted by his labours, he discontinued his lectures, and visited the houses of the Society in Tuscany. Restored to health, he returned to the Roman College, where he filled the chair of exegesis, and found time to give missions in various places, preaching with an eloquence truly apostolic. His reputation for scholarship induced Pius V to appoint him as a member of the commission in charge of preparing the authentic edition of the Septuagint. This did not prevent him from continuing his apostolic labours and from founding several houses of his order in Upper Italy. After residing for a time at Genoa, he withdrew to the professed house of Arona (Diocese of Milan), where he died. His exegetical works are: "Scholia in Quatuor Evangelia" (Antwerp, 1596), and "Notationes in totam Scripturam Sacram" (Antwerp, 1598), both of which passed thrrough several editions. However short, Sa's annotations clearly set forth the literal sense of Holy Writ, and bespeak a solid erudition, despite a few inaccuracies which have been sharply rebuked by Protestant critics. His theological treatise entitled "Aphorismi Confessariorum ex Doctorum sententiis collecti" (Venice, 1595), however remarkable, was censured in 1603, apparently because the Master of the Sacred Palace treated some of its maxims as contrary to opinions commonly received among theologians, but it was later corrected and has recently removed from the Roman Index (1900). Sa's life of John of Texeda, the Capuchin confessor of St. Francis Borgia, when Duke of Gandia, has not been published. DE BACKER, Biblioth. des Ecrivains de la Compagnie de Jésus (Liège, 1853); HURTER, Nomenclator (Innsbruck, 1907). FRANCIS E. GIGOT Angel de Saavedra Remirez de Baquedano Angel de Saavedra Remírez de Baquedano Spanish poet and statesman, b. at Cordova, 10 March, 1791; d. at Madrid, 22 June, 1865. He was the second son of Juan Martín de Saavedra, Duque de Rivas, and succeeded to the title upon the death without issue of his elder brother in 1834. At eleven he entered the Seminario de Nobles at Madrid but left at sixteen to join the army. From 1808 to 1813 he took an active part in the Spanish War of Independence. From 1813 to 1820 he lived quietly in Seville, devoting his time to literary pursuits, and from 1820 to 1823 he distinguished himself as a member of the Cortes. He sided with the revolutionary party, and as a result, when Ferdinand VII came into power, he was forced to flee, escaping with difficulty to Gibraltar. From there he proceeded to London, and later to Malta where he remained five years during which he continued his literary activities, and then went to live in France. Upon the death of Ferdinand VII, he was able to return to Spain (1834). In 1836, he became minister of the interior in the cabinet headed by Isturiz, and in 1844 he was sent as ambassador to Naples where he remained until 1850. Besides being a poet of great merit, Saavedra had considerable skill as a painter, and during his exile in France, earned a living for himself and family by conducting a school for painting and by selling his pictures. But it is as a poet that he is best known. He published his first volume of "Poesias" in 1813 and in 1814, two tragedies, "Aliatur" and "El Duque de Aquitania". Only the first was presented. The works which place him in the front rank of Spanish poets are "El moro expósito", a narrative poem breathing a spirit of patriotism (1834), and the tragedy "Don Alvaro" (1835), presented with great success in Madrid and considered his best work. A complete edition of his works was published (5 vols., Madrid, 1854), under the title "Obras Completas", and in 1885 a complete edition with illustrations appeared ar Barcelona in two volumes. DE BENA in La Biblioteca de Autores Espanoles, II (Madrid, 1848); CANETE, Autores dramaticos contemporaneos, I (Madrid, 1881). VENTURA FUENTES Saba and Sabeans Saba and Sabeans This Saba (Sheba) must not be confounded with Saba (Seba) in Ethiopia of Is., xliii, 3; xlv, 14. It lies in the Southern Arabian Jôf about 200 miles north-west of Aden. The Sabeans are mentioned in the Bible as a distant people (Joel, iii, 8), famous traders (Ez., xxvii,22-3; xxxviii, 13; Job, vi, 19), who exported gold (Is., lx,6; Ps., lxxiii, 15 (R.V.); Ez., xxxviii, 13), precious stones (Ez., xxvii, 22), perfumes (Jer., vi, 20), incense (Is.,lx, 6), and perhaps slaves (Joel, ibid.), and practised brigandage. The genealogies of Genesis connect them now with Dadan, as sons of Regma (x,7; cf. I Par., i, 9) and of Jecsan (xxv, 3; cf. I Par., i, 32), now with Asarmoth (Hadhramôt), as sons of Jecsan (x, 26-8, cf.,I Par., i, 20-22). These details point to two Sabas, one in the south contiguous to Hadhramot, another in the north near Taima (Job, i, 15; vi, 19) and El 'Ela (cf. "Comptes rendus de l'académie des Inscriptions" etc., June 1910); but which was the original home of the Sabeans, cannot yet be decided. Hommel indeed places it in the north, near Idumean Dedan, and identifies it with Aribi-Yareb (whose queens figure in Assyrian inscriptions),with the Saba, whose queen visited Solomon (III Kings, x), which is probably mentioned as tributary to Theglathphalasar III (745-27 B.C.), and whose ruler, Ithamara, paid tribute to Sargon in 715 B.C. Thence (according to Glaser) the Sabeans moved south in the eighth or ninth century and established their kingdom on the ruins of the Minaean power. This theory is plausible and solves the difficulty of III Kings, x; but the identification of Saba with Aribi-Yareb is arbitrary, and all present evidence disproves the existence of kings in Saba till much later. Sargon, who lavishes the title of King on his tributaries, refuses it to Ithamara, the Yethamara of Sabean inscriptions, and these inscriptions point to a long period of rule by Mukarribs (priest-kings), ten of whose names have been preserved. Their capital was Çirwah. Authorities agree in dating their rule from the beginning of the tenth century B.C., and in making the advent of the kings contemporaneous with the destruction of the Minaean kingdom. Here agreement ceases. Glaser, e.g. dates the Sabean kings from 820, Müller from 750, and they can certainly not be placed later than 500 B.C., since at least seventeen of them reigned before 115 B.C. At that date a new era begins. The Himayarites (Homeritae of classical geography) overthrew in that year the Kingdom of Saba, and founded the "Kingdom of Saba and Raidân". In 25 B.C. the army of Aelius Gallus failed miserably before the walls of Marib, the Sabean capital. About A.D. 300 the ever-increasing Abyssinian immigrants overthrew the Himyarite dynasty, and inaugurated the "Kingdom of Saba, Raidan, Hadhramôt, and Yemen", which, after yielding place for an interval to a Judaeo-Sabean kingdom and violent religious persecution (cf. Pereira, "Historia dos Martyres de Nagran", Lisbon, 1899) was re-established by Byzantine intervention in 525. After the rout of the Viceroy Abraha at Mecca in 570, the Persians seized their opportunity, and Southern Arabia became a Persian province till its incorporation in Islam. Modern discoveries confirm the classical and Biblical accounts of Sabean prosperity. Ruins of fortresses and walled towns of temples and irrigation-works, cover the land. Of the immense dams the most famous is that of the capital, Marib, which did service, after repeated restoration, down to the sixth century of our era. Thanks to irrigation, agriculture flourished. Gold, too, abounded, with silver and precious spices. Brigandage reinforced the natural products. But the chief source of wealth was the trade route from India to Egypt and northern Syria, which passed through the Sabean capital (cf. Müller, "Der Islam im Morgen- und Abendland", I, 24 sqq.). Accordingly, when, in the first century after Christ, the Ptolomies exchanged the Southern Arabian route for a direct road from Alexandria to Egypt, the decline of Sabean prosperity began. Thus the bursting of the dam of Marib was the consequence, not, as Arabic legend pretended, the cause, of the disintegration of the Sabean tribes. The Sabean polity seems to have been based on the feudal system. Two kings appear to have shared the supreme power, but the monarchy was not hereditary, and passed on the king's death to the first male born during the reign to one of the leading families. The heads of these families shared with the king the exclusive right to sanction the building of castles, and are even called the kings of their own tribes. Of other magistrates-e.g. the eponymous magistrates- we know little more than the names. A wide principle of individual equality seems to have prevailed; strangers were admitted as clients; slaves abounded. Women appear to enjoyed equal rights with their consorts and are sometimes called "mistress of the castle". Concubinage prevailed, but not polygamy. Sabean art has in some respects merited high praise, but it lacks originality, and betrays at different periods the influence of the surrounding civilizations. The coins, the king's head with an owl on the reverse, are sometimes of fine workmanship (cf. Schlumberger, "Le trésor de San'a Daris", 1880). The earliest date from the fifth century B.C. Many recent writers attribute to the Sabeans the invention of the Semitic alphabet. The supreme god of Saba was Il-Mukah, to whom was joined in the inferior capacity of spouse or daughter, the sun-goddess Shamsh. Other deities were Athtar, the morning or evening star, Ta'lab, "Patron of Riyâm", Haubas, Rammâm, and others-names which may be merely epithets of the moon-god. Submission towards and intimate affinity to the deity is the characteristic of the Sabean religion. The inscriptions commemorate gratitude for success in arms, "man-slaying", health, preservation, safe return, booty, and rich crops. Worshippers offer to the gods themselves and their children, register vows, and attest their fulfilment. Votive offerings consisted in gilt images of the object, and one king dedicated as many as thirty golden ("gilt") statues on one occasion. We can only make a passing allusion to the predominant influence attributed by some savants to Southern Arabia on the formation of the Mosaic institutions. Especial stress is laid on the Arabian origin of the Divine name and of many religious terms, on the scruple of the Arabians about using the Divine name, their designation of priests as Levites, their laws of ceremonial purity, their imageless worship, their sin-offerings etc., especially when viewed in the light of Abraham's ancestry, and of the intimate connection of Moses with Midian. Apart, however, from the fact that the question belongs to the Minaean rather than to the Sabean problem, the materials at present at our disposal do not warrant any probable solution of the question. Classical Geographers: GLASER, Skizze der Geschichte u. Geographic Arabiens (Berlin, 1890). Arabic Geographers: see especially Müller, Die Burgen u. Schölsser Südarabiens nach dem Iklîl des Hamdani (Vienna, 1879). Sabean Inscriptions: Corpus inscr. Semit., IV (Paris, 1889--); HOMMEL, Südarabische Chrestomathie (Munich, 1892); MULLER and MORDTMAN, Sabäische Denkmäler (Vienna, 1883); MULLER, Sudarabische Alterthumer im Kunsthistorische Hofmuseum (Vienna, 1889). General Reference: HOMMEL, Aufsätze u. Abhandlungen (Munich, 1892); WEBER, Arabien vor dem Islam (Leipzig, 1901); Idem, Studien zur Sudarab. Altertumskunde, I-III (Berlin, 1901-7); GRIMME, Mohammed (Munster, 1895); KÖNIG, Fünf neue Landschaftenamen im a. Test. (Berlin, 1902); HARTMANN, Der islamische Orient, II (Leipzig, 1909); HASTINGS, Dict. of the Bible. For Biblical Aspect: HOMMEL, Ancient Hebrew Tradition (New York and London, 1897); IDEM in HILPRECHT, Explorations in Bible Lands (Edinburg, 1903), 741-52; LANDSDORFER, Die Bibel u. die s¨darab. Altertumsforschung (Munster, 1910); GRIMME in Zeitschrift der morgenländischen Geschichte, LXI, 3S sqq. Sabaean Religion: NIELSEN, Die altarab. Mondreligion (Strasburg, 1904); IDEM, Der Sabäische Gott Il-Mukah (Leipzig, 1910). Modern Explorations: HOMMEL in Hilprecht, op.cit., 697-726; WEBER, Forschungsreisen in Südarabien bis zum Auftreten Glasers (Leipzig,1906); IDEM, E. Glasers Forschungsreisen in Südarabien (Leipzig, 1908). J.A. HARTINGER Sabaoth Sabaoth (In Hebrew, plural form of "host" or "army"). The word is used almost exclusively in conjunction with the Divine name as a title of majesty: "the Lord of Hosts", or "the Lord God of Hosts". The origins and precise signification of the title are matters of more or less plausible conjecture. According to some scholars the "hosts" represent, at least primitively, the armies of Israel over whom Jehovah exercised a protecting influence. Others opine that the word refers to the hosts of heaven, the angels, and by metaphor to the stars and entire universe (cf. Genesis 2:1). In favour of the latter view is the fact that the title does not occur in the Pentateuch or Josue though the armies of Israel are often mentioned, while it is quite common in the prophetic writings where it would naturally have the more exalted and universal meaning. JAMES F. DRISCOLL St. Sabbas St. Sabbas ( Also spelled Sabas). Hermit, born at Mutalaska near Caesarea in Cappadocia, 439; died in his laura 5 December, 532. He entered a Basilian monastery aat the age of eight, came to Jerusalem in 456, lived five years in a cavern as a disciple of St. Euthymius, and, after spending some time in various monasteries, founded (483) the Laura Mar Sabe (restored in 1840) in the gorges of the Cedron, southeast of Jerusalem. Because some of his monks opposed his rule and demanded a priest as their abbot, Patriarch Salustius of Jerusalem ordained him in 491 and appointed archimandrite of all the monasteries in Palestine in 494. The opposition continued and he withdrew to the new laura which he had built near Thekoa. A strenuous opponent of the Monophysites and the Origenists he tried to influence the emperors against them by calling personally on Emperor Anastasius at Constantinople in 511 and on Justinian in 531. His authorship of "Typicon S. Sabæ" (Venice, 1545), a regulation for Divine worship throughout the year as well as his authorship of a monastic rule bearing the same title (Kurtz in "Byzant, Zeitschrift", III, Leipzig, 1894, 167-70), is doubtful. After him was named the Basilica of St. Sabas with its former monastery on the Aventine at Rome. His feast is on 5 December. Other saints of this name are: + St. Sabbas, a Goth, martyred 12 April, 372, by being drowned in the Musæus, a tributary of the Danube; + St. Sabbas, also a Goth, martyred with about seventy others at Rome, under Aurelian; + St. Julianus Sabbas, a hermit near Edessa, d. about 380; + St. Sabbas the Younger, a Basilian abbot, 6 February, 990 or 991, at the monastery of St. Caesarius in Rome; + St. Sabbas, Archbishop of Serbia, d. at Trnawa, 14 January, 1237. A Life in Greek by Cyril of Scythopolis was edited by Cotelier in Eccl. Graecae Monum., III (Paris, 1686) 220-376, and by Ponjalovskij together with an Old-Slavonian version (St. Petersburg, 1890); another old Life in Greek was edited by Koiklydes (Jerusalem, 1905). MICHAEL OTT Sabbatarians, Sabbatarianism Sabbatarians, Sabbatarianism (Heb. Shabot rest). The name, as appears from its origin, denotes those individuals or parties who are distinguished by some peculiar opinion or practice in regard to the observance of the Sabbath or day of rest. In the first place it is applied to those rigorists who apparently confound the Christian Sunday with the Jewish Sabbath and, not content with the prohibition of servile work, will not allow many ordinary and innocent occupations on the Sunday. This form of Sabbatariansm has chiefly prevailed among Scottish and English Protestants and was at one time very common. Of late years it has sensibly declined; and there is now a tendency towards the opposite extreme of laxity in observing the law of Sunday rest. These Sabbatarians never formed a distinct sect; but were merely a party of rigorists scattered among many and various Protestant denominations. At the same time it is not only in their name that they have something in common with the distinctive sects of Sabbatarians properly so-called, for their initial error in neglecting the distinction between the Christian weekly festival and the Jewish Sabbath is likewise the starting-point of the Sabbatarian sects; and these carry their mistaken principle to its logical conclusion. This logical development of judaizing Sabbatarianism is curiously illustrated in the history of a sect of Sabbatarian Socinians founded in Transylvania in Hungary towards the end of the sixteenth century. Their first principle, which led them to separate from the rest of the Unitarian body, was their belief that the day of rest must be observed with the Jews on the seventh day of the week and not on the Christian Sunday. And as we learn from Schrodl the greater part of this particular Sabbatarian sect joined the orthodox Jews in 1874, thus carrying out in practice the judaizing principle of their founders. Although there does not seem to be any immediate or obvious connection between the observance of the seventh day and the rejection of infant baptism, these two errors in doctrine and discipline are often found together. Thus Sabbatarianism made many recruits among the Mennonite Anabaptists in Holland and among the English Baptists who, much as they differ on other points of doctrine, agree in the rejection of paedo-baptism. And it is presumably a result of this contact with Anabaptism that Sabbatarianism is also found in association with fanatical views on political or social questions. The most conspicuous of English Sabbatarian Baptists was Francis Bampfield (d. 1683), brother of a Devonshire baronet and originally a clergyman of the English Church. He was the author of several works and ministered to a congregation of Sabbatarian Baptists in London. He suffered imprisonment for his heterodoxy and eventually died in Newgate. In America the Baptists who profess Sabbatarianism are known as Seventh-Day Baptists. But if the greater number of Sabbatarians have come from the Baptists, the most amazing of them was at one time associated with the Wesleyan Methodists. This was the prophetess Joanna Southcott (1750-1814), like Bampfield, a native of Devonshire, who composed many spiritual poems and prophetical writings, and became the mother of a sect of Sabbatarians, also known as Southcottians or Joannas. Modern Englishmen who are apt to smile at medieval credulity can scarcely find in Catholic countries in the "darkest" days of ignorance any instance of a more amazing credulity than that of Joanna Southcott's disciples, who confidently awaited the birth of the promised Messiah whom the prophetess of sixty-four was to bring into the world. They gave practical proof of their faith by preparing a costly cradle. Nor did they abandon all hope when the poor deluded woman died of the disease which had given a false appearance of pregnancy. The sect survived for many years; and when in 1874 her tombstone was shattered by an accidental explosion, the supposed portent re-enkindled the faith of her followers. The American sect of Seventh-Day Adventists may be added to the list of Sabbatarian communities, among which their large numbers should give them a conspicuous place. To these may be added the Jewish sect of Sabbatarians, though these derive their name not from the Sabbath, but from their founder, Sabbatian Zebi or Zevi (1626-76). His teaching was not concerned with any special observance of the Sabbath, but as a form of false Messianism it may be compared with the mission of Joanna Southcott. The two stories show some strange points of resemblance especially in the invincible credulity of the disciples of the pretended Jewish Messiah and of the deluded Devonshire prophetess. (See bibliography of ADVENTISTS) W.H. KENT Sabbath Sabbath (Heb. shabbath, cessation, rest; Gr. Sabbaton; Lat. Sabbatum). The seventh day of the week among the Hebrews, the day being counted from sunset to sunset, that is, from Friday evening to Saturday evening. Prescriptions concerning the Sabbath The Sabbath was a day of rest "sanctified to the Lord" (Ex., xvi, 23; xxxi, 15; Deut., v, 14). All work was forbidden, the prohibition including strangers as well as Israelites, beasts as well as men (Ex., xx, 8-10; xxxi, 13-17; Deut., v, 12-14). The following particular actions are mentioned as forbidden: cooking (ex., xvi, 23); gathering manna (xvi, 26 sqq.); plowing and reaping (xxxiv, 21); lighting a fire (for cooking, xxxv, 3); gathering wood (num., xv, 32 sqq.); carrying burdens (jer., xvii, 21-22); pressing grapes, bringing in sheaves, and loading animals (II Esd., xiii, 15); trading (Ibid., 15 sqq.). Travelling, at least with a religious object, was not forbidden, the prohibition of Ex., xvi, 29, referring only to leaving the camp to gather food; it is implied in the institution of holy assemblies (Lev., xxiii, 2-3, Heb. text), and was customary in the time of the kings (IV Kings, iv, 23). At a later period, however, all movement was restricted to a distance of 2000 cubits (between five and six furlongs), or a "sabbath day's journey" (Acts, I, 12). Total abstention from work was prescribed only for the Sabbath and the Day of Atonement; on the other feast-days servile work alone was prohibited (Ex., xii, 16; Lev., xxiii, 7 sqq.). Wilful violation of the Sabbath was punished with death (Ex., xxxi, 14-15; Num., xv, 32-36). The prohibition of work made it necessary to prepare food, and whatever might be needed, the day before the Sabbath, hence known as the day of preparation, or Parasceve (paraskeue; Matt., xxvii, 62; Mark, xv, 42; etc.). Besides abstention from work, special religious observances were prescribed. (a) The daily sacrifices were doubled, that is two lambs of a year old without blemish were offered up in the morning, and two in the evening, with twice the usual quantity of flour tempered with oil and of the wine of libation (num., xxvii, 3-10). (b) New loaves of proposition were placed before the Lord (Lev., xxiv, 5; 1 Par., ix, 32). (c) A sacred assembly was to be held in the sanctuary for solemn worship (Lev., xxiii, 2-3, Heb. text; Ezech., xlvi, 3). We have no details as to what was done by those living at a distance from the sanctuary. Synagogal worship belongs to the post-Exilic period; still it is probably a development of an old custom. In earlier days the people were wont to go to hear the instructions of the Prophets (IV Kings, iv, 23), and it is not unlikely that meetings for edification and prayer were common from the oldest times. Meaning of the Sabbath The Sabbath was the consecration of one day of the weekly period to God as the Author of the universe and of time. The day thus being the Lord's, it required that man should abstain from working for his own ends and interests, since by working he would appropriate the day to himself, and that he should devote his activity to God by special acts of positive worship. After the Sinaitic covenant God stood to Israel in the relation of Lord of that covenant. The Sabbath thereby also became a sign, and its observance an acknowledgment of the pact: "See that thou keep my sabbath; because it is a sign between me and you in your generations; that you may know that I am the Lord, who sanctify you" (Ex., xxxi, 13). But while the Sabbath was primarily a religious day, it had a social and philanthropic side. It was also intended as a day of rest and relaxation, particularly for the slaves (Deut., v, 14). Because of the double character, religious and philanthropic, of the day, two different reasons are given for its observance. The first is taken from God's rest on the seventh day of creation: "For in six days the Lord made heaven and earth, . . .and rested on the seventh day: therefore the Lord blessed the seventh day, and sanctified it" (Ex., xx, 11; xxxi, 17). This does not mean that the Sabbath was instituted at the Creation, as some commentators have thought, but that the Israelites were to imitate God's example and rest on the day which He had sanctified by His rest. The Sabbath as the sign of the Sinaitic covenant recalled the deliverance from the bondage of Egypt. Hence, in the second place, the Israelites are bidden to remember that they were once slaves in Egypt, and should therefore in grateful remembrance of their deliverance rest themselves and allow their bond-servants to rest (Deut., v, 14-15). As a reminder of God's benefits to Israel the Sabbath was to be a day of joy (Is., lvii, 13) and such it was in practice (cf. Osee, II, 11; Lam., II, 6). No fasting was done on the Sabbath (Judith, viii, 6) on the contrary, the choicest meals were served to which friends were invited. Origin of the Sabbath The Sabbath is first met with in connection with the fall of the manna (Ex., xvi, 22 sqq.), but it there appears as an institution already known to the Israelites. The Sinaitic legislation therefore only gave the force of law to an existing custom. The origin of this custom is involved in obscurity. It was not borrowed from the Egyptians, as the week of seven days closing with a day of rest was unknown to them. In recent years a Babylonian origin has been advocated. A lexicographical tablet gives shabattu as the equivalent of um nuh libbi, "the day of the appeasement of the heart" (of the gods). Furthermore, a religious calendar of the intercalary month Elul and of the month Marchesvan mentions the 7th, 14th, 21st, 28th, and 19th days, the latter probably because it was the 49th (7x7) day from the beginning of the preceding month, as days on which the king, the magician, and the physician were to abstain from certain acts. The king, for instance, was not to eat food prepared with fire, put on bright garments, ride in a chariot, or exercise acts of authority. These days were then, days of propitiation, and therefore shabattu days. We have thus periods of seven days the last day of which is marked by abstention from certain actions, and called shabattu, in other words the equivalent of the Sabbath. A Babylonian origin is not in itself improbable, since Chaldea was the original home of the Hebrews, but there is no proof that such is actually the case. The reading shabattu is uncertain, shapattu being at lest equally probable. Besides, there is no evidence that these days were called shabattu; the signs so read are found affixed only to the 15th day of the month, where, however, sha patti, "division" of the month is the more probable reading. These days, moreover, differed entirely from the Sabbath. They were not days of general rest, business being transacted as on other days. The abstention from certain acts had for object to appease the anger of the gods; the days were, therefore, days of penance, not of joy like the Sabbath. Lastly, these days followed the phases of the moon, whereas the Sabbath was independent of them. Since the Sabbath always appear as a weekly feast without connexion with the moon, it cannot be derived, as is done by some writers, from the Babylonian feast of the full moon, or fifteenth day of the month, which, moreover, has only doubtful claim to the designation shabattu. Observance of the Sabbath Violations of the Sabbath seem to have been rather common before and during the exile (Jer., xvii, 19 sqq., Ezech., xx, 13, 16, 21, 24; xxii, 8; xxii, 38); hence the Prophets laid great stress on its proper observance (Amos, viii, 5; Is., I, 13; lvii, 13-14; Jer., loc. cit.; Ezech., xx, 12 sqq.). After the Restoration the day was openly profaned, and Nehemias found some difficulty in stopping the abuse (II Esd., xiii, 15-22). Soon, however, a movement set in towrds a meticulous observance which went far beyond what the law contemplated. At the time of the Machabees the faithful Jews allowed themselves to be massacred rather than fight on the Sabbath (I Mach., ii, 35-38); Mathathias and his followers realizing the folly of such a policy decided to defend themselves if attacked on the Sabbath, though they would not assume the offensive (I Mach., ii, 40-41; II Mach., viii, 26). Under the influence of pharasaic rigorism a system of minute and burdensome regulations was elaborated, while the higher purpose of the Sabbath was lost sight of. The Mishna treatise Shabbath enumerates thirty-nine main heads of forbidden actions, each with subdivisions. Among the main heads are such trifling actions as weaving two threads, sewing two stitches, writing two letters, etc. To pluck two ears of wheat was considered as reaping, while to rub them was a species of threshing (cf. Matt., xii, 1-2; Mark, ii, 23-24; Luke, vi, 1-2). To carry an object of the weight of a fig was carrying a burden; hence to carry a bed (John, v, 10) was a gross breach of the Sabbath. It was unlawful to cure on the Sabbath, or to apply a remedy unless life was endangered (cf. Matt., xii, 10 sqq.; Mark, iii, 2 sqq.; Luke vi, 7 sqq.). This explains why the sick were brought to Christ after sundown (Mark, I, 32). It was even forbidden to use a medicament the preceding day if it produced its effect on the Sabbath. In the time of Christ it was allowed to lift an animal out of a pit (Matt., xii, 11; Luke xiv, 5), but this was later modified so that it was not permitted to lay hold of it and lift it out, though it might be helped to come out of itself by means of mattresses and cushions. These examples, and they are not the worst, show the narrowness of the system. Some of the rules were, however, found too burdensome, and a treatise of the Mishna (Erubin) tempers their rigour by subtle devices. The Sabbath in the New Testament Christ, while observing the Sabbath, set himself in word and act against this absurd rigorism which made man a slave of the day. He reproved the scribes and Pharisees for putting an intolerable burden on men's shoulders (Matt., xxiii, 4), and proclaimed the principle that "the sabbath was made for man, and not man for the sabbath" (Mark, ii, 27). He cured on the Sabbath, and defended His disciples for plucking ears of corn on that day. In His arguments with the Pharisees on this account He showed that the Sabbath is not broken in cases of necessity or by acts of charity (Matt., xii, 3 sqq.; Mark, ii, 25 sqq.; Luke, vi, 3 sqq.; xiv, 5). St. Paul enumerates the Sabbath among the Jewish observances which are not obligatory on Christians (Col., ii, 16; Gal., iv, 9-10; Rom., xiv, 5). The gentile converts held their religious meetings on Sunday (Acts, xx, 7; 1 Cor., xvi, 2) and with the disappearance of the Jewish Christian churches this day was exclusively observed as the Lord's Day. (See SUNDAY.) EDERSHEIM, "Life and Times of Jesus II" (New York, 1897), 52-62, 777 sqq.; SCHURER, "Hist. Of the Jewish People" (New York, 1891), see index; PINCHES, "Sapattu, the Babylonian Sabbaath" in "Proceed. Of Soc. Of Bibl. Archeol." (1904), 51-56; LAGRANGE, "Relig. Semit." (Paris, 1905), 291-5; DHORME in "Rev. bibl." (1908), 462-6; HERN, "Siebenzahl und Sabbath bei den Babyloniern un im A. T." (Leipzig, 1907); IDEM, Der Israelitische Sabbath" (Munster, 1909); KEIL, "Babel und Bibelfrage" (Trier, 1903), 38-44; LOTZ, "Quaestiones de histor. sabbati" (1883); LESETRE in VIGOUROUX, "Dict. de la bible", s.v. "Sabbat." F. BECHTEL Sabbatical Year Sabbatical Year ( Shenath shabbathon, "Year of rest"; Septuagint eniautos anapauseos; Vulgate annus requietionis). The seventh year, devoted to cessation of agriculture, and holding in the period of seven years a place analogous to that of the Sabbath in the week; also called "Year of Remission". Three prescriptions were to be observed during the year (Exodus 23:10-11; Leviticus 25:1-7; Deuteronomy 15:1-11, 31:10-13): + The land was to lie fallow and all agricultural labor was to be suspended. There was to be neither plowing nor sowing, nor were the vines and olives to be attended to. The spontaneous yield was not to be garnered, but was to be left in the fields for common use, and what was not used was to be abandoned to the cattle and wild animals (Exodus 23:10-11; Leviticus 25:1-7). Of the fruit trees the olive is alone mentioned, because its oil was one of the three great agricultural products; but the law probably applied also to other trees. The prescribed rest was for the land, not for man. Hence work other than agricultural was not forbidden, nor even work in the fields which had no direct connection with raising crops, such as building walls of enclosure, digging wells, etc. + No crops being reaped during the sabbatical year, the payment of debts would have been a great hardship, if not an impossibility, for many. Hence the creditor was commanded "to withhold his hand" and not to exact a debt from an Israelite, though he might demand it of strangers, who were not bound to abstain from agricultural pursuits (Deuteronomy 15:1-3, Hebrew text). The Talmudists and many after them understand the law to mean the remission of the debt; but modern commentators generally hold that it merely suspended the obligation to pay and deferred the creditor from extracting the debt during the year. The Douay translation "He to whom anything is owing from his friend or neighbour or brother cannot demand it again" is incorrect. + During the sabbatical year the Law was to be read on the Feast of Tabernacles to all Israel -- men, women, and children -- as well as to the strangers within the gates, that they might know and fear the Lord, and fulfill all the words of the Law (Deuteronomy 31:10-13). The law concerning the release of Hebrew slaves in the seventh year (Exodus 21:2 sqq.; Deuteronomy 15:12 sqq.) is wrongly connected by some writers with the sabbatical year. That there was no special connection between the two is sufficiently shown by the requirement of six years of servitude, the beginning of which was not affixed to any particular year, and by the law prescribing the liberation of Hebrew slaves in the year of jubilee, which immediately followed the seventh sabbatical year (Leviticus 25:39 sqq.). Since the sabbatical year was preceded by six sowings and six harvests (Exodus 23:10), it began with autumn, the time of sowing, and probably coincided with the civil year, which began with the month of Tishri (September-October); some commentators, however, think that like the year of jubilee it began on the tenth of the month. The year was not well observed before the Captivity (cf. II Paralipomenon 36:21 and Leviticus 26:34, 35, 43). After the return, the people covenanted to let the land lie fallow and to exact no debt in the seventh year (II Esdras 10:31), and thereafter it was regularly kept. The occurrence of a sabbatical year is mentioned in I Machabees 6:49 and 6:53, and its observance is several times referred to by Josephus (Jewish Wars I:2:4; Antiquities XI:8:5-6; XIII:8:1; XIV:16:2). The absence of any allusion to the celebration of the sabbatical year in pre-exilic times has led modern critics to assert that it was instituted at the time of the Restoration, or that at least the custom of allowing all fields to lie fallow simultaneously was then introduced. But it is hardly credible that the struggling community would have adopted a custom calculated to have a seriously disturbing effect on economic conditions, and without example among other nations, unless it had the sanction of venerable antiquity. The main object for which the sabbatical year was instituted was to bring home to the people that the land was the Lord's, and that they were merely His tenants at will (Leviticus 25:23). In that year He exercised His right of sovereign dominion. Secondarily it was to excite their faith and reliance on God (Leviticus 25:20-22), and to stimulate their faithfulness to His Law (Deuteronomy 31:10-13). F. BECHTEL Sabbatine Privilege Sabbatine Privilege The name Sabbatine Privilege is derived from the apocryphal Bull "Sacratissimo uti culmine" of John XXII, 3 March, 1322. In this Bull the pope is made to declare that the Mother of God appeared to him, and most urgently recommended to him the Carmelite Order and its confratres and consorores. The Blessed Virgin asked that John, as Christ's representative on earth, should ratify the indulgences which He had already granted in heaven (a plenary indulgence for the members of the Carmelite Order and a partial indulgence, remitting the third part of the temporal punishment due to their sins, for the members of the confraternity); she herself would graciously descend on the Saturday (Sabbath after their death and liberate and conduct to heaven all who were in purgatory. Then follow the conditions which the confratres and consorores must fulfill. At the end of the Bull the pope declares: Istam ergo sanctam Indulgentiam accepto, roboro et in terris confirmo, sicut, propter merita Virginis Matris, gratiose Jesus Christus concessit in coelis (This holy indulgence I therefore accept; I confirm and ratify it on earth, just as Jesus Christ has graciously granted it in heaven on account of the merits of the Virgin Mother). Our first information of this Bull is derived from a work of the Carmelite Balduinus Leersius ("Collectaneum exemplorum et miraculorum" in "Bibliotheca Carmelit.", I, Orleans, 1752, p. 210), who died in 1483. The authenticity of the Bull was keenly contested especially in the seventeenth century, but was vigorously defended by the Carmelites. The chief opponents of its authenticity were Joannnes Launoy and the Bollandist, Daniel Papebroch, both of whom published works against it. Today it is universally regarded by scholars as inauthentic, even the "Monumenta histor. Carmel." of the Carmelite B. Zimmerman (I, Lérins, 1907, pp. 356-63) joining in rejecting it. In 1379, in consequence of the hostility still shown to their order and especially to its name, the Carmelites besought Urban VI to grant an indulgence of 3 years and 3 quarantines to all the faithful who designated them and their order "Ordinem et Fratres B. Mariae Genetricis Dei de Monte Carmeli" (Bullar. Carmelit. I, 141); this was granted by Urban on 26 April, 1379. It is difficult to understand why, instead of asking for this indulgence, they did not appeal to the old promise and the recent "Bulla sabbatina", if the scapular was then known and the promise to St. Simon Stock and this Bull were genuine and incontestable. While the Bull of John XXII was ratified by some later popes in the sixteenth century (cf. Bullar. Carmelit., II, 47, 141), neither the Bull itself in its wording nor its general contents were thereby declared authentic and genuine. On the contrary, the ratification by Gregory XIII on 18 September, 1577 (Bullar. Carmelit., II, 196), must be interpreted quite in the sense of the later Decree of the Holy Office. This Decree, which appeared in 1613, expresses no opinion concerning the genuineness of the Bull, but confines itself to declaring what the Carmelites may preach of its contents. The Bull forbids the painting of pictures representing, in accordance with the wording of the Bull, the Mother of God descending into purgatory (cum descensione beatae Virginis ad animas in Purgatorio liberandas). It must be also remembered that the latest authentic summary of indulgences of the Carmelite Order of 31 July, 1907 (Acta S. Sedis, XL, 753 sqq.), approved by the Congregation of Indulgences, says nothing either of the Bull of John XXII, of the indulgences granted by him, or of the Sabbatine privilege of the Carmelites. To learn the meaning and importance of the Sabbatine privilege, we may turn only to the above-mentioned Decree of the Holy Office. It was inserted in its entirety (except for the words forbidding the painting of the pictures) into the list of the indulgences and privileges of the Confraternity of the Scapular of Mount Carmel. We reproduce here the whole passage dealing with the Sabbatine privilege, as it appears in the summary approved by the Congregation of Indulgences on 4 July, 1908. It is noteworthy that the Bull of John XXII, which was still mentioned in the previous summary approved on 1 December, 1866, is no longer referred to (cf. "Rescript. authent. S.C. Indulg.", Ratisbon, 1885, p. 475). Among the privileges, which are mentioned after the indulgences, the following occurs in the first place: "The privilege of Pope John XXII, commonly [vulgo] known as the Sabbatine, which was approved and confirmed by Clement VII ("Ex clementi", 12 August 1530), St. Pius V ("Superna dispositione", 18 Feb., 1566), Gregory XIII ("Ut laudes", 18 Sept., 1577), and others, and also by the Holy Roman General Inquisition under Paul V on 20 January, 1613, in a Decree to the following effect: It is permitted to the Carmelite Fathers to preach that the Christian people may piously believe in the help which the souls of brothers and members, who have departed this life in charity, have worn in life the scapular, have ever observed chastity, have recited the Little Hours [of the Blessed Virgin], or, if they cannot read, have observed the fast days of the Church, and have abstained from flesh meat on Wednesdays and Saturdays (except when Christmas falls on such days), may derive after death -- especially on Saturdays, the day consecrated by the Church to the Blessed Virgin -- through the unceasing intercession of Mary, her pious petitions, her merits, and her special protection. With this explanation and interpretation, the Sabbatine privilege no longer presents any difficulties, and Benedict XIV adds his desire that the faithful should rely on it (Opera omnia, IX, Venice, 1767, pp. 197 sqq.). Even apart from the Bull and the tradition or legend concerning the apparition and promise of the Mother of God the interpretation of the Decree cannot be contested. The Sabbatine privilege thus consists essentially in the early liberation from purgatory, through the special intercession and petition of Mary, which she graciously exercises in favour of her devoted servants preferentially -- as we may assume -- on the day consecrated to her, Saturday. Furthermore, the conditions for the gaining of the privilege are of such a kind as justify a special trust in the assistance of Mary. It is especially required of all who wish to share in the privilege that they faithfully preserve their chastity, and recite devoutly each day the Little Hours of the Blessed Virgin. However, all those who are bound to read their Breviary, fulfil the obligation of reciting the Little Hours by reading their Office. Persons who cannot read must (instead of reciting the Little Hours) observe all the fasts prescribed by the Church as they are kept in their home diocese or place of residence, and must in addition abstain from flesh meat on all Wednesdays and Saturdays of the year, except when Christmas falls on one of these days. The obligation to read the Little Hours and to abstain from flesh meat on Wednesday and Saturday may on important grounds be changed for other pious works; the faculty to sanction this change was granted to all confessors by Leo XIII in the Decree of the Congregation of Indulgences of 11 (14) June, 1901. For the text of the Bull see Bullarium Carmelit., I (Rome, 1715), 61 sq.; for its defense cf. Carmelite authors, e.g. BROCARD, Receueil d'instructions (4th ed., Ghent, 1875); RAYNAUD, Scapulare Partheno-Carmeliticum (Cologne, 1658). For the explanation of the privilege, consult BERINGER, Die Ablasse (13th ed.), 659 sqq. JOSEPH HILGERS St. Sabina St. Sabina Widow of Valentinus and daughter of Herod Metallarius, suffered martyrdom about 126. According to the Acts of the martyrdom, which however have no historic value, she lived at Rome and was converted to Christianity by her female slave Serapia. Serapia was put to death for her faith and later, in the same year, Sabina suffered martyrdom. In 430 her relics were brought to the Aventine, where a basilica, which is very interesting in the history of art, is called after St. Sabina. Originally the church was dedicated to both saints. The feast of St. Sabina is celebrated on 29 August. KLEMENS LÖFFLER Pope Sabinianus Pope Sabinianus The date of his birth is unknown, but he was consecrated pope probably 13 Sept., 604, and died 22 Feb., 606. The son of Bonus, he was born at Blera (Bieda) near Viterbo. In 593 he was sent by St. Gregory I as apocrisiarius or Apostolic nuncio to Constantinople; but in some respects his administration of the office did not come up to Gregory's expectations. He was not astute enough for the rulers of Byzantium. He returned to Rome in 597, and was chosen to succeed Gregory soon after the death of that great pontiff; but as the imperial confirmation of his election did not arrive for some months, he was not consecrated till September. The difficulties of his pontificate were caused by fear of the Lombards and by famine. When the Lombard danger had passed, Sabinianus opened the granaries of the Church, and sold corn to the people at one solidus (twelve shillings) for thirty pecks. Because he was unable or unwilling to allow the people to have the corn for little or nothing, there grew up in later times a number of idle legends in which his predecessor was represented punishing him for avarice. He is reputed to have restored to the secular clergy posts which St. Gregory had filled with monks. He was buried in St. Peter's. Liber Pontificalis, ed. DUCHESNE, I (Paris, 1886), 315; Epp. Gregorii; 1, ed. EWALD (Berlin, 1891); MANN, Lives of the Popes in the early Middle Ages, I, 251 sq. HORACE K. MANN Louis de Sabran Louis de Sabran Jesuit; born in Paris, 1 March, 1652; died at Rome, 22 Jan., 1732. His father, afterwards a marquis, was attached to the French embassy in London during the Commonwealth, and piously visited the martyrs Corby and Duckett (q.v.) before their deaths. He married an English lady (a Goring?), and Louis was sent to the English college of St. Omer, and entered among the English Jesuits. Distinguished for many talents, he became one of the royal chaplains to King James II, in 1685, preached with great diligence and was engaged in controversy with William Sherlock, dean of St. Paul's, and Edward Gee. On the outbreak of the Revolution in 1688 he was first sent to Portsmouth with the infant Prince of Wales, and then became involved in many adventures. He was repeatedly seized by the mob and maltreated, but as often escaped, and finally managed to slip over to France. He was subsequently appointed visitor of the Neopolitan Jesuits, and represented his province at Rome in the congregation of 1693, when the case of Father González (q.v.) was discussed. In 1699 the Prince-Bishop of Liège appointed him president of his episcopal seminary, which excited a furious attack from the Jansenistic party, and the bishop had to enforce order with soldiers. But once the crisis was past, Father Sabran's rule became perfectly successful, and in 1708 or 1709, he was made provincial. He then wrote to Father Metcalfe, a Jesuit in the North, about the progress of Jansenism, but his letter was intercepted, and was declared by some to portend that he intended to gain possession of Douai College, as he had done that of Liège. A long-drawn and somewhat bitter controversy ensued. After his provincialship he became rector of St. Omer (1712-5), then spiritual director at the English College, Rome, till death. The titles of his controversial tracts, will be found in Sommervogel, and he is alleged to have written a paper "Artes Bajanae" about 1701 against Jansenism. SOMMERVOGEL, Bibl. de la comp. de Jesús, VII (Paris, 1896), 359; FOLEY, Records of the English Province of the Society of Jesus, VII (London, 1883), 676; KIRK, Biographies of English Catholics in the Eighteenth Century, ed. POLLEN (London, 1903), 203; MSS. at Stonyhurst, etc. J.H. POLLEN Sabrata Sabrata A titular see in Tripolitana. Sabrata was a Phoenician town on the northern coast of Africa, between the two Syrta. With Oca and Leptis Magna it caused the Greek name Tripolis to be given to the region. Its Phoenician name, which occurs on coins and in an inscription at Thevesta, was hellenized Abrotomon, though Pliny (V, 4) makes these two separate towns. Sabrata became a Roman colony; Flavia Domitilla, Vespasian's first wife, was the daughter of Statilius Capella of Sabrata. Justinian fortified the town and built there a beautiful church. In the Middle Ages it continued to be an important market, to which the natives of the interior brought their corn; the Arab writers call it Sabrat en-Nefousa, from a powerful tribe, the Nefousa, formerly Christian. Sabrata is now represented by Zouagha, a small town called by Europeans Tripoli Vecchia, in the vilayet of Tripoli, fifty miles west of the town of Tripoli. Its ruins lie a little north of the village; they consist of crumbled ramparts, an amphitheatre, and landing-stage. Four of its bishops are known: Pompey in 233; Nados, present at the Conference of Carthage, 411; Vincent, exiled by Genseric about 450; Leo, exiled by Huneric after the Conference of Carthage, 484. SMITH, Dict. of Greek and Roman Geog., s. v. Sabrata and Abrotonum, with a bibliography of ancient authors; BARTH, Wanderungen, 277; TOULOTTE, Geographie de l'Afrique chrétienne (Montreuil, 1894), 258-60; DIEHL, L'Afrique byzantine (Paris, 1896), passim. S. PÉTRIDÈS Raneiro Sacchoni Raneiro Sacchoni (Reiner.) A learned and zealous Dominican, born at Piacenza about he beginning of the thirteenth century; died about 1263. It is generally said that he died in 1258 or 1259, but this in an error, as we learn from the Brief of Urban IV, by which he was called to Rome, 21 July, 1262. Little is known as to his youth and early manhood. That, however, at an early age, he was perverted by the Cathari, became on of their bishops, and remained amongst them for seventeen years, we are assured by his own humble avowal ("Summa contra Waldenses", vi). He was led back to the Faith, most probably, by the preaching of St. Peter Martyr, joined the Order of Preachers, then recently established, and laboured zealously for many years among the heretics of Upper Italy. After the martyrdom of St. Peter he was made inquisitor for Lombardy and the Marches of Ancona. Being enraged against him, and yet unable to put him to death, the heretics finally succeeded in having him sent into exile. Thereafter we have no further mention of him except in the Brief of Urban IV. The "Summan de catharis et leonistis, sive pauperibus de Lugduno" (Paris, 1548, and by Martene in "Thes. Anecd.:, V, 1759), is the only authentic work ascribed to him. This work is a collection of the heretical doctrines of his time, and was regarded as a great authority during the Middle Ages. The edition of Gretser (Ratisbon, 1738) is much interpolated. ECHARD, Script. Ord. Praed., I, 154 sq.; HUNTER, Nomenclator, II, 336 sq.; TOURON, Hist. des hommes ill., I (Paris, 1743), 313 sq. Sacra Jam Splendent Sacra Jam Splendent The opening words of the hymn for Matins of the Feast of the Holy Family. The Holy See instituted the feast in 1893, making it a duplex majus (greater double) and assigning it to the third Sunday after Epiphany. Leo XIII composed the three hymns (Vespers, Matins, Lauds) of the Breviary Office. The hymn for Matins contains nine Sapphic stanzas of the classical type of the first stanza: Sacra jam splendent decorata lychnis Templa, jam sertis redimitur ara, Et pio fumant redolentque aerrae Thuris honore. (A thousand lights their glory shed On shrines and altars garlanded, While swinging censers dusk the air With perfumed prayer.) The hymns for Vespers (O lux beata caelitum) and Lauds (O gente felix hospita) are in classical dimeter iambics, four-lined stanzas, of which the Vespers hymn contains six and the Lauds hymn seven exclusive of the usual Marian doxology (Jesu tibi sit gloria). All three hymns are replete with spiritual unction, graceful expression, and classical dignity of form. They reflect the sentiment of the pope in his letter establishing a Pious Association in honour of the Holy Family and in his Encyclical dealing with the condition of working-men. Translations of the three hymns are given in HENRY, Poems, Charades, Inscriptions of Leo XIII (Philadelphia, 1902), with Latin text, pp. 104-15, and comment., pp. 282-84. The hymns for Vespers and Lauds are translated by BAGSHAWE, Breviary Hymns and Missal Sequences (London, s.d.), nos. 52, 53. H.T. HENRY Sacramentals Sacramentals In instituting the sacraments Christ did not determine the matter and form down to the slightest detail, leaving this task to the Church, which should determine what rites were suitable in the administration of the sacraments. These rites are indicated by the word Sacramentalia, the object of which is to manifest the respect due to the sacrament and to secure the sanctification of the faithful. They belong to widely different categories, e.g.: substance, in the mingling of water with Eucharistic wine; quantity, in the triple baptismal effusion; quality, in the condition of unleavened bread; relation, in the capacity of the minister; time and place, in feast-days and churches; habit, in the liturgical vestments; posture, in genuflection, prostrations; action, in chanting etc. So many external conditions connect the sacramentals with the virtue of religion, their object being indicated by the Council of Trent (Sess. XXII, 15), that it is asserted that apart from their ancient origin and traditional maintenance ceremonies, blessings, lights, incense, etc. enhance the dignity of the Holy Sacrifice and arouse the piety of the faithful. Moreover the sacramentals help to distinguish the members of the Church from heretics, who have done away with the sacramentals or use them arbitrarily with little intelligence. Sacramental rites are dependent on the Church which established them, and which therefore has the right to maintain, develop, modify, or abrogate them. The ceremonial regulation of the sacraments in Apostolic times is sufficiently proved by the words of St. Paul to the Corinthians with regard to the Eucharist: "Cetera autem, cum venero, disponam" [the rest I will set in order when I come (I Cor., xi, 34)], which St. Augustine, on what ground we know not, supposes to refer to the obligation of the Eucharistic fast (Ep. liv, "Ad Januarium", c. 6, n. 8, in P. L., XXXIII, 203). The Fathers of the Church enumerate ceremonies and rites, some of which were instituted by the Apostles, others by the early Christians (cf. Justin Martyr, "Apol. I", n. 61, 65 in P.G., VI, 419, 427; Tertullian, "De baptismo:, vii in P. L., I, 1206; St. Basil, "De Spiritu Sancto", I, xxvii, n. 67 in P.G., XXXII, 191). The Catholic Church, which is the heiress of the Apostles, has always used and maintained against heretics this power over sacramentals. To her and to her alone belongs the right to determine the matter, form, and minister of the sacramentals. The Church, that is, the supreme authority represented by its visible head, alone legislates in this matter, because the bishops no longer have in practice the power to modify of abolish by a particular legislation what is imposed on the universal Church. What concerns the administration of the sacraments is contained in detail in the Roman Ritual and the Episcopal Ceremoniale. Apart from the ceremonies relating to the administration of the sacraments the Church has instituted others for the purpose of private devotion. To distinguish between them, the latter are named sacramentals because of the resemblance between their rites and those of the sacraments properly so-called. In ancient times the term sacrament alone was used, but numerous confusions resulted and the similarity of rites and terms led many Christians to regard both as sacraments. After Peter Lombard the use and definition of the word "sacramental" had a fixed character and was exclusively applicable to those rites presenting an external resemblance to the sacraments but not applicable to the sensible signs of Divine institution. St. Thomas Aquinas makes use of the terms sacra and sacramentalia (Summa I-II, Q. cviii, a. 2 ad 2um; III, Q. lxv, a. 1 ad 8um), which the theologians of a later period adopted, so that at present sacramentalia is exclusively reserved for those rites which are practiced apart from the administration of the seven sacraments, for which the word ceremonies is used. The number of the sacramentals may not be limited; nevertheless, the attempt has been made to determine their general principles or rather applications in the verse: "Orans, tinctus, edens, confessus, dans, benedicens". + Orans indicates public prayer, whether liturgical or private; + tinctus, the use of holy water and the unctions in use at various consecrations; + edens, the eating of blessed foods; + confessus, the general avowal of faults which is made in the Confiteor recited at Mass, at Communion, in the Divine Office; + dans, alms; + benedicens, papal and episcopal blessings etc., blessings of candles, ashes, palms etc. Another distinction classifies sacramentals according to whether they are acts, e.g. the Confiteor mentioned above, or things, such as medals, holy water etc. The sacramentals do not produce sanctifying grace ex opere operato, by virtue of the rite or substance employed, and this constitutes their essential difference from the sacraments. The Church is unable to increase or reduce the number of sacraments as they were instituted by Christ, but the sacramentals do not possess this dignity and privilege. Theologians do not agree as to whether the sacramentals may confer any other grace ex opere operantis through the action of the one who uses them, but the negative opinion is more generally followed, for as the Church cannot confer sanctifying grace nor institute signs thereof, neither can she institute efficacious signs of the other graces which God alone can give. Moreover, as experience teaches, the sacramentals do not infallibly produce their effect. Finally in the euchologic formulas of the sacramentals the Church makes use, not of affirmative, but of deprecatory expressions, which shows that she looks directly to Divine mercy for the effect. Besides the efficacy which the sacramentals possess in common with other good works they have a special efficacy of their own. If their whole value proceeded from the opus operantis, all external good works could be called sacramentals. The special virtue recognized by the Church and experienced by Christians in the sacramentals should consist in the official prayers whereby we implore God to pour forth special graces on those who make use of the sacramentals. These prayers move God to give graces which He would not otherwise give, and when not infallibly acceded to it is for reasons known to His Wisdom. God is aware of the measure in which He should bestow His gifts. All the sacramentals have not the same effect; this depends on the prayer of the Church which does not make use of the same urgency nor have recourse to the same Divine sources of merit. Some sacramentals derive no special efficacy from the prayer of the Church; such are those which are employed in worship, without a blessing, or even with a blessing which does not specify any particular fruit. This is the case with the blessing of vessels meant to contain the holy oils: "Give ear to our prayers, most merciful Father, and deign to bless and sanctify these purified vessels prepared for the use of the sacred ministry of Thy Church". On the other hand, some sacramentals, among them one of those most frequently used, holy water, are the object of a benediction which details their particular effects. One of the most remarkable effects of sacramentals is the virtue to drive away evil spirits whose mysterious and baleful operations affect sometimes the physical activity of man. To combat this occult power the Church has recourse to exorcism and sacramentals. Another effect is the delivery of the soul from sin and the penalties therefor. Thus in the blessing of a cross the Church asks that this sacred sign may receive the heavenly blessing in order that all those who kneel before it and implore the Divine Majesty may be granted great compunction and a general pardon of faults committed. This means remission of venial sins, for the sacraments alone, with perfect contrition, possess the efficacy to remit mortal sins and to release from the penalties attached to them. St. Thomas is explicit on this point: "The episcopal blessing, the aspersion of holy water, every sacramental unction, prayer in a dedicated church, and the like, effect the remission of venial sins, implicitly or explicitly" (Summa III, Q. lxxxvii, a. 3, ad 1um). Finally the sacramentals may be employed to obtain temporal favours, since the Church herself blesses objects made use of in every-day life, e.g. the blessing of a house on which is called down the abundance of heavenly dew and the rich fruitfulness of the earth; so likewise in the benediction of the fields, in which God is asked to pour down His blessings on the harvests, so that the wants of the needy may be supplied by the fertile earth. H. LECLERCQ Sacraments Sacraments Sacraments are outward signs of inward grace, instituted by Christ for our sanctification (Catechismus concil. Trident., n.4, ex S. Aug. "De Catechizandis rudibus"). The subject may be treated under the following headings: I. The necessity and the nature of the sacramental system II. The nature of the sacraments of the new law III. The origin (cause) of the sacraments IV. The number of the sacraments V. The effects of the sacraments VI. The minister of the sacraments VII. The recipient of the sacraments I. NECESSITY AND NATURE (1) In what sense necessary Almighty God can and does give grace to men in answer to their internal aspirations and prayers without the use of any external sign or ceremony. This will always be possible, because God, grace, and the soul are spiritual beings. God is not restricted to the use of material, visible symbols in dealing with men; the sacraments are not necessary in the sense that they could not have been dispensed with. But, if it is known that God has appointed external, visible ceremonies as the means by which certain graces are to be conferred on men, then in order to obtain those graces it will be necessary for men to make use of those Divinely appointed means. This truth theologians express by saying that the sacraments are necessary, not absolutely but only hypothetically, i.e., in the supposition that if we wish to obtain a certain supernatural end we must use the supernatural means appointed for obtaining that end. In this sense the Council of Trent (Sess. VII, can. 4) declared heretical those who assert that the sacraments of the New Law are superfluous and not necessary, although all are not necessary for each individual. It is the teaching of the Catholic Church and of Christians in general that, whilst God was nowise bound to make use of external ceremonies as symbols of things spiritual and sacred, it has pleased Him to do so, and this is the ordinary and most suitable manner of dealing with men. Writers on the sacraments refer to this as the necessitas convenientiae, the necessity of suitableness. It is not really a necessity, but the most appropriate manner of dealing with creatures that are at the same time spiritual and corporeal. In this assertion all Christians are united: it is only when we come to consider the nature of the sacramental signs that Protestants (except some Anglicans) differ from Catholics. "To sacraments considered merely as outward forms, pictorial representations or symbolic acts, there is generally no objection", wrote Dr. Morgan Dix ("The sacramental system", New York, 1902, p. 16). "Of sacramental doctrine this may be said, that it is co-extensive with historic Christianity. Of this there is no reasonable doubt, as regards the very ancient days, of which St. Chrysostom's treatise on the priesthood and St. Cyril's catechetical lectures may be taken as characteristic documents. Nor was it otherwise with the more conservative of the reformed bodies of the sixteenth century. Martin Luther's Catechism, the Augsburg, and later the Westminster, Confessions are strongly sacramental in their tone, putting to shame the degenerate followers of those who compiled them" (ibid., p. 7, 8) (2) Why the sacramental system is most appropriate The reasons underlying a sacramental system are as follows: + Taking the word "sacrament" in its broadest sense, as the sign of something sacred and hidden (the Greek word is "mystery"), we can say that the whole world is a vast sacramental system, in that material things are unto men the signs of things spiritual and sacred, even of the Divinity. "The heavens show forth the glory of God, and the firmament declareth the work of his hands" (Ps. xviii, 2). The invisible things of him [i.e. God], from the creation of the world, are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made; his eternal power also, and divinity" (Rom., i, 20). + The redemption of man was not accomplished in an invisible manner. God renewed, through the Patriarchs and the Prophets, the promise of salvation made to the first man; external symbols were used to express faith in the promised Redeemer: "all these things happened to them [the Israelites] in figure" (I Cor., x, 11; Heb., x, 1). "So we also, when we were children, were serving under the elements of the world. But when the fullness of time was come, God sent his Son, made of a woman" (Gal., iv, 3, 4). The Incarnation took place because God dealt with men in the manner that was best suited to their nature. + The Church established by the Saviour was to be a visible organization (see CHURCH: The Visibility of the Church): consequently it should have external ceremonies and symbols of things sacred. + The principal reason for a sacramental system is found in man. It is the nature of man, writes St. Thomas (III:61:1), to be led by things corporeal and semse-perceptible to things spiritual and intelligible; now Divine Providence provides for everything in accordance with its nature (secundum modum suae conditionis); therefore it is fitting that Divine Wisdom should provide means of salvation for men in the form of certain corporeal and sensible signs which are called sacraments. (For other reasons see Catech. Conc. Trid., II, n.14.) (3) Existence of sacred symbols (a) No sacraments in the state of innocence. According ot St. Thomas (III:61:2) and theologians generally there were no sacraments before Adam sinned, i.e., in the state of original justice. Man's dignity was so great that he was raised above the natural condition of human nature. His mind was subject to God; his lower faculties were subject to the higher part of his mind; his body was subject to his soul; it would have been against the dignity of that state had he been dependent, for the acquisition of knowledge or of Divine grace, on anything beneath him, i.e., corporeal things. For this reason the majority of theologians hold that no sacraments would have been instituted even if that state had lasted for a long time. (b) Sacraments of the law of nature. Apart from what was or might have been in that extraordinary state, the use of sacred symbols is universal. St. Augustine says that every religion, true or false, has its visible signs or sacraments. "In nullum nomen religionis, seu verum seu falsum, coadunari homines possunt, nisi aliquo signaculorum seu sacramentorum visibilium consortio colligantur" (Cont. Faust., XIX, xi). Commentators on the Scriptures and theologians almost unanimously assert that there were sacraments under the law of nature and under the Mosaic Law, as there are sacraments of greater dignity under the Law of Christ. Under the law of nature -- so called not to exclude supernatural revelation but because at that time there existed no written supernatural law -- salvation was granted through faith in the promised Redeemer, and men expressed that faith by some external signs. What those signs should be God did not determine, leaving this for the people, most probably to the leaders or heads of families, who were guided in their choice by an interior inspiration of the Holy Ghost. This is the conception of St. Thomas, who says that, as under the law of nature (when there was no written law), men were guided by interior inspiration in worshiping God, so also they determined what signs should be used in the external acts of worship (III:60:5, ad 3). Afterwards, however, as it was necessary to give a written law: (a) because the law of nature had been obscured by sin, and (b) because it was time to give a more explicit knowledge of the grace of Christ, then also it became necessary to determine what external signs should be used as sacraments (III:60:5, ad 3; III:61:3, ad 2) This was not necessary immediately after the Fall, by reason of the fullness of faith and knowledge imparted to Adam. But about the time of Abraham, when faith had been weakened, many had fallen into idolatry, and the light of reason had been obscured by indulgence of the passions, even unto the commission of sins against nature, God intervened and appointed as a sign of faith the rite of circumcision (Gen., xvii; ST III:70:2, ad 1; see CIRCUMCISION). The vast majority of theologians teach that this ceremony was a sacrament and that it was instituted as a remedy for original sin; consequently that it conferred grace, not indeed of itself (ex opere operato), but by reason of the faith in Christ which it expressed. "In circumcisione conferebatur gratia, non ex virtute circumcisionis, sed ex virtute fidei passionis Christi futurae, cujus signum erat circumcisio -- quia scilicet justitia erat ex fide significata, non ex circumcisione significante" (ST III:70:4). Certainly it was at least a sign of something sacred, and it was appointed and determined by God himself as a sign of faith and as a mark by which the faithful were distinguished from unbelievers. It was not, however, the only sign of faith used under the law of nature. It is incredible, writes St. Augustine, that before circumcision there was no sacrament for the relief (justification) of children, although for some good reason the Scriptures do not tell us what that sacrament was (Cont. Jul., III, xi). The sacrifice of Melchisedech, the sacrifice of the friends of Job, the various tithes and oblations for the service of God are mentioned by St. Thomas (III:61:3, ad 3; III:65:1, ad 7) as external observances which may be considered as the sacred signs of that time, prefiguring future sacred institutions: hence, he adds, they may be called sacraments of the law of nature. (c) Sacraments of the Mosaic Law. As the time for Christ's coming drew nearer, in order that the Israelites might be better instructed God spoke to Moses, revealing to him in detail the sacred signs and ceremonies by which they were to manifest more explicitly their faith in the future Redeemer. Those signs and ceremonies were the sacraments of the Mosaic Law, "which are compared to the sacraments which were before the law as something determined to something undetermined, because before the law it had not been determined what signs men should use" (ST III:61:3, ad 2). With the Angelic Doctor (I-II:102:5) theologians usually divide the sacraments of this period into three classes: 1. The ceremonies by which men were made and signed as worshippers or ministers of God. Thus we have (a) circumcision, instituted in the time of Abraham (Gen., xvii), renewed in the time of Moses (Lev., xii, 3) for all people; and (b) the sacred rites by which the Levitical priests were consecrated. 2. The ceremonies which consisted in the use of things pertaining to the service of God, i.e. (a) the paschal lamb for all the people, and (b) the loaves of proposition for the ministers. 3. The ceremonies of purification from legal contamination, i.e. (a) for the people, various expiations, (b) for the priests, the washing of hands and feet, the shaving of the head, etc. St. Augustine says the sacraments of the Old Law were abolished because they had been fulfilled (cf. Matt., v.17), and others have been instituted which are more efficacious, more useful, easier to administer and to receive, fewer in number ("virtute majora, utilitate meliora, actu faciliora, numero pauciora", Cont. Faust., XIX, xiii). The Council of Trent condemns those who say that there is no difference except in the outward rite between the sacraments of the Old Law and those of the New Law (Sess. VII, can. ii). The Decree for the Armenians, published by Order of the Council of Florence, says that the sacraments of the Old Law did not confer grace, but only prefigured the grace which was to be given by the Passion of Christ. This means that they did not give grace themselves (i.e. ex opere operato) but only by reason of the faith in Christ which they represented -- "ex fide significata, non ex circumcisione significante" (ST I-II:102:5) II. NATURE OF THE SACRAMENTS OF THE NEW LAW (1) Definition of a sacrament The sacraments thus far considered were merely signs of sacred things. According to the teaching of the Catholic Church, accepted today by many Episcopalians, the sacraments of the Christian dispensation are not mere signs; they do not merely signify Divine grace, but in virtue of their Divine institution, they cause that grace in the souls of men. "Signum sacro sanctum efficax gratiae" -- a sacrosanct sign producing grace, is a good, succinct definition of a sacrament of the New Law. Sacrament, in its broadest acceptation, may be defined as an external sign of something sacred. In the twelfth century Peter Lombard (d. 1164), known as the Master of the Sentences, author of the manual of systematized theology, gave an accurate definition of a sacrament of the New Law: A sacrament is in such a manner an outward sign of inward grace that it bears its image (i.e. signifies or represents it) and is its cause -- "Sacramentum proprie dicitur quod ita signum est gratiae Dei, ei invisibilis gratiae forma, ut ipsius imaginem gerat et causa existat" (IV Sent., d.I, n.2). This definition was adopted and perfected by the medieval Scholastics. From St. Thomas we have the short but very expressive definition: The sign of a sacred thing in so far as it sanctifies men - "Signum rei sacrae in quantum est sanctificans homines" (III:60:2). All the creatures of the universe proclaim something sacred, namely, the wisdom and the goodness of God, as they are sacred in themselves, not as they are sacred things sanctifying men, hence they cannot be called sacraments in the sense in which we speak of sacraments (ibid., ad 1um). The Council of Trent includes the substance of these two definitions in the following: "Symbolum rei sacrae, et invisibilis gratiae forma visibilis, sanctificandi vim habens" -- A symbol of something sacred, a visible form of invisible grace, having the power of sanctifying (Sess. XIII, cap.3). The "Catechism of the Council of Trent" gives a more complete definition: Something perceptible by the senses which by Divine institution has the power both to signify and to effect sanctity and justice (II, n.2). Catholic catechisms in English usually have the following: An outward sign of inward grace, a sacred and mysterious sign or ceremony, ordained by Christ, by which grace is conveyed to our souls. Anglican and Epscopalian theologies and catechisms give definitions which Catholics could accept. In every sacrament three things are necessary: the outward sign; the inward grace; Divine institution. A sign stands for and represents something else, either naturally, as smoke represents fire, or by the choice of an intelligent being, as the red cross indicates an ambulance. Sacraments do not naturally signify grace; they do so because they have been chosen by God to signify mysterious effects. Yet they are not altogether arbitrary, because in some cases, if not in all, the ceremonies performed have a quasi-natural connection with the effect to be produced. Thus, pouring water on the head of a child readily brings to mind the interior purification of the soul. The word "sacrament" (sacramentum), even as used by profane Latin writers, signified something sacred, viz., the oath by which soldiers were bound, or the money deposited by litigants in a contest. In the writings of the Fathers of the Church the word was used to signify something sacred and mysterious, and where the Latins use sacramentum the Greeks use mysterion (mystery). The sacred and mysterious thing signified is Divine grace, which is the formal cause of our justification (see GRACE), but with it we must associate the Passion of Christ (efficient and meritorious cause) and the end (final cause) of our sanctification, viz., eternal ife. The significance of the sacraments according to theologians (e.g. ST III:60:3) and the Roman Catechism (II, n.13) extends to these three sacred things, of which one is past, one present, and one future. The three are aptly expressed in St. Thomas's beautiful antiphon on the Eucharist: "O sacrum convivium, in quo Christus sumitur, recolitur memoria passionis ejus, mens impletur gratia, et futurae gloriae nobis pignus datur -- O sacred banquet, in which Christ is received, the memory of the passion is recalled, the soul is filled with grace, and a pledge of future life is given to us". (2) Errors of Protestants Protestants generally hold that the sacraments are signs of something sacred (grace and faith), but deny that they really cause Divine grace. Episcopalians, however, and Anglicans, especially the Ritualists, hold with Catholics that the sacraments are "effectual signs" of grace. In article XXV of the Westminster Confession we read: Sacraments ordained of God be not only badges or tokens of Christian men's profession, but rather they be certain sure witnesses and effectual signs of grace and God's good will towards us by which He doth work invisibly in us, and doth not only quicken but strengthen and confirm our faith in Him (cf. art. XXVII). "The Zwinglian theory", writes Morgan Dix (op.cit., p.73), "that sacraments are nothing but memorials of Christ and badges of Christian profession, is one that can by no possible jugglery with the English tongue be reconciled with the formularies of our church." Mortimer adopts and explains the Catholic formula " ex opere operato" (loc. cit., p. 122). Luther and his early followers rejected this conception of the sacraments. They do not cause grace, but are merely "signs and testimonies of God's good will towards us" (Augsburg Confessions); they excite faith, and faith (fiduciary) causes justification. Calvinists and Presbyterians hold substantially the same doctrine. Zwinglius lowered still further the dignity of the sacraments, making them signs not of God's fidelity but of our fidelity. By receiving the sacraments we manifest faith in Christ: they are merely the badges of our profession and the pledges of our fidelity. Fundamentally all these errors arise from Luther's newly-invented theory of righteousness, i.e. the doctrine of justification by faith alone (see GRACE). If man is to be sanctified not by an interior renovation through grace which will blot out his sins, but by an extrinsic imputation through the merits of Christ, which will cover his soul as a cloak, there is no place for signs that cause grace, and those used can have no other purpose than to excite faith in the Saviour. Luther's convenient doctrine on justification was not adopted by all his followers and it is not baldly and boldly proclaimed by all Protestants today; nevertheless they accept its consequences affecting the true notion of the sacraments. (3) Catholic Doctrine Against all innovators the Council of Trent declared: "If anyone say that the sacraments of the New Law do not contain the grace which they signify, or that they do not confer grace on those who place no obstacle to the same, let him be anathema" (Sess. viii, can.vi). "If anyone say that grace is not conferred by the sacraments ex opere operato but that faith in God's promises is alone sufficient for obtaining grace, let him be anathema" (ibid., can. viii; cf. can.iv, v, vii). The phrase "ex opere operato", for which there is no equivalent in English, probably was used for the first time by Peter of Poitiers (D. 1205), and afterwards by Innocent III (d. 1216; de myst. missae, III, v), and by St. Thomas (d. 1274; IV Sent., dist. 1, Q.i, a.5). It was happily invented to express a truth that had always been taught and had been introduced without objection. It is not an elegant formula but, as St. Augustine remarks (In Ps. cxxxviii): It is better that grammarians should object than that the people should not understand. "Ex opere operato", i.e. by virtue of the action, means that the efficacy of the action of the sacraments does not depend on anything human, but solely on the will of God as expressed by Christ's institution and promise. "Ex opere operantis", i.e. by reason of the agent, would mean that the action of the sacraments depended on the worthiness either of the minister or of the recipient (see Pourrat, "Theology of the Sacraments", tr. St. Louis, 1910, 162 sqq.). Protestants cannot in good faith object to the phrase as if it meant that the mere outward ceremony, apart from God's action, causes grace. It is well known that Catholics teach that the sacraments are only the instrumental, not the principal, causes of grace. Neither can it be claimed that the phrase adopted by the council does away with all dispositions necessary on the part of the recipient, the sacraments acting like infallible charms causing grace in those who are ill-disposed or in grievous sin. The fathers of the council were careful to note that there must be no obstacle to grace on the part of the recipients, who must receive them rite, i.e. rightly and worthily; and they declare it a calumny to assert that they require no previous dispositions (Sess. XIV, de poenit., cap.4). Dispositions are required to prepare the subject, but they are a condition (conditio sine qua non), not the causes, of the grace conferred. In this case the sacraments differ from the sacramentals, which may cause grace ex opere operantis, i.e. by reason of the prayers of the Church or the good, pious sentiments of those who use them. (4) Proofs of the Catholic Doctrine In examining proofs of the Catholic doctrine it must be borne in mind that our rule of faith is not simply Scripture, but Scripture and tradition. (a) In Sacred Scripture we find expressions which clearly indicate that the sacraments are more than mere signs of grace and faith: "Unless a man be born again of water and the Holy Ghost, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God" (John, iii, 5); "He saved us, by the laver of regeneration, and renovation of the Holy Ghost" (Tit., iii, 5); "Then they laid their hands upon them, and they received the Holy Ghost" (Acts, viii, 17); "He that eateth my flesh and drinketh my blood, hath everlasting life...For my flesh is meat indeed, and my blood is drink indeed" (John, vi, 55, 56). These and similar expressions (see articles on each sacrament) are, to say the least, very much exaggerated if they do not mean that the sacramental ceremony is in some sense the cause of the grace conferred. (b) Tradition clearly indicates the sense in which they have been interpreted in the Church. From the numerous expressions used by the Fathers we select the following: "The Holy Ghost comes down from heaven and hovers over the waters, sanctifying them of Himself, and thus they imbibe the power of sanctifying" (Tertullian, De bapt., c. iv). "Baptism is the expiation of sins, the remission of crimes, the cause of renovation and regeneration" (St. Gregory of Nyssa, "Orat. in Bapt."). "Explain to me the manner of nativity in the flesh and I will explain to you the regeneration of the soul...Throughout, by Divine power and efficacy, it is incomprehensible; no reasoning, no art can explain it" (ibid.) "He that passes through the fountain [Baptism] shall not die but rises to new life" (St. Ambrose, De sacr., I, iv). "Whence this great power of water", exclaims St. Augustine, "that it touches the body and cleanses the soul?" (Tr. 80 in Joann). "Baptism", writes the same Father, "consists not in the merits of those by whom it is administered, nor of those to whom it is administered, but in its own sanctity and truth, on account of Him who instituted it" (Cont. Cres., IV). The doctrine solemnly defined by the Council of Trent had been announced in previous councils, notably at Constantinople (381; Symb. Fid.), at Mileve (416; can.ii) in the Second Council of Orange (529; can. xy); and in the Council of Florence (1439; Decr. pro. Armen., see Denzinger-Bannwart, nn. 86, 102, 200, 695). The early Anglican Church held fast to the true doctrine: "Baptism is not only a sign of profession and a mark of difference, whereby christened men are discerned from those that be not christened, but is also a sign of regeneration or New-Birth, whereby as by an instrument they that receive Baptism rightly are grafted into the church" (Art. XXVII). (c) Theological argument. -- The Westminster Confession adds: "The Baptism of children is in any wise to be retained in the church as most agreeable with the institution of Christ". If Baptism does not confer grace ex opere operato, but simply excites faith, then we ask: (1) Of what use would this be if the language used be not understood by the recipient, i.e. an infant or an adult that does not understand Latin? In such cases it might be more beneficial to the bystanders than to the one baptized. (2) In what does the Baptism of Christ surpass the Baptism of John, for the latter could excite faith? Why were those baptized by the Baptism of John rebaptized with the Baptism of Christ? (Acts, xix). (3) How can it be said that Baptism is strictly necessary for salvation since faith can be excited and expressed in many other ways? Finally Episcopalians and Anglicans of today would not revert to the doctrine of grace ex opere operato unless they were convinced that the ancient faith was warranted by Scripture and Tradition. (5) Matter and Form of the sacraments Scholastic writers of the thirteenth century introduced into their explanations of the sacraments terms which were derived from the philosophy of Aristotle. William of Auxerre (d. 1223) was the first to apply to them the words matter (materia) and form (forma). As in physical bodies, so also in the sacramental rite we find two elements, one undetermined, which is called the matter, the other determining, called the form. For instance, water may be used for drinking, or for cooling or cleansing the body, but the words pronounced by the minister when he pours water on the head of the child, with the intention of doing what the Church does, determines the meaning of the act, so that it signifies the purification of the soul by grace. The matter and form (the res et verba) make up the external rite, which has its special significance and efficacy from the institution of Christ. The words are the more important element in the composition, because men express their thoughts and intentions principally by words. "Verba inter homines obtinuerunt principatum significandi" (St. Augustine, De doct. christ.", II, iii; ST III:60:6). It must not be supposed that the things used for the acts performed, for they are included in the res, remarks St. Thomas (ST III:60:6, ad 2) have no significance. They too may be symbolical, e.g. anointing the body with oil relates to health; but their significance is clearly determined by the words. "In all the compounds of matter and form the determining element is the form: (ST III:60:7). The terminology was somewhat new, the doctrine was old; the same truth had been expressed in former times in different words. Sometimes the form of the sacrament meant the whole external rite (St. Augustine, "De pecc. et mer.", xxxiv; Conc. Milev., De bapt.). What we call the matter and form were referred to as "mystic symbols"; "the sign and the thing invisible"; the "word and the element" (St. Augustine, tr. 80 in Joann.). The new terminology immediately found favour. It was solemnly ratified by being used in the Decree for the Armenians, which was added to the Decrees of the Council of Florence, yet has not the value of a conciliar definition (see Denzinger-Bannwart, 695; Hurter, "Theol. dog. comp.", I, 441; Pourrat, op.cit., p. 51). The Council of Trent used the words matter and form (Sess. XIV, cap. ii, iii, can. iv), but did not define that the sacramental rite was composed of these two elements. Leo XIII, in the "Apostolicae Curae" (13 Sept., 1896) made the scholastic theory the basis of his declaration, and pronounced ordinations performed according to the ancient Anglican rite invalid, owing to a defect in the form used and a lack of the necessary intention on the part of the ministers. The hylomorphistic theory furnishes a very apt comparison and sheds much light on our conception of the external ceremony. Nevertheless our knowledge of the sacraments is not dependent on this Scholastic terminology, and the comparison must not be carried too far. The attempt to verify the comparison (of sacraments to a body) in all details of the sacramental rite will lead to confusing subtilities or to singular opinions, e.g., Melchior Cano's (De locis theol., VIII, v.3) opinion as to the minister of Matrimony (see MARRIAGE; cf. Pourrat, op.cit., ii). III. ORIGIN (CAUSE) OF THE SACRAMENTS It might now be asked: in how far was it necessary that the matter and form of the sacraments should have been determined by Christ? (1) Power of God The Council of Trent defined that the seven sacraments of the New Law were instituted by Christ (Sess. VII, can.i). This settles the question of fact for all Catholics. Reason tells us that all sacraments must come originally from God. Since they are the signs of sacred things in so far as by these sacred things men are sanctified (ST III:60:2); since the external rite (matter and form) of itself cannot give grace, it is evident that all sacraments properly so called must originate in Divine appointment. "Since the sanctification of man is in the power of God who sanctifies", writes St. Thomas (ST III:60:2), "it is not in the competency of man to choose the things by which he is to be sanctified, but this must be determined by Divine institution". Add to this that grace is, in some sense, a participation of the Divine nature (see GRACE) and our doctrine becomes unassailable: God alone can decree that by exterior ceremonies men shall be partakers of His nature. (2) Power of Christ God alone is the principal cause of the sacraments. He alone authoritatively and by innate power can give to external material rites the power to confer grace on men. Christ as God, equally with the Father, possessed this principal, authoritative, innate power. As man He had another power which St. Thomas calls "the power of the principal ministry" or "the power of excellence" (III:64:3). "Christ produced the interior effects of the sacraments by meriting them and by effecting them... The passion of Christ is the cause of our justification meritoriously and effectively, not as the principal agent and authoritatively but as an instrument, inasmuch as His Humanity was the instrument of His Divinity" (III:64:3; cf. III:13:1, III:13:3). There is theological truth as well as piety in the old maxim: "From the side of Christ dying on the cross flowed the sacraments by which the Church was saved" (Gloss. Ord. in Rom.5: ST III:62:5). The principal efficient cause of grace is God, to whom the Humanity of Christ is as a conjoined instrument, the sacraments being instruments not joined to the Divinity (by hypostatic union): therefore the saving power of the sacraments passes from the Divinity of Christ, through His Humanity into the sacraments (ST III:62:5). One who weighs well all these words will understand why Catholics have great reverence for the sacraments. Christ's power of excellence consists in four things: (1) Sacraments have their efficacy from His merits and sufferings; (2) they are sanctified and they sanctify in His name; (3) He could and He did institute the sacraments; (4) He could produce the effects of the sacraments without the external ceremony (ST III:64:3). Christ could have communicated this power of excellence to men: this was not absolutely impossible (III:64:4). But, (1) had He done so men could not have possessed it with the same perfection as Christ: "He would have remained the head of the Church principally, others secondarily" (III:64:3). (2) Christ did not communicate this power, and this for the good of the faithful: (a) that they might place their hope in God and not in men; (b) that there might not be different sacraments, giving rise to divisions in the Church (III:64:1). This second reason is mentioned by St. Paul (I Cor., i, 12, 13): "every one of you saith: I indeed am of Paul; and I am of Apollo; and I of Cephas; and I of Christ. Is Christ divided? Was Paul then crucified for you? Or were you baptized in the name of Paul?" (3) Immediate or Mediate Institution The Council of Trent did not define explicitly and formally that all the sacraments were instituted immediately by Christ. Before the council great theologians, e.g. Peter Lombard (IV Sent., d. xxiii), Hugh of St. Victor (De sac. II, ii) Alexander of Hales (Summa, IV, Q. xxiv, 1) held that some sacraments were instituted by the Apostles, using power that had been given to them by Jesus Christ. Doubts were raised especially about Confirmation and Extreme Unction. St. Thomas rejects the opinion that Confirmation was instituted by the Apostles. It was instituted by Christ, he holds, when he promised to send the Paraclete, although it was never administered whilst He was on earth, because the fullness of the Holy Ghost was not to be given until after the Ascension: "Christus instituit hoc sacramentum, non exhibendo, sed promittendo" (III. Q.lxii, a.1, ad 1um). The Council of Trent defined that the sacrament of Extreme Unction was instituted by Christ and promulgated by St. James (Sess. XIV, can.i). Some theologians, e.g. Becanus, Bellarmine, Vasquez, Gonet, etc. thought the words of the council (Sess. VII, can.i) were explicit enough to make the immediate institution of all the sacraments by Christ a matter of defined faith. They are opposed by Soto (a theologian of the council), Estius, Gotti, Tournely, Berti, and a host of others, so that now nearly all theologians unite in saying: it is theologically certain, but not defined (de fide) that Christ immediately instituted all the sacraments of the New Law. In the decree "Lamentabili", 3 July, 1907, Pius X condemned twelve propositions of the Modernists, who would attribute the origin of the sacraments to some species of evolution or development. The first sweeping proposition is this: "The sacraments had their origin in this that the Apostles, persuaded and moved by circumstances and events, interpreted some idea and intention of Christ", (Demzinger-Bannwart, 2040). Then follow eleven propositions relating to each of the sacraments in order (ibid., 2041-51). These propositions deny that Christ immediately instituted the sacraments and some seem to deny even their mediate institution by the Saviour. (4) What does Immediate Institution Imply? Power of the Church. Granting that Christ immediately instituted all the sacraments, it does not necessarily follow that personally He determined all the details of the sacred ceremony, prescribing minutely every iota relating to the matter and the form to be used. It is sufficient (even for immediate institution) to say: Christ determined what special graces were to be conferred by means of external rites: for some sacraments (e.g. Baptism, the Eucharist) He determined minutely (in specie) the matter and form: for others He determined only in a general way (in genere) that there should be an external ceremony, by which special graces were to be conferred, leaving to the Apostles or to the Church the power to determine whatever He had not determined, e.g. to prescribe the matter and form of the Sacraments of Confirmation and Holy Orders. The Council of Trent (Sess. XXI, cap. ii) declared that the Church had the power to change the "substance" of the sacraments. She would not be claiming power to alter the substance of the sacraments if she used her Divinely given authority to determine more precisely the matter and form in so far as they had not been determined by Christ. This theory (which is not modern) had been adopted by theologians: by it we can solve historical difficulties relating, principally, to Confirmation and Holy Orders. (5) May we then say that Christ instituted some sacraments in an implicit state? That Christ was satisfied to lay down the essential principles from which, after a more or less protracted development, would come forth the fully developed sacraments? This is an application of Newman's theory of development, according to Pourrat (op.cit., p.300), who proposes two other formulae; Christ instituted all the sacraments immediately, but did not himself give them all to the Church fully constituted; or Jesus instituted immediately and explicitly Baptism and Holy Eucharist: He instituted immediately but implicitly the five other sacraments (loc.cit., p.301). Pourrat himself thinks the latter formula too absolute. Theologians probably will consider it rather dangerous, and at least " male sonans". If it be taken to mean more than the old expression, Christ determined in genere only the matter and the form of some sacraments, it grants too much development. If it means nothing more than the expression hitherto in use, what is gained by admitting a formula which easily might be misunderstood? IV. NUMBER OF THE SACRAMENTS (1) Catholic Doctrine: Eastern and Western Churches The Council of Trent solemnly defined that there are seven sacraments of the New Law, truly and properly so called, viz., Baptism, Confirmation, Holy Eucharist, Penance, Extreme Unction, Orders, and Matrimony. The same enumeration had been made in the Decree for the Armenians by the Council of Florence (1439), in the Profession of Faith of Michael Palaelogus, offered to Gregory X in the Council of Lyons (1274) and in the council held at London, in 1237, under Otto, legate of the Holy See. According to some writers Otto of Bamberg (1139), the Apostle of Pomerania, was the first who clearly adopted the number seven (see Tanquerey, "De sacr."). Most probably this honour belongs to Peter Lombard (d. 1164) who in his fourth Book of Sentences (d. i, n.2) defines a sacrament as a sacred sign which not only signifies but also causes grace, and then (d.ii, n.1) enumerates the seven sacraments. It is worthy of note that, although the great Scholastics rejected many of his theological opinions (list given in app. to Migne edition, Paris, 1841), this definition and enumeration were at once universally accepted, proof positive that he did not introduce a new doctrine, but merely expressed in a convenient and precise formula what had always been held in the Church. Just as many doctrines were believed, but not always accurately expressed, until the condemnation of heresies or the development of religious knowledge called forth a neat and precise formula, so also the sacraments were accepted and used by the Church for centuries before Aristotelian philosophy, applied to the systematic explanation of Christian doctrine, furnished the accurate definition and enumeration of Peter Lombard. The earlier Christians were more concerned with the use of sacred rites than with scientific formulae, being like the pious author of the "Imitation of Christ", who wrote: "I had rather feel compunction than know its definition" (I, i). Thus time was required, not for the development of the sacraments - except in so far as the Church may have determined what was left under her control by Jesus Christ -- but for the growth and knowledge of the sacraments. For many centuries all signs of sacred things were called sacraments, and the enumeration of these signs was somewhat arbitrary. Our seven sacraments were all mentioned in the Sacred Scriptures, and we find them all mentioned here and there by the Fathers (see THEOLOGY; and articles on each sacrament). After the ninth century, writers began to draw a distinction between sacraments in a general sense and sacraments properly so called. The ill-fated Abelard ("Intro. ad Theol.", I, i, and in the "Sic et Non") and Hugh of St. Victor (De sacr., I, part 9, chap. viii; cf. Pourrat, op.cit., pp.34, 35) prepared the way for Peter Lombard, who proposed the precise formula which the Church accepted. Thenceforward until the time of the so-called Reformation the Eastern Church joined with the Latin Church in saying: by sacraments proper we understand efficacious sacred signs, i.e. ceremonies which by Divine ordinance signify, contain and confer grace; and they are seven in number. In the history of conferences and councils held to effect the reunion of the Greek with the Latin Church, we find no record of objections made to the doctrine of seven sacraments. On the contrary, about 1576, when the Reformers of Wittenberg, anxious to draw the Eastern Churches into their errors, sent a Greek translation of the Augsburg Confession to Jeremias, Patriarch of Constantinople, he replied: "The mysteries received in this same Catholic Church of orthodox Christians, and the sacred ceremonies, are seven in number -- just seven and no more" (Pourrat, op.cit., p.289). The consensus of the Greek and Latin Churches on this subject is clearly shown by Arcadius, "De con. ecc. occident. et orient. in sept. sacr. administr." (1619); Goar (q.v.) in his "Euchologion" by Martene (q.v.) in his work "De antiquis ecclesiae ritibus", by Renaudot in his "Perpetuite de la foi sur sacrements" (1711), and this agreement of the two Churches furnishes recent writers (Episcopalians) with a strong argument in support of their appeal for the acceptance of seven sacraments. (2) Protestant Errors Luther's capital errors, viz. private interpretation of the Scriptures, and justification by faith alone, logically led to a rejection of the Catholic doctrine on the sacraments (see LUTHER; GRACE). Gladly would he have swept them all away, but the words of Scripture were too convincing and the Augsburg Confession retained three as "having the command of God and the promise of the grace of the New Testament". These three, Baptism, the Lord's Supper, and Penance were admitted by Luther and also by Cranmer in his "Catechism" (see Dix, "op.cit.", p. 79). Henry VIII protested against Luther's innovations and received the title "Defender of the Faith" as a reward for publishing the "Assertio septem sacramentorum" (re-edited by Rev. Louis O'Donovan, New York, 1908). Followers of Luther's principles surpassed their leader in opposition to the sacraments. Once granted that they were merely "signs and testimonies of God's good will towards us", the reason for great reverence was gone. Some rejected all sacraments, since God's good will could be manifested without these external signs. Confession (Penance) was soon dropped from the list of those retained. The Anabaptists rejected infant Baptism, since the ceremony could not excite faith in children. Protestants generally retained two sacraments, Baptism and the Lord's Supper, the latter being reduced by the denial of the Real Presence to a mere commemorative service. After the first fervour of destruction there was a reaction. Lutherans retained a ceremony of Confirmation and ordination. Cranmer retained three sacraments, yet we find in the Westminster Confession: "There are two Sacraments ordained of Christ Our Lord in the Gospel, that is to say, Baptism, and the Supper of the Lord. Those five commonly called sacraments, that is to say Confirmation, Penance, Orders, Matrimony, and Extreme Unction, are not to be counted for sacraments of the Gospel, being such as have grown partly of the corrupt following of the Apostles, partly are states of life allowed in the Scriptures but yet have not like nature of sacraments with Baptism and the Lord's Supper, for that they have not any visible signs or ceremony ordained by God (art.XXV). The Wittenberg theologians, by way of compromise, had shown a willingness to make such a distinction, in a second letter to the Patriarch of Constantinople, but the Greeks would have no compromise (Pourrat, loc.cit., 290). For more than two centuries the Church of England theoretically recognized only two "sacraments of the Gospel" yet permitted, or tolerated other five rites. In practice these five "lesser sacraments" were neglected, especially Penance and Extreme Unction. Anglicans of the nineteenth century would have gladly altered or abolished the twenty-fifth article. There has been a strong desire, dating chiefly from the Tractarian Movement, and the days of Pusey, Newman, Lyddon, etc. to reintroduce all of the sacraments. Many Episcopalians and Anglicans today make heroic efforts to show that the twenty-fifth article repudiated the lesser sacraments only in so far as they had "grown of the corrupt following of the Apostles, and were administered 'more Romamensium' ", after the Roman fashion. Thus Morgan Dix reminded his contemporaries that the first book of Edward VI allowed "auricular and secret confession to the priest", who could give absolution as well as "ghostly counsel, advice, and comfort", but did not make the practice obligatory: therefore the sacrament of Absolution is not to be "obtruded upon men's consciences as a matter necessary to salvation" (op.cit., pp.99, 101, 102, 103). He cites authorities who state that "one cannot doubt that a sacramental use of anointing the sick has been from the beginning", and adds, "There are not wanting, among the bishops of the American Church, some who concur in deploring the loss of thiss primitive ordinance and predicting its restoration among us at some propitious time" (ibid., p.105). At a convention of Episcopalians held at Cincinnati, in 1910, unsuccessful effort was made to obtain approbation for the practice of anointing the sick. High Church pastors and curates, especially in England, frequently are in conflict with their bishops because the former use all the ancient rites. Add to this the assertion made by Mortimer (op.cit., I, 122) that all the sacraments cause grace ex opere operato, and we see that "advanced" Anglicans are returning to the doctrine and the practices of the Old Church. Whether and in how far their position can be reconciled with the twenty-fifth article, is a question which they must settle. Assuredly their wanderings and gropings after the truth prove the necessity of having on earth an infallible interpreter of God's word. (3) Division and Comparison of the Sacraments (a) All sacraments were instituted for the spiritual good of the recipients; but five, viz. Baptism, Confirmation, Penance, the Eucharist, and Extreme Unction, primarily benefit the individual in his private character, whilst the other two, Orders and Matrimony, primarily affect man as a social being, and sanctify him in the fulfillment of his duties tiowards the Church and society. By Baptism we are born again, Confirmation makes us strong, perfect Christians and soldiers. The Eucharist furnishes our daily spiritual food. Penance heals the soul wounded by sin. Extreme Unction removes the last remnant of human frailty, and prepares the soul for eternal life, Orders supplies ministers to the Church of God. Matrimony gives the graces necessary for those who are to rear children in the love and fear of God, members of the Church militant, future citizens of heaven. This is St. Thomas's explanation of the fitness of the number seven (III:55:1). He gives other explanations offered by the Schoolmen, but does not bind himself to any of them. In fact the only sufficient reason for the existence of seven sacraments, and no more, is the will of Christ: there are seven because He instituted seven. The explanations and adaptations of theologians serve only to excite our admiration and gratitude, by showing how wisely and beneficently God has provided for our spiritual needs in these seven efficacious signs of grace. (b) Baptism and Penance are called "sacraments of the dead", because they give life, through sanctifying grace then called "first grace", to those who are spiritually dead by reason of original or actual sin. The other five are "sacraments of the living", because their reception presupposes, at least ordinarily, that the recipient is in the state of grace, and they give "second grace", i.e. increase of sanctifying grace (q.v.). Nevertheless, since the sacraments always give some grace when there is no obstacle in the recipient, it may happen in cases explained by theologians that "second grace" is conferred by a sacrament of the dead, e.g. when one has only venial sins to confess receives absolution and that "first grace" is conferred by a sacrament of the living (see ST III:72:7 ad 2; III:79:3). Concerning Extreme Unction St. James explicitly states that through it the recipient may be freed from his sins: "If he be in sins, they shall be forgiven him" (James, v.15). (c) Comparison in dignity and necessity. The Council of Trent decalred that the sacraments are not all equal in dignity; also that none are superfluous, although all are not necessary for each individual (Sess. VII, can.3, 4). The Eucharist is the first in dignity, because it contains Christ in person, whilst in the other sacraments grace is conferred by an instrumental virtue derived from Christ (ST III:56:3) To this reason St. Thomas adds another, namely, that the Eucharist is as the end to which the other sacraments tend, a centre around which they revolve (ST III:56:3). Baptism is always first in necessity; Holy Orders comes next after the Eucharist in the order of dignity, Confirmation being between these two. Penance and Extreme Unction could not have a first place because they presuppose defects (sins). Of the two Penance is the first in necessity: Extreme Unction completes the work of Penance and prepares souls for heaven. Matrimony has not such an important social work as Orders (ST III:56:3, ad 1). If we consider necessity alone -- the Eucharist being left out as our daily bread, and God's greatest gift -- three are simply and strictly necessary, Baptism for all, Penance for those who fall into mortal sin after receiving Baptism, Orders for the Church. The others are not so strictly necessary. Confirmation completes the work of Baptism; Extreme Unction completes the work of Penance; Matrimony sanctifies the procreation and education of children, which is not so important nor so necessary as the sanctification of ministers of the Church (ST III:56:3, ad 4). (d) Episcopalians and Anglicans distinguish two great sacraments and five lesser sacraments because the latter "have not any visible sign or ceremony ordained by God" (art. XXXV). Then they should be classed among the sacramentals since God alone can be the author of a sacrament (see above III). On this point the language of the twenty-fifth article ("commonly called sacraments") is more logical and straightforward than the terminology of recent Anglican writers. The Anglican Catechism calls Baptism and Eucharist sacraments "generally (i.e. universally) necessary for salvation". Mortimer justly remarks that this expression is not "entirely accurate", because the Eucharist is not generally necessary to salvation in the same way as Baptism (op.cit., I, 127). The other five he adds are placed in a lower class because, "they are not necessary to salvation in the same sense as the two other sacraments, since they are not necessary for everyone" (loc.cit., 128). Verily this is interpretation extraordinary; yet we should be grateful since it is more respectful than saying that those five are "such as have grown partly of the corrupt following of the Apostles, partly are states of life allowed in the Scriptures" (art. XXV). Confusion and uncertainty will be avoided by accepting the declaration of the Council of Trent (above). V. EFFECTS OF THE SACRAMENTS (1) Catholic Doctrine (a) The principal effect of the sacrament is a two-fold grace: (1) the grace of the sacrament which is "first grace", produced by the sacraments of the dead, or "second grace", produced by the sacraments of the living (supra, IV, 3, b); (2) The sacramental grace, i.e., the special grace needed to attain the end of each sacrament. Most probably it is not a new habitual gift, but a special vigour or efficacy in the sanctifying grace conferred, including on the part of God, a promise, and on the part of man a permanent right to the assistance needed in order to act in accordance with the obligations incurred, e.g., to live as a good Christian, a good priest, a good husband or wife (cf. ST III:62:2). (b) Three sacraments, Baptism, Confirmation and Orders, besides grace, produce in the soul a character, i.e., an indelible spiritual mark by which some are consecrated as servants of God, some as soldiers, some as ministers. Since it is an indelible mark, the sacraments which impress a character cannot be received more than once (Conc. Trid., sess. VII, can.9; see CHARACTER). (2) How the sacraments cause Grace: Theological controversies. Few questions have been so hotly controverted as this one relative to the manner in which the sacraments cause grace (ST IV, Sent., d.1, Q.4, a.1.). (a) All admit that the sacraments of the New Law cause grace ex opere operato, not ex opere operantis (above, II, 2, 3). (b) All admit that God alone can be the principal cause of grace (above 3, 1). (c) All admit that Christ as man, had a special power over the sacraments (above, 3, 2). (d) All admit that the sacraments are, in some sense, the instrumental causes either of grace itself or of something else which will be a "title exigent of grace" (infra e). The principal cause is one which produces an effect by a power which it has by reason of its own nature or by an inherent faculty. An instrumental cause produces an effect, not by its own power, but by a power which it receives from the principal agent. When a carpenter makes a table, he is the principal cause, his tools are the instrumental causes. God alone can cause grace as the principal cause; sacraments can be no more than his instruments "for they are applied to men by Divine ordinance to cause grace in them" (ST III:62:1). No theologian today defends Occasionalism (see CAUSE) i.e. the system which taught that the sacraments caused grace by a kind of concomitance, they being not real causes but the causae sine quibus non: their reception being merely the occasion of conferring grace. This opinion, according to Pourrat (op.cit., 167), was defended by St. Bonaventure, Duns Scotus, Durandus, Occam, and all the Nominalists, and "enjoyed a real success until the time of the Council of Trent, when it was transformed into the modern system of moral causality". St. Thomas (III:62:1, III:62:4; and "Quodlibeta", 12, a, 14), and others rejected it on the ground that it reduced the sacraments to the condition of mere signs. (e) In solving the problem the next step was the introduction of the system of dispositive instrumental causality, explained by Alexander of Hales (Summa theol., IV, Q. v, membr. 4), adopted and perfected by St. Thomas (IV Sent., d. 1, Q. i, a. 4), defended by many theologians down to the sixteenth century, and revived later by Father Billot, S.J. ("De eccl. sacram.", I, Rome, 1900). According to this theory the sacraments do not efficiently and immediately cause grace itself, but they cause ex opere operato and instrumentally, a something else -- the character (in some cases) or a spiritual ornament or form -- which will be a "disposition" entitling the soul to grace ("dispositio exigitiva gratiae"; "titulus exigitivus gratiae", Billot, loc.cit.). It must be admitted that this theory would be most convenient in explaining "reviviscence" of the sacraments (infra, VII, c). Against it the following objections are made: + From the time of the Council of Trent down to recent times little was heard of this system. + The "ornament", or "disposition", entitling the soul to grace is not well explained, hence explains very little. + Since this "disposition" must be something spiritual and of the supernatural order, and the sacraments can cause it, why can they not cause the grace itself? + In his "Summa theologica" St. Thomas does not mention this dispositive causality: hence we may reasonably believe that he abandoned it. (f) Since the time of the Council of Trent theologians almost unanimously have taught that the sacraments are the efficient instrumental cause of grace itself. The definition of the Council of Trent, that the sacraments "contain the grace which they signify", that they "confer grace ex opere operato" (Sess. VII, can.6, 8), seemed to justify the assertion, which was not contested until quite recently. Yet the end of the controversy had not come. What was the nature of that causality? Did it belong to the physical or to the moral order? A physical cause really and immediately produces its effects, either as the principal agent or as the instrument used, as when a sculptor uses a chisel to carve a statue. A moral cause is one which moves or entreats a physical cause to act. It also can be principal or instrumental, e.g., a bishop who in person successfully pleads for the liberation of a prisoner is the principal moral cause, a letter sent by him would be the instrumental moral cause, of the freedom granted. The expressions used by St. Thomas seem clearly to indicate that the sacraments act after the manner of physical causes. He says that there is in the sacraments a virtue productive of grace (III:62:4) and he answers objections against attributing such power to a corporeal instrument by simply stating that such power is not inherent in them and does not reside in them permanently, but is in them only so far and so long as they are instruments in the hands of Almighty God (loc.cit., ad um and 3 um). Cajetan, Suarez, and a host of other great theologians defend this system, which is usually termed Thomistic. The language of the Scripture, the expressions of the Fathers, the Decrees of the councils, they say, are so strong that nothing short of an impossibility will justify a denial of this dignity to the sacraments of the New Law. Many facts must be admitted which we cannot fully explain. The body of man acts on his spiritual soul; fire acts, in some way, on souls and on angels. The strings of a harp, remarks Cajetan (In III, Q.lxii) touched by an unskilled hand, produce nothing but sounds: touched by the hands of a skilful mmusician they give forth beautiful melodies. Why cannot the sacraments, as instruments in the hands of God, produce grace? Many grave theologians were not convinced by these arguments, and another school, improperly called the Scotistic, headed by Melchior Cano, De Lugo, and Vasquez, embracing later Henno, Tournely, Franzelin, and others, adopted the system of instrumental moral causality. The principal moral cause of grace is the Passion of Christ. The sacraments are instruments which move or entreat God effectively and infallibly to give his grace to those who receive them with proper disposotions, because, says Melchior Cano, "the price of the blood of Jesus Christ is communicated to them" (see Pourrat, op. cit., 192, 193). This system was further developed by Franzelin, who looks upon the sacraments as being morally an act of Christ (loc.cit., p.194). The Thomists and Suarez object to this system: + Since the sacraments (i.e. the external rites) have no intrisic value, they do not, according to this explanation, exert any genuine causality; they do not really cause grace, God alone causes the grace: the sacrament do not operate to produce it; they are only signs or occasions of conferring it. + The Fathers saw something mysterious and inexplicable in the sacraments. In this system wonders cease or are, at least, so much reduced that the expressions used by the Fathers seem altogether out of place. + This thoery does not sufficiently distinguish, in efficacy, the sacraments of the Gospel from the sacraments of the Old Law. Nevertheless, because it avoids certain difficulties and obscurities of the physical causality theory, the system of moral causality has found many defenders, and today if we consider numbers alone, it has authority in its favour. Recently both of these systems have been vigorously attacked by Father Billot (op.cit., 107 sq.), who proposes a new explanation. He revives the old theory that the sacraments do not immediately cause grace itself, but a disposition or title to grace (above e). This disposition is produced by the sacraments, neither physically nor morally, but imperatively. Sacraments are practical signs of an intentional order: they manifest God's intention to give spiritual benefits; this manifestation of the Divine intention is a title exigent of grace (op.cit., 59 sq., 123 sq.; Pourrat, op.cit., 194; Cronin in reviews, sup. cit.). Father Billot defends his opinions with remarkable acumen. Patrons of the physical causality gratefully note his attack against the moral causality, but object to the new explanation, that the imperative or the intentional causality, as distinct from the action of signs, occasions, moral or physical instruments (a) is conceived with difficulty and (b) does not make the sacraments (i.e. the external, Divinely appointed ceremonies) the real cause of grace. Theologians are perfectly free to dispute and differ as to the manner of instrumental causality. Lis est adhuc sub judice. VI. MINISTER OF THE SACRAMENTS (1) Men, Not Angels It was altogether fitting that the ministration of the sacraments be given, not to the angels, but to men. The efficacy of the sacraments comes from the Passion of Christ, hence from Christ as a man; men, not angels, are like unto Christ in His human nature. Miraculously God might send a good angel to administer a sacrament (ST III:64:7). (2) Ordination Requirements for the Ministers of Particular Sacraments For administering Baptism validly no special ordination is required. Any one, even a pagan, can baptize, provided that he use the proper matter and pronounce the words of the essential form, with the intention of doing what the Church does (Decr. pro Armen., Denzinger-Bannwart, 696). Ony bishops, priests, and in some cases, deacons may confer Baptism solemnly (see BAPTISM). It is now held as certain that in Matrimony the contracting parties are the ministers of the sacrament, because they make the contract and the sacrament is a contract raised by CHrist to the dignity of a sacrament (cf. Leo XIII, Encycl. "Arcanum", 10 Febr., 1880; see MATRIMONY). For the validity of the other five sacraments the minister must be duly ordained. The Council of Trent anathematized those who said that all Christians could administer all the sacraments (Sess. VII, can.10). Only bishops can confer Sacred Orders (Council of Trent, sess. XXIII, can.7). Ordinarily only a bishop can give Confirmation (see CONFIRMATION). The priestly Order is required for the valid administration of Penance and Extreme Unction (Conc. Trid., sess. XIV, can.10, can.4). As to the Eucharist, those only who have priestly Orders can consecrate, i.e. change bread and wine into the Body and Blood of Christ. Consecration presupposed, any one can distribute the Eucharistic species but, outside of very extraordinary circumstances this can be lawfully done only by bishops, priests, or (in some cases) deacons. (3) Heretical or Schismatic Ministers The care of all those sacred rites has been given to the Church of Christ. Heretical or schismatical ministers can administer the sacraments validly if they have valid Orders, but their ministrations are sinful (see Billot, op.cit., thesis 16). Good faith would excuse the recipients from sin, and in cases of necessity the Church grants jurisdiction necessary for Penance and Extreme Unction (see EXCOMMUNICATION: V, EFFECTS OF EXCOMMUNICATION). (4) State of Soul of the Minister Due reverence for the sacraments requires the minister to be in a state of grace: one who solemnly and officially administers a sacrament, being himself in a state of mortal sin, would certainly be guilty of a sacrilege (cf. ST III:64:6). Some hold that this sacrilege is committed even when the minister does not act officially or confer the sacrament solemnly. But from the controversy between St. Augustine and the Donatists in the fourth century and especially from the controversy between St. Stephen and St. Cyprian (q.v.) in the third century, we know that personal holiness or the state of grace in the minister is not a prerequisite for the valid administration of the sacrament. This has been solemnly defined in several general councils including the Council of Trent (Sess VII, can.12, ibid., de bapt., can.4). The reason is that the sacraments have their efficacy by Divine institution and through the merits of Christ. Unworthy ministers, validly conferring the sacraments, cannot impede the efficacy of signs ordained by Christ to produce grace ex opere operato (cf. St. Thomas, III:64:5, III:64:9). The knowledge of this truth, which follows logically from the true conception of a sacrament, gives comfort to the faithful, and it should increase, rather than diminish, reverence for those sacred rites and confidence in their efficacy. No one can give, in his own name, that which he does not possess; but a bank cashier, not possessing 2000 dollars in his own name, could write a draft worth 2, 000, 000 dollars by reason of the wealth of the bank which he is authorized to represent. Christ left to His Church a vast treasure purchased by His merits and sufferings: the sacraments are as credentials entitling their holders to a share in this treasure. On this subject, the Anglican Church has retained the true doctrine, which is neatly proved in article XXVI of the Westminster Confession: "Although in the visible church the evil be ever mingled with the good, and sometimes the evil hath the chief authority in the ministration of the Word and Sacraments, yet forasmuch as they do not the same in their own name, but in Christ's, and do minister by His commission and authority, we may use their ministry both in hearing the Word of God and in receiving the Sacraments. Neither is the effect of Christ's ordinance taken away by their wickedness nor the grace of God's gifts from such as by faith, and rightly, do receive the sacraments ministered unto them; which be effectual, because of Christ's institution and promise, although they be administered by evil men" (cf. Billuart, de sacram., d.5, a.3, sol.obj.) (5) Intention of the Minister (a) To be a minister of the sacraments under and with Christ, a man must act as a man, i.e. as a rational being; hence it is absolutely necessary that he have the intention of doing what the Church does. This was declared by Eugene IV in 1439 (Denzinger-Bannwart, 695) and was solemnly defined in the council of Trent (Sess.VII, can.II). The anathema of Trent was aimed at the innovators of the sixteenth century. From their fundamental error that the sacraments were signs of faith, or signs that excited faith, it followed logically that their effect in no wise depended on the intention of the minister. Men are to be "ministers of Christ, and the dispensers of the mysteries of God" (I Cor., iv, 1), and this they would not be without the intention, for it is by the intention, says St. Thomas (III:64:8, ad 1) that a man subjects and unites himself to the principal agent (Christ). Moreover, by rationally pronouncing the words of the form, the minister must determine what is not sufficiently determined or expressed by the matter applied, e.g. the significance of pouring water on the head of the child (ST III:64:8). One who is demented, drunk, asleep, or in a stupor that prevents a rational act, one who goes through the external ceremony in mockery, mimicry, or in a play, does not act as a rational minister, hence cannot administer a sacrament. (b) The necessary object and qualities of the intention required in the minister of the sacrament are explained in the article INTENTION. Pourrat (op.cit., ch.7) gives a history of all controversies on this subject. Whatever may be said speculatively about the opinion of Ambrosius Catherinus (see POLITI, LANCELOT) who advocated the sufficiency of an external intention in the minister, it may not be followed in practice, because, outside of cases of neccessity, no one may follow a probable opinion against one that is safer, when there is question of something required for the validity of a sacrament (Innoc. XI, 1679; Denzinger-Bannwart, 1151). (6) Attention in the Minister Attention is an act of the intellect, viz. the application of the mind to what is being done. Voluntary distraction in one administering a sacrament would be sinful. The sin would however not be brave, unless (a) there be danger of making a serious mistake, or (b) according to the common opinion, the distraction be admitted in consecrating the Eucharistic species. Attention on the part of the minister is not necessary for the valid administration of a sacrament, because in virtue of the intention, which is presupposed, he can act in a rational manner, notwithstanding the distraction. VII. RECIPIENT OF THE SACRAMENTS When all conditions required by Divine and ecclesiastical law are complied with, the sacrament is received validly and licitly. If all conditions required for the essential rite are observed, on the part of the minister, the recipient, the matter and form, but some non-essential condition is not complied with by the recipient, the sacrament is received validly but not licitly; and if the condition wilfully neglected be grave, grace is not then conferred by the ceremony. Thus baptized persons contracting Matrimony whilst they are in the state of mortal sin would be validly (i.e. really) married, but would not then receive sanctifying grace. (1) Conditions for valid reception (a) The previous reception of Baptism (by water) is an essential condition for the valid reception of any other sacrament. Only citizens and members of the Church can come under her influence as such; Baptism is the door by which we enter the Church and thereby become members of a mystical body united to Christ our head (Catech. Trid., de bapt., nn.5, 52). (b) In adults, for the valid reception of any sacrament except the Eucharist, it is necessary that they have the intention of receiving it. The sacraments impose obligations and confer grace: Christ does not wish to impose those obligations or confer grace without the consent of man. The Eucharist is excepted because, in whatever state the recipient may be, it is always the body and blood of Christ (see INTENTION; cf. Pourrat, op.cit., 392). (c) For attention, see above, VI, 6. By the intention man submits himself to the operation of the sacraments which produce their effects exopere operato, hence attention is not necessary for the valid reception of the sacraments. One who might be distracted, even voluntarily, during the conferring, e.g. of Baptism, would receive the sacrament validly. It must be carefully noted, however, that in the case of Matrimony the contracting parties are the ministers as well as the recipients of the sacraments; and in the sacrament of Penance, the acts of the penitent, contrition, confession, and willingness to accept a Penance in satisfaction, constitute the proximate matter of the sacraments, according to the commonly received opinion. Hence in those cases such attention is required as is necessary for the valid application of the matter and form. (2) Conditions for the Licit Reception (a) For the licit reception, besides the intention and the attention, in adults there is required: + for the sacraments of the dead, supernatural attrition, which presupposes acts of faith, hope, and repentance (see ATTRITION and JUSTIFICATION); + for the sacraments of the living the state of grace. Knowingly to receive a sacrament of the living whilst one is in the state of mortal sin would be a sacrilege. (b) For the licit reception it is also necessary to observe all that is prescribed by Divine or ecclesiastical law, e.g. as to time, place, the minister, etc. As the Church alone has the care of the sacraments and generally her duly appointed agents alone have the right to administer them, except Baptism in some cases, and Matrimony (supra VI, 2), it is a general law that application for the sacraments should be made to worthy and duly appointed ministers. (For exceptions see EXCOMMUNICATION.) (3) Reviviscence of the Sacraments Much attention has been given by theologians to the revival of effects which were impeded at the time when a sacrament was received. The question arises whenever a sacrament is received validly but unworthily, i.e. with an obstacle which prevents the infusion of Divine grace. The obstacle (mortal sin) is positive, when it is known and voluntary, or negative, when it is involuntary by reason of ignorance or good faith. One who thus receives a sacrament is said to receive it feignedly, or falsely (ficte), because by the very act of receiving it he pretends to be properly disposed; and the sacrament is said to be validum sed informe -- valid, but lacking its proper form, i.e. grace or charity (see LOVE). Can such a person recover or receive the effects of the sacraments? The term reviviscence (reviviscentia) is not used by St. Thomas in reference to the sacraments and it is not strictly correct because the effects in question being impeded by the obstacle, were not once "living" (cf. Billot, op.cit., 98, note). The expression which he uses (III:69:10), viz., obtaining the effects after the obstacle has been removed, is more accurate, though not so convenient as the newer term. (a) Theologians generally hold that the question does not apply to Penance and the Holy Eucharist. If the penitent be not sufficiently disposed to receive grace at the time he confesses his sins the sacrament is not validly received because the acts of the penitent are a necessary part of the matter of this sacrament, or a necessary condition for its reception. One who unworthily receives the Eucharist can derive no benefit from that sacrament unless, perhaps, he repent of his sins and sacrilege before the sacred species have beeen destroyed. Cases that may occur relate to the five other sacraments. (b) It is certain and admitted by all, that if Baptism be received by an adult who is in the state of mortal sin, he can afterwards receive the graces of the sacrament, viz. when the obstacle is removed by contrition or by the sacrament of Penance. On the one hand the sacraments always produce grace unless there be an obstacle; on the other hand those graces are necessary, and yet the sacrament cannot be repeated. St. Thomas (III:69:10) and theologians find a special reason for the conferring of the effects of Baptism (when the "fiction" has been removed) in the permanent character which is impressed by the sacrament validly administered. Reasoning from analogy they hold the same with regard to Confirmation and Holy Orders, noting however that the graces to be received are not so necessary as those conferred by Baptism. (c) The doctrine is not so certain when applied to Matrimony and Extreme Unction. But since the graces impeded are very important though not strictly necessary, and since Matrimony cannot be received again whilst both contracting parties are living, and Extreme Unction cannot be repeated whilst the same danger of death lasts, theologians adopt as more probable the opinion which holds that God will grant the graces of those sacraments when the obstacle is removed. The "reviviscence" of the effects of sacraments received validly but with an obstacle to grace at the time of their reception, is urged as a strong argument against the system of the physical causality of grace (supra, V, 2), especially by Billot (op.cit., thesis, VII, 116, 126). For his own system he claims the merit of establishing an invariable mode of causality, namely, that in every case by the sacrament validly received there is conferred a "title exigent of grace". If there be no obstacle the grace is conferred then and there: if there be an obstacle the "title" remains calling for the grace which will be conferred as soon as the obstacle is removed (op.cit., th.VI, VII). To this his opponents reply that exceptional cases might well call for an exceptional mode of causality. In the case of three sacraments the character sufficiently explains the revival of effects (cf. ST III:66:1, III:69:9, III:69:10). The doctrine as applied to Extreme Unction and Matrimony, is not certain enough to furnish a strong argument for or against any system. Future efforts of theologians may dispel the obscurity and uncertainty now prevailing in this interesting chapter. D.J. KENNEDY Brothers of the Sacred Heart Brothers of the Sacred Heart A congregation founded in 1821 by Père André Coindre, of the Diocese of Lyons, France. Its constitutions were modeled upon the constitutions of St. Ignatius based upon the Rule of Saint Augustine. Its members bind themselves for life by the simple vows of religion. There are no priests in the congregation, the objective purpose of which is the Christian education of boys in asylums, parochial and select schools, and commercial colleges. The growth of the congregation was slow. At the period of its origin the political condition of France was very unfavorable. It was a day of political agitation and revolution. Lyons, the cradle of the congregation, suffered sorely in these revolutions. But a more hampering difficulty to its growth lay in the ill-defined government imposed upon the congregation. Père André Coindre was the superior-general and continued such till his death in 1821. Père Vincent Coindre, his brother, succeeded him in this office. In 1840 Père Coindre assembled the general chapter of the congregation. During the discussions of the chapter, opinion among the brothers was unanimous that it was necessary for the success of the congregation that its temporal affairs should be in the hands of the brothers themselves, and that one of their number should be superior-general. The question was referred to Mgr de Bonald, Archbishop of Lyons, who, after an exhaustive examination, judged it advisable that Père Coindre should resign the office. On 13 Sept., 1841, Brother Polycarp was unanimously chosen by the brothers as their superior-general. He reconstructed the government of the community and gave it stability and permanency. At the time of his death in 1859, there were in France alone seventy three establishments, an increase of sixty during his administration. He had, moreover, in 1846 opened up in the United States, at Mobile, Ala., a new field of labor for the institute. In 1872 the province of the United States extended its schools into Canada, and in 1880 transferred its novitiate from Indianapolis to Arthabaskaville, P. Q., Canada. The growth of the congregation was here so rapid that it was deemed advisable to erect the establishments in Canada into a separate province. This was effected by a decree of the general chapter of the society held at Paradis, near Le Puy, France, in 1900. About the same time a house of studies for postulants and a novitiate for the United States province were established at Metuchen, N. J. The congregation has at the present time (1907) in the United States and Canada forty-eight establishments directed by 460 brothers, educating more than 9000 pupils. Just previous to the French Law of 1901, suppressing religious communities in France, there were in that country alone 1100 brothers, 150 schools, academies, colleges, asylums, deaf and dumb institutions, with 25,000 pupils, in twenty dioceses. Owing to the present religious persecution in France, the congregation has been obliged to seek new fields of labor, and twenty establishments have recently been founded in Spain and Belgium. BROTHER CHARLES Missionary Sisters of the Sacred Heart of Jesus Missionary Sisters of the Sacred Heart of Jesus A religious congregation having its general mother house at Rome, founded in 1880 by Mother Francis Xavier Cabrini, who is still living. The aim of the institute is to spread devotion to the Heart of Jesus by means of the practice of spiritual and corporal works of mercy. The sisters conduct homes for the aged and the sick, orphanages, industrial schools, sewing classes; they visit hospitals and prisons, and give religious instruction in their convents, which are open to women desirous of making retreats. The congregation has spread rapidly in Europe and America. In 1899, at the suggestion of Leo XIII, the sisters came to New York, and have since opened convents in the Dioceses of Brooklyn, Chicago, Denver, Los Angeles, Newark, Scranton, and Seattle. At the beginning of 1911 the institute had in the United States: 253 sisters; 11 schools with 4850 pupils; 6 orphanages with 713 orphans; 2 hospitals with about 3520 patients annually; and 1 dispensary where 21,630 persons were treated during the preceding years. This congregation is to be distinguished from the Missionary Sisters of the Sacred Heart of Jesus, founded by Father Hubert Linckens, provincial of the Missionaries of the Sacred Heart, Hiltrup, near Munster, on 3 August, 1899, and approved episcopally in 1900. The latter sisters are engaged teaching in New Guiana, New Pomerania, and the Marshall Islands, in the districts confided to the care of the Missionaries of the Sacred Heart. A.A. MACERLEAN Missionaries of the Sacred Heart of Jesus Missionaries of the Sacred Heart of Jesus (Issoudun). A religious congregation of priests and lay brothers with the object of promoting the knowledge and practice of devotion to the Heart of Jesus as embodied in the revelations of Our Lord to Blessed Margaret Mary Alacoque, and of offering personal reparation to the Divine Heart. The society's motto is, "Ametur ubique terrarum Cor Jesu Sacratissimum" (May the most Sacred Heart of Jesus be loved everywhere). It was founded at Issoudun, in the Archdiocese of Bourges, France, by the Abbe Jules Chevalier. Until very recent years the mother house was in the above-named town, but since the separation of Church and State in France the society has its headquarters in Rome. The origin of the Missionaries of the Sacred Heart is closely connected with the Papal definition of the dogma of the Immaculate Conception of the B. V. M., the means to lay their foundation being the outcome of special prayers addressed to the Mother of God during the nine days preceding the great religious event of 8 Dec., 1854. The founder had pledged himself to honor the Blessed Virgin in a special manner. He redeemed his promise the following year by erecting a shrine dedicated to the honor of the Blessed Virgin under the title of "Our Lady of the Sacred Heart ". In 1864 an association of prayer was founded which has since been honored with the official title of Universal Archconfraternity of Our Lady of the Sacred Heart, and enriched with numerous indulgences. The central governing body is at Rome, with local directors in various countries. The official centre for the United States is at Watertown, New York; those for other English-speaking countries are at Glastonbury, Somerset, England; Sydney, New South Wales, and Cork, where the society's first house in Ireland was founded, and an ecclesiastical college opened, in 1909. On 2 Oct. 1867, an apostolic school was founded by Father Vandel at Chezal-Benoit in France, with twelve pupils. It grew and prospered, and in course of time other similar institutions arose in different countries. From these the priests of the society are chiefly recruited. The work is represented in the United States by St. Joseph's Apostolic School at Watertown, N. Y. The personnel of the society is composed of 825 professed religious, with provincial houses in Italy, Germany, Holland, Australia, and a Provincial Superior residing in Paris, who rules over the dispersed members of the French Province, and its establishments in Switzerland; Belgium; Canada -- Quebec; Beauport, Province of Quebec; South Qu'Appelle, Medicine Hat, Saskatchewan, and North Cobalt, Ont. The Fathers at Quebec direct the Archconfraternity of Our Lady of the Sacred Heart, publish the Annals, its monthly bulletin, and conduct five missions and retreats. They also have a public chapel. The novitiate for Canada and the States is at Beauport. The other Canadian communities are engaged in parochial and missionary work. In England, besides Glastonbury, the Missionaries of the Sacred Heart have communities at St. Albans, Herfordshire, and at Braintree, Essex. They engage in parish work and act as chaplains. In the United States the Society has communities at Watertown, N. Y.; Natick, R. I.; Onawa and Sioux City, Iowa; Cazenovia, Wis., this last being a dependency of the German Province; the first four form an American Quasi-Province with headquarters at Natick. In all these places the Fathers have charge of parishes, except those at Sioux City, who preach missions, supply the places of absent priests, and assist the clergy. The Natick community supplies chaplains to St. Joseph's Hospital for tubercular patients at Hills Grove, and to the Rhode Island State charitable and correctional institutions at Howard, Cranston, and Sackanosset. For the past quarter of a century the efforts of the Missionaries of the Sacred Heart have been expended chiefly in foreign mission fields. On 1 Sept., 1881, three Fathers set out from Barcelona for the South Sea Islands at the request of Leo XIII, and established a station in New Britain -- now New Pomerania. To-day the priests and brothers doing missionary work in divers islands and archipelagoes of the South Pacific number upward of 300, exclusive of the new mission lately opened in Mindanao, Philippine Islands -- where thirty or more apostolic laborers from the Dutch Province are already employed -- and the vast territory comprised in the diocese of Port Victoria and Palmerston, South Australia, in charge of Father F. X. Gsell as Administrator Apostolic, with residence at Port Darwin. The Bishop of Ponso-Alegre has just entrusted the direction of his episcopal college to the congregation. CHEVALIER, Le Sacre-Coeur de Jesus dans ses rapports avec Marie, ou Notre Dame du Sacre-Coeur (Paris, 1884); VAUDON, Mgr Henry Verjus (Paris, 1899); CARRIERE, Le P. Jean Vandel (Issoudun, 1908); Album societatis missionariorum SSmi Cordis Jesu (ROME, 1911). ZÉPHYRIN PÉLOQUIN Society of the Sacred Heart of Jesus (Paccanarists) Society of the Sacred Heart of Jesus (PACCANARISTS). This society was founded by two young seminarists of Saint-Sulpice who had emigrated to Belgium during the French Revolution, Francois-Eleonor de Tournély and Prince Charles de Broglie, a son of the marshal. Their object was to form a society similar in all respects to the order founded by St. Ignatius Loyola. Their first residence was the old country house of the Louvain Jesuits, into which the community under Tournély entered 8 May, 1794, numbering four members. These four were the two founders and two young officers of the army of Condé, Xavier de Tournély, brother of the superior, and Pierre-Charles Le Blanc. The victory of the French forces at Fleurus (26 June, 1794) obliged them to leave Belgium just as they were joined by a recruit who was destined to play a part of great importance, Joseph Varin de Solmon, who had also been in the army of Condé. The fugitives lived for some time at Leutershofen near Augsburg. In the church of the Benedictines at Augsburg, on 15 Oct., 1794, they consecrated themselves by a special vow to the Sacred Heart of Jesus and the Most Holy Heart of Mary, to continue the work they had begun, to offer themselves to the sovereign pontiff and to obey him as St. Ignatius and his companions had done. When it had to leave Augsburg, the Society of the Sacred Heart numbered sixteen subjects. It wandered about for some time in Southern Germany and several of its members, Father Varin among them, were ordained priests. At length, on Easter Tuesday, 1797, it settled in the village of Hagenbrunn, three leagues from Vienna. There the founder, not more than thirty years of age, died of smallpox, 9 July, 1797, and Father Varin, but twenty-eight years of age, was chosen his successor. The new superior submitted the statutes of the society for the endorsement of the exiled French bishops in Germany and the approbation of Pius VI, then detained at Florence. The number of postulants having greatly increased, a novitiate was opened at Prague under the protection of the Archduchess Maria Anna, and Hagenbrunn was converted into a boarding-school. This was at the close of the year 1798. Nicholas Paccanari, a native of Valsugnana, near Trent, had at one time been a sergeant in the garrison of S. Angelo, had then become a merchant and, having met with financial disaster, was reduced to earn his livmg as a sort of guide or cicerone. Though entirely without education, he possessed a remarkable natural gift of eloquence. At about this period Paccanari was attached to the Oratory of the Caravita, a pious association at Rome umder the direction of Father Gravita, who had been a Jesuit. Here Paccanari conceived a desire to re-constitute the Society of Jesus. He won over to his project those priests who were his associates at the Caravita: Joseph della Vedova, a doctor of the Sapienza; Halnat, of the Diocese of Rennes, formerly a missionary in Madagascar; Epinette, of the Diocese of Le Mans. He drew up a rule of life for them and shut himself up at Loreto in a retreat which lasted eleven months. Returning to Rome in May, 1797, he obtained for his project the approval of Cardinal della Somaglia, the pope's vicar, and on 15 August, in the Chapel of the Caravita, the founder and his three companions made the three vows of religion and the vow of obedience to the sovereign pontiff. They adopted the habit of the original Jesuits and settled themselves at Spoleto. In August, 1798, Paccanari, having been received by Pius VI who was then at Sienna, obtained from the pope several privileges and a Rescript m which the society was designated "The Company of the Faith of Jesus". The pope charged him with the care of the Propaganda students who had been expelled from their seminary. Paccanari made three journeys to Rome to collect these young men; the third time he and his companions were arrested by the French military authorities and lodged in the Castle of S. Angelo. They remained there four months, were then expelled from the Roman Republic and retired to Parma, where many of the former Jesuits had established themselves under the protection of the duke. Father Halnat, having learned of the existence of the Sacred Heart Fathers, suggested to Paccanari the idea of one foundation for the two institutes devoted to the same object. Negotiations were opened, but were interrupted by the imprisonment of Paccanari, and were resumed in 1799. The founder of the Fathers of the Faith, after a visit to Pius VI who heartily encouraged his project, repaired to Vienna. The society numbered about a score of members, only three of them priests. It had at first been well received by the Jesuits of Parma and of Venice, but its leader's lukewarmness towards the idea of union with the Jesuits of Russia rendered it suspect to those religious. Fusion with the French community at Hagenbrunn therefore offered the only opportunity for its development. Conferences were inaugurated at Hagenbrunn, 9 April, 1799, and lasted nine days, Father Sineo della Torre, one of the Sacred Heart Fathers, acting as interpreter between Father Varin and Paccanari, who knew neither French nor Latin. The encouragement given by Pius VI was accepted by the Fathers of the Sacred Heart as a command, and their already numerous congregation allowed itself to be absorbed by Paccanari's little society. On 18 April, Paccanari, still only a tonsured cleric, was received as superior-general, and the name Fathers of the Sacred Heart was changed to that of Fathers of the Faith. The general, deeming the manner of life of the Hagenbrunn Fathers too austere and too confined, shortened their hours of prayer, increased the time devoted to studies and recreation, and launched his subjects on the external life and the work of preaching. Having been introduced by Father Varin to the Archduchess Maria Anna, Paccanari gained an extraordinary ascendancy over that princess, through whose good offices he received minor orders, the subdiaconate, and the diaconate from the hands of the nuncio at Vienna. At the request of his new subjects, who were already beginning to be uneasy about his tendencies, he gave out (11 Aug., 1799) a somewhat vague statement of his intentions in regard to the original Jesuits. At last he left Germany, but only after distributing his men among the different countries of Western Europe. A college was opened at Dillingen, a foundation which lasted five or six years was made at Amsterdam, and Fathers Rozaven and de Broglie with some scholastics set out for England, where in March, 1800, they opened a boarding-school at Kensington. Paccanari himself, returning to Italy, established a novitiate at Cremona, then at Este. He scattered many of his religious among the hospitals—at that time overcrowded with wounded soldiers—in Italy and Germany. In the midst of of his labors he was ordained priest at Padua, and soon after this he received from the new pope, Pius VII, permission to have a house at Rome. The Archduchess Maria Anna bought from the Theatines the Church of St. Sylvester, with its convent and gardens, at Monte-Cavallo; and in 1801 the pope in person came to install the Fathers there. In the month of August, 1802, the first congregation was held; with some temporary modifications, the old constitution of the Society of Jesus was adopted. In 1803 and 1804 Paccanari summoned to the College of St. Sylvester the young religious of the society, and the courses in philosophy and theology, as well as the solemn theses, of this house of studies shed great lustre upon the nascent order. At that time there were 110 religious at St. Sylvester. In the beginning of 1804, again under the archduchess's patronage, the Salviati Palace, near St. Peter's, was opened as a boarding-school for young nobles, the institution being named, after its benefactress, the "Collegio Mariano". Throughout Italy, but particularly at Spoleto, the Paccanarists gave missions with great success. In Nov., 1805, the Council of the Republic of Le Valais offered Paccanari the College of Sion, which was accepted. To Father Varin France had been assigned as the field of his apostolate; he returned thither in the spring of 1800 and began by preaching to the sick in the hospitals of Bicêtre and la Salpêtrière. It was at this time that, with Blessed Sophie Barat, he established the Society of the Ladies of the Sacred Heart (21 Nov., 1800). The Fathers of the Faith rapidly increased in number; in 1801 they were able to open at Lyons a boarding-school, which was transferred in the following year to the old Jesuit college at Belley. Lamartine was educated there. Another school was established in 1802 at Amiens, and then another at Roanne in 1804. These foundations aroused the suspicions both of Fouché, the minister of police, and of Napoleon; but Portalis and, still more, Cardinal Fesch quieted them for a time. Missions were preached with brilliant success; at the first mission, at Tours, the extraordinary power which Father Enfantin exercised over the crowds was unexpectedly revealed; at the second, at Amiens, more than six hundred marriages were rehabilitated. Meanwhile Paccanari's administration, his taste for display, his festivals, and the premature thrusting of his subjects into publicity displeased the Fathers of the Faith. Besides, Father Rozaven, the provincial of England, who had learned in 1802 certain unsavory details of the general's private life, pursued his inquiries, and, having attained certainty, visited Rome in 1803 to communicate the melancholy facts to Pius VII. During his absence most of his brethren in London wrote to Father Gruber, the Vicar-General of the Society of Jesus in Russia, to obtain admission individually. Father Rozaven on his return to England imitated their example, and in March, 1804, he set out for Russia. Only Father Charles de Broglie remained in London, as a secular priest; he broke with his former friends, allied himself closely with the anti-concordataire bishops, and persisted in his protestations against the act of Pius VII as late as 1842. Father Varin, apprised of the course of events by Father Rozaven, referred the matter to the cardinal-legate in France, and on 21 June, 1804, broke with Paccanari. His society, having become independent, remained in France on the advice of the legate and of Pius VII himself. It flourished in that country until 1807; missions were given at Grenoble, Poitiers, Niort, Bordeaux, and elsewhere; seminaries were opened at Roulers (Gand), Marvejols (Mende), Bazas (Bordeaux), and a college at Argentière (Lyons). This progress alarmed Fouché; Napoleon issued an order for the suppression of the congregation, which was executed in Nov., 1807; the connivance of local authorities enabled it to continue the work of the seminaries, but its missions were stopped. Many of the Fathers entered the parochial ministry. In August, 1806, Father Sineo della Torre and the Fathers in Switzerland in their turn abandoned Paccanari. In 1810 they were received as a body into the Society of Jesus, though only in foro inferno, the official aggregation not taking place until 1814. Also about the year 1806 some of the Fathers of Spoleto, Padua, Lombardy, and Amsterdam seceded. The Society of Jesus having been restored at Naples by Pius VII (31 July, 1804), many Fathers of the Collegio Mariano went there and were admitted as novices. In July, 1807, Paccanari received positive commands from the pope to retire to Spoleto. A first canonical process was begun during the winter. Relegated to the convent of the Franciscans at Assisi, the general made a confession of his whole life and appeared penitent. At the end of five months he was transferred to the prisons of the Holy Office. A new trial resulted, in August, 1806, in a sentence of ten years' imprisonment. The sentence paid a tribute to the innocence and virtue of the other Fathers of the Faith; nevertheless it was the annihilation of their soceity. In 1809, when the French army opened the pontifical prisons, Paccanari at first refused to go out, but eventually left and disappeared. It is uncertain whether he withdrew to Switzerland under an assumed name, as some have asserted, or whether, under some regrettable circumstances, he was stabbed by a domestic servant and his body thrown into the Tiber, as another tradition has it. No one knows what his end was. The Archduchess Maria Anna, who, in spite of the commands of her brother the Emperor Leopold, had at first refused to abandon Paccanari and his work, was obliged to submit, overcome by the miserable life which her brother allowed her to live and the shame of ier condemnation. She retired to Styria to die a holy death. She obtained permission for the last remnants of the Paccanarists to live, though without the religious habit, in the house of St. Sylvester. The Collegio Mariano was sold, and in 1814 most of the Paccanarists entered the Society of Jesus. As for the French Fathers, the fall of Napoleon enabled them to meet in Paris and deliberate as to what course they should take. Father de Cloriviere, one of the old Jesuits, and Monsignori di Gregorio and della Genga (the latter afterwards Leo XII), the pope's representatives, advised them to remain in France. Father Varin, however, had already set out for Russia to ask the general to appoint a commissary to re-establish the Society of Jesus in France, when the commission was given to Father Cloriviere himself. Father Varin was received by him into the Society on 19 July, 1814. Nearly all the former Fathers of the Faith followed him; the rest remaining among the secular clergy. GUIDEE, Vie du P. Joseph Varin (2nd ed., Paris, 1860); IDEM, Notices hist. sur quelques membres de la Soc. des Peres du Sacre-Coeur et de la C. de J. (Paris, 1860); SPEIL, Leonor v. Tournély u. die Gesellschaft des hl. Herzens Jesu (Breslau, 1874). MARC DUBRUEL Congregation of Picpus Congregation of the Sacred Hearts of Jesus and Mary and of the Perpetual Adoration of the Blessed Sacrament of the Altar Better known as the Congregation of Picpus, was founded by Father Coudrin, b. at Coursay-les-Bois, in Poiton on 1 March, 1768. He was only deacon when the persecution, directed against the clergy, dispersed the students of the seminary of Poitiers, where he was being trained. Having learned that Mgr de Bonald, Bishop of Clermont, was in Paris and would confer Holy Orders upon him, he set out for that city, and on 4 March, 1792, was ordained priest in the Irish Seminary. The ordination took place in the library, because the revolutionaries had invaded the chapel in which they were actually holding their meetings. After ordination he returned to Coursay, but the violence of the persecution soon compelled him to hide elsewhere. During October of the same year, disguised, he labored in the Dioceses of Poitiers and Tours. Father Coudrin gathered around him a few companions, to whom he communicated his views to promote devotion to the Sacred Hearts of Jesus and of Mary, and who were also willing to assist him in his great work. On Christmas night, 1800, he solemnly made his religious vows, devoting himself entirely to the love of the Sacred Hearts. During the year 1805 Father Coudrin bought some dilapidated houses in the Rue Picpus in Paris, and there established himself with a few of his religious. A college for the training of youths and a seminary were soon started. "The Good Father", as his religious used to call him, governed his congregation with tact and prudence, and in spite of many difficulties, his work prospered. Several new monasteries and colleges were founded and opened in various towns. In 1825 the evangelization of the Sandwich Islands in the Pacific Ocean was entrusted by the Holy See to the Congregation of the Sacred Hearts, and the following year the first band of missionaries of the Sacred Hearts left France to carry the Faith to the inhabitants. In 1833 the Archipelagos of Oriental Oceanica were likewise confided to the same Congregation and immediately missionaries were sent to the Gambier Islands; some of these fathers established houses of the congregation in Peru and Chile, South America. Not long afterwards other evangelical laborers were sent to the Marquesa Islands at the death of the founder in 1837. The perpetual adoration of the Blessed Sacrament was made day and night in nineteen houses, while several other houses had also been founded abroad. In 1817 it was formally approved by Pius VII, in 1825 by Leo XII, and in 1840 by Gregory XVI, under the name of Congregation of the Sacred Hearts of Jesus and Mary and of the Perpetual Adoration of the Most Holy Sacrament of the Altar. Its special aim is to honor and imitate the four ages of our Lord: His infancy by the instruction of children, and by the formation of youths for the priesthood; His hidden life by the exercise of the Adoration; His public life, by preaching and by missionary work; His crucified life by the works of Christian mortification. At the present day the missions confided to the Congregation of the Sacred Hearts comprise three Apostolic Vicariates: the Tahiti Islands, Marquesa Islands, and the Hawaiian Islands, where Father Damien fell a victim to his humble and generous devotion for the poor lepers of Molokai. The Congregation of the Sacred Hearts, which depends directly upon the Propaganda, is governed by a Superior General, who is elected for life. The members make perpetual but simple vows after a probation of eighteen months' novitiate. In 1898 the Congregation was divided into three provinces. The Belgian province, under which England and the United States of America are comprised, has a novitiate and a house of studies at Courtray. The provincial has his residence in the monastery of the Sacred Hearts in Louvain, Mount St. Antoine, Belgium. The superior in England is in the Damien house of Eccleshall in Staffordshire; in the United States in the monastery of the Sacred Hearts at Fairhaven in Massachusetts. HEIMBUCHER, Die Orden u. Kongregationen (2nd ed., Paderborn, 1908), 471. WILLIAM DE BROECK Sacrifice Sacrifice (Lat. sacrificium; Ital. sacrificio; French sacrifice.) This term is identical with the English offering (Latin offerre) and the German Opfer; the latter is derived, not from offerre, but from operari (Old High German opfâron; Middle High German opperu, opparôn), and thus means "to do zealously, to serve God, to offer sacrifice" (cf. Kluge "Etymologisches Wörterbuch der deutschen Sprache", Strassburg, 1899, p. 288). By sacrifice in the real sense is universally understood the offering of a sense-perceptible gift to the Deity as an outward manifestation of our veneration for Him and with the object of attaining communion with Him. Strictly speaking however, this offering does not become a sacrifice until a real change has been effected in the visible gift (e. g. by slaying it, shedding its blood. burning it, or pouring it out). As the meaning and importance of sacrifice cannot be established by a priori methods, every admissible theory of sacrifice must shape itself in accordance with the sacrificial systems of the pagan nations, and especially with those of the revealed religions, Judaism and Christianity. Pure Buddhism, Mohammedanism, and Protestantism here call for no attention, as they have no real sacrifice; apart from these there is and has been no developed religion which has not accepted sacrifice as an essential portion of its cult. We shall consider successively: + I. Pagan Sacrifice; + II. Jewish Sacrifice; + III. Christian Sacrifice; + IV. Theory of Sacrifice. I. PAGAN SACRIFICE (1) Among the Indians The Vedism of the ancient Indies was, to an extent never elsewhere attained, a sacrificial religion connected with the deities Agni and Soma. A Vedic proverb runs: "Sacrifice is the navel of the world". Originally regarded as a feast for the gods, before whom food-offerings (cakes, milk, butter, meat, and the soma drink) were set on the holy grass before the altar, sacrifice gradually became a magical agency for influencing the gods, such as might be expressed in the formula, "Do ut des", or in the Vedic proverb: "Here is the butter; where are thy gifts?" The Vedic sacrificial prayers express no spirit of humility or submission; even the word "thank" is unknown in the Vedic language. The gods thus sank to the level of mere servants of man, while the high-priests or Brahmins entrusted with the complicated rites gradually acquired an almost divine dignity. In their hands the sacrificial ceremonial, developed to the extremest detail, became an irresistible power over the gods. A proverb says: "The sacrificer hunts Indra like game, and holds him fast as the fowler does the bird; the god is a wheel which the singer understands how to turn." The gods derive their whole might and power from the sacrifice as the condition of their existence, so that the Brahmins are indispensable for their continued existence. However, that the gods were not entirely indifferent to man, but gave him their assistance, is proved among other things by the serious expiatory character which was not quite eliminated from the Vedic sacrifices. The actual offering of the sacrifices, which was never effected without fire, took place either in the houses or in the open air; temples were unknown. Among the various sacrifices two were conspicuous: the soma offering and the sacrifice of the horse. The offering of the soma (Agnistoma) -- a nectar obtained by the pressing of some plants -- took place in the spring; the sacrifice lasted an entire day, and was a universal holiday for the people. The triple pressing of the soma, performed at certain intervals during the day, alternated with the offering of sacrificial cakes, libations of milk, and the sacrifice of eleven he-goats to various gods. The gods (especially Indra) were eager for the intoxicating soma drink: "As the ox bellows after the rain, so does Indra desire the soma." The sacrifice of the horse (açvamedha), executed at the command of the king and participated in by the whole people, required a whole year's preparation. It was the acme, "the king of the sacrifices", the solemnities lasting three days and being accompanied by all kinds of public amusements. The idea of this sacrifice was to provide the gods of light with another steed for their heavenly yoke. At first, instead of the sacrifice of the horse, human sacrifice seems to have been in vogue, so that here also the idea of substitution found expression. For the later Indians had a saying: "At first the gods indeed accepted men as sacrificial victims. Then the sacrificial efficacy passed from them to the horse. The horse thus became efficacious. They accepted the horse, but the sacrificial efficacy went to the steer, sheep, goat, and finally to rice and barley: Thus for the instructed a sacrificial cake made of rice and barley is of the same value as these [five] animals" (cf. Hardy, "Die vedisch-brahmanisehe Periode der Religion des alten Indiens", Münster, 1892, p. 150). Modern Hinduism with its numberless sects honours Vishnu and Shiva as chief deities. As a cult it is distinguished from ancient Vedism mainly by its temple service. The Hindu temples are usual artistic and magnificent edifices with numerous courts, chapels, and halls, in which representations of gods and idols are exposed. The smaller pagodas serve the same purpose. Although the Hindu religion centres in its idolatry sacrifice has not been completely evicted from its old place. The symbol of Shiva is the phallus (linga); linga stones are indeed met throughout India (especially in the holy places) in extraordinary numbers. The darker shades of this superstition, degenerated into fetichism, are somewhat relieved by the piety and elevation of many Hindu hymns or songs of praise (stotras), which surpass even the old Vedic hymns in religious feeling. (2) Among the Iranians The kindred religion of the ancient Iranians centres, especially after its reform by Zoroaster, in the service of the true god Ormuzd (Ahura Mazda), whose will is the right and whose kingdom is the good. This ethically very elevated religion promotes especially a life of purity, the conscientious fulfilment of all liturgical and moral precepts, and the positive renunciation of the Devil and all demoniacal powers. If the ancient Indian religion was essentially a religion of sacrifice, this religion of the ancient Persians may be described as a religion of observance. Inasmuch as, in the old Avesta (q. v.), the sacred book of the Persians, the war between the good god Ormuzd and the Devil ends eschatologically with the complete victory of the good god, we may designate the earliest Parseeism as Monotheism. However, the theological Dualism taught in the later Avesta, where the wicked anti-god Ahriman is opposed to the good god Ormuzd as an absolute principle, is already foreshadowed and prepared for in many didactic poems (gâthas) of the old Avesta. Sacrifice and prayer are intended to paralyze the diabolical machinations of Ahriman and his demons. The central feature of the Avestic divine service was the worship of fire, a worship, however, unconnected with special fire-temples. Like the modern Mobeds in India, the priests carried portable altars with them, and could thus offer sacrifice everywhere. Special fire-temples were, however, early erected, in which five times daily the priests entered the sacred fire-chamber to tend the fire in a metal vessel, usually fed with odoriferous wood. In a roomy antechamber the intoxicating haoma (the counterpart of the Indian soma drink) was brewed, the holy water prepared, and the sacrifice of flesh (myazda) and cakes (darun) offered to the gods. The precious haoma, the drink of immortality, not only conduced in the case of mankind to eternal life, but was likewise a drink for the gods themselves. In the later Avesta this drink, originally only a medium of cult, was formally deified, and identified with the divinity; nay even the very vessels used in the fabrication of this drink from the haoma branches were celebrated and adored in hymns of praise. Worthy of mention also are the sacrificial twigs (baresman, later barsom), which were used as praying twigs or magical wands and solemnly stretched out in the hand. After the reduction of the kingdom of the Sassanids by the Arabians (A. D. 642) the Persian religion was doomed to decay, and the vast majority of its followers fell away into Islamism. Besides some small remnants in modern Persia, large communities still exist on the west coast of India, in Guzerat and Bombay, whither many Parsees then immigrated. (3) Among the Greeks The universal religion of ancient Greece was a glad and joyous Polytheism most closely connected with civic life. Even the ancient Amphictyonic Council was a confederacy of states with the object of maintaining in common a certain shrine. The object of the religious functions, which consisted in prayer, sacrifice, and votive offerings, was the winning of the favour and assistance of the gods, which were always received with feelings of awe and gratitude. The sacrificial offerings, bloody and unbloody, were generally taken from articles of human food; to the gods above pastry, sacrificial cakes, pap, fruits, and wine were offered, but to the nether gods, cakes of honey and, as a drink, a mixture of milk, honey, and water. The sacrificial consecration often consisted merely in the exposition of the foods in pots on the roadsides or on the funeral mounds with the idea of entertaining the gods or the dead. Usually a portion was retained wherewith to solemnize a sacrificial feast in union with the gods; of the sacrifices to the nether gods in Hades, however, nothing was retained. Great banquets of the gods (theoxenia) were well known to the Greeks as were the Leotisternia to the Romans. As a rule, however, the sacrifices were burned on the altar, at times as holocausts. Incense was added as a subsidiary offering with most sacrifices, although there were also special offerings of incense. The offerer of sacrifice wore clean clothes and chaplets around his head, sprinkled his hands and the altar with holy water, and strewed with solemn prayers sacrificial meal over the heads of the victims (pigs, goats, and cocks). Flutes were played while the victim was being slain, and the blood was allowed to drop through holes into the sacrificial trenches. The meritoriousness of the sacrifice was regarded as to a great extent dependent on its costliness. The horns of the victims were gilded, and on great festivals whole hecatombs were slain; sacrifices of twelve, and especially of three victims (trittues) were the most usual. In times of great affliction human sacrifices were offered even down to the historical era. The sacrifice was the centre of the Greek cult, and no meal was partaken of until a libation of the wine about to be consumed was poured out to the gods. Among the characteristic peculiarities of the Greek religion may be mentioned the votive offerings (anathemata), which (besides firstlings, tithes, votive tablets, and objects of value) consisted chiefly of chaplets, cauldrons, and the popular tripods (tripodes). The number of the votive offerings, which were frequently hung up on the sacred oaks, grew in time so immeasurably that various states erected their special treasuries at Olympia and Delphi. (4) Among the Romans To a still greater extent than among the Greeks was religion and the whole sacrificial system a business of the state among the ancient Romans. Furthermore, no other people of antiquity developed Polytheism to such extremes. Peopling the world with gods, genii, and lares, they placed almost every action and condition under a specially-conceived deity (god or goddess). The calendar prepared by the pontifices gave the Romans detailed information as to how they should conduct themselves with respect to the gods throughout the year. The object of sacrifice was to win the favour of the gods and to ward off their sinister influence. Sacrifices of atonement (piacula) for perpetrated crimes and past errors were also scheduled. In the earliest times the ancient Indo-Germanic sacrifice of the horse, and also sacrifices of sheep, pigs, and oxen were known. That human sacrifices must have been once usual may be concluded from certain customs of a later period (e. g. from the projection of straw puppets into the Tiber and the hanging of woollen puppets at the crossways and on the doors of the houses). Under the empire various foreign cults were introduced, such as the veneration of the Egyptian deities Isis and Osiris, the Syrian Astarte, the Phrygian goddess Cybele, etc. The Roman Pantheon united in peace the most incongruous deities from every land. Finally, however, no cult was so popular as that of the Indo-Iranian Light-god Mithra, to whom especially the soldiers and officials of the empire, even in such distant places as the Danube and the Rhine offered their sacrifices. In honour of the steer-killing Mithra the so-called taurobolia were introduced from the East; by taurobolium is meant the loathsome ceremony wherein the worshippers of Mithra let the warm blood of a just-slaughtered steer flow over their naked backs as they lay in a trench with the idea of attaining thereby not only physical strength, but also mental renewal and regeneration. (5) Among the Chinese The religion of the Chinese, a peculiar mixture of nature and ancestor-worship, is indissolubly connected with the constitution of the state. The oldest Sinism was a perfect Monotheism. However, we are best acquainted with the Chinese sacrificial system in the form which was given it by the great reformer, Confucius (sixth century before Christ), and which it has retained practically unaltered after more than two thousand years. As the "Son of Heaven" and the head of the State religion, the Emperor of China is also the high-priest who alone may offer sacrifice to heaven. The chief sacrifice takes place annually during the night of the winter solstice on the "altar of heaven" in the southern section of Peking. On the highest terrace of this altar stands a wooden table as the symbol of the soul of the god of heaven; there are in addition many other "soul tables" (of the sun, moon, stars, clouds, wind, etc.), including those of the ten immediate predecessors of the emperor. Before every table are set sacrificial offerings of soup, flesh, vegetables, etc. To the ancestors of the emperor, as well as to the sun and moon, a slaughtered ox is offered; to the planets and the stars a calf, a sheep, and a pig. Meanwhile, on a pyre to the south-east of the altar, a sacrifice of an ox lies ready to be burned to the highest god of heaven. While the ox is being consumed, the emperor offers to the soul-table of heaven and the tables of his predecessors a staff of incense, silk, and some meat broth. After the performance of these ceremonies, all the articles of sacrifice are brought to special furnaces and there consumed. Similarly the emperor sacrifices to the earth at the northern wall of Peking, the sacrificial gifts being in this case not burned, but buried. The gods of the soil and of corn, as well as the ancestors of the emperor, have also their special places and days of sacrifice. Throughout the empire the emperor is represented in the sacrifices by his state officials. In the classical book of ritual, "Li-ki", it is expressly stated: "The son of heaven sacrifices to the heaven and the earth; the vassals to the gods of the soil and of corn." Besides the chief sacrifices, there are a number of others of the second or third rank, which are usually performed by state officials. The popular religion with its innumerable images, which have their special temples, is undisguised idolatry. (6) Among the Egyptians The ancient religion of the Egyptians, with its highly developed priesthood and its equally extensive sacrificial system, marks the transition to the religion of the Semites. The Egyptian temple contained a dark chapel with the image of the deity; before it was a pillared hall, (hypostyle) faintly lit by a small window under the roof, and before this hall a spacious court-yard, enclosed by a circular series of pillars. The ground-plan proves that the temple was not used either for assemblies of the people or as the residence of the priests, but was intended solely for the preservation of the images of the gods, the treasures, and the sacred vessels. To the sanctuary proper only the priests and the king were admitted. The sacrifices were offered in the great court-yard, where also the highly popular processions, in which the images of the gods were borne in a ship, took place. The rites of the daily service of the temple, the movements, words, and prayers of the officiating priest, were all regulated down to the smallest detail. The image of the god was entertained daily with food and drink, which were placed on the sacrificial table. At the laying of the foundation-stone of a new temple human sacrifices were offered, being abolished only in the era of the Ramassides; a trace of this repulsive custom survived in the later ceremony of impressing on the sacrificial victim a seal bearing the image of a man in chains with a knife in his throat. To the favourite god of the Egyptians, Ammon-Râ, the rulers of the New Empire made such extraordinarily numerous and costly votive offerings that the state became almost bankrupt. The Egyptian religion, which finally developed into abominable bestiolatry, fell into decay with the destruction of the Serapeum in Alexandria by the Eastern Emperor, Theodosius I (391). (7) Among the Semites Among the Semites the Babylonians and Assyrians deserve first mention. The Babylonian temple contained in the sanctuary the image of the god to whom it was consecrated, and in adjoining chambers or chapels the images of the other gods. The Babylonian priests were a private caste, the mediators between the gods and man, the guardians of the sacred literature, and the teachers of the sciences. In Assyria, on the other hand, the king was the high-priest, and offered up sacrifice. According to the Babylonian idea, sacrifice (libations, offerings of foods, bloody sacrifices) is the due tribute of mankind to the gods, and is as old as the world; sacrifices are the banquets of the gods, and the smoke of the offerings is for them a fragrant odour; a joyous sacrificial banquet unites the sacrificers with their divine guests. Both burnt and aromatic offerings were common to the Babylonians and the Assyrians. The sacrificial gifts included wild and tame animals, fowl, fish, fruit, curds, honey, and oil. Sacrificial animals were usually of the male sex; they had to be without defects, strong and fat, for only the unblemished is worthy of the gods. Only in the rite of purification were female animals allowed, and only in the lesser ceremonies defective animals. The offering of bread on tables (showbread) was also usual. To the sacrifices was attributed a purifying and atoning force, and the idea of substitution, the sacrificial victim being substituted for man, was clearly expressed. In the Babylonian penitential psalms especially, the deep consciousness of sin and guilt often finds touching expression. Men were slain only with lamentations for the dead. The demonstration that the Chanaanites originally came from Arabia (that ancient home of the races) to Palestine, and there disseminated the culture of the ancient Arabians, is an achievement of modern investigators. While the Babylonian religion was governed by the course of the stars (astrology), the spiritual horizon of the Chanaanites was fixed by the periodical changes of dying and reawakening nature, and thus depended secondarily on the vivifying influence of the stars, especially of the sun and the moon. Wherever the force of nature revealed evidence of life, there the deity had his seat. At fountains and rivers temples arose, because water brings life and drought, death. Feeling themselves nearest to the deity on mountains, hill-worship (mentioned also in the Old Testament) was the most popular among the Chanaanites. On the height stood an altar with an oval opening, and around it was made a channel to carry off the blood of the sacrificial victim. To the cruel god Moloch sacrifices of children were offered -- a horrible custom against which the Bible so sternly inveighs. The kindred cult of the Ph nicians originated in a low idea of the deity, which inclined towards gloominess, cruelty, and voluptuousness. We need only mention the worship of Baal and Astarte, Phallism and the sacrifice of chastity, the sacrifice of men and children, which the civilized Romans vainly strove to abolish. In their sacrificial system the Ph nicians had some points in common with the Israelites. The "sacrificial table of Marseilles", which, like the similar "sacrificial table of Carthage", was of Ph nician origin, mentions as sacrificial victims: steers, calves, stags, sheep, she-goats, lambs, he-goats, fawns, and fowl, tame and wild. Sick or emaciated animals were forbidden. The Ph nicians were also acquainted with holocausts (kalil), which were always supplicatory sacrifices and partial offerings, which might be sacrifices of either supplication or thanks. The chief efficacy of the sacrifice of men and animals was regarded as lying in the blood. When the victim was not entirely consumed, the sacrificers participated in a sacrificial banquet with music and dancing. II. JEWISH SACRIFICE (1) In General That many general ideas and rites, which are found in pagan religions, find their place also in the Jewish sacrificial system, should excite as little surprise as the fact that revealed religion in general does not reject at all natural religion and ethics, but rather adopts them in a higher form. The ethical purity and excellence of the Jewish sacrificial system is at once seen in the circumstance that the detestable human sacrifices are spurned in the official religion of Jahweh (cf. Deut., xii, 31; xviii, 10). Abraham's trial (Gen. xxii 1 sqq.) ended with the prohibition of the slaying of Isaac, God ordering instead the sacrifice of the ram caught in the briers. Among the Children of Israel human sacrifice meant the profanation of Jahweh's name (Lev., xx, 1 sqq., etc.). The later prophets also raised their mighty voices against the disgraceful service of Moloch with its sacrifice of children. It is true that the baneful influence of pagan environment won the upper hand from the time of King Achaz to that of Josias to such an extent that in the ill-omened Valley of Hinnom near Jerusalem thousands of innocent children were sacrificed to Moloch. To this infectious pagan example, not to the spirit of the religion of Jahweh, is also to be referred the sacrifice which Jephte, in consequence of his vow, reluctantly performed by slaying his own daughter (Judges, xi, 1 sqq.). The assertion of many investigators (Ghilany, Daumer, Vatke) that even in the legitimate service of Jahweh human sacrifices occurred, is historically untenable; for, though the Mosaic Law contained the provision that, not only the firstlings of beasts and Fruits, but also the firstborn of men were due to Jahweh, it was expressly provided that these latter should be redeemed, not sacrificed. The offering of the blood of an animal instead of a human life originated in the profound idea of substitution, and has its justification in the prophetical metaphorical references to the unique vicarious sacrifice offered by Christ on Golgotha. The Israelitic blood vengeance (cherem), in accordance with which impious enemies and things were utterly exterminated (cf. Jos., vi, 21 sqq.; 1 kings, xv, 15, etc.), had absolutely nothing to do with human sacrifice. The idea of the blood vengeance originated, not as in various pagan religions in the thirst of God for human blood, but in the principle that the powers hostile to God should be removed by a bloody chastisement from the path of the Lord of life and death. The accursed were not sacrificed but removed from the face of the earth. According to Jewish tradition, sacrifice in its bloody and its unbloody form extends back to the beginning of the human race. The first and oldest sacrifice mentioned in the Bible is that of Cain and Abel (Gen. iv, 3 sq.). With sacrifice an altar was associated (Gen., xii, 7 sq.). Even in patriarchal times we meet also the sacrificial meal, especially in connexion with treaties and the conclusion of peace. The conclusion of the covenant at Mount Sinai was also effected under the auspices of a solemn sacrifice and banquet (Ex., xxiv., 5 sqq.). Subsequently Moses, as the envoy of Jahweh, elaborated the whole sacrificial system, and in the Pentateuch fixed with most scrupulous exactness the various kinds of sacrifice and their ritual. Like the whole Mosaic cult, the sacrificial system is governed by the one central idea, peculiar to the religion of Jahweh: "Be holy because I am holy" (Lev., xi, 44). (2) Material of the Sacrifices The general name for Jewish sacrifice was originally minchah (anaphora, donum), afterwards the special technical term for the unbloody food-offering. To the latter was opposed the bloody sacrifice (thysia, victima). According to the method of offering, sacrifices were known as korban ("bringing near") or 'õlah ("ascending"), the latter term being used especially of the holocaust (q.v.). The material of the bloody sacrifice must be taken from the personal possessions of the offerer, and must belong to the category of clean animals. Thus, on the one hand, only domestic animals (oxen, sheep, goats) from the stock of the sacrificer were allowed (Lev., xxii, 19 sqq.), and hence neither fish nor wild animals; on the other hand, all unclean animals (e. g. dogs, pigs, asses, camels) were excluded, even though they were domestic animals. Doves were about the only sort of birds that could be used. The substitution of turtle doves or young pigeons for the larger animals was allowed to the poor (Lev., v, 7; xii, 8). Concerning the sex, age, and physical condition of the animals there were also exact precepts; as a rule, they had to be free from defect, since only the best were fit for Jahweh (Lev., xxii, 20 sqq.; Mal., i, 13 sq.). The material of the unbloody sacrifices (usually additions to the bloody sacrifice or subsidiary sacrifices) was chosen from either the solid or the liquid articles of human food. The fragrant incense, the symbol of prayer ascending to God, was an exception. The sacrifice of solids (minchah) consisted partly of toasted ears of corn (or shelled grain) together with oil and incense (Lev., ii, 14 sqq.), partly of the finest wheaten flour with the same additional gifts (Lev., ii, 1 sqq.), and partly of unleavened bread (Lev., ii, 4 sqq.). Since not only leaven, but also honey produced fermentation in bread, which suggests rottenness, the use of honey was also forbidden (Lev., ii, 11; cf. 1 Cor., v, 6 sqq.). Only the bread of the first fruits, which was offered on the feast of Pentecost, and the bread added to many sacrifices of praise were leavened, and these might not be brought to the altar, but belonged to the priests (Lev., ii, 4 sqq.; vii, 13 sq., etc.). On the other hand salt was regarded as a means of purification and preservation, and was prescribed as a seasoning for all food-offerings prepared from corn (Lev., ii, 13). Consequently, among the natural productions supplied to the (later)Temple, was a vast quantity of salt, which, as "salt of Sodom" was usually obtained from the Dead Sea, and stored up in a special salt chamber (Esd., vi, 9; vii, 22; Josephus, "Antiquities", XII, iii, 3). As an integral portion of the food-offering we always find the libation (spondeion, libamen), which is never offered independently. Oil and wine were the only liquids used (cf. Gen., xxviii, 18; xxxv, 14; Num., xxviii, 7,14): the oil was used partly in the preparation of the bread, and partly burned with the other gifts on the altar; the wine was poured out before the altar. Libations of milk, such as those of the Arabs and the Ph nicians, do not occur in the Mosaic Law. The fact that, in addition to the subsidiary sacrifices, unbloody sacrifices were also customary, has been unjustifiably contested by some Protestants in their polemics against the Sacrifice of the Mass, of which the sacrifices of food and drink were the prototypes. Passing over the oldest sacrifices of this kind in the case of Cain and Abel (see MASS, SACRIFICE OF THE), the Mosaic cult recognized the following independent sacrifices in the sanctuary: (a) the offering of bread and wine on the showbread table; (b) the incense offering on the altar of incense; (c) the light offering in the burning lamps of the golden candle-stick. And in the outer court: (d) the daily minchah of the high-priest, which, like every other priestly minchah, had to be entirely consumed as a holocaust (Lev.,vi, 20 sqq. cf. Josephus, "Antiquit.", III, x, 7); (e) the bread of the first fruits on the second day of the Pasch; (f) the bread of the first fruits on the feast of Pentecost. Of the independent unbloody sacrifices at least a portion was always burnt as a memorial (askara, memoriale) for Jahweh; the rest belonged to the priests, who consumed it as sacred food in the outer court (Lev., ii, 9 sq.; v, 12 sq.; vi, 16). (3) The Rites of the Bloody Sacriflce The ritual of the bloody sacrifice is of special importance for the deeper knowledge of Jewish sacrifice. Despite other differences, five actions were common to all the categories: the bringing forward of the victim, the imposition of hands, the slaying, the sprinkling of the blood, and the burning. The first was the leading of the victim to the altar of burnt sacrifices in the outer court of the tabernacle (or of the Temple) "before the Lord" (Ex., xxix, 42; Lev., i, 5; iii, 1; iv, 6). Then followed on the north side of the altar the imposition of hands (or, more accurately, the resting of hands on the head of the victim), by which significant gesture the sacrificer transferred to the victim his personal intention of adoration, thanksgiving, petition, and especially of atonement, If sacrifice was about to be offered for the whole community, the ancients, as the representatives of the people, performed the ceremony of the imposition of hands (Lev., iv, 15). This ceremony was omitted in the case of certain sacrifices (first fruits, tithes, the paschal lamb, doves) and in the case of bloody sacrifices performed at the instance of pagans. From the time of Alexander the Great the offering of burnt sacrifices even by Gentiles was permitted in recognition of the supremacy of foreign rulers; thus, the Roman Emperor Augustus required a daily burnt offering of two lambs and a steer in the Temple (cf. Philo, "Leg. ad Caj.," 10; Josephus, "Contra Ap.", II, vi). The withdrawal of this permission at the beginning of the Jewish War was regarded as a public rebellion against the Roman rule (cf. Josephus, "De bello jud.", II, xvii, 2). The ceremony of the imposition of hands was usually preceded by a confession of sins (Lev., xvi, 21; v, 5 sq.; Num., v, 6 sq.), which, according to Rabbinic tradition, was verbal (cf. Otho, "Lex rabbin.", 552). The third act or the slaying, which effects as speedy and complete a shedding of the blood as possible by a deep cut into the throat, had also, like the leading forward and the imposition of hands, to be performed by the sacrificer himself (Lev., i, 3 sqq.); only in the case of the offering of doves did the priest perform the slaying (Lev., i, 15). In later times, however, the slaying, skinning, and dismemberment of the larger animals were undertaken by the priests and Levites, especially when the whole people were to offer sacrifice for themselves on great festivals (II Par., xxix, 22 sqq.). The real sacrificial function began with the fourth act, the sprinkling of blood by the priest, which, according to the Law, pertained to him alone (Lev., i, 5; iii, 2; iv, 5; II Par., xxix, 23, etc.). If a layman undertook the blood-sprinkling, the sacrifice was invalid (cf. Mischna Sebachim, II, 1). The oblation of the blood on the altar by the priest thus formed the real essence of the bloody sacrifice. This idea was indeed universal, for "everywhere from China to Ireland the blood is the chief thing, the centre of the sacrifice; in the blood lies its power" (Bähr, "Symbolik des mosaischen Kultus", II, Heidelberg, 1839, p. 62). That the act of slaying or the destruction of the victim was not the chief element, is evident from the precept that the sacrificers themselves, who were not priests, had to care for the slaying. Jewish tradition also expressly designated the priestly sprinkling of the blood on the altar as "the root and principle of the sacrifice". The explanation is given in Lev., xvii, 10 sq.: "If any man whosoever of the house of Israel, and of the strangers that sojourn among them, eat blood, I will set my face against his soul an will cut him off from among his people: Because the life of the flesh is in the blood: and I have given it to you, that you may make atonement with it upon the altar for your souls, and the blood may be for an expiation of the soul." Here the blood of the victim is declared in the clearest terms to be the means of propitiation, and the propitiation itself is associated with the application of the blood on the altar. But the propitiation for the guilt-laden soul is accomplished by the blood only in virtue of the life contained in it, which belongs to the Lord of death and life. Hence the strict prohibition of the "eating" of blood under penalty of being cut off from among the people. But inasmuch as the blood, since it bears the life of the victim, represents or symbolizes the soul or life of man, the idea of substitution finds clear expression in the sprinkling of the blood, just as it has been already expressed in the imposition of hands. But the blood obtained by the slaying exerts its expiatory power first on the altar, where the soul of the victim symbolically laden with sin comes into contact with the purifying and sanctifying power of God. The technical term for the reconciliation and remission of sin is kipper "to expiate" (Piel from the word meaning "to cover"), a verb which is connected rather with the Assyrian kuppuru (wipe off, destroy) than with the Arabic "to cover, cover up". The fifth and last act, the burning, was performed differently, according as the whole victim (holocaust) or only certain portions of it were to be consumed by fire. By the altar and the "consuming fire" (Deut., iv, 24) Jahweh symbolically appropriated, as through His Divine mouth, the sacrifices offered; this was strikingly manifested in the sacrifices of Aaron, Gedeon, and Elias (cf. Lev., ix, 24; Judges, vi, 21; III Kings, xviii, 38). (4) Different Categories of the Bloody Sacrifices (a) Among the various classes of bloody sacrifice, the burnt offering takes the first place. It is called both the "ascent sacrifice" ('õlah) and the "holocaust" (kâlil); Sept. holokautoma; in Philo, holokauston), because the whole victim -- with the exception of the hip muscle and the hide -- is made through fire to ascend to God in smoke and vapour (see HOLOCAUST). Although the idea of expiation was not excluded (Lev., i, 4), it retired somewhat into the background, since in the complete destruction of the victim by fire the absolute submission of man to God was to find expression. The holocaust is indeed the oldest, most frequent, and most widespread sacrifice (cf. Gen., iv, 4; viii, 20; xxii, 2 sqq.; Job., i, 5; xlii, 8). As the "ever enduring" sacrifice, it had to be offered twice daily, in the morning and in the evening (cf. Ex., xxix, 38 sqq.; Lev., vi, 9 sqq.; Num., xxviii, 3 sqq., etc.). As the sacrifice of adoration par excellence, it included in itself all other species of sacrifice. [Concerning the altar, see ALTAR (IN SCRIPTURE).] (b) The idea of expiation received especially forcible expression in the expiatory sacrifices, of which two classes were distinguished, the sin and the guilt-offering. The distinction between these lies in the fact that the former was concerned rather with the absolution of the person from sin (expiatio), the latter rather with the making of satisfaction for the injury done (satisfactio). Turning first to the sin-offering (sacrificium pro peccato, chattath), we find that, according to the Law, not all ethical delinquencies could be expiated by it. Excluded from expiation were all deliberate crimes or "sins with raised hand", which involved a breech of the covenant and drew upon the transgressor as punishment ejection from among the people because he had "been rebellious against the Lord" (Num., xv, 30 sq.). To such sins belonged the omission of circumcision (Gen., xvii, 14), the desecration of the Sabbath (Ex., xxxi, 14), the blaspheming of Jahweh (Lev., xxiv, 16), failure to celebrate the Pasch (Num., ix, 2 sqq.), the "eating of blood" (Lev., vii, 26 sq.), working or failure to fast on the Day of Atonement (Lev., xxiii, 21). Expiation availed only for misdeeds committed through ignorance, forgetfulness, or hastiness. The rites were determined not so much by the kind and gravity of the transgressions as by the quality of the persons for whom the sacrifice of expiation was to be offered. Thus, for the faults of the high-priest or the whole people a calf was prescribed (Lev., iv, 3; xvi, 3); for those of the prince of a tribe (Lev., iv, 23), as well as on certain festivals, a he-goat; for those of the ordinary Israelites, a she-goat or ewe lamb (Lev., iv, 28; v, 6); for purification after child-birth and certain other legal uncleannesses, turtle doves or young pigeons (Lev., xii, 6; xv, 14, 29). The last-mentioned might also be used by the poor as the substitute for one of the small cattle (Lev., v, 7; xiv, 22). The very poor, who were unable to offer even doves, might in the case of ordinary transgressions sacrifice the tenth of an ephi of flour, but without oil or incense (Lev., v, 11 sqq.). The manner of the application of the blood was different according to the various degrees of sin, and consisted, not in the mere sprinkling of the blood, but in rubbing it on the horns of the altar for burnt-offerings or the incense altar, after which the remainder of the blood was poured out at the foot of the altar. Concerning the details of this ceremony the handbooks of Biblical archæology should be consulted. The usual and best sacrificial portions of the victims (pieces of fat, kidneys, lobes of the liver) were then burned on the altar of burnt-offerings, and the remainder of the victim eaten by the priests as sacred food in the outer court of the sanctuary (Lev., vi, 18 sq.). Should any of the blood have been brought into the sanctuary, the flesh had to be brought to the ash-heap and there likewise burned (Lev., iv, 1 sqq.; vi, 24 sqq.), The guilt-offering (sacrificium pro delicto, asham) was specially appointed for sins and transgressions demanding restitution, whether the material interests of the sanctuary or those of private persons were injured -- e.g. by misappropriating gifts to the sanctuary, defrauding one's neighbour, retaining the property of another, etc. (cf. Lev., v, 15 sqq.; vi, 2 sq.; Num., v, 6 sqq.), The material restitution was reckoned at one-fifth higher than the loss inflicted (six fifths had thus to be paid). In addition, a guilt-sacrifice had to be offered, consisting of a ram sacrificed at the north side of the altar. The blood was sprinkled in a circle around the altar, on which the fatty portions were burnt; the rest of the flesh as sacrosanct was eaten by the priests in the holy place (Lev., vii, 1 sqq.). (c) The third class of bloody sacrifice embraced the "peace offerings" (victima pacifica, shelamim), which were sub-divided into three classes: the sacrifice of thanks or praise, the sacrifice in fulfilment of a vow, and entirely voluntary offerings. The peace sacrifices in general were distinguished by two characteristics: (i) the remarkable ceremony of "wave" and "heave"; (ii) the communal sacrificial meal held in connexion with them. All animals allowed for sacrifice (even female) might be used and, in the case of entirely "voluntary sacrifices", even such animals as were not quite without defects (Lev., xxii, 23). Until the act of sprinkling the blood the rites were the same as in the burnt-sacrifice, except that the slaying did not necessarily take place at the north side of the altar (Lev., iii, 1 sqq.; vii, 11 sqq.). The usual portions of fat had, as in the case of the sacrifice of expiation, to be burned on the altar. In the cutting up of the victim, however, the breast and the right shoulder (Sept. brachion; Vulg. armus) had to be first separately severed, and the ceremony of "wave" (tenupha) and "heave" (teruma) performed with them. According to Talmudic tradition the "wave" was performed as follows: the priest placed the breast of the victim on the hands of the offerer, and then, having placed his own hands under those of this person, moved them backward and forward in token of the reciprocity in giving and receiving between God and the offerer. With the right shoulder the same ceremony was then performed, except that the "heave" or "teruma" consisted in an upward and downward movement. The breast and shoulder used in these ceremonies fell to the share of the priests, who might consume them in a "clean place" (Lev., x, 14). They also received a loaf from the supplementary food-offering (Lev., vii, 14). The offerer assembled his friends at a common meal on the same day to consume in the vicinity of the sanctuary the flesh remaining after the sacrifice. Levitically clean guests, especially the Levites and the poor, were admitted (Deut., xvi, 11; Lev., 19 sqq.), and wine was freely drunk at this meal. Whatever remained of a sacrifice of thanksgiving or praise had to be burned on the following day; only in the case of the vowed and entirely voluntary sacrifices might the remainder be eaten on the second succeeding day, but all that thereafter remained had to be burned on the third day (Lev., vii, 15 sqq.; xix, 6 sqq.). The idea of the peace-offering centres in the Divine friendship and the participation at the Divine table, inasmuch as the offerers, as guests and table-companions, participated in a certain manner in the sacrifice to the Lord. But, on account of this Divine friendship, when all three classes of sacrifice were combined, the sacrifice of expiation usually preceded the burnt-offering, and the latter the peace-offering. In addition to the periodical sacrifices just described, the Mosaic Law recognized other extraordinary sacrifices, which must at least be mentioned. To these belong the sacrifice offered but once on the occasion of the conclusion of the Sinaitic covenant (Ex., xxiv, 4 sqq.), those occurring at the consecration of the priests and Levites (Ex., xxix, 1 sqq.; Lev., viii; Num., viii, 5 sqq.) and certain occasional sacrifices, such as the sacrifice of purification of a healed leper (Lev., xiv, 1 sqq.), the sacrifice of the red cow (Num., xix, 1 sqq.), the sacrifice of jealousy (Num., v, 12 sqq.), and the sacrifice of the Nazirites (Num., vi, 9 sqq.). On account of its extraordinary character one might include the yearly sacrifice of the paschal lamb (Ex., xii, 3 sqq.; Deut., xvi, 1 sqq.) and that of the two he-goats on the Day of Atonement (Lev., xvi, 1 sqq.) among this class. With the appearance of the Messias, the entire Mosaic sacrificial system was, according to the view of the Rabbis, to come to an end, as in fact it did after the destruction of the Temple by Titus (A. D. 70). Concerning the sacrificial persons see PRIESTHOOD. (5) Modern Criticism A detailed examination of modern criticism concerning Jewish sacrifice cannot be attempted here, since the discussion involves the whole Pentateuch problem (see PENTATEUCH). What is called the "Graf-Wellhausen hypothesis" denies that the ritual legislation in the Pentateuch comes from Moses. It is claimed that the setting down of the sacrificial legislation first began in the exilic period. From the time of Moses to the Babylonian Captivity sacrifice was offered freely and without any legal compulsion, and always in connexion with a joyous sacrificial meal. The strict forms of the minutely-prescribed sacrificial rite were first established by the Priest's Code (=P), Divine authority being afterwards claimed for them by artificially projecting them into the Mosaic era. Even during the time of the Great Prophets nothing was known of a Mosaic sacrificial thora, as is proved by their disparaging remarks Concerning the worthlessness of sacrifice (cf. Is., i, 11 sqq.; Jer., vi, 19 sq.; Amos, v, 21 sqq.; Osee, viii, 11 sqq., etc.). With Ezechiel, however, a change is visible, the ritual forms of sacrifice being highly cherished as a Divine law. But it is impossible to refer this law to Moses. We may briefly reply that the disparaging statements of the pre-exilic Prophets are no proof for the assertion that in their time there was no sacrificial law regarded as Mosaic. Like the Psalms (xl, 7 sqq.; l, 8 sqq.; lxix, 31 sq.), the Prophets emphasized only the ancient and venerable truth that Jahweh valued most highly the interior sacrifice of obedience, and rejected as worthless purely external acts without pious dispositions. He demanded of Cain the right sentiment of sacrifice (cf. Gen iv 4 sq.), and proclaimed through Samuel: "Obedience is better than sacrifices" (I Kings, xv, 22). This requirement of ethical dispositions is not equivalent to the rejection of external sacrifice. Nor can one accept the statement that Moses did not legally regulate the Jewish sacrificial system. How otherwise could he have been regarded among the Jews as the God-appointed founder of the religion of Jahweh, which is inconceivable without Divine service and sacrifice? That during the centuries after Moses the sacrificial cult underwent an internal and external development, which reached its climax in the extant priest's code, is a natural and intelligible assumption, indications of which appear in the Pentateuch itself. The whole reorganization of the cult by the Prophet Ezechiel shows that Jahweh always stood above the letter of the law, and that he was nowise bound to maintain in unalterable rigidity the olden regulations. But the changes and deviations in Ezechiel are not of such magnitude as to justify the view that not even the foundation of the sacrificial code originated with Moses. The further statement that a sacrificial meal was regularly connected with the ancient sacrifices, is an unjustifiable generalization. For the burnt-offering (holocaustum, 'õlah), with which no meal was associated, belonged to the most ancient sacrifices (cf. Gen., viii, 20), and is at least as old as the peace-offering (shelamim), which always terminated with a meal. Again, it is antecedently at least improbable that the older sacrifices always had, as is asserted, a gay and joyous character, since the need of expiation was not less, but rather more seriously felt by the Israelites than by the pagan nations of antiquity. Where there was a consciousness of sin, there must also have been anxiety for expiation. III. CHRISTIAN SACRIFICE Christianity knows but one sacrifice, the sacrifice which was once offered by Christ in a bloody manner on the tree of the Cross. But in order to apply to individual men in sacrificial form though a constant sacrifice the merits of redemption definitively won by the sacrifice of the Cross, the Redeemer Himself instituted the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass to be an unbloody continuation and representation of the bloody sacrifice of Calvary. Concerning this eucharistic sacrifice and its relation to the sacrifice on the Cross, see the article MASS. In view of the central position which the sacrifice of the Cross holds in the whole economy of salvation, we must briefly discuss the reality of this sacrifice. (1) The Dogma of the Sacrifice of the Cross The universal conviction of Christianity was expressed by the Synod of Ephesus (431), when it declared that the Incarnate Logos "offered Himself to God the Father for us for an odour of sweetness" (in Denzinger-Bannwart, "Enchiridion," n. 122), a dogma explicitly confirmed by the Council of Trent (Sess. XXII. cap. i-ii; can. ii-iv). The dogma is indeed nothing else than a clear echo of Holy Writ and tradition. If all the sacrifices of the Old Testament, and especially the bloody sacrifice, were so many types of the bloody sacrifice of the Cross (Cf. Heb., viii-x), and if the idea of vicarious atonement was present in the Mosaic bloody sacrifices, it follows immediately that the death on the Cross, as the antitype, must possess the character of a vicarious sacrifice of atonement. A striking confirmation of this reasoning is found in the pericope of Isaias concerning God's "just servant," wherein three truths are clearly expressed: (a) the substitution of the innocent Messias for guilty mankind; (b) the deliverance of the guilty from sin and punishment through the suffering of the Messias; (c) the manner of this suffering and satisfaction through the bloody death on the Cross (cf. Is., liii, 4 sqq.). The Messianity of the passage, which was unjustifiably contested by the Socinians and Rationalists, is proved by the express testimony of the New Testament (cf. Matt., viii, 17; Mark, xv, 28; Luke, xxii, 37; Acts, viii, 28 sqq.; 1 Peter. ii, 22 sqq.). The prophecy found its fulfilment in Christ. For, although His whole life was a continuous sacrifice, yet the sacrifice culminated in His bloody death on the Cross, as He Himself says: "He came to give His life a redemption for many" (Matt. xx, 28). Three factors are here emphasized: sacrifice, vicarious offering, and expiation. The phrase, "to give his life" (dounai ten psychen), is, as numerous parallel passages attest, a Biblical expression for sacrifice; the words, "for many" (anti pollon), express the idea of vicarious sacrifice, while the term, "redemption" (lytron), declares the object of the expiation (cf. Eph., v, 2; II Cor., v, 21). Rationalism (Socinus, Ritschl) seeks in vain to deny that St. Paul had this idea of vicarious expiation on the ground that the expression anti pollon (in the place of many) is foreign to him. For, apart from the fact that he clearly expresses in other terms the idea of substitution (cf. IL Cor., v, 15; Gal., iii, 13), his phrase "for many" (hyper pollon instead of anti pollon), taken in connexion with the idea of sacrifice current in his writings, bears the pregnant meaning "instead of many," not merely "for the advantage of many". This is clearly indicated by I Tim., ii, 6: "Who gave himself a redemption for all [antilytron hyper panton]." As in the Old Testament the expiatory power of the sacrifice lay in the blood of the victim, so also the expiation for the forgiveness of sins is ascribed to the "Blood of the New Testament" (see MASS, SACRIFICE OF THE). There is thus nothing more precious than the Blood of Christ: ". . . you were not redeemed with corruptible things as gold and silver . . . ., but with the precious blood of Christ, as of a lamb unspotted and undefiled" (I Peter, i, 18 sq.). While the foregoing considerations refute the assertion of modern "critics" that the expiatory sacrifice of Christ was first introduced by Paul into the Gospel, it is still true that the bloody sacrifice of the Cross occupied the central position in the Pauline preaching. He speaks of the Redeemer as Him "whom God hath proposed to be a propitiation [hilasterion], through faith in his blood" (Rom., iii, 25). Referring to the types of the Old Testament, the Epistle to the Hebrews especially elaborates this idea: "For if the blood of goats and of oxen, and the ashes of a heifer being sprinkled, sanctify such as are defiled, to the cleansing of the flesh: how much more shall the blood of Christ who by the Holy Ghost offered himself unspotted unto God, cleanse our conscience from dead works" (Heb., ix, 13 sq.). With the multiplicity and variety, the inefficacy and inadequacy of the Mosaic bloody sacrifices is contrasted the uniqueness and efficacy of the sacrifice of the Cross for the forgiveness of sins (cf. Heb., ix, 28: "So also was Christ once [apax] offered to exhaust the sins of many"; x, 10: "In the which will we are sanctified by the oblation of the body [dia tes prosphoras tou somatos] of Jesus Christ once"). The bloody death on the Cross is specially characterized as a "sin offering": "But this man offering one sacrifice for sins [mian hyper amartion prosenegkas thysian], for ever sitteth on the right hand of God" (Heb., x, 12; cf. II Cor., v, 21). The "heavenly sacrifice" of Christ, the existence of which is assumed by Thalhofer, Zill, and Schoulza, cannot be deduced from the Epistle to the Hebrews. In heaven Christ no longer sacrifices Himself, but simply, through His "priestly intercession", offers the sacrifice of the Cross (Heb., vii, 25; cf. Rom., viii, 34). While the Apostolic Fathers and the apologist Justin Martyr merely repeat the Biblical doctrine of the sacrificial death of Christ, Irenæus was the first of the early Fathers to consider the sacrifice of the Cross from the standpoint of a "vicarious satisfaction" (satisfactio vicaria); this expression, however, did not come into frequent use in ecclesiastical writings during the first ten centuries. Irenæus emphasizes the fact that only a God-Man could wash away the guilt of Adam, that Christ actually redeemed mankind by His Blood and offered "His Soul for our souls and His Flesh for our flesh" (" Adv. hær.", V, i, 1, in P. G. VII, 1121). Though Irenæus bases the redemption primarily on the Incarnation, through which our vitiated nature was restored to its original holiness (" mystical interpretation" of the Greeks), he nevertheless ascribes in a special manner to the bitter Passion of the Saviour the same effects that he ascribes to the Incarnation: viz. the making of man like unto God, the forgiveness of sin, and the annihilation of death (Adv. hær., II, xx, 3; III, xviii, 8). It was not so much "under the influence of the Græco-Oriental mysteries of expiation" (Harnack) as in close association with Paul and the Mosaic sacrificial ritual, that Origen regarded the death on the Cross in the light of the vicarious sacrifice of expiation. But, since he maintained preferentially the Biblical view of the "ransom and redemption", he was the originator of the one-sided "old patristic theory of the redemption". Incidentally ("In Matt., xvi, 8," in P. G., XIII, 1397 sqq.) he makes the rash statement that the ransom rendered on the Cross was paid to the Devil -- a view which Gregory of Nyssa later systematized. This statement was, however, repudiated by Adamantius ("De recta in Deum fide", I, xxvii, in P. G., XI, 1756 sqq.) as "the height of blasphemous folly" (polle blasphemos anoia), and was positively rejected by Gregory of Nazianzus and John of Damascus. This repulsive theory never became general in the Church, although the idea of the supposed "rights of the Devil" (erroneously derived from John, xii, 31; xiv, 30; II Cor., iv, 4; II Peter, ii, 19) survived among some ecclesiastical writers even to the time of Bede and Peter Lombard. Whatever Origen and Gregory of Nyssa say of our ransom from the Evil One, they are both clear in their statements that Christ offers the sacrifice of expiation to the Heavenly Father and not to the Devil; the redemption from the slavery of the Devil is effected by Christ through His sacrifice on the Cross. As, according to Harnack's admission, the idea of vicarious expiation "is genuine among the Latins", we may easily dispense with the testimony of Latin patristic literature. While the Greek Church adhered to the old mystical conception in connexion with the theory of ransom, the doctrine of the Redemption received a further development in the "juristic theory of satisfaction" of St. Anselm of Canterbury ("Cur Deus homo" in P. L., CLVIII, 359 sqq.); this was freed of some crudities by St. Thomas Aquinas and deepened by the "ethical theory of reconciliation". A comprehensive theory, employing dialectically all the Biblical and patristic factors, is still a desideratum in speculative theology. (2) Theological Problems Other difficult questions concerning the sacrifice of the Cross have been already more successfully dealt with by theologians. On account of the remarkable and unique coincidence of the priest, victim, and acceptor of the sacrifice, a first question arises as to whether Christ was victim and priest according to His Divine or according to His human nature. On the basis of the dogma of the hypostatic union the only answer is: although the God-Man or the Logos Himself was at once both priest and victim, He was both, not according to His Divine nature, but through the function of His humanity. For, since the Divine nature was absolutely incapable of suffering, it was no more possible for Christ to act as priest according to His Divine nature, than it was for God the Father or the Holy Ghost. As regards the relation between the priest and the acceptor, it is usually stated in explanation that Christ acts only as sacrificing priest, and that God the Father alone receives the sacrifice. This view is false. Even though God the Father is mentioned as the only acceptor by the Council of Trent (Sess. XXII, cap. i), this is merely an appropriation, which excludes neither the Son nor the Holy Ghost in the matter of acceptance. The acceptor of the sacrifice of the Cross is thus the offended God, or the whole Trinity, to which Christ as Logos and Son of God also belongs. One must, however, distinguish between the Divinity and the Humanity of Christ and say: while Christ as God, together with the Father and the Holy Ghost accepted His own sacrifice in expiation of the offended Deity, He offered this same sacrifice as Man vicariously to the Blessed Trinity. While this coincidence of the three functions of priest, victim, and acceptor in the same Christ may constitute a mystery, it yet contains no contradiction (cf. Augustine, "De civ. Dei", X, xx). A third problem of great importance concerns the nature of the actio sacrifica in the sacrifice of the Cross. Did the sacrificial act consist in the slaying of Christ on the Cross? This question must be answered with a decided negative; otherwise one would have to say that the function of high-priest at the sacrifice of the Cross was exercised, not by Christ, but by his torturers and their myrmidons, the Roman soldiers. In the Mosaic sacrifices also the essence of the sacrifice lay, not in the actual slaying of the victim, but in the letting, or rather in the sprinkling, of the blood. Consequently, the sacrifice of the Cross, at which Christ functions as sole priest, must likewise be referred to the free offering of His blood for us men, inasmuch as the Redeemer, while outwardly submitting to the forcible shedding of His blood by His executioners, simultaneously offered it to God in the spirit of sacrifice (cf. John, x, 17 sq.; Heb., ix, 22; I Peter, 1, 2). IV. THEORY OF SACRIFICE In view of the comprehensive historical material which we have gathered both from pagan practice and from the religions Divinely revealed, it is now possible to essay a scientific theory of sacrifice, the chief lines being drawn naturally from the Jewish and Christian sacrificial systems. ( 1) Universality of Sacrifice One of the specially characteristic features which the history of religions places before us is the wide diffusion, even the universality, of sacrifice among the human race. It is true that Andrew Lang ("The Making of a Religion", London, 1899) maintains the improbable view that originally the supreme, majestic, and heavenly God was as little venerated with sacrifices as He is to-day among certain tribes of Africa and Australia; that even in the Jahwehism of the Israelites the sacrificial cult was rather a degeneration than an ethico-religious advance. In agreement with this (other investigators add) is the fact that in many features the Mosaic sacrificial ritual was simply borrowed from the pagan ritual of the Egyptians, Babylonians, and other Semitic peoples. It is remarkable also that many Fathers of the Church (e. g. Chrysostom) and Scholastics, and among the Jews, Maimonides represented the Mosaic sacrifices as merely a concession which God made to the weakness of the Jewish character in order to restrain the Chosen People from the horrors of bloody sacrifice to idols.. This one-sided view, however, cannot be maintained before the bar of the history or the psychology of religion. Nothing is psychologically so intelligible as the derivation of sacrifice from the naturally religious heart of man, and the history of all peoples similarly proves that scarcely a single religion has ever existed or exists to-day without Some sacrifice. A religion entirely without sacrifice seems almost a psychological impossibility, and is at least unnatural. It is the complete want of sacrifice among some African and Australian tribes, rather than the numerous sacrifices of Mosaism, that has resulted from degeneration. Had God conceded the bloody sacrifices simply on account of the weakness of the Israelites, as above asserted, He would have promoted, rather than checked, the spread of pagan idolatry, especially if the sacrificial ritual were also taken from pagan religions. Here as elsewhere parallels in other religions prove no borrowing, unless such is supported by strict historical evidence, and even the actual borrowings may in their new home have been inspired with an entirely new spirit. The adoption of the substance of paganism into Mosaism is disproved especially by the anti-pagan and unique idea of holiness with which the whole Jewish cult is stamped (cf. Lev., xi, 44), and which shows the sacrificial thora as of one piece. A later editor could never have imprinted the stamp of holiness on a ritual composed of pagan fragments without the pure paganism peeping through the seams and joinings. One must therefore, both before and after the Priest's Code (save for later additions and accommodations to new circumstances) regard the sacrificial thora as truly Mosaic, and see in them the expression not only of human nature, but also of the Divine will. A remarkable exception from the general rule is Islamism, which knows neither sacrifice nor priest; sacrifice is replaced by a strict ritual of prayer, with which religious ablutions and almsgiving are associated. Again, while genuine Buddhism rejects sacrifice, this rule was far from obtaining in practice, for Lamaism in Tibet has sacrifices for the dead, and the average Buddhist of the people offers unbloody sacrifices to his buddha. The Hindu offers flowers, oil, food, and incense to his idols, and slays victims to the god Shiva and his spouse. And not even the believing Protestant is without a sacrifice, since, in spite of his rejection of the Mass, he at least recognizes Christ's death on the Cross as the great sacrifice of Christianity. (2) Species of Sacrifice The two chief kinds of sacrifice, the bloody and the unbloody, were suggested to mankind by nature itself, and were thus known in the earliest times. To which of the two historical priority is to be conceded, can scarcely be decided. For the greater antiquity of the unbloody sacrifice equally good grounds can be offered as for that of the bloody sacrifice. The earliest historical mentions of sacrifice found in the Bible would make them coeval, for Cain as the husband-man offered the fruits of the field, while his brother Abel as the shepherd offered bloody victims (Gen., iv, 3 sq.). As regards pagan religions, many historians of religion plead for the priority of the unbloody sacrifice. Porphyrius and Theophrastus also expressed the view that the first sacrifices consisted of plants and flowers, which were burned in honour of the Deity. The soma-haoma, a drink-offering common to both Indian Vedism and Iranian Parseeism, must be dated back to primeval times, when the Indians and the Iranians still formed one great people. How the Indians came to offer their very ancient horse sacrifice is unknown. It is a mere surmise to suppose that perhaps the general transition from a vegetable to a flesh diet, as related by Noe (cf. Gen., ix, 3 sqq.), occasioned the rise of animal sacrifices. The rare occurrence of slaying an animal was turned into a festival, which was celebrated with sacrifices. Among the earliest Hebrews sebach (bloody sacrifice) was a "slaying festival", with which bloody sacrifice was inseparably associated. The introduction of bloody sacrifices among the Iranians is more easily explained, since, especially in Zoroastrianism, it was esteemed a great merit to destroy the harmful animals belonging to the wicked god Ahriman, and eventually to sacrifice them to the good god Ormuzd. Further than surmises, however, we are unable to go. That the unbloody sacrifice was practised among the ancient Greeks, classical archæologists maintain with good reason, arguing that in Homer the word thyein (Lat. suffire) did not mean "to slay" or "to offer as a bloody sacrifice" (as it did in post-Homeric Greek), but rather to "offer a smoking sacrifice" (incense). It is not impossible that even the cruel and voluptuous cults of Anterior Asia also offered at first only vegetable sacrifices, since the fundamental idea of their religion, the death and renascence of nature, is expressed most evidently and impressively in the plant world. All this is however purely hypothetical. The observation that human sacrifice once extended over the whole earth, leaves room also for the supposition that the bloody sacrifice in the form of slaughtered men claims chronological priority, the hideous custom being replaced, as civilization advanced, by the sacrifice of animals. But among many peoples (e. g. the Chanaanites, Ph nicians, and the ancient Mexicans) not even the possession of a high culture succeeded in abolishing the detestable human sacrifices. But, whatever view may be taken of the priority question, it is undoubted that both the bloody and the unbloody sacrifices reach back to prehistoric times. Not without its significance for the scientific idea of sacrifice is the fact that the material of the bloody and unbloody sacrifices was regularly taken from things used as food and drink, and indeed from the best of these commodities. This very general circumstance affords evidence that the sacrificial gift must be taken from the belongings of the sacrificer and must be associated, as a means of sustenance, with his physical life. The independent sacrifice of incense alone requires another explanation; this is supplied by the fragrant odour, which symbolizes either the sweetness of the ascending offering of prayer or the gracious acceptance of the sacrifice by the Deity. The bloody sacrifice, on account of its symbolical connexion with the life of man, was especially expressive of complete self-oblation to the Divinity. In the cruder views of naive natural man, the ascending odour of the incense offering soothed the olfactory organs of the gods. Especially crude was this unworthy materializing of sacrifice in Indian Vedism (the soma drink) and in the Babylonian story of the Flood, where it is said: "The gods suck in the fragrant odour; like flies, the gods gathered over the sacrificer." Even the Old Testament expression, "a sweet savour for God" (odor suavitatis), was originally an accommodation to the ingenuous ideas of the uncultured nomadic people (cf. Gen., viii, 21; Lev., i, 17, etc.), an anthro-pomorphism which was ever more clearly recognized as such according as the Israelites progressed in their ethical refinement of the idea of God. Not on the greatness or material worth of the sacrificial gifts should store be laid, since Jahweh was above necessity, but on the true sentiment of sacrifice, without which, as declared by the Prophets (cf. Is., i, 11 sqq.; Osee, iv, 5; Mal., i, 10), all external sacrifices were not only worthless, but even reprehensible. (3) Rites of Sacrifice While sacrifice itself originates spontaneously in the natural prompting of religious-minded man, the particular rites, dependent on law and custom, display a manifold variety at different times and places. Among the different peoples the ceremonial of sacrifice offers indeed a very variegated picture. If we emphasize only that which was general and common to all, the simplest sacrificial rite consists in the mere exposition of the gifts in a holy place, as for example the show-bread (panis propositionis) of the Israelites and Babylonians, or the votive offerings (anathemata) of the Greeks. Frequently the idea of entertaining the gods or the dead is evidently associated with the offering of food and drink, e. g. among the Indians, Egyptians, and Greeks. Even in the oldest history of Israel this idea of entertainment, although spiritualized, is perceptible (Judges, vi, 17 sqq.; xiii, 15 sqq.). As true sacrifices in the strict sense were regarded only those in which a real alteration was effected in the sacrificial gift at the time of offering it. By this immutation the gifts were not only withdrawn from all profane usage, but were also completely given over to the service and possession of God or the gods. With this object in view edibles or sacrificial victims were either completely or partly burned, while libations were poured out as drink offerings. The earliest form seems to have been the whole or burnt-offering (holocaust). While only special portions of the victims (for the most part the best portions) were burned, the remainder of the flesh was regarded as holy sacrificial food, and was eaten either by the priests or by the offerers in a holy place (or even at home) with the idea of entering into communion. The chief element in the sacrifice, however, was not the sacrificial meal, but rather the sprinkling of the blood, which, as the bearer of life, was clearly intended in many religions to represent man himself. This idea of substitution is seen with overwhelming clearness in the sacrifice of Christ on the Cross. Among all peoples the sacrifice, as the chief and most perfect function of religion, was surrounded with the greatest pomp and solemnity; the celebration was usually of a light and joyous character, especially in the case of the sacrifices of praise, petition, and thanksgiving. With joyous heart man consecrated himself to the Deity through the medium of the gifts he offered. External adornment, music, song, prayer, and dance heightened the festive joy. On the other hand the expiatory sacrifice was of a serious character, whether it was intended to atone for misdeeds or to avert misfortune. Not every private person was competent to offer sacrifice; this function pertained only to certain persons or priests, whose office was immediately connected with the sacrifices. In the earliest time the head of the family or tribe performed the functions of priest -- in ancient Egypt the king, as even to-day the emperor in China (see PRIESTHOOD). Sacrifice and altar (q.v.) are, like sacrifice and priest, correlative terms. Originally the altar consisted of a single stone, which by consecration became the dwelling of God (cf. Gen., xii, 7 sq.; xiii, 4; xxviii, 18 sqq.). Among many peoples the place of sacrifice was either the house (for private sacrifices) or the open air (for public sacrifices). In the latter case specially selected places (trees, groves, heights) in an elevated position were preferred for sacrifice. Among the Romans altar and hearth (ara et focus) were regarded as indispensable requisites for sacrifice. (4) Origin of Sacrifice Since sacrifice is a regular concomitant of every religion, sacrifice must, according to the law of causality, have originated simultaneously with religion. Consequently, sacrifice is as old as religion itself. It is evident that the nature of the explanation given of sacrifice will depend on the views one takes of the origin of religion in general. (a) Widely held to-day is the theory of evolution, which, in accordance with the principles of Darwin, endeavours to trace the origin of religion from the degraded stage of the half-animal, religionless primeval man, and its gradual development to higher forms. The scheme of development is naturally different according to the personal standpoint of the investigator. As the starting-point for the comparative study of the lowest religious forms is usually taken the uncivilized savage of to-day, the true portrait of the primeval man (Lubbock, Tyler, etc.). An attempt is made to construct an ascending scale from the crudest Fetichism to naturalistic Polytheism, from which develops ethical Monotheism, as the highest and purest product. Until recently the Animism (q, v.) proposed by Tylor was the prevalent theory; this traced religion from the ancient worship of souls, ghosts, spirits of ancestors, etc. (under the influence of fear). At this original stage sacrifice had no other purpose than the feeding and entertaining of these deified beings, or their appeasement and conciliation, if hostile dispositions were ascribed to them (demons). In recent times this explanation, once honoured as dogma in the history of religions, is most vigorously combated by the experts themselves as untenable. It has been recognized that Animism and the kindred Fetichism and Totemism represent only secondary elements of many nature-religions, not the essence. "In any case," says Chantepie de la Saussaye, "a purely animistic basis of religion can nowhere be shown" ("Lehrbuch der Religionsgeschichte", I, Tübingen, 1905, p. 12). But if the origin of the idea of God cannot be explained from Animism, entertainment cannot have been the original idea of sacrifice, especially since, according to the most recent investigations, the primeval religions seem to converge rather towards Monotheism. Just as in the consciousness of all sacrificing peoples the gods remained sublime above souls, spirits, and demons, sacrifice as a religious gift far transcended food and drink. But, wherever the gods are represented as companions at the banquet, there always appeared the right idea, that by his participation in the sacrificial gifts man enters into communion with the gods, and (e. g. in the case of the ancient Indian soma drink) even partakes of divine strength. The obscuring of this idea by anthropomorphic errors, fostered by priestly deceit, did indeed here and there lead to the one-sided "feeding of the gods" (cf. Dan., xiv, 2 sqq.), but this may by no means be regarded as a primitive institution, Animism (q. v.) is most successfully refuted by Andrew Lang ('The Making of a Religion", London, 1898). (b) A second naturalistic explanation, which may be called the "social theory", derives religion from social instincts and accordingly sacrifice from the communal meal which was established to strengthen and seal in religious manner the tribal community. These communal meals are supposed to have given the first impulse to sacrifice. These fundamental thoughts may be developed in several ways. As Totemism, in addition to its religious, has also a distinctly social element, and in this respect is on a far higher level than Animism, some authors (especially W. Robertson Smith, "The Religion of the Semites", London, 1894) believe that the origin of animal sacrifices can be traced back to Totemism. When the different clans or divisions of a tribe partook at the communal meal of the sacred animal (totem) which represented their god and ancestors, they believed that by this meal they participated in the divine life of the animal itself. Sacrifice in the sense of offering gifts to the Deity, the symbolic replacing of human life by an animal, the idea of expiation, etc., are declared to belong to a much later period of the history of sacrifice. Originally the gifts of cereals had rather the character of a tribute due to the gods, and this idea was later transferred to the animal sacrifices. It is however very questionable whether this totemistic theory, notwithstanding some excellent suggestions, entirely meets the facts. Certainly the social force of religion and its significance in the formation of communities should not be underestimated; but, apart from the fact that Totemism is not, any more than Animism, an explanation of the origin of religion, the hypothesis is contradicted by the certain fact that in the earliest epoch the whole or burnt offering existed side by side with the communal meal, the former being equally old, if not older than the latter. In the consciousness of the peoples the sacrificial meal constituted not so much an element of the sacrifice, as the participation, confirmation, and completion of the same. On the same ground what is called the "banquet theory" of the late Bishop Bellord must also be rejected; this theory refers the essence of the sacrifice to the meal, and declares a sacrifice without a meal impossible (cf. The Ecclesiastical Review, XXXIII, 1905, pp. 1 sqq., 258 sqq.). This theory is not in accordance with the facts; for, as it is compelled to refer the essence of the Sacrifice of the Mass solely to the priest's communion, instead of to the twofold transubstantiation, the truth of the sacrifice of the Cross can be maintained only on the forced and false supposition that the Last Supper in its organic connexion with the Crucifixion imprinted on the latter its sacrificial character. (For further particulars, see MASS, SACRIFICE OF THE.) (c) So far as we may gather from revelation, the most natural and probable view seems to be that sacrifice originated in the positive command of God, since, by the original revelation in Paradise, the whole religion of mankind appears to have been established in advance on a supernatural basis. The Greek legend of the invention of sacrifice by Prometheus and the giant Chiron, together with similar legends of Asiatic religions, might be interpreted as reminiscences of the Divine origin of sacrifice. The positive command to sacrifice might even after the Fall have been preserved by tradition among the descendants of Adam, and thus spread among the pagan nations of all lands. The idolatrous deviations from the paradisaic idea of sacrifice would thus appear as regrettable errors, which, however, would not be more difficult to explain than the general fall of the human race. But, however plausible and probable this hypothesis may be, it is unprovable, and indeed unnecessary for the explanation of sacrifice. Regarding sacrifice in Paradise the Bible gives us no information; for the explanation of "eating of the Tree of Life" as a sacramental food offering is a later theologumenon which the acuteness of theologians, following Augustine's lead, has devised. But without recurring to a Divine ordinance, the origin of sacrifice may easily be explained by purely psychological motives. In consideration of the relation of sonship between man and God, which was felt more deeply in primitive times than subsequently, the only evidence of sincere inner adoration that the creature could give was by sacrificing some of his own possessions, thus visibly expressing his absolute submission to the Divine Majesty. Nor was it less in keeping with the inner promptings of man to declare his gratitude to God by gifts offered in return for benefits received, and to give through the medium of sacrificial presents expression to his petitions for new favours. Finally, the sinner might hope to free himself of the oppressive consciousness of guilt, when in the spirit of contrition he had to the best of his ability repaired the wrong done to the Divinity. The more childlike and ingenuous the conception of God formed by primitive man, the more natural and easy was for him the introduction of sacrifice. A truly good child offers little gifts to his parents, though he does not know what they will do with them. The psychological theory thus seems to offer the best explanation of the origin of sacrifice. (5) Object of Sacrifice As its "metaphysical form", the object first gives sacrifice its full spiritual content, and quickens the external rites with a living soul. The developed pagan religions agree with revealed religion in the idea that sacrifice is intended to give symbolical expression to man's complete surrender of himself into the hands of the Supreme God in order to obtain communion with Him. In the recognition of the absolute supremacy of God lies the juridical, and in the correlative absolute subjection to God the ethical side of sacrifice. In both moments the latreutic character of the sacrifice stands out clearly, since to God alone, as the First Cause (Causa prima) and the Last End (Finis ultimus) of all things, may sacrifice be offered. Even the idolatrous sacrifices of pagans did not entirely lose sight of this fundamental idea, since they esteemed their idols as gods. Even sacrifices of thanksgiving and petition never exclude this essential latreutic feature, since they concern thanksgivings and petitions to the ever-adorable Divinity. From our sinful condition arises the fourth object of sacrifice, i. e. the appeasing of the Divine anger. The fourfold object of sacrifice supplies an immediate explanation of the four kinds of sacrifice (cf. St. Thomas, I-II, Q. cii, a. 3). With the sentiments of sacrifice incorporated in these objects is closely connected the high importance of prayer, which accompanies the rite of sacrifice in all the higher religions; Grimm thus simply declares: "Sacrifice is only a prayer offered with gifts." Where we are to seek the culminating point of the sacrificial act (actio sacrifica), in which the object of sacrifice is especially expressed, is the most freely debated question, and concerning it the theorists are not in agreement. While some see the culmination of the sacrifice in the real alteration (immutatio), and especially in the destruction of the gift, others refer the essence of the sacrificial act to the external oblation of the gift, after it has been subjected to any change whatsoever; a third, but not very numerous party make the sacrificial meal the chief element. This last view has already been set aside as untenable. That the meal is not essential is likewise shown by numerous sacrifices, with which no meal is associated (e. g. the primitive burnt-sacrifice, and the sacrifice of the Cross). Again, the importance of the blood, which as a means of nourishment was avoided, spurned by, and even forbidden to the Jews, finds no expression in the banquet-theory. That the destruction of the gift (especially the slaying) cannot constitute the essence of the sacrifice is clear from the fact that the sprinkling of the blood (aspersio sanguinis) was regarded as the culmination, and the killing as only the preparation for the real sacrificial act. In fact the "destruction theory", settled in Catholic theology since the time of Vasquez and Bellarmine, harmonizes neither with the historical pagan conception of sacrifice nor with the essence of the sacrifice of Christ on the Cross, nor finally with the fundamental ideas of the Mosaic cult. The destruction is at most the material, and the oblation the formal element of the sacrifice. Consequently, the idea of sacrifice lies in the self-surrender of man to God, not with the object of (symbolical) self-destruction, but of final transformation, glorification, and deification. Wherever a meal is associated with the sacrifice, this signifies merely the confirmation and certification of the communion with God, already existing or reacquired by expiation. We may thus define sacrifice as the external oblation to God by an authorized minister of a sense-perceptible object, either through its destruction or at least its real transformation, in acknowledgement of God's supreme dominion and for the appeasing of His wrath. In so far as this definition refers to the sacrifice of the Mass, see SACRIFICE OF THE MASS. I. Concerning pagan sacrifice in general see CREUZER, Symbolik u. Mythologie der alten Völker (3rd ed., Darmstadt, 1877); WERNER, Die Religionen u. Kulte des vorchristl. Heidentums (Ratisbon, 1888); VOLLERS, Die Weltreligionen in ihrem geschichtl. Zusammenhang (Jena, 1909); DE LA SAUSSAYE, Lehrbuch der Religionsgesch. (2 vols., 3rd ed., Tübingen, 1905). Concerning the sacrifices of the ancient Indians see MÜLLER, Hibbert Lectures on the Origin and Growth of Religion as illustrated by the Religion of India (London, 1878); LINDNER, Die Dîkshâ oder die Weihe für das Somaopfer (1878); BERGAIGNE, La religion védique (3 vols., Paris, 1878-83); WEBER, Zur Kenntnis des ved. Opferrituals in Indische Studien, X and XIII; HILLEBRANDT, Das altind. Neu- u. Vollmondsopfer (1879); IDEM, Ritual-Literatur, ved. Opfer u. Zauber (1897); MUIR, Original Sanscrit Texts, III-V (London, 1890); HOPKINS, The Religions of India (London, 1893); HARDY, Die vedischbrahmanische Periode der Religion des alten Indiens (1893); IDEM, Indische Religionsgesch. (1898); OLDENBERG, Die Religion des Veda (1894); SCHWAB, Das altindische Tieropfer (1896); MACDONELL, Vedic Mythology (1897); DAHLMANN, Der Idealismus der indischen Religionsphilos. im Zeitalter der Opfermystik (Freiburg, 1901); ROUSSELL, La religion védique (Paris, 1909). Concerning Hinduism consult: MONIER-WILLIAMS, Brahmanism and Hinduism (London, 1891); GURU PROSAD SEN, An Introduction to the Study of Hinduism (Calcutta, 1893); CROOKE, Introduction to the Popular Religion and Folklore of Northern India (London, 1896); DUBOIS, Hindu Manners, Customs and Ceremonies (Oxford, 1897); SLATER, The higher Hinduism in relation to Christianity (London, 1902). Concerning the Iranians, cf. HYDE, Historia religionis veterum Persarum (Oxford, 1700); WINDISCHMANN, Zoroastrische Studien (1863); SPIGEL, Eranische Altertumskunde, II (1878); DE HARLEZ, Les origines du Zoroastrisme (Paris, 1879); HAUG, Essays on the Sacred Language, Writings and Religion of the Parsis (London, 1884); DOSABHAI FRANIJI KARAKA, History of the Parsis, including their Manners, Customs, Religion and Present Position (2 vols., London, 1884); CASARTELI, La philos. religeuse du Mazdéisme sous les Sassanides (Paris, 1884); JACKSON, Zoroaster, the Prophet of Ancient Iran (New York, 1899). Concerning the Greeks, Cf. MAURY, Hist. des religions de la Grèce antique (3 vols., Paris, 1857-9); GIRARD, Le sentiment religieux en Grèce d'Homère à Eschyle (Paris, 1879); ROSCHER, Ausführliches Lexikon der griech. u. röm. Mythologie (1884); REISCH, Griechische Weihegeschenke (Vienna, 1890); STENGEL, Die griech. Sakralaltertümer (1890); RHODE, Psyche (1891); GARDENER AND JEVONS, Manual of Greek Antiquities (London, 1895); USENER, Götternamen (1896); FARNELL, Cults of the Greek States (2 vols., London, 1896); GRUPPE, Griech. Mythologie u. Religionsgesch. (Munich, 1897-1906); ROUSE, Greek Votive Offerings (Cambridge, 1910); REITZENSTEIN, Die hellenistischen Mysterienreligionen (1910); PIEPERS, Qu stiones anathematic (Leiden, 1903). Concerning the Romans, cf. BOUCHÉ-LECLERC, Manuel des institutions romaines (Paris, 1896); WISSOWA, Religion u. Kultus der Römer (Munich, 1902); VON PÖHLMANN, Die röm. Kaiserzeit u. der Untergang der antiken Welt (1910); GASQUET, Essai sur le culte et les mystères de Mithra (Paris, 1899); CUMONT, Die Mysterien des Mithra (Leipzig, 1903); PRELLER, Römische Mythologie (3rd ed., 1881-83); BEURLIER, Le culte rendu aux empereurs romains (Paris, 1890); WENDLAND, Die hellenist.-röm. Kultur in ihren Beziehungen zum Judentum u. Christentum (1907); DIETERICH, Eine Mithrasliturgie (2nd ed., 1910). Concerning the Chinese, cf. DOUGLAS, Confucianism and Taoism (London, 1892); DE HARLEZ, Les religions de la Chine (Brussels, 1891); DVORAK, Chinas Religionen (2 Vols., Leipzig, 1895-1903). Concerning the Egyptians, cf. LE PAGE RENOUF, Lectures on the Origin and Growth of Religion as illustrated by the Religion of Ancient Egypt (London, 1879); ERMAN, Aegypten u, ägyptisches Leben im Altertum (2 vols., 1885-88); IDEM, Die ägyptische Religion (2nd ed., Berlin, 1909); BRUGSCH, Religion u. Mythologie der alten Aegypter (1888); BUDGE, The Mummy (London, 1893); IDEM, The Gods of the Egyptians (London, 1904); IDEM, History of Egypt (8 vols., London, 1902-); WIEDEMANN, Die Religion der alten Aegypter (1890); FLINDERS PETRIE, History of Egypt (London, 1894); SAYCE, Religions of Ancient Egypt and Babylonia (London, 1902); OTTO, Priester u. Tempel im hellenist. Aegypten (2 vols., 1902-08). Concerning the Semites. cf. VON BAUDISSIN, Beiträge zur semitischen Religionsgesch. (Berlin, 1875-78); ROBERTSON SMITH, Lectures on the Religion of the Semites (London, 1899); LAGRANGE, Sur les religions sémitiques (Paris, 1903); ZIMMER, Beiträge zur Kenntnis der babylon. Religion (1896); HAUPT, Babylonian Elements in the Levitical Ritual (1900); HILPRECHT, Die Ausgrabungen im Bel-Tempel zu Nippur (1903); JEREMIAS, Montheistische Strömungen innerhalb der babylonischen Religion (1904); WINCKLER, Die Gesetze Hammurabis (1904); JASTROW, Die Religion Babyloniens u. Assyriens (1905); KOLDEWEY, Die Tempel von Babylon (1911); MOVERS, Das Opferwesen der Karthager (1847); CHEYNE-BLACK, Encycl. biblica, s. v. Ph nicia; SCHOLZ, Götzendienst u. Zauberwesen bei den alten Hebräern u. benachbarten Völkern (1877); SCHANZ, Apologie des Christentums, II (1905). See also the literature to PRIESTHOOD. II. LIGHTFOOT, Ministerium templi (Rotterdam, 1699); BÄHR, Symbolik des mosaischen Kultus, II (Heidelberg, 1839); THALHOFER, Die unblutigen Opfer des mosaischen Kultus (Ratisbon, 1848); RIEHM, Der Begriff der Sühne im A. T. (Gotha, 1876); IDEM, Handwörterbuch des biblischen Altertums (Leipzig, 1884-); IDEM, Alttestamentl. Theologie (Halle, 1889); KURTZ, Sacrificial Worship of the Old Testament, tr. (Edinburgh, 1863); WANGEMANN, Das Opfer nach der hl. Schrift (1866); SCHOLZ, Die hl. Altertümer des Volkes Israel (Ratisbon, 1868); IDEM, Götzendienst u. Zauberwesen bei den alten Hebräern (Ratisbon, 1877); HANEBERG, Die reliqiösen Altertümer der Bibel (Munich, 1869); SCHEGG, Biblische Archäologie (Freiburg, 1887); LAOUENAN, Du Brahmanisme et ses rapports avec le Judaisme et le Christianisme (Paris, 1888); CAVE, Scriptural Doctrine of Sacrifice and Atonement (Edinburgh, 1890); SCHÄFER, Die religiösen Altertümer der Bibel (1891); SCHMOLLER, Das Wesen der Sühne in der alttestamentlich. Opferthora in Studien u. Kritiken (1891); NOWACK, Hebräische Archäologie (Freiburg, 1894); VOLCK, De nonnullis V. T. prophet. locis ad sacrificia spectantibus (Leipzig, 1893); SCOTT, Sacrifice, its Prophecy and Fulfilment (Edinburgh, 1894); BAXTER, Sanctuary and Sacrifice (London, 1895); SCHULTZ, Old Testament Theology, tr. (Edinburgh, 1898); FREY, Tod, Seelenglaube u. Seelenkult im alten Israel (1898); MATTHIEU, La notion de sacrifice dans l'ancien Testament et son évolution (Toulouse, 1902); GOLD, Sacrificial Worship (NeW York, 1903); NIKEL, Genesis u. Keilschriftforschung (Freiburg, 1903); SCHRADER, Die Keilinschriften u. das A. T. (3rd ed., Berlin, 1903); ZAPLETAL, Alttestamentliches (Freiburg, 1903); KÖBERLE, Sünde u. Gnade im religiösen Leben des Volkes Israel bis auf Christus (Munich, 1905); HERRMANN, Die Idee der Sühne im A. T. (Leipzig, 1905); SCHÖPFER, Gesch, des A. T. (4th ed., 1906); KENT, Israel's Laws and Legal Precedents (NeW York, 1907); BENZINGER, Hebräische Archäologie (Freiburg, 1907); MADER, Die Menschenopfer der alten Hebräer u. der benachbarten Völker (Freiburg, 1908); ENGELKEMPER, Heiligtum u, Opferstätten in den Gesetzen des Pentateuch (Münster, 1908); SMITH, The Biblical Doctrine of Atonement in Biblical World, XXXI (1908), 22 sqq.; KITTEL, Gesch. des Volkes Israel, II (Gotha, 1909); PETERS, Die jüdische Gemeinde von Elephantine-Syene u. ihr Tempel im 5. Jahrh. vor Chr. (Freiburg, 1910); ALLGEIER, Ueber Doppelberichte in der Genesis. Eine kritische Untersuchung u. eine prinzipielle Prüfung (Freiburg, 1911). III. TANNER, Cruentum Christi sacrificium, incruentum Missæ sacrificium explicatum (Prague, 1669); CONDREN. Das Priestertum u. das Opfer Jesu Christi (Ratisbon, 1847); VON CICHOWSKI, Das alttestamentl. Pascha in seinem Verhältnis sum Opfer Christi (Munich, 1849); THALHOFER, Die Opfer des Hebräerbriefes (Dillinger, 1855); IDEM, Das Opfer des alten u. neuen Bundes (Ratisbon, 1870); BICKEL, Messe u. Pascha (Mainz, 1871); PELL, Das Dogma von der Sünde u. Erlösung im Lichte der Vernunft (Ratisbon, 1886); IDEM, Die Lehre des hl. Athanasius von der Sünde u. Erlösung (Passau, 1888); OSWALD, Die Erlösung in Christo Jesu (2nd ed., Paderborn, 1887); STRÄTER, Die Erlösungslehre des hl. Athanasius (Freiburg, 1894); ANRICH, Das antike Mysterien. wesen u. sein Einfluss auf das Christentum (Göttingen, 1894): SCHENZ, Die priesterl. Tätigkeit des Messias nach dem Propheten Isajas (Ratisbon, 1892); SEEBERG, Der Tod Christi in seiner Bedeutung für die Erlösung (Leipzig, 1895); DÖRHOLT, Die Lehre von der Genugtuung Christi (Paderborn, 1896); CHARRE, Le sacrifice de l'Homme-Dieu (Paris, 1899); GRIMM, Gesch. des Leidens Jesu, I (Ratisbon, 1903); FUNKE, Die Satisfactionstheorie des hl. Anselm (Münster, 1903); RITTER, Christus der Erlöser (Linz, 1903); BELSER, Gesch. des Leidens u. Sterbens, der Auferstehung u. Himmelfahrt des Herrn (Freiburg, 1903); JENTSCH, Hellentum u. Christentum (Leipzig, 1903); MUTH, Die Heilstat Christi als stellvertretende Genugtuung (Ratisbon, 1904); RIVIÈRE, Le dogme de la Rédemption (Paris, 1905); CROMBRUGGHE, De soteriologiæ christianæ primis fontibus (Louvain, 1905); KLUGE, Das Seelenleiden des Welterlösers (Mainz, 1905); WEIGL, Die Heilslehre des hl. Cyrill von Jerusalem (Mainz, 1905); WEISS, Die messianischen Vorbilder im A. T. (Freiburg, 1905); FIEBIG, Babel u. das N. T. (Tübingen, 1905); FELDMANN, Der Knecht Gottes in Isajas Kap. 40-55 (Freiburg, 1907); STAAB, Die Lehre von der stellvertretenden Genugtuung Christi (Paderborn, 1908); POHLE, Dogmatik, II (Paderborn, 1909); BAUER, Vom Griechentum zum Christentum (Leipzig, 1910); HARNACK, Dogmengesch., I-II (Tübingen, 1901). For other literature see MASS, SACRIFICE OF THE, and PRIESTHOOD. IV. BECANUS, De triplici sacrificio natur, legis, grati (Lyons, 1631); OUTRAM, De sacrificiis libri duo (Amsterdam, 1678); STÖCKL, Das Opfer nach seinem Wesen u. seiner Gesch. (Mainz, 1861); VON LASAULX, Ueber die Gebete der Griechen u. Römer (Würzburg, 1842); IDEM, Die Sühnopfer der Griechen u. Römer u. ihr Verhältnis zum Einen auf Golgatha (Ratisbon, 1854); DE MAISTRE, Eclaircissements sur le sacrifice (Paris, 1862); DÖLLINGER, Heidentum u. Judentum (2nd ed., Ratisbon, 1868); WANGEMANN, Das Opfer nach der Lehre der hl. Schrift des A. u. N. Testamentes (Berlin, 1866); LÜCKEN, Die Traditionen des Menschengeschlechts (Münster, 1869); SCHULTZE, Der Fetischismus (Leipzig, 1871); MÜLLER, Introduction to the Science of Religion (London, 1873); IDEM, Lectures on the Origin of Religion (London, 1878); IDEM, Natural Religion (London, 1899); IDEM, Physical Religion (London, 1890); IDEM, Anthropological Religion (London, 1892); FAIRBAIRN, Studies in the Philosophy of Religion and History (London, 1876); FREEMAN-CLARKE, Ten Great Religions (2 vols., London, 1871-83); CAIRD, An Introduction to the Philosophy of Religion (London, 1880); VON HARTMANN, Das religiöse Bewusstsein der Menscheit in Stufengang seiner Entwickelung (Berlin, 1882); LIPPERT, Allgemeine Gesch. des Priestertums (2 vols., Berlin, 1883); SCHNEIDER, Die Naturvölker (2 vols., Paderborn, 1885-86); PELEIDERER, Religionsphilosophie auf geschichtl. Grundlage (2 vols., Leipzig, 1883-89); KÖPPLER, Priester u. Opfergabe (Mainz, 1886); ROBERTSON-SMITH, Lectures on the Religion of the Semites (London, 1889); KELLOG, The Genesis and Growth of Religion (New York, 1892); SIEBECK, Lehrbuch der Religionsgesch. (Freiburg, 1883); JEVONS, An Introduction to the History of Religion (London and New York, 1896); SABATIER, La doctrine de l'expiation et son évolution historique (Paris, 1896); TIELE, Elements of the Science of Religion (New York, 1896); BRINTON, Religions of Primitive Peoples (New York, 1897); LANG, The Making of a Religion (London and New York, 1898); DE LA GRASSERIE, La psychologie des religions (Paris, 1899); LETOURNEAU, L'évolution religieuse (Paris, 1897); VON ORELLI, Allgemeine Religionsgesch. (Bonn, 1899); FRAZER, The Golden Bough (London and New York, 1900); IDEM, Totemism and Exogamy (London 1910); BORCHERT, Der Animismus oder Ursprung der Religion aus dem Seelen-, Ahnen- u. Geisterkult (Leipzig, 1900); ZAPLETAL, Der Totemismus u. die Religion Israels (Freiburg, 1900); MORRIS-JASTROW, The Study of Religion (London, 1901); RENZ, Die Gesch. des Messopferbegriffs, I (Freising, 1901); LUBBOCK, The Origin of Civilization and the Primitive Condition of Man (6th ed., London, 1902); TYLOR, Primitive Culture (2 Vols., 6th ed., London, 1902); BOUSSET, Das Wesen der Religion (Leipzig, 1903); DORNER, Grundriss der Religionsphilosophie (Leipzig, 1903); POHLE, Dogmatik, III (Paderborn, 1910), 317-27; PELL, Noch ein Lösungsversuch zur Messopferfrage unter Revision des Opferbegriffs (2nd ed., Passau, 1911), Cf. GOURD in Revus de métaphysique et de morale (1902), 131 sqq.; MESCHLER in Stimmen aus Maria-Laach, LXIX (1905), 156 sqq.; Zeitschr. für Religionspsychologie, II (1908), 81 sqq. J. POHLE Sacrilege Sacrilege (Lat. sacrilegium, robbing a temple, from sacer, sacred, and legere, to purloin.) Sacrilege is in general the violation or injurious treatment of a sacred object. In a less proper sense any transgression against the virtue of religion would be a sacrilege. Theologians are substantially agreed in regarding as sacred that and that only which by a public rite and by Divine or ecclesiastical institution has been dedicated to the worship of God. The point is that the public authority must intervene; private initiative, no matter how ardent in devotion or praiseworthy in motive, does not suffice. Attributing a sacred character to a thing is a juridical act, and as such is a function of the governing power of the Church. It is customary to enumerate three kinds of sacrilege: personal, local, and real. St. Thomas teaches (Summa, II-II, Q., xcix) that a different sort of holiness attaches to persons, places, and things. Hence the irreverence offered to any one of them is specifically distinct from that which is exhibited to the others. Suarez (De Religione, tr. iii, 1-3) does not seem to think the division very logical, but accepts it as being in accord with the canons. Personal Sacrilege. Personal sacrilege means to deal so irreverently with a sacred person that, whether by the injury inflicted or the defilement caused, there is a breach of the honour due to such person. This sacrilege may be committed chiefly in three ways: + by laying violent hands on a cleric or religious. This constitutes an infraction of what is known as the privilege of the canon (privilegium canonis), and is visited with the penalty of excommunication; + by violating the ecclesiastical immunity in so far as it still exists. Clerics according to the old-time discipline were entitled to exemption from the jurisdiction of lay tribunals (privilegium fori). The meaning, therefore, is that he who despite this haled them before a civil court, otherwise than as provided by the canons, was guilty of sacrilege and was excommunicated; + by any sin against the vow of chastity on the part of those who are consecrated to God -- such are those in sacred orders (in the Latin Church) and religious, even those with simple vows, if these are perpetual. The weight of opinion amongst moralists is that this guilt is not contracted by the violation of a privately-made vow. The reason seems to be that, while there is a breach of faith with Almighty God, still such a vow, lacking the indorsement and acceptance of the Church, does not make the person formally a sacred one; it does not in the juridical sense set such an one apart for the worship of God. It need hardly be noted that the partners of sacred persons in sins of this kind are to be adjudged equally guilty of sacrilege even though their status be a purely lay one. Local Sacrilege. Local sacrilege is the violation of a sacred place. Under the designation "sacred place" is included not only a church properly so-called even though it be not consecrated, but merely blessed, but also public oratories as well as cemeteries canonically established for the burial of the faithful. Four species of this crime are ordinarily distinguished: + the theft of something found in and specially belonging to the church; + the infringing of the immunity attaching to sacred places in so far as this prerogative still prevails. It should be observed that in this case the term "sacred place" receives a wider comprehension than that indicated above. It comprises not only churches, public chapels, and cemeteries, but also the episcopal palace, monasteries, hospitals erected by episcopal authority and having a chapel for the celebration of the Holy Sacrifice, and also the person of the priest when he is carrying the Blessed Sacrament. To all of these was granted the right of asylum the outraging of which was deemed a sacrilege; + the commission within the sacred precincts of some sinful act by which, according to canon law, the edifice is esteemed polluted. These acts are homicide, any shedding of blood reaching to the guilt of a grievous sin, any consummated offence against chastity (including marital intercourse which is not necessary), the burial within the church or sacred place of an unbaptized person or of one who has been excommunicated by name or as a notorious violator of the privilege of the canon; + the doing of certain things (whether sins or not), which, either by their own nature or by special provision of law, are particularly incompatible with the demeanour to be maintained in such a place. Such would be for instance turning the church into a stable or a market, using it as a banquet hall, or holding court there indiscriminately for the settlement of purely secular affairs. Real Sacrilege. Real sacrilege is the irreverent treatment of sacred things as distinguished from places and persons. This can happen first of all by the administration or reception of the sacraments (or in the case of the Holy Eucharist by celebration) in the state of mortal sin, as also by advertently doing any of those things invalidly. Indeed deliberate and notable irreverence towards the Holy Eucharist is reputed the worst of all sacrileges. Likewise conscious maltreatment of sacred pictures or relics or perversion of Holy Scripture or sacred vessels to unhallowed uses, and finally, the usurpation or diverting of property (whether movable or immovable) intended for the maintenance of the clergy or serving for the ornamentation of the church to other uses, constitute real sacrileges. Sometimes the guilt of sacrilege may be incurred by omitting what is required for the proper administration of the sacraments or celebration of the sacrifice, as for example, if one were to say Mass without the sacred vestments. SLATER, Manual of Moral Theology (New York, 1908); RICKABY, Moral Teaching of St. Thomas (London, 1896); BALLERINI, Opus theologicum morale (Prato, 1899); D'ANNIBALE, Summula theologi moralis (Rome, 1908); SPELMAN, The History and Fate of Sacrilege (London, 1888). JOSEPH F. DELANY Sacris Solemniis Sacris Solemniis The opening words of the hymn for Matins of Corpus Christi and of the Votive Office of the Most Blessed Sacrament, composed by St. Thomas Aquinas. The rhythmic stanza imitates the classical measures found in Horace and in several hymns of the Roman Breviary (see SANCTORUM MERITIS); but for whatever excellence the hymn lacks in respect of classical prosody it compensates in the interesting and intricate rhymic scheme. This may be illustrated by breaking up the stanza of four lines into seven. The sixth stanza, which is sometimes employed as a separate hymn at Benediction will serve to illustrate: Panis angelicus Fit panis hominum: Dat Panis coelicus Figuris terminum: O res mirabilis! Manducat Dominum Pauper, servus et humilis. The incisio (i.e. the coincidence of the end of a word with the end of a foot) is perfect throughout all the stanzas. With what rhythm should the hymn be recited? Translators vary much in their conception of an appropriate English equivalent. The first words suggest by the tonic accents English dactylics: Lo! the Angelic Bread Feedeth the sons of men: Figures and types are fled Never to come again. O what a wondrous thing! Lowly and poor are fed, Banqueting on their Lord and King. The felicitous Anglican translator, the Rev. Dr. J.M. Neale, used iambic metre: He ordered in the wine Our Holy Offering, To be the Sacrifice Which Priests along should bring; For whom is meet and fit That they should eat of it, And in their turn to others give. This fifth stanza is interesting for its own sake, as it calls attention to the plan of the Eucharistic sacrifice. Dr. Neale's translation does not follow strictly the rhymic scheme, which is better observed in a translation given in "Sursum Corda" (1908, p. 6). Shipley "Annus Sanctus", London, 1874, p. 192) gives Wallace's translation, the first stanza of which illustrates another metric form: "Sing of that solemn eve When, as true hearts believe, Christ gave the lamb and the paschal bread Unto the chosen band Met for the high command God had of old on the fathers laid." Caswall (Lyra Catholica, 1849) gave a condensed translation: "Let us with hearts renewed, Our grateful homage pay; And welcome the triumphant songs This ever blessed day." In his "Hymns and Poems" (1873) it appears revised as: "Let old things pass away Let all be fresh and bright; And welcome we with hearts renewed This feast of new delight." The revision (which also includes the change of "night" into "eve", and changes in the third and fourth lines of the sixth stanza) appears in the "Lyra" of 1884, in Shipley's Annus Sanctus", and in the Marquess of Bute's translation of the Roman Breviary; the revision is interesting as illustrating Caswall's zeal for literal betterment of the translation.. Wagner ("Origine et developpement du chant liturgique", translation of Bour, Tournai, 1904, p. 169) speaks of the gradual substitution of rhythm for metre in the hymns and refers to the "Sacris solemniis" as illustrative of "the two conceptions of verse . . . where the old verse and the rhythmic disposition of syllables meet peaceably together. Rhyme, also, was gradually introduced; this same hymn offers very instructive examples of it. It is a device of punctuation for the ear." Birkle ("Vatican Chant", translation of Lemaistre, New York, 1904, p. 103) says: "The first three lines have three accents each — a weak accent upon the second and seventh syllable and the chief accent upon the tenth. The first half of the line concludes with the sixth syllable, which must be noticeable in the chanting. In the last verse the chief accent must be placed upon the sixth syllable" (but in the illustration he places an accent also upon the third syllable). Consult Pimont, Les hymnes du breviaire romain, II (Paris, 1884), 177-88, for text and extensive comment; Hymnarium Sarisburiense (London, 1851), 119 for text, variant readings, and very simple plainsong. The text and official plainsong melodies are given in the Vatican Graduale (Ad processionem Coporis Christi). Cf. also JULIAN, Dict. Of Hymnology (2nd ed., London, 1907; HENRY in Sursum Corda (1908), 6, translation and comment; DREVES Analecta hymnica, XVI (Leipzig), p. 38 (In dedicatione urbis Granatae), 75 (De Angelo Custode), 103 (De S. Disma), for fifteenth-sixteenth-century imitations of the hymn. See also bibliography to SANCTUS MERITIS. H.T. HENRY Sacristan Sacristan An officer who is charged with the care of the sacristy, the church, and their contents. In ancient times many duties of the sacristan were performed by the doorkeepers (ostiarii), later by the mansionarii and the treasurers. The Decretals of Gregory IX (lib. I, tit. xxvi, "De officio sacristæ speak of the sacristan as if he had an honourable office attached to a certain benefice, and say that his duty was to care for the sacred vessels, vestments, lights, etc. Nowadays the sacristan is elected or appointed. The "Cæremoniale episcoporum" prescribed that in cathedral and collegiate churches the sacristan should be a priest, and describes his duties in regard to the sacristy, the Blessed Eucharist, the baptismal font, the holy oils, the sacred relics, the decoration of the church for the different seasons and feasts, the preparation of what is necessary for the various ceremonies, the pregustation in pontifical Mass, the ringing of the church bells, the preservation of order in the church, and the distribution of Masses; and finally it suggests that one or two canons be appointed each year to supervise the work of the sacristan and his assistants. The under-sacristan (custos) is also mentioned in the Decretals (lib. I, tit. xxvii, "De officio custodis"). He was the assistant of the sacristan, was subject to the archdeacon, and discharged duties very similar to those of the sacristan. Now the office is hardly ever attached to a benefice, but is usually a salaried position. The Council of Trent desired that, according to the old canons, clerics should hold such offices; but in most churches, on account of the difficulty or impossibility of obtaining clerics, laymen perform many of the duties of the sacristan and under-sacristan. Altar Societies There are altar societies in connection with most parish churches. The duties of members vary according to circumstances, in some instances including those which ordinarily fall within the sacristan's province, such as the vestments and altar vessels, making ready for the priest's Mass, and so on, but as a general thing they consist of the payment of yearly dues into a fund for the maintenance and repair of the accessories used in the ceremonies of the Church and usually also of a certain amount of labor for this purpose. Altar societies differ from tabernacle societies in that their work is for the benefit of the church to which they are attached. (See TABERNACLE SOCIETIES). The Sodality of St. John Berchmans, known as the Pious Association of Servers of Mass and Sacristans, was founded by Vincent Basile, S.J., missionary Apostolic among the southern Slavs, for lay acolytes, choir boys, sacristans, and all who have any duty to perform in the services of the Church. Its object is to induce all its members to perform their duties piously and in a manner befitting the ceremonies in which they participate, for the glory of God and the edification of the faithful. The rules compiled by Father Basile bind the members to absolute silence in church, devout genuflexion when passing before the Blessed Sacrament, and the clear pronunciation of the words of the liturgical prayers. This same circumspection is expected to characterize their conduct even in the sacristy, and they are required to attend monthly meeting and to receive Holy Communion at least once a month. The director should be either the pastor or a priest appointed by him. Although it is not a confraternity properly so-called, this sodality was approved by Pope Pius IX, 21 Sept., 1865, and indulgences were accorded to its members, subject to the usual conditions. Cæremoniale episcoporum, I (Ratisbon, 1902), vi. J.F. GOGGIN BLANCHE M. KELLY Sacristy Sacristy (Latin sacrastia, vestry). A room in the church or attached thereto, where the vestments, church furnishings and the like, sacred vessels, and other treasures are kept, and where the clergy meet and vest for the various ecclesiastical functions. It corresponds to the secretarium or diaconicum of old. At present the almost universal practice is to have the sacristy directly behind the main altar or at either side. The sacristy should contain cases, properly labelled, for the various vestments in all the liturgical colors; a crucifix or other suitable image in a prominent position to which the clergy bow before going to the sanctuary and on returning (Ritus celebrandi missam, II, i); a lavatory, where the officiating clergy may wash their hands (op. cit. I, i); a copy of the Decree of Urban VIII prohibiting certain offices and masses (S. R. C., 460 ad 6; 555 § Et ne); a book containing the obligations of the Church regarding foundations and their fulfillment (Innocent XII, Nuper, § 26, 21 Dec., 1699). It is customary to have a holy water font, and a bell to admonish the congregation of the advent of the clergy, at the door leading to the sanctuary. The sacristy is not blessed or consecrated together with the church, and consequently is not a sacred place in the canonical sense. However, except where penalties are concerned, it enjoys on the whole the same prerogatives as the church. When a sacristy directly behind the sanctuary has two entrances, the clergy enter the sanctuary at the gospel side, and leave by the epistle side (S.R.C., 3029 ad 12). A double sacristy is sometimes provided, one for the clergy, one for the altar boys. Canons too usually have their own sacristy. In cathedrals, where there is no special chapel for this purpose, there should be a separate sacristy (secretarium) with an altar, where the bishop may assist at Terce and prepare for pontifical Mass (Cærem. Episcoporum, I, 137; II, 74; see SACRISTAN). St. CHARLES BORROMMEO, Instructiones Fabric£ Eccl. 1, 28 in Acta Eccles. Mediol. (Paris, 1645), 206 sq.; Raym. Antonii Instructio Pastoralis, 8, 1, ed. EYST. (1877), 166 sq. ANDREW B. MEEHAN Sadducees Sadducees A politico-religious sect of the Jews during the late post-Exile and New-Testament period. The old derivation of the name from tsaddiqim, i.e. the righteous; with assumed reference to the adherence of the Sadducees to the letter of the Law as opposed to the pharasaic attention to the superadded "traditions of the elders", is now generally discredited mainly on philological grounds and the term is associated with the proper name "Sadoc", Sadducee being equivalent to Sadokite. They became the dominant priestly party during the Greek and Roman period of Jewish history, and the name, whether bestowed seriously or in irony, originated doubtless in their pretensions to the descendants of Sadoc, the high-priest prominent in the times of David and Solomon (III Kings, I, 8, 26, 32; ii, 35; I Par., xxix, 22; cf. Ezech., xl, 46; xlii, 19; etc.). As a prominent political party they first appear in the reign of John Hyrcanus (135-105 B.C.). They espoused the hellenizing tendencies of the Asmonean princes in which they were strongly opposed by the Pharisees (q.v.), or Separatists, a party evolved from the earlier Assideans, and which abhorred all forms of Greek culture as detrimental to the religious interests of the Jewish nation. Under Aristobulus I and Alexander Jannæus, the immediate successor of John Hyrcanus, the power of the Sadducees was supreme, and though the opposing faction of the Pharisees came into favour during the regency of Alexandra Salome (780-69 B.C.), the Sadducees regained their ascendancy under Aristobulus II (69-63 B.C.) whom they supported in his conflicts with Hyrcanus II, Antipater, and the Romans. When Pompey captured Jerusalem (63 B.C.) he executed many of their leaders, as did also Herod the Idumean on his accession to power (37 B.C.). The Sadducees retained however, their traditional priestly functions and also a varying preponderance in the Sanhedrin, but even in this respect their influence was much diminished through the policy of Herod and later of the Roman procurators of Judea, who, arbitrarily and mainly for political reasons, appointed and removed the high-priests at will. During this period and down to the destruction of Jerusalem the Sadducees were naturally unpopular with the masses because of their marked tendency to side closely with the ruling power, while the patriotic and exclusive Pharisees became more and more the leaders of the people. Among the religious difference between the two parties may be mentioned the denial on the part of the Sadducees of the resurrection, the immortality of the soul and the existence of angels (Matt., xxii, 23; Mark xii, 18; Acts, xxiii, 8). They rejected likewise the oral traditions which the Pharisees maintained and emphasized as a Divinely ordained supplement to the written law. While the tenacity and exclusiveness and other characteristics of the Pharisees have been indelibly impressed on all subsequent generations of Judaism, the influence of the indifferent and materialistic Sadducees vanished completely as soon as the Jews ceased to be a nation. JAMES F. DRISCOLL Thomas Vincent Faustus Sadler Thomas Vincent Faustus Sadler Born 1604; died at Dieulward, Flanders, 19 Jan., 1680-1. He was received into the Church at the age of seventeen by his uncle, Dom Walter Sadler, and joined the Benedictines at Dieulward, being professed in 1622. Little is known of his missionary labors, but probably he was chaplain to the Sheldons of Weston and the Tichbornes in Hampshire before going to London, where he worked many years. He edited several spiritual books, often collaborating with Dom Anselm Crowther, and signing himself T.V. His chief publications are "The Christian Pilgrim in his Spiritual Conflict and Conquest" (1652); "Jesus, Maria, Joseph" (1657); "The Daily Exercise of the Devout Rosarists" (1657), which was afterwards developed into a well-known prayer book, "The Daily Exercise of the Devout Christian"; "A Guide to Heaven", translated from Bona's "Manuductio" (1672); "The Holy Desires of Death", translated from Lallemant (1678). Wood attributes to him "The Childe's Catechism" (1678). WELLDON, Chronological Notes on the English Benedictine Congregation (London, 1881; SNOW, Necrology of the English Congregation O. S. B. (London, 1883); WOOD, Athenae Oxonienses, ed. BLISS (London, 1813-20); OLIVER, Collections (London, 1857); GILLOW in Bibl. Dict. Eng. Cath.; COOPER in Dict. Nat. Biol. EDWIN BURTON Mary Anne Madden Sadlier Mary Anne Madden Sadlier Authoress, b. at Cootehill, Co. Cavan, Ireland, 30 Dee., 1820; d. at Montreal, Canada, 5 April, 1903. Her father, Francis Madden, a merchant of fine tastes, encouraged her literary aspirations, and her first efforts were printed in a London magazine, while she was still a girl. After the death of her father she emigrated to Montreal (1844). Here, two years later, she became the wife of James Sadlier, member of the firm, and manager of the Montreal branch of the New York publishing house of D. & J. Sadlier & Co. During the fourteen years that followed she continued to live in Montreal, and did most of the literary work that made her name famous. The family then moved to New York, where her husband died nine years later. The Sadliers owned a weekly paper ("The Tablet"), and in it the majority of her stories appeared. She contributed regularly also to its editorial columns. Her stories and translations number more than sixty volumes, and in their day enjoyed a well-deserved popularity among the rapidly-growing Irish-American community, on whose character, in its constructive period, they exerted a powerful influence. Many of them, admirably wrought out in simplicity of style and the naturalness of the characters, were written for a special purpose. "The Blakes and Flanagans" dealt with the school question "Bessy Conway"; with the trials of the Irish immigrant girl; "Aunt Honor's Keepsake" with the saving of the destitute Catholic children of New York for whom the great protectory was then founded. Irish history also supplied her with a constant source of inspiration which resulted in "The Red Hand of Ulster", "The Confederate Chieftains", "Maureen Dhu", "Life in Galway", "MacCarthy More", "The Old House by the Boyne" and other tales. She translated Orsini's "Life of the Blessed Virgin", and de Ligny's "Christ" and other works, and compiled a "Catechism of Sacred History". After her husband's death Mrs. Sadlier remained several years in New York, and then returned to Canada, where she spent the remainder of her days. ALLIBONE, Dictionary of Authors, s. v.; The Messenger (New York, May, 1903); The Ave Maria (Notre Dame, Indiana), files; The Catholic News (New York), files. THOMAS F. MEEHAN Sadoleto, Jacopo Jacopo Sadoleto Cardinal, humanist, and reformer, b. at Modena, 1477; d. at Rome, 1547. His father, a distinguished lawyer, intended him for his own profession; but Jacopo devoted himself to classical and philosophical studies. At Rome he enjoyed the favour of Cardinal Caraffa, and afterwards of Leo X, who made him his secretary. In 1517 he was appointed Bishop of Carpentras near Avignon. Unlike many of the humanists, he was a man of blameless life and attentive to all his duties as a priest and bishop. It was only at the express command of the successive popes whom he served that he would consent to absent himself even for a time from his diocese. In him were combined in an eminent degree the qualities of a man of piety, a man of letters, and a man of action. As a poet, orator, theologian, and philosopher he was in the foremost rank of his time. His poem on the recently discovered Laocoön first brought him to the notice of the learned. His mild and gentle character, shunning all extremes, and his profound learning fitted him for the difficult task of conciliating the Protestants. Indeed, his commentary on the Epistle to the Romans was considered to favour them too much, and the publication of it was forbidden at Rome until it had undergone correction. He would have nothing to do with persecuting the heretics. In 1536 he was summoned to Rome by Paul III to be a member of a special commission for the reform of the Church. In the following December he received the cardinal's hat, at the same time as Caraffa (afterwards Paul IV) and Pole, also members of the commission. With Cardinal Contarini (q. v.), the president of the commission, they drew up the famous "Consilium de emendanda Ecclesia", which they presented to the pope. Sadoleto was sent as legate to Francis I to bring about a reconciliation between him and Charles V (1542), but his mission failed. After 1543, when a coadjutor was appointed to govern Carpentras, he was constantly at the side of Paul III, ever urging the pontiff in the path of peace and reform. Sadoleto's works were published at Verona in four volumes (1737-8), and at Rome (1759). Joly, Etude sur Sadolet (Caen, 1856); Tiraboschi, Storia della letteratura italiana, XVIII (Venice, 1824); Pastor, Geschichte der Päpste, IV-V (Freiburg, 1906-9). It is only by perusing this last-named work that the extent of Sadoleto's activity and influence in the counter-Reformation can be estimated. T.B. SCANNELL Sagalassus Sagalassus A titular see in Pisidia, suffragan of Antioch. Sagalassus was one of the chief towns of Pisidia, near the north-west boundary of that province, in a fertile plain surrounded by hills, situated on the banks of an affluent of the Cestrus, a river which is represented on its coins. Alexander stormed it, after defeating its inhabitants in the neighbourhood. Cneius Manlius ravaged the district and made it pay a heavy war indemnity. After being subject to Amyntas, Tetrarch of Lycaonia and Galatia it became part of the Roman province of Pisidia. nothing else is known of its history, though it is mentioned by most of the ancient geographers; it is to be noted that Strabo (XII, 569) places it less accurately in Isauria, and Ptolemy (V, iii, 6) locates it erroneously in Lycia. Until the thirteenth century the "Notitiæ episcopatuum" mention it as the first suffragan see of Antioch in Pisidia. Le Quien (Oriens christianus, I, 1041) mentions four of its bishops: Jovius, present at the Council of Constantinople, 381; Frontianus, at Chalcedon, 451; Theodosius, at Nicæa, 787; Leo, at Constantinople, 869. This formerly wealthy and fortified city is now a poor village, called Aghiassoun by the Turks, about twenty-three miles south of Isbarta, in the vilayet of Koniah, containing some hundred inhabitants. It has immense ruined monuments, all later than the second century A. D.: a theatre, vast portico, gymnasium, ramparts, tombs, sarcophagi, churches, etc. ARUNDELL, A Visit to the Seven Churches, 132 seq.; HAMILTON, Researches in Asia Minor, I, 486 seq.; FELLOWS, Asia Minor, 164 seq.; SMITH, Dict. of Gr. and Rom. Geog., s. v., with bibliography of ancient authors; TEXIER, Asie mineure, 715; MÜLLER (ed. Didot), Notes à Ptolemy, I, 483. S. PÉTRIDÈS. Theodat-Gabriel Sagard Théodat-Gabriel Sagard Recollect lay brother, missionary, and historian, b. in France at the end of the sixteenth century; d. towards the close of the seventeenth. In 1623, with Nicolas Viel, the future martyr, he was sent to Canada on the Huron mission. Anne of Austria, the consort of Louis XIII, had provided them with a portable altar and vestments. On his way to the Hurons, he acquired from Joseph Le Caron, his superior, the first rudiments of their difficult tongue, so that on reaching his post he began to catechize and baptize the Indians. He shared in the incredible hardships of his companions. The provision of mass wine having been exhausted, they had recourse to the juice of the wild grape (Vitis Canadensis). In one year's residence he won the affection of his neophytes and acquired a certain ascendency over them. When appointed, in the spring of 1624, to descend to Quebec for provisions, he was allowed by the Indians to depart on the express condition that he would return. A letter of his superior, ordering him back to France, thwarted his most ardent desire. He presented a memoir concerning the state of religion to the Duc de Montmorency, Viceroy of New France, inveighing against the agents of the trading companies whose evil influence paralyzed the zeal of the missionaries. He convinced his superiors of the necessity of introducing a more powerful and influential religious order to cope with the difficult situation. The Jesuits having been suggested, the choice of them was ratified by Cardinal Richelieu in 1625. In 1686, Sagard published a history of Canada under the title: "Histoire du Canada et voyages que les Freres Mineurs Recollets ont faits pour la conversion des infideles". It is a clear and simple account of all he saw or heard mentioned in this new land. Charlevoix criticises his Huron vocabulary as inaccurate compared with later studies of the language, but gives him credit for his good judgment and zeal for the conversion of souls and the progress of the colony. CHARLEVOIX, Histoire de la Nouvelle-France (Paris, 1744); SIXTE LE TAC, Histoire chronologique de la Nouvelle-France (Paris, 1888); BEAUBIEN, Le Sault-au-Recollet (Montreal, 1898); GOSSELIN, La mission du Canada avant Mgr de Laval (Evreux, 1909). LIONEL LINDSAY Bernardino de Sahagun Bernardino de Sahagún Missionary and Aztec archeologist, b. at Sahagún, Kingdom of Leon, Spain, in or before the year 1500; d. at Mexico, 23 Oct., 1590. He studied at the convent of Salamanca where he took the vows of the order, and in 1529 was sent out to Mexico, being one of the earliest missionaries assigned to that country, where he labored until his death more than sixty years later. He was assigned to the college of Santa Cruz in Tlaltelolco, near the City of Mexico, and took up the work of preaching, conversion, and the instruction of the native youth in Spanish and Latin, science, music, and religion, while by close study and years of daily practice he himself acquired such mastery of the Aztec language as has never since been attained by any other student. Although several times filling administrative positions, he preferred to devote his attention solely to the work of instruction and investigation. His zeal and pre-eminent ability in respect to the Indian language and religion attracted the attention of his superior, who directed him to compile in the Aztec language a compendium of all things relating to the native history and custom that might be useful in the labor of Christianizing the Indians. The work thus undertaken occupied some seven years, in collaboration with the best native authorities, and was expanded into a history and description of the Aztec people and civilization in twelve manuscript books, together with a grammar (Arte) and dictionary of the language. Various delays enabled the author to continue revisions and additions for several years. One of these delays hinged upon the question of the hiring of clerical assistance as inconsistent with the Franciscan vow of poverty, although Father Sahagún, by reason of age and the trembling of his hand, was then unable to write himself. After five years of waiting it was decided in favor of the author, who was given the help he needed, and the complete Aztec manuscript with the grammar and dictionary, was finished in 1569. In the meantime a preliminary manuscript draft had been carried to Spain, where it became known to Ovando, president of the Council of the Indies, on whose request the Franciscan delegate general directed Father Sahagún to make a complete Spanish translation, furnishing all necessary assistance. On account of the fear of encouraging the educated natives to dwell upon their heathen past—a very real danger at the time—and on account also of the author's strictures upon the methods of the Conquistadores, it was not published, but was consulted in manuscript, being sent from one to the another college of the order, until finally carried to Spain and deposited in the convent of Tolosa, where it was found, and a copy made, by the archivist Muñoz shortly before 1800. It was published under the title "Hlstoria general de las cosas de Nueva España" in three volumes at Mexico in 1829, and in volumes five and seven of Kingsborough's "Mexican Antiquities", London, 1831. Father Sahagún thus describes the inception of the work: "I was commanded in all holy obedience by my chief prelate to write in the Mexican language that which appeared to me to be useful for the doctrine, worship, and maintenance of Christianity among these natives of New Spain, and for the aid of the ministers and workers that taught them. Having received this commandment, I made in the Spanish language a minute or memorandum of all the matters that I had to treat of, which matters are what is written in the twelve books . . . which were begun in the pueblo of Tepeopulco. . . . I got together all the principal men, together with the lord of the place, who was called Don Diego de Mendoza, of great distinction and ability well-experienced in things ecclesiastic, military, political, and even relating to idolatry. They being come together, I set before them what I proposed to do, and prayed them to appoint me able and experienced persons with whom I might converse and come to an understanding on such questions as I might propose. They answered me that they would talk the matter over and give their answer on another day; and with this they took their departure. So on another day the lord and his principal men came and having conferred together, with great solemnity, as they were accustomed at that time to do, they chose out ten or twelve of the principal old men, and told me that with these I might communicate and that these would instruct me in any matters I should inquire of. Of these there were as many as four instructed in Latin, to whom I, some few years before, had myself taught grammar in the college of Santa Cruz in Tlaltelolco. With these appointed principal men, including the four instructed in grammar, I talked many days during about two years, following the order of the minute I had already made out. On all the subjects on which we conferred they gave me pictures—which were the writings anciently in use among them—and these the grammarians interpreted to me in their language, writing the interpretation at the foot of the picture." Besides the "Historia", the "Arte" and the "Diccionario" (the last in Aztec, Spanish, and Latin) he was the author of a number of lesser works, mostly religious and in the Aztec language, among which may be noted a volume of sermons; an explanation of the Epistles and Gospels of the Mass; a history of the coming of the first Franciscans to Mexico, in two volumes; a Christian psalmody in Aztec, for the use of the neophytes in church (Mexico, 1583-84), and a catechism in the same language. He died at the age of ninety years, sixty-one of which had been devoted to missionary labor and research. At his funeral, which was attended by all the religious and students of the city, the Indians also attended, shedding tears. In Sahagún we have the ideal missionary priest and scholar. As a young man he was noted for his beauty and grace of person, and from childhood was given to prayer and self-restraint. His religious companions affirmed that he went into frequent ecstasies. He was most exact in the duties of his order, never missing Matins, even in his old age. Always and to all persons he was gentle, humble, and courteous. In over sixty years as college professor he rested not for a day "teaching civilization and good customs, reading, writing, grammar, music, and other in the service of God and the state". In addition to his unequaled mastery of the Mexican language, it was said of him that he excelled in all the sciences. BANCROFT, Native Races of the Pacific States: III, Myths and Languages (San Francisco, 1856); BERISTAIN Y SOUSA, Biblioteca Hispano Americana Setentrional III (Amecameca, 1883); PRECOTT, Conquest of Mexico, I (New York, 1843); VETANCURT, Menologio Franciscano (Mexico, 1871). JAMES MOONEY Sahaptin Indians Sahaptin Indians A prominent tribe formerly holding a considerable territory in Western Idaho and adjacent portions of Oregon and Washington, including the lower Snake River, with its tributaries the Salmon, Clearwater, and Grande Ronde, from about 45° down nearly to the entrance of the Palouse, and from the Blue Mountains of Oregon on the west to the main divide of the Bitter-root Mountains on the east. They are of the Shahaptian linguistic stock, to which belong also the Palouse, Umatilla, Tenino (Warmsprings), Yakima and others farther to the west, with whom they maintained close friendly relations, while frequently at variance with the Salishan tribes on their northern border — the Flatheads, Coeur d'Alene and Spokan — and in chronic warfare with the Blackfeet, Crows, and Shoshoni on the east and south. They call themselves Numipu, meaning simply "people". The name Sahaptin or Saptin comes through the Salishan tribes. By Lewis and Clark (1805) they were called Chopunnish, possibly another form of Saptin. Their popular and official name of Nez Percés, "Pierced Noses", originally bestowed by the French trappers, refers to a former custom of wearing a dentalium shell through a hole bored in the septum of the nose. When first known (1805) they numbered, according to the most reliable estimates, probably over 6000, but have greatly decreased since the advent of the whites, and are still steadily on the decline. Contributing causes are incessant wars with the more powerful Blackfeet in earlier years; a wasting fever, and measles epidemic (1847) from contact with immigrants; smallpox and other diseases following the occupation of the country by miners after 1860; losses in the war of 1877 and subsequent removals; and wholesale spread of consumption due to their changed condition of living under civilization. In 1848 they were officially estimated at 3000; in 1862 they were reported at 2800; in 1893 the census showed 2035; in 1910 they were officially reported at 1530, including all mixed bloods, all upon the Fort Lapwai (allotted) reservation in northern Idaho, excepting the remnant of Joseph's band, numbering then only 97, upon Colville reservation in north-eastern Washington. Of their numerous former bands, this one, formerly centring in Wallowa (or Willewah) valley, Oregon, was perhaps the most important, numbering originally about 500. In their primitive condition the Nez Percés, although semi-sedentary, were without agriculture, depending on hunting, fishing, and the gathering of wild roots and berries. Their permanent houses were communal structures, sometimes circular, but more often oblong, about twenty feet in width and sixty to ninety feet in length, with framework of poles covered by rush mats, with floor sunk below the ground level, and earth banked up around the sides, and with an open space along the centre of the roof, for the escape of smoke. On the inside were ranged fires along the centre at a distance of ten or twelve feet apart, each fire serving two families on opposite sides of the house, the family sections being sometimes separated by mat curtains. One house might thus shelter more than one hundred persons. Lewis and Clark mention one large enough to accommodate nearly fifty families. On temporary expeditions they used the ordinary buffalo-skin tipi or brush shelter. They had also sweat-houses and menstrual lodges. The permanent sweat-house was a shallow subterranean excavation, roofed with poles and earth and bedded with grass, in which the young and unmarried men slept during the winter season, and occasionally sweated themselves by means of steam produced by pouring water upon hot stones placed in the centre. The temporary sweat-house used by both sexes was a framework of willow rods, covered with blankets, with the heated stones placed inside. The menstrual lodge, for the seclusion of women during the menstrual period and for a short period before and after childbirth, was a subterranean structure, considerably larger than the sweat-house, and entered by means of a ladder from above. The occupants thus secluded cooked their meals alone and were not allowed even to touch any articles used by outsiders. Furniture consisted chiefly of bed platforms, baskets and bags woven of rushes or grass, wooden mortars for pounding roots and spoons of horn. The woman had also her digging stick for gathering roots; the man his bow, lance, shield, and fishing equipment. The Nez Percé bow of mountain-sheep horn backed with sinew was the finest in the West. The ordinary dress was of skins, with the addition of a fez-shaped basket hat for the woman and a protective skin helmet for the warrior. Aside from fish and game, chiefly salmon and deer, their principal foods were the roots of the camas (Camassia esculenta) and kouse (Lomatium kous, etc.), the first being roasted in pits by a peculiar process, while the other was ground in mortars and molded into cakes for future use. The gathering and preparing devolved upon the women. Marriage occurred at about the age of fourteen and was accompanied by feasting and giving of presents. Polygamy was general, but kinship prohibition was enforced even to the third degree. Inheritance was in the male line. "The standard of morality, both before and after marriage seems to have been conspicuously high" (Spinden). Interment was in the ground, the personal belongings of the deceased being deposited with the body, and the house torn down or removed to another spot. The new house was ceremonially purified and the ghost exorcised, and the mourning period was terminated with a funeral feast. Sickness and death, especially of children, were frequently ascribed to the work of ghosts. The religion was animistic, with a marked absence of elaborate myth or ritual. The principal religious event in the life of the boy or girl was the dream vigil, when, after the solitary fasting for several days, the fevered child had a vision of the spirit animal which was to be his or her tutelary through life. Dreams were the great source of spiritual instruction. The principal ceremonial was the dance to the tutelary spirit, next to which in importance was the scalp dance. The clan system was unknown. Chiefs were elective rather than hereditary, governing by assistance of the council, and there was no supreme tribal chief. They were considerably under the influence of the so-called "Dreamer religion" of the upper Columbia tribes, but had no part in the later "ghost dance". Previous to the visit of the American explorers, Lewis and Clark (1805), the Nez Percés had had no direct acquaintance with white men, although aware of their presence beyond the mountains and on the Pacific coast. They already had horses from the South. A few years later trading posts were established in the upper Columbia region, and from the Catholic Canadian and Iroquois employees of the Hudson's Bay Company traders they first learned of Christianity and as early as 1820 both they and the Flatheads had voluntarily adopted many of the Catholic forms. Of the Nez Percés it has been said: "They seemed to realize the paucity of their religious traditions and from the first eagerly seconded the efforts of the missionaries to instruct them in the Christian faith." As a result of urgent appeals from the Flathead Indians for missionaries, a Presbyterian mission was established (1837) among the Nez Percés at Lapwai, near the present Lewistown, Idaho, under Reverend H.H. Spaulding, who, two years later, set up a printing press from which he issued several small publications in the native language. Regular Catholic work in the same region began with the advent of Fathers Blanchet and Demers on the Columbia (1838) and of De Smet and the Jesuits in the Flathead country (1840). The establishment of the Oregon trail through the country of the Nez Percés and allied tribes led (1849) to the introduction of an epidemic disease, by which they were terribly wasted, particularly the Cayuse, who, holding responsible Dr. Whitman, in charge of the Presbyterian mission in their tribe, attacked and destroyed the mission, murdering Whitman and his wife and eleven others. The Catholic Bishop Brouillet, who was on his way at the time to confer with Whitman for the purchase of the mission property, was not molested, but was allowed to bury the dead and then found opportunity to warn Spaulding in time for him to reach safety. In consequence of these troubles all the Presbyterian missions in the Columbia region were discontinued but the work was resumed in later years and a considerable portion of the Nez Percés are now of that denomination. In 1855 they sold by treaty a large part of their territory. In the general outbreak of 1855-6, sometimes designated as the Yakima war, the Nez Percés, almost alone, remained friendly. In the year 1863, in consequence of the discovery of gold, another treaty was negotiated by which they surrendered all but the Lapwai reservation. Joseph, whose band held the Wallowa valley in North-Eastern Oregon, refused to be a party to the treaty, and his refusal led to the memorable Nez Percés war (1877). After successfully holding in check for some months the regular troops under General Howard and a large force of Indian scouts, Joseph conducted a masterly retreat for over a thousand miles across the mountains, but was finally intercepted by General Miles when within a short distance of the Canadian frontier. Despite the promise that he should be returned to his own country, Joseph and the remnant of his band were deported to Oklahoma, where they wasted away so rapidly that in 1885 the few who survived were transferred, not to Lapwai, but to the Colville reservation in Washington. Throughout the entire retreat no outrage was committed by Joseph's warriors. The main portion of the tribe took no part in the war. In 1893 those of Lapwai were given individual allotments and the reservation was thrown open to white settlement. The Catholic work in the tribe is in charge of the Jesuits, aided by the Sisters of Saint Joseph, and centring at St. Joseph's mission, Slickpoo, Idaho. For fifty years it was conducted by Fr. Joseph Cataldo,. S.J., who gave attention also to the neighbouring cognate tribes. The Catholic Indians are reported at over 500, edifying and faithful in their religious duties, in spite of the general tribal aversion to education and civilization. The materiel condition of the tribe, however, is not promising. While maintaining their old reputation for honesty and generosity, they are non-progressive and are rapidly withering away under consumption, which threatens their speedy extinction. Aside from the Spaulding publications already noted the most valuable contributions to the study of the Nez Percé language are a grammar by Father Cataldo and a dictionary by Father Van Gorp. The most important study of a cognate language is probably the "Grammar and Dictionary of the Yakama Language" by the Oblate Father Pandosy (see Yakima). BANCROFT, Native Races of the Pacific States; I, Wild Tribes; III, Myths and Languages (San Francisco, 1886); IDEM, HIST. Washington, Idaho and Montana (San Francisco, 1890), Annual Reports of Bureau of Catholic Indian Missions (Washington); CATALDO, A Numipu or Nez Percé Grammar (De Smet, 1891); CHITTENDEN, American Fur Trade (New York, 1902), Annual Reports of the Commissioner Indian Affairs (Washington); COX, Adventures on the Columbia (New York, 1832); DE SMET, Life, Letters, and Travels, ed. CHITTENDEN AND RICHARDSON (4 vols., New York, 1905); HENRY AND THOMPSON, New Light on the Early History of the Greater Northwest, ed. COUES (3 vols., New York 1897); IRVING, Rocky Mountains (2 vols., Philadelphia, 1837); IDEM, Astoria (2 vols., Philadelphia, 1836); LEWIS AND CLARK, Original Journals (1804-6), ed. THWAITES, 7 vols. and atlas (New York 1904- 5); MCBETH, Nez Percés since Lewis and Clark (New York, 1908); MOONEY, The Ghost Dance Religion, 14th Rept. Bur. Am. Ethnology, II (Washington, 1896); PARKER, Journey of a Tour beyond the Rocky Mountains (Auburn, 1846); ROSS, Adventures on the Columbia (London, 1849), reprint in THWAITES, Early Western Travels, VII (Cleveland, 1904); IDEM, Fur Traders of the Far West (2 vols., London, 1855); SPAULDING, Nez Percés First Book (Lapwai, 1839); IDEM, Primer in the Nez Percés Language (Lapwai, 1840); IDEM, Gospel of Matthew in Nez Percés Language (Clearwater, Lapwai, 1845); SPINDEN, Myths of the Nez Percé Inds. in Jour. Am. Folk Lore, XXI (Boston, 1908); IDEM, The Nez Percé Indians in Memoirs Am. Anthrop. Assn., II, pt. iii (Lancaster, 1908); STEVENS, Report in Rept. Comsner. Ind. Affairs for 1854 (Washington, 1855); IDEM, Narrative and final Report in Pacific R.R. Reports, XII, B. 1 (Washington, 1860); VAN GORP, Dictionary of the Numipu or Nez Percé Language (St. Ignatius, Montana, 1895); WYETH, Correspondence and Journals, 1831-6; Sources of the History of Oregon, I, pts. iii-vi in Oregon Hist. Soc. (Eugene, Oregon, 1899). JAMES MOONEY Vicariate Apostolic of Sahara Vicariate Apostolic of Sahara The Sahara is a vast desert of northern Africa, measuring about 932 miles from north to south and 2484 miles from east to west, and dotted with oases which are centres of population. Eight years after the journey of the famous Duveyrier (1859-61), which had important scientific results, Pius IX (6 Aug., 1868) appointed the Archbishop of Algiers, Mgr Lavigerie, delegate Apostolic of the Sahara and the Sudan. In the same year the Jesuits established themselves at Laghouat, the extremity occupied by French arms. In 1871 they sent to Mgr Lavigerie a long report in which they advocated the establishment of dispensaries and schools. In 1872 Father Charmetant and two other White Fathers (Missionary Fathers of Africa of Algiers) replaced the Jesuits at Laghouat. In 1573 the White Fathers established themselves at Biskra, Ouargla, Touggart, and Gerryville. Later a station was founded at Melili in Mzab. Two successive attempts were made by the White Fathers to reach the Sudan by crossing the Sahara, thus reaching Timbuktu, a large market for black slaves, there to join in the struggle against slavery. The first attempt was made in December, 1878, by Fathers Menoret, Paulmier, and Bouchand; they were slain in April, 1876, by their Touarag guides, being the first martyrs of the Society of White Fathers, and the cause of their beatification was introduced at Rome in 1909. After this disaster the White Fathers founded two stations, not farther north in the desert, but to the north-east, at Tripoli and Ghadames. The massacre of the explorer Flatters and his companions (1880-81) did not discourage the White Fathers in their second attempt to cross the Sahara. In 1881 Father Richard set out from Ghadames, having become so Arabian in speech and bearing that no one suspected his nationality. He intended to establish himself with Fathers Morat and Pouplard at Ghat in the midst of the desert, but all three were assassinated. The White Fathers then left Ghadames. On 25 March, 1890, while the Brussels conference against slavery was being held, Mgr Lavigerie explained in a letter to Keller that to eradicate in Africa the great corporation of the Senoussi, which protected the slave-trade, the Sahara must be crossed, and he announced the opening at Biskra, at the entrance to the Sahara, of a house which he called the House of God, intended for the formation of the "Brothers of the Sahara", or "Pioneers of the Sahara", who would be engaged in charitable works and in extending hospitality to travelers, the sick, and fugitive slaves. The Pioneers of the Sahara had to live as religious, but without monastic vows. As early as February, 1891, the station at Ouargla, suppressed in 1876, was re-established, and in October Father Harquard sent thither six armed "pioneers" who wrote to the cardinal: "We shall endeavor to hold high the banner of the Sacred Heart and the flag of France." The White Sisters founded hospitals at Ghardaia and El Tbiod Sidi Cheikh, thus gaining the confidence of populations which were hostile to France. The Fourean-Lamy expedition of 1898, which succeeded in crossing the desert as far as Lake Tehad, opened wider avenues to the Catholic apostolate. The Prefecture Apostolic of the Sahara and the Sudan became a vicariate Apostolic on 6 March, 1891, and in 1901 received new boundaries by which the Prefecture Apostolic of Ghardaia was separated from it. The twentieth degree of latitude forms the boundary between them. The vicariate governs 1000 European Catholics, 600 negro Catholics, 4000 catechumens, 40 missionaries, 15 sisters, 35 catechists; it has 12 churches or chapels, 10 schools, 7 orphanages, 3 leper houses, 2 hospitals. The population of the Sahara is estimated at 4,000,000. VOILLOT, L'exploration du Sahara, etude historique et geographique (Paris, 1895); BERNARD AND LACROIX, La penetration saharaienne (Algiers, 1909); BAUNARD, Le cardinal Lavigerie (Paris, 1896, 1898); Annales de la propagagation de la Foi (1909), 333-40; PIOLET, La France au dehors, V (Paris, 1902). GEORGES GOYAU Johann Michael Sailer Johann Michael Sailer Professor of theology and Bishop of Ratisbon, b. at Aresing in Upper Bavaria 17 October, 1751; d. 20 May, 1832, at Ratisbon. Sailer was the son of a poor shoemaker. Until his tenth year he attended the primary school in his native place; after this he was a pupil in the gymnasium at Munich. In 1770 he entered the Society of Jesus at Landsberg in Upper Bavaria as a novice; upon the suppression of the Society in 1773 he continued his theological and philosophical studies at Ingolstadt. In 1775 he was ordained priest; 1777-80 he was a tutor of philosophy and theology, and from 1780 second professor of dogmatics at Ingolstadt. Along with many others, he lost his position in 1781 when the Elector Charles Theodore transferred theological instruction to the monasteries. In the years 1781-84 while engaged in literary work he attracted the attention of the elector and Bishop Clement Wenceslaus. In 1794 the latter called Sailer to Dillingen as professor of pastoral theology and ethics, a position which Sailer held for ten years and which brought him a high reputation. His opponents, professors of Dillingen and Rossle, the principal of the school at Pfaffenhausen, succeeded in limiting Sailer's activities in 1793 and in securing his sudden dismissal in 1794. Sailer now went to visit his friend Winkelhofer at Munich, and pursued there by his opponents, went to the house of his friend Beck at Ebersberg. Here he devoted himself to literary work until, in 1799, he was called to a professorship at Ingolstadt. In 1800 he was transferred along with the university to Landshut. Here he taught pastoral and moral theology, pedagogics, homiletics, liturgy, and catechetics; celebrated as a teacher and a writer he was repeatedly called to other positions, was on terms of friendship with distinguished Catholics and Protestants, and was universally revered by his pupils, among whom was the Crown Prince Louis, later King of Bavaria. In 1818 Sailer declined the offer of the Prussian Government to have him appointed Archbishop of Cologne; in 1819 the Bavarian Government, through the influence of the Crown Prince Louis, nominated him as Bishop of Augsburg, but the nomination was rejected by Rome. In 1821, however, after he had sufficiently justified himself, he was appointed cathedral canon of Ratisbon, in 1822 auxiliary bishop and coadjutor with right of succession, in 1825 cathedral provost, and in 1829 Bishop of Ratisbon. The age in which Sailer lived was dominated by the "Enlightenment", which in its radical form disputed the fundamental dogmas of Christianity, and was characterized by externalism, contempt for Christian mysticism, worldliness of the clergy, degradation of the pulpit by the treatment of secular topics, relaxation of ecclesiastical discipline, denial of the primacy of papal jurisdiction, efforts of the State to gain control of the Church, turbulent reforms within the Church, and a one-sided training of the mind in education. In opposition to these destructive tendencies Sailer came to the defense of faith in Christ and in the fundamental principles of Christianity, striving for an inner, living, practical Christianity, for a faith that should manifest itself in charity, for the maintenance of godliness (Christian mysticism), and for the training of a pious and intelligent clergy. He also insisted that the pulpit should be reserved solely for the preaching of the Gospel, and that the bishops should be in union with the pope; he upheld the primacy of the papal jurisdiction, and defended the freedom and rights of the Church against the encroachments of the State. Ecclesiastical reform he ardently desired, not, however, through unauthorized agencies but by the appointed organs of the Church; and he demanded that education should aim at training both mind and will. Sailer labored for the Christian ideal by his winning personality, by his utterances as teacher, parish priest, and preacher, and by his numerous works that were philosophical, theological, devotional, and biographical in character. Thus Sailer brought back large numbers of people to Chrlstianity and the Church. Notwithstanding his fruitful activity and his benevolence, Sailer had antagonists who opposed him partly from jealousy, partly from misunderstanding and ill-will; he was accused of heterodoxy, indifferentism, and mysticism. If Sailer is judged in connection with his times, these reproaches are without foundation. In his day Sailer was a pillar of the Church. A perfectly correct judgment of Sailer has been expressed by Goyau in "L'Allemagne religieuse" (Paris,1905): "With Sailer German piety, both Protestant and Catholic, learned again to pray. This is the peculiar characteristic of his activity. Do not expect from him any religious polemics; he abhorred them; what he really cherished was the idea of a sort of coöperation of the various Christian bodies against the negations of infidelity. Sailer made a breach in Rationalism, by opposing to it a piety in which both Christian bodies could unite" (pp. 294, 295). The best edition of his works is "J.M. Sailers samtliche Werke unter Anleitung des Verfassers", ed. Joseph Widmer, 40 vols., Sulzbach, 1830-41; supplementary volume, 1845. SAILER, Selbstbiographie (1819), vol. XIX of collected works; VON SCHENK, Die Bischofe Sailer u. Wittmann in Charitas (1838); VON SCHMID, Erinnerungen aus meinem Leben (2 vols., Augshurg, 1853); LUTOLF, Leben u. Bekenntnisse des Jos. L. Schiffmann, ein Beitrag zur Charakteristik Sailers u. seiner Schule in der Schweiz (Lucerne, I860); AICHINGER, J.M. Sailer (Freising, 1865); JOCHAM, Dr. Alois Buchner, ein Lebensbild zur Verstandigung uber J.M. Sailers Priesterschule (Augsburg, 1870); VON MULLER, Jean Paul u. Sailer als Erzieher der deutschen Nation (Munich 1908); KL0TZ, Sailer als Moralphilosoph (Paderborn, 1908); RADLMAIER, J.M. Sailer als Padagog (Berlin, 1909); STOLZLE, J.M. Sailer u. seine Bedeutung in Hochland (1910); IDEM, J.M. Sailers Schriften, ausgewahlt u. eingeleitet (Kempten and Munich, 19lO); IDEM, J.M. Sailer, seine Massregelung an der Akademie zu Dillingen u. seine Berufung nach Ingolstadt; ein Beitrag zu Gelehrtengesch. aus dem Zeitalter der Aufklarung (Kempten and Munich, 1910). R. STOLZLE Claude de Sainctes Claude de Sainctes French controversialist, b. at Perche, 1525; d. at Crèvecoeur, 1591. At the age of fifteen he joined the Canons Regular of Saint-Cheron, and was sent to the College of Navarre in Paris, where he received the degree of Doctor of Theology (1555) On account of the erudition of his early works and the aptitude which he showed for controversy, he was called to the Conference of Poissy held in 1561 between the Catholics and the Huguenots, at which Theodore of Beza and Father Lainez, general of the Jesuits, were present. He was afterwards deputed to the Council of Trent to represent, with Simon Vigor, the University of Paris. Upon his return he acquired a notable reputation by his sermons and his discussions with Protestants. He published a work against their spoliation of Catholic churches and a vigorous declaration against the doctrines of Calvin and Theodore of Beza; the latter replied and drew upon himself a new attack from Claude de Sainctes. At the same time he charged the King of France by his treatise on "L'ancien naturel des Français" never to tolerate heretics and against these latter he defended the dogma of the Church by an exhaustive treatise on the Eucharist. Through the patronage of the Cardinal of Lorraine, he was appointed to the Bishopric of Evreux (1575). He was very zealous in his efforts to convert Protestants. He assisted at the provincial Council of Rouen (1581) and published its records in French. When the League became active he took sides with it and worked to gain partisans, but the royal troops took possession of Evreux and the bishop was forced to flee. Unfortunately for him there were found among his papers writings in which he approved the murder of Henry III and maintained that one could likewise kill his successor. Arrested and arraigned before the Parlement of Caen, he was condemned to death as guilty of high treason. At the request of the Cardinal of Bourbon and of several bishops, Henry IV commuted his sentence to life imprisonment, and he was confined in the château of Crèvecoeur where he died two months later. His works were published, some in Latin and others in French. The more important are: "Liturgiae sive missae SS. Patrum Jacobi, Basilii J. Chrysostomi" (Greek-Latin, Paris, 1560); "Discours sur le saccagement des églises catholiques par les hérétiques anciens et nouveaux calvinistes" (Paris, 1562); "Traité de l'ancien naturel des Français en la religion chrétienne" (Paris, 1567); "Déclaration d'anciens athéismes de la doctrine de Calvin et de Bèze contre les premiers fondements de la chrétienté" (Paris, 1567); "De rebus Eucharistiae controversis libri X" (Paris, 1575). DUPIN, Hist.des auteurs ecclesiastiques du XVIe siecle, IV (Paris, 1703), 539; HURTER, Nomencl. ANTOINE DEGERT Abbey of Saint Albans Abbey of Saint Albans Located in Hertfordshire, England; founded about 793 by Offa, king of the Mercians. Venerable Bede (Hist. Eccles., I, vii), writing at the beginning of the eighth century, speaks of a church, existing at that date, of wonderful workmanship and worthy of the martyrdom it commemorated. Offa's monastery seems to have been attached to this church, which he repaired, having personally obtained the papal approval for his foundation. Willegod, a relation of the king, was made abbot. By the year 1000 the old church was evidently in a dilapidated state again and Ealdred and Eadmer, the eighth and ninth abbots, collected materials to build a new church from the ruins of the Roman city of Verulam. The actual building was only begun in 1077, when Abbot Paul of Caen, a relative of Archbishop Lanfranc, undertook the work with such energy that the whole church was completed in eleven years; a large part of this church still remains. The abbey increased in wealth and importance; Adrian IV exempted it from episcopal jurisdiction and gave it precedence over all other English abbeys. In the Wars of the Roses St. Albans suffered much, and the unsettled state of the country involved the abbey in a long series of lawsuits by which it was much impoverished. In 1521 Cardinal Wolsey became abbot in commendam, the only instance of this practice known in England. On his disgrace in 1529 Robert Catton, prior of Norwlch, was elected abbot, but was deprived in 1538 to make room for a nominee of Henry VIII, Robert Boreman, by whom the abbey was surrendered to the king in the following year. The list of abbots may be found in Dugdale. Matthew Paris is probably the most famous monk of the foundation, which is notorious for refusing to accept Nicholas Breakspere, afterwards Adrian IV, when he begged for admission as a novice. The church of St. Albans escaped destruction at the dissolution of the abbey, and in 1553 was purchased from the Crown for £400 by the mayor and burgesses of the town, to be used as a parish church. Of the church built by Paul of Caen most of the nave, transepts, and presbytery still exist, but portions fell and were rebuilt in the style of the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries. The eastern part of the presbytery with the Lady chapel beyond it also belong to the latter periods. In the second half of the nineteenth century the late Lord Grimthorpe undertook to restore the building at his own expense. In spite of all remonstrance he did this in such a way that "to grimthorpe" has now become an active verb signifying the unintelligent mutilation of an ancient building under the cloak of restoration. The church is 550 feet long, and 190 wide across the transepts, the central tower being 144 feet high. It contains a famous reredos of the late fifteenth century, the reconstructed base of St. Alban's shrine, and several fine chantries and monuments. Of the conventual buildings only the gatehouse now remains. DUGDALE, Monasticon Anglicanum, II (London, 1846), 178-255; NEWCOME, History of the Abbey of St. Albans (London, 1795); BUCKLER, History of the Architecture of the Abbey Church of St. A. (London, 1847); BROWNE WILLIS, History of the Mitred Abbies, I (London, 1718), 13-27; COMYNS-CARR Abbey Church of St. A. (London, 1877); PERKINS, Cathedral Church of St. Albans (London, 1910). G. ROGER HUDLESTON Diocese of Saint Albert Diocese of Saint Albert (SANCTI ALBERTI). The immense territories, known to-day as the Provinces of Manitoba, Saskatchewan, and Alberta, formed till 1871 only one diocese under the name of St. Boniface. On 22 Sept., 1871, St. Boniface having been elevated to the rank of archdiocese, the new Diocese of St. Albert was canonically erected and Right Rev. Vital J. Grandin, O.M.I. (consecrated 30 Nov., 1859, Bishop of Satala and appointed co-adjutor of the Bishop of St. Boniface) was transferred to the new see. The first Bishop of St. Albert died on 3 June, 1902, after a long episcopate of nearly forty-five years, and half a century of missionary life. He was succeeded by Right Rev. Emile J. Legal, O.M.I. (consecrated Bishop of Pogla, 17 June, 1897, and coadjutor of St. Albert, 3 June, 1902). This diocese, even after having been subdivided in 1891 to form the Vicariate Apostolic of Saskatchewan, comprises the southern half of Province of Alberta and the western part of Saskatchewan, an area of some 150,000 square miles. It is bounded on the east by the 110th degree of longitude; on the west by the Rocky Mountains; on the south by the United States, and on the north by the 55th degree of latitude. At the time of its erection, the total population of the diocese was from 4000 to 5000 half-breeds, 10,000 to 12,000 Indians belonging to half a dozen tribes, and a few hundred white people, employees of the Hudson Bay Company. The evangelization of this new diocese was then entrusted to twelve Oblates of Mary Immaculate. Five missions had been established, hundreds of miles apart. The first cathedral was a log-house and the bishop's palace a small frame building. Three schools and two orphan asylums were in charge of Sisters of Charity. The whole Catholic population numbered scarcely 10,000. Though cut off from all means of communication with the civilized world, receiving but a yearly mail, deprived not only of all comfort, but even of the necessaries of life, obliged to travel long distances, camping outside for weeks and even months consecutively, in cold of 30 to 40 degrees, to spread the knowledge of divine Faith and establish here and there new centres of missions, the first two bishops of St. Albert and their missionaries never despaired or lost faith in the future of their work. After several years of hard struggle a great change became apparent. In 1874-75, the Canadian Government having established a few posts of mounted police in the diocese, new settlements were founded. Reservations for the Indians were established; churches, schools, and missions built. At the same time a considerable number of half-breeds from Manitoba settled in the eastern part of the diocese, where they soon formed new parishes or missions. In 1883-84 the opening of the Canadian Pacific Railway brought colonies of immigrants, and soon the work of the missions was much increased. In 1890 the Diocese of St. Albert was divided, and the Vicariate Apostolic of Saskatchewan created, which in 1911 was erected as a diocese. Since 1890 the development of the missionary work has been wonderful. An appeal was made in 1891 to the secular clergy to come and help the Oblates of Mary Immaculate who could no longer attend alone to so many stations, missions, and parishes, already erected or urgently needed. Several secular priests, and later several religious orders came to help in the work of education and evangelization. The Catholic population of the diocese is now 55,000, of which about 15,000 are Greek Catholics. They are attended by 1 bishop; 98 regular priests; 20 secular priests; and 33 seminarists. There are: churches with resident priests, 56; missions, 55; stations, 98; communities of men, 9, of women, 15; boarding schools, 14; 1 industrial school for Indians; boarding schools for Indians, 8; primary schools, 60; hospitals, 11; hospices, 2; orphan asylums, 20. The great majority of the Cree Indians have been converted to the Catholic Faith, and the Blackfeet have of late manifested better dispositions. French, English, German, and Polish-speaking Catholics have parishes or missions of their own. Thousands of Galicians of the Greek Catholic Rite have started three flourishing missions attended by Basilian Fathers of the same rite. A community of nuns, belonging also to the Greek Catholic Church has been founded to take charge of their schools and charitable institutions. The Diocese of St. Albert, after many years of almost insurmountable obstacles and difficulties, has become one of the most promising of Western Canada. It is crossed by the transcontinental lines of the Canadian Pacific, the Grand Trunk Pacific and Canadian Northern Railways, and towns and villages spring up almost every ten miles. Immigrants come daily from all parts of the civilized world. Among them a fair proportion of Catholics take possession of the soil, settle on their homesteads, and new fields of missionary labour are incessantly open to the zeal of the secular and regular clergy of St. Albert. Annuaire Pontif. Cath. (1911); MORICE, History of the Catholic Church in Western Canada, I, II (Toronto, 1910). H. LEDUC Saint Andrews and Edinburgh Saint Andrews and Edinburgh (S. Andreae et Edinburgensis). Archdiocese. The exact date of the foundation of the See of St. Andrews is, like any others in the earliest history of the Scottish Church, difficult, if not impossible, to fix. That there were bishops in the country now called Scotland, and exercising jurisdiction in the district where the city of St. Andrews afterwards arose, as early as the eighth or ninth century, is practically certain. We may, however, take 908, the year of the famous assembly at the Moot hill of Scene, as that in which a Bishop of St. Andrews (Cellach) first appears in history, vowing, in association with the king (Constantine), to "protect the laws and discipline of the Faith, and the rights of the churches and of the Gospel". In the two most ancient and authentic lists that have come down to us, those given by Wyntoun, Prior of Lochleven, and by Bower of Inchcolm in his "Scotichronicon", Cellach is called the first Bishop of St. Andrews. For two centuries the bishops bore Celtic names -- Fothad, Maelbrigd, Maelduin, and the like=2E The death of Fothad II (1093) marks the close of the first period of the history of the see, of which scanty records and still scantier material traces remain. The English influence on Scottish national life, both ecclesiastical and civil, which followed the marriage of St. Margaret, great-niece of Edward the Confessor, to the King of Scots in 1069, had as one of its results the nomination of Turgot (Margaret's former confessor) to the See of St. Andrews. He was succeeded by Eadmer, a Benedictine monk of Canterbury; and Eadmer by Robert, a canon regular of St. Augustine, who founded at St. Andrews in 1144 the cathedral priory for canons of his own order. It was his successor Arnold who began, at the eastern end, the construction of the magnificent cathedral, the building of which occupied more than a century and a half. Meanwhile the bishops of St. Andrews, although they claimed and exercised (as their Celtic predecessors had done) the right of presiding at all assemblies of the Scottish clergy, had never been formally granted the ecclesiastical primacy: indeed in 1225 their position was seriously affected by a Bull of Honorius III, enjoining that future synods were to be presided over by one of the bishops, styled the Conservator, to be elected by his brother prelates. This arrangement, which of course deprived the bishops of St. Andrews of their quasi-primatial jurisdiction, remained in force until the subsequent erection of the see into an archbishopric. It was William Lamberton, the twenty-third bishop of the diocese, who had the honour of seeing the cathedral completed, and solemnly consecrated in presence of King Robert Bruce on 5 July, 1318. The building was 355 feet in length, and consisted of a nave of twelve bays with aisles, north and south transepts, each of three bays, with eastern aisles, choir of five bays with aisles, and presbytery. Sixty years after the consecration it was partly destroyed by fire, but was completely restored before 1440. Bishop Lamberton built the beautiful chapter-house, which still exists, though roofless. Among Lamberton's most eminent successors were Henry Wardlaw, who founded the University of St. Andrews in 1411, James Kennedy, founder of St. Salvator's College, and Patrick Graham (Kennedy's half-brother), who successfully resisted the claim revived by Archbishop Neville of York to have the supremacy of that see over the Scottish Church recognized in Rome. So successful was Graham's protest, that Sixtus IV finally decided the question by a Bull, 27 August, 1472, erecting the See of St. Andrews into an archbishopric, and its cathedral into the metropolitan church for the whole of Scotland. Twelve sees were assigned to St. Andrews as its suffragans, those of Glasgow, Dunkeld, Aberdeen, Moray, Brechin, Dunblane, Ross, Caithness, Orkney, Argyll, the Isles, and Galloway. The last-named bishopric had hitherto been subject to York, while those of Orkney, Argyll, and the Isles had continued to form part of the Province of Trondhjem in Norway. Pope Sixtus announced the new creation in letters addressed to James III and to the Scottish bishops, and he also conferred on the primate the office of Apostolic nuncio. The new metropolitan see, however, preserved its unique position for barely twenty years. Scotland was unanimous in demanding -- through its king, its chancellor, and its bishops -- that the ancient See of Glasgow should be similarly honoured; and in 1492 Innocent VIII erected it also into an archbishopric and separate province, with Dunkeld, Dunblane, Galloway, and Argyll as suffragans. In 1496 James IV procured the nomination to St. Andrews first of his brother, the Duke of Ross, and, after his death (by an abuse too common in those times), of his own natural son, Alexander Stuart, a boy of sixteen. The youthful archbishop fell at Flodden in 1513, fighting by his father's side. He was followed successively by Archbishops Forman, James and David (Cardinal) Beaton, and Hamilton. At the period immediately preceding the Reformation and the spoliation of the ancient Church, the ecclesiastical jurisdiction of the primate included two archdeaconries, nine rural deaneries, the patronage of 131 benefices, and the administration of 245 parishes. Archbishop Hamilton (q. v.) was hanged at Stirling (in his pontifical vestments) on 5 April, 1571; and though the few remaining members of his cathedral chapter duly elected Robert Hay as his successor, he was never consecrated, and the See of St. Andrews remained vacant for three hundred and seven years. For nearly a century the scattered Catholics of the former archdiocese were under the jurisdiction of the English prefects and vicars Apostolic; but in 1653 a prefect of the Scottish Mission (William Ballantyne) was appointed by the Holy See. Forty years later the first vicar Apostolic for Scotland (Bishop Nicholson) was consecrated in Paris. The country was divided into two vicariates in 1726, a Highland and a Lowland, and just a hundred years later Leo XII added a third, the Eastern, including the whole of the former Archdiocese of St. Andrews. At length, on 4 March, 1878, the regular hierarchy was restored by Leo XIII. The Catholic Diocese of St. Andrews and Edinburgh as defined in the Apostolic Letter "Ex Supremo Apostolatus Apice" of 4 March 1878, comprises the counties of Edinburgh, Berwick, Fife (southern part), Haddington, Linlithgow, Peebles, Roxburgh, Selkirk and (practically) Stirlingshire. The entire population of this portion of Scotland, according to the latest census, amounts to nearly 870,000, and the number of Catholics is estimated at 63,000, or about seven per cent of the whole. The number of churches, chapels and stations at the beginning of 1911 was 87, and of missions 51, served by eight Jesuit priests, and four Oblates of Mary Immaculate. The last-named order has one house in the diocese, and the Society of Jesus two. orders of women in the diocese comprise Ursulines of the Incarnation (whose convent, founded Edinburgh in 1835, was the first established in Scotland since the Reformation); Sisters of Mercy (two houses); Little Sisters of the Poor; Sisters of the Immaculate Conception; Sisters of Charity of St. Vincent of Paul, (four houses); Sisters of the Sacred Hearts of Jesus and Mary; Poor Clares; Helpers of the Holy Souls. Religious of Marie Réparatrice; Sisters of Charity of St. Paul (two houses); Sisters of the Holy Cross; Dominicans; and Carmelites. The Catholic institutions are, a children's refuge, industrial school and boy's orphanage, orphanage for girls, House of Mercy for servants, home for working boys, Sacred Heart Home for penitents, dispensary and home for respectable girls, convalescent home, and St. Vincent's Home for destitute Children. The number of congregational day-schools is fifty, and the average attendance of children at them between 10,000 and 11,000. The great majority of the Catholics of the diocese (certainly over 90 per cent) are of Irish origin and parentage; of the remainder many are Italians, (chiefly from Naples), Poles, and Lithuanians, the latter engaged for the most part as miners. The Poles tend to become absorbed in the native population, usually discarding their Polish names. The material progress in the diocese, in the way of church building, has been noteworthy in recent years. In 1859 there was one church in the capital; half a century later there were eight; and churches have been built in different parts of the diocese of considerable architectural merit. Several of them being the finest ecclesiastical edifices in their respective towns. The archi-episcopal residence is in Edinburgh, where is also the old cathedral of St. Andrews was wrecked by the Protestant mob (Knox's "rascal multitude") in 1559; and though efforts were made by the Protestant Archbishop Spottiswoode and others to restore it, it became a total ruin. Nothing now remains of it but the south wall of the nave, a fragment of the beautiful west front, the eastern gable with its flanking turrets, portions of the transept and some pier bases. The present archbishop is the Most Rev. James A. Smith, b. in Edinburgh, 1841, ordained in Rome, 1866, and consecrated Bishop of DunkeId in 1890. He was translated, to the See of Saint Andrews and Edinburgh in 1901. The last Protestant archbishop died in 1704; and the title remained unused until 1844, when it was revived by the episcopalian synod. Registrum Prioratus S. Andreae (Bannatyne Club, Edinburgh, 1841); BRADY, Episcopal Succession in England, Scotland, and Ireland (Rome, 1876); LYON, History of St. Andrews (Edinburgh, 1813); FORDUN, Scotichronicon (ed. GOODALL, Edinburgh, 1759); KEITH, Historical Catalogue of Scottish Bishops (Edinburgh, 1824); THEINER, Annales Ecclesiastici (Rome, 1856); MACKENZIE-WALCOTT, The Ancient Church of Scotland (London, 1874): LANG, St. Andrews (London, 18935; BELLESHEIM, Hist. of the Catholic Church of Scotland (4 vols., Edinburgh, 1887-90). D.O. HUNTER-BLAIR University of Saint Andrews University of Saint Andrews The germ of the university is to be found in an association of learned ecclesiastics, formed in 1410, among whom were: Laurence of Lindores, Abbot of Scone, Richard Cornwall, Archdeacon of Lothian, Wm. Stephen, afterwards Archbishop of Dunblane. They offered courses of lectures in divinity, logic, philosophy, canon and civil law. Henry Wardlaw, the Bishop of St. Andrews, granted a charter of privilege in 1411; he sought a Bull of foundation from the antipope, Benedict XIII, whose legate he was and whose claims Scotland supported. The Bull was granted in 1413; it was confirmed by royal charter of James I in 1532. The five-hundredth anniversary of the foundation was celebrated in 1911. The university consisted of three colleges: St. Salvator's, founded in 1450 by Bishop James Kennedy, confirmed and further privileged by Popes Nicholas V, Pius II, and Paul II; St. Leonard's, founded by Archbishop Stuart and Prior Hepburn in 1512; and St. Mary's, founded by Archbishop James Beaton, under sanction of Paul III, in 1537. This occupied the site of the original pedagogy. All the foundations were amply supported by successive endowment. The college buildings escaped when the churches of St. Andrews were demolished by the reformers, but it was not until 1574 that the university began to recover. At the same time that Andrew Melville (a St. Andrews' student) was re-erecting the university at Glasgow, a commission, inspired by George Buchanan, began a series of reforms at St. Andrews, which intermittently continued throughout the seventeenth century. In 1747 St. Salvator's and St. Leonard's Colleges were united. The university was further enlarged and strengthened by the affiliation in 1897 of University College, Dundee, at which the scientific departments are chiefly conducted. A proposal by the Marquess of Bute (rector 1892-98) to affiliate Blair's College, Aberdeen, was unsuccessful. Among the famous professors and students in St. Andrews of the earlier period must be named John Major, Andrew Melville, Gavin Douglas, George Buchanan, Patrick Forbes, Napier of Merchiston; its leaders and its alumni, played a great part in Scottish ecclesiastical politics of the seventeenth century, most notably Zachary Boyd, Wm. Carstares, principal of the University of Edinburgh, and Samuel Rutherford. During the last century St. Andrews can show a long list of distinguished scientists and men of letters. The total number of students (1909-10) was 571, of whom 247 were women; University College, Dundee, contributed 214 of the total. St. Andrews' University Calendar (1910-11); ANDERSON, The University of St. Andrews, a Historical Sketch (1878); RASHDALL, Universities of Europe in the Middle Ages (Oxford, 1895), 295; COOPER, Dict. Nat. Biog., s. v. Andrew Melville, LYON, History of St. Andrews (Edinburgh, 1843). J.S. PHILLIMORE Priory of Saint Andrews Priory of Saint Andrews The Priory of Saint Andrews priory was one of the great religious houses in Scotland and the metropolitan church in that country before the Reformation. Its origin is uncertain, although all agree that it must be very ancient. According to the "Registrum S. Andreae", the first founder was Angus, King of the (Picts 735-747), who gave to Bishop Regulus, who had brought to Scotland the relics of St. Andrew, meadows, fields, and other properties. The church was, perhaps from the beginning, administered by Culdees, who also had the right of electing the bishop. In 1144, however, at the request of King Alexander I, who may be called the second founder of the priory on account of his many donations to it, Robert, Prior of Scone, was made Bishop of St. Andrews. He brought with him some of his brother-canons regular whom he established in the priory. For some time the canons and the Culdees served the church together, but by order of the pope in 1147 the Culdees, who had previously been given the option to become canons and had refused, were removed and all their rights passed to the canons who from that moment till the Reformation formed the Cathedral Chapter. When in 1297 Bishop Lamberton, who succeeded Bishop Fraser, was chosen by the canons without the intervention of the Culdees, as was done in the two previous elections, Cumyn, Provost of the Culdees, opposed the election and went to Rome. He pleaded his case before the pope in vain, and Lamberton was consecrated bishop in 1298. The Culdees, after this, disappear from St. Andrews altogether. The priory protected by bishops, kings, and noble families prospered, and like all the great monasteries it had cells or privies as its dependencies. These were: (1) Lochleven, formerly a house of Culdees, and given to the canons by Bishop Robert and King David; (2) Monymusk, where the Culdees became canons regular; (3) Isle of May, which Bishop Wishart bought from the monks of Reading and gave to the canons of St. Andrews, pleno jure; (4) Pittenweem, an old priory, which already existed in 1270; (5) Portmoak, founded in 838 for Culdees and given to St. Andrews by Bishop Roger. Kilrimont was made over to the canons by Bishop Robert, who also gave them the hospital "in susceptionem hospitum et peregrinorum". On account of his position as Superior of the Cathedral Chapter, the prior pro tempore had precedence of all the abbots in the kingdom. To the canons of St. Andrews the now famous university of that name owes its existence. It was founded by Prior Biset and his canons in 1408, and many of them lectured there. Some of the canons became bishops of St. Andrews or of other dioceses, and in other ways distinguished themselves for their piety or learning. Of Bishop Robert the chronicler tells us that he was a man of rare prudence, virtuous, and a scholar. In 1349, when the black plague made so many victims, Abbot Bower records the death of twenty-four canons of St. Andrews, who, as he says, were all "sufficienter litterati et morum conspicui". When in 1412 the new parish church was founded by the canons, the first incumbent was one of them, W. Romer, "vir multum laudabilis religiosus et benignus". Bishop Bell, returning from Rome, became a canon at St. Andrews, where he died in 1342. But evil days came for the priory when lay-priors or commendatories were introduced; relaxations and irregularities crept in, and the Reformation completed the work of destruction. Instigated by the fiery preaching of John Knox, his followers burnt down the cathedral and the priory. A few years ago the late Marquess of Bute purchased the remaining ruins with a view to restore them to Catholic use. MARTINE, Reliquiae S. Andreae, or the state of the venerable, and Primatial See of St. Andrew's; FORDUN-BOWER, Scotichronicon (Edinburgh, 1759); GORDON, Monasticon (1875); History of Holyrod (Edinburgh). A. ALLARIA Ancient Diocese of Saint Asaph Ancient Diocese of Saint Asaph (ASSAVENSIS, originally ELVIENSIS) This diocese was founded by St. Kentigern about the middle of the sixth century when he was exiled from his see in Scotland. He founded a monastery called Llanelwy at the confluence of the Clwyd and Elwy in North Wales, where after his return to Scotland in 573 he was succeeded by Asaph or Asa, who was consecrated Bishop of Llanelwy. The diocese originally coincided with the principality of Powys, but lost much territory first by the Mercian encroachment marked by Watt's dyke and again by the construction of Offa's dyke, soon after 798. Nothing is known of the history of the diocese during the disturbed period that followed. Domesday Book gives scanty particulars of a few churches but is silent as to the cathedral. Early in the twelfth century Norman influence asserted itself and in 1143 Theobald, Archbishop of Canterbury, consecrated one Gilbert as Bishop of St. Asaph, but the position of his successors was very difficult and one of them, Godfrey, was driven away by poverty and the hostility of the Welsh. A return made in the middle of the thirteenth century (British Museum, Cotton MSS. Vitellius, c. x.) shows the existence of eight rural deaneries, seventy-nine churches, and nineteen chapels. By 1291 the deaneries had been doubled in number and there were Cistercian houses at Basingwerk, Aberconway, Strata Marcella and Valle Crucis, and a Cistercian nunnery at Llanllugan. The cathedral, which had been burnt in the wars, was rebuilt and completed in 1295. It was a plain massive structure of simple plan, and was again destroyed during the Wars of the Roses. When it was restored by Bishop Redman the palace was not rebuilt and thus the bishops continued to be nonresident. At the end of the fifteenth century there was a great revival of church building, as is evidenced by the churches of that date still existing in the diocese. The chief shrines in the diocese were St. Winefred's Well, St. Garmon in Yale, St. Dervel Gadarn in Edeirnion, St. Monacella at Pennant, and the Holy Cross in Strata Marcella. All these were demolished at the Reformation. At that time the diocese contained one archdeaconry, sixteen deaneries, and one hundred and twenty-one parishes. The names and succession of the bishops after Sts. Kentigern and Asaph are not known until 1143. For five hundred years the only names we meet with are Tysilio (about 600), Renchidus (about 800), Cebur (about 928), and Melanus (about 1070). From 1143 the succession is as follows: Gilbert (1143); Geoffrey of Monmouth (1152); Richard (1154); Godfrey (1158); Adam (1175); John I (1183); Reyner (1186); Abraham (1225); Hugh (1235); Howel ap Ednyfed (1240); Anian I (1249); John II (1267); Anian II (1268); Llewelyn ap Ynyr (Leolinus de Bromfield), 1293; Davydd ap Bleddyn (1314); John Trevor I (1352); Llewelyn ap Madoc (1357); William de Spridlington (1376); Lawrence Child (1382); Alexander Bache (1390); John Trevor II (1395); Robert de Lancaster (1411); John Lowe (1433); Reginald Pecock (1444); Thomas Knight (1450); Richard Redman (1471); Michael Diacon (1495); Davydd ap Iorwerth (1500); Davydd ap Owen (1503); Edmund Birkhead (1513); Henry Standish (1518); see held by schismatics (1535-55); Thomas Goldwell (1555), who died at Rome 13 April, 1585, not only the last Catholic Bishop of St. Asaph's, but the last survivor of the ancient hierarchy. The bishop had five episcopal residences, four of which were alienated by the schismatical bishop under Edward VI. The cathedral was dedicated to St. Asaph and the arms of the see were sable, two keys in saltire argent. THOMAS, History of St. Asaph, diocesan, cathedral and parochial (London, 1874); IDEM, St. Asaph in Diocesan Histories (London, 1865); WALCOTT, Memorials of St. Asaph (London, 1865); WILLIS, Survey of St. Asaph (2 vols., Wrexham, l80l); WHARTON historia de episcopis et decanis Londinencibus necnon Assavensibus (London, 1695). EDWIN BURTON Abbey of Saint Augustine Abbey of Saint Augustine A Benedictine monastery, originally dedicated to Sts. Peter and Paul, founded in 605 outside of the City of Canterbury, on the site of the earlier Church of St. Pancras given by King Ethelbert to St. Augustine in 597. It was subsequently enlarged, and in 978 St. Dunstan, then Archbishop of Canterbury, dedicated it anew to St. Peter, St. Paul, and St. Augustine, since which time it has always been known by the name of the latter saint whose body lay enshrined in the crypt of the abbey church. In spite of its proximity to the neighboring cathedral priory of Christ Church, the abbey precincts covered much ground and the monastery was of considerable importance for many centuries. At the dissolution in 1538 the act of surrender was signed by the abbot and thirty monks, who were rewarded with pensions. The abbey itself was appropriated by Henry VIII as a royal palace, but since that time the greater part of the buildings have been allowed gradually to fall to ruin. In 1844 the remains of the abbey were sold at public auction and on the site was erected a college for missionaries of the Church of England. The revenues of the abbey at the time of its suppression were £1684. TANNER, Notitia Monastica (London, 1744) DUGDALE, Monasticon Anglicanum (London, 1817-30); Customary of St Augustine's Abbey (ed. THOMPSON), XXIII, Henry Bradshaw Society's publications (London, 1902). G. CYPRIAN ALSTON Saint Bartholomew's Day Massacre Saint Bartholomew's Day This massacre of which Protestants were the victims occurred in Paris on 24 August, 1572 (the feast of St. Bartholomew), and in the provinces of France during the ensuing weeks, and it has been the subject of knotty historical disputes. The first point argued was whether or not the massacre had been premeditated by the French Court — Sismondi, Sir James Mackintosh, and Henri Bordier maintaining that it had, and Ranke, Henri Martin, Henry White, Loiseleur, H. de la Ferrière, and the Abbé Vacandard, that it had not. The second question debated was the extent to which the court of Rome was responsible for this outrage. At present only a few over-zealous Protestant historians claim that the Holy See was the accomplice of the French Court: this view implies their belief in the premeditation of the massacre, which is now denied by the majority of historians. For the satisfactory solution of the question it is necessary to distinguish carefully between the attempted murder of Coligny on 22 August and his assassination on the night of 23-24 August, and the general massacre of Protestants. The idea of a summary execution of the Protestant leaders, which would be the means of putting an end to the civil discord that had caused three "religious wars" in France in 1562-1563, 1567-1568, and 1569-1570 respectively, had long existed in the mind of Catherine de' Medici, widow of Henry II and mother of the three successive kings, Francis II, Charles IX, and Henry III; it had also been entertained by her sons. As early as 1560 Michaelis Suriano, the Venetian ambassador, wrote: "Francis II (1559-1560) wanted to fall upon the Protestant leaders, punish them without mercy and thus extinguish the conflagration." When, in 1565, Catherine de' Medici with her son Charles IX (1560-1574) and her daughters Margaret of Valois and Elizabeth, wife of Philip II, investigated the political and religious questions of the hour at the conferences of Bayonne, the Duke of Alba, who was present on these occasions, wrote to Philip II: "A way to be rid of the five, or at most six, who are at the head of the faction and direct it, would be to seize their persons and cut off their heads or at least to confine them where it would be impossible for them to renew their criminal plots." Just at that time Alava on his side confided to the same Spanish king this dark forecast, "I foresee that these heretics will be completely wiped out". In 1569 Catholics and Protestants were in arms one against the other, and the Venetian ambassador, Giovanni Carrero, remarked: "It is the common opinion that, in the beginning it would have sufficed to do away with five or six heads and no more". This same year Parliament promised a reward of 50,000 écus to whoever would apprehend the Admiral de Coligny (1517-72), leader of the Calvinist party, the king adding that this sum would be awarded to him who would deliver up the admiral either alive or dead. Maurevel tried to overtake the admiral for the purpose of killing him but instead only assassinated one of his lieutenants. Thus we see that the idea of a summary execution of the leaders of Protestantism was in the air from 1560 to 1570; moreover it was conformable to the doctrine of political murder as it flourished during the sixteenth century when the principles of social morality and Christian politics elaborated by the theology of the Middle Ages, were replaced by the lay and half-pagan doctrine of Machiavellianism, proclaiming the right of the strongest or the most crafty. The peace signed at Saint-Germain, August, 1570, between the Court and the Protestants seemed to reestablish order. It was sanctioned by conferences held at La Rochelle in which on the one side a war was planned against Philip II, all the Calvinist nobility being supposed to enlist; and on the other, the marriage of Henry of Bourbon (the future King Henry IV), a Calvinist and the son of Jeanne of Albret, with Margaret of Valois, sister of Charles IX. On 12 September, 1571, the Admiral de Coligny came to Blois, where Charles IX resided, to superintend and further this new policy, and it would seem that just at that time the king was sincere in seeking the support of Coligny and the Protestants against Philip II. And Catherine de' Medici was shrewdly endeavouring to court favour on all sides. Upon hearing of Spain's victory at Lepanto (7 October, 1571), she remonstrated with Charles IX for his lack of policy in severing relations with Philip II; and in June, 1572, she tried to arrange a marriage between her third son, the Duke of Alençon, and the Protestant Elizabeth of England, and also made active preparations for the marriage of Margaret of Valois with Henry of Bourbon, taking every means to have it solemnized in Paris. Meanwhile Coligny, with money which Charles IX had given him unknown to Catherine, sent 4000 men to the relief of Mons, who was at the time besieged by the Duke of Alba. They were beaten (11 July, 1572) and the Duke of Alba, having ascertained that Charles IX was instrumental in the attempt to defeat him, thenceforth entertained the most hostile feeling toward the French King. Charles IX, greatly irritated, made open preparations for war against Spain, relying on Coligny for assistance. Suddenly on 4 August, Catherine made her way to Charles IX, who was then hunting at Montripeau, and insisted that unless he would give up the conflict with Philip II she would withdraw to Florence, taking with her the Duke of Anjou. A conference was held and Coligny, with the idea of sustaining his co-religionists in Flanders, demanded war with Spain, but the council unanimously refused it. Then with rash audacity Coligny declared to the king and to Catherine that if war were not waged against Spain, another war might be expected. From this Catherine deduced that the Protestant party, with the admiral for spokesman, threatened the King of France with a religious war which would be the fourth within ten years. At the time of the marriage of Henry of Bourbon and Margaret of Valois (18 August), the situation was as follows: on the one side were the Guises with their troops, and on the other Coligny and his musketeers, while Charles IX, although recognizing both parties, leaned more towards Coligny, and Catherine favoured the Guises with a view to revenging herself on Coligny and recovering her influence over Charles IX. Just at this time Philip II was of the opinion that the King of France should strike a decisive blow against the Protestants, and we have proof of this in a letter written to Cardinal Come, Secretary of State to Gregory XIII, by the Archbishop of Rossano, nuncio in Spain. Wrote the nuncio: The King (Philip II) bids me say that if his Most Christian Majesty means to purge his kingdom of its enemies, the time is now opportune, and that by coming to terms with him (Philip II) His Majesty could destroy those who are left. Now, especially as the Admiral is at Paris where the people are attached to the Catholic religion and to their king, it would be easy for him (Charles IX) to do away with him (Coligny) forever. It is probable that Philip II sent similar suggestions to his ministers at Paris, and that the latter conferred with Catherine and the Duke of Anjou, even offering them military assistance for the struggle against the Protestants. This intervention caused Catherine to plan Coligny's assassination, and at a meeting to which she called Madame de Nemours, widow of the great Duke of Guise, it was decided that Maurevel should set a trap for the admiral. This was done, with the result that on the morning of 22 August, a musket-shot fired by Maurevel struck Coligny although wounding him but slightly. The Protestants became excited and Charles IX grew angry, declaring that the peace edict must be observed. He went to visit the wounded Coligny and Catherine accompanied him, but at Coligny's request she had to withdraw and, if we may credit the account given by the Duke of Anjou (Henry III), the admiral, lowering his voice, warned Charles IX against his mother's influence. But just at that moment Charles had but one idea, which was to find and punish Henry of Guise, whom he suspected of being the instigator if not the perpetrator of the attempt on Coligny's life. It was because the attack made on Coligny, 22 August, had failed that Catherine conceived the idea of a general massacre. "If the Admiral had died from the shot," wrote Salviati, the nuncio, "no others would have been killed." Those historians who claim the massacre to have been premeditated explain that Catherine had the marriage of Margaret and Henry of Bourbon solemnized in Paris in order to bring the Protestant leaders there for the purpose of murdering them. However, this interpretation is based merely upon a very doubtful remark attributed to Cardinal Alessandrino and of which we shall speak later on, and it was certainly unlike Catherine, who was always more inclined to placate the various parties by dint of subtle manoeuvring them, after careful deliberation, to inaugurate a series of irreparable outrages. As we shall see, the decision to have recourse to a massacre arose in Catherine's mind under pressure of a sort of madness; she saw in this decision a means of preserving her influence over the king and of preventing the vengeance of Protestants, who were exasperated by the attack made on Coligny. "The Admiral's death was premeditated, that of the others was sudden," wrote Don Diego de Zuniga to Philip II, on 6 September 1572. Herein lies the exact difference: the attempt on Coligny's life was premeditated whereas the massacre was the outcome of a cruel impulse. On the night of 22 August Catherine de' Medici felt herself lessened in her son's consideration. She learned from one Bouchavannes that the Huguenots had decided to meet at Meaux, 5 September, and avenge Coligny's attempted murder by marching on Paris; she knew that the Catholics were preparing to defend themselves, and she foresaw that between both parties the king would be alone and powerless. At supper she heard Pardaillan, a Huguenot, say that justice would be rendered even if the king would not render it, and Captain Piles, another Huguenot, was of the opinion that "even if the Admiral lost an arm there would be numberless others who would take so many lives that the rivers of the kingdom would run with blood". The threats of the Huguenots and her son's consternation impelled Catherine to try to avert this civil war by organizing an immediate massacre of the Protestants. But Charles IX had to be won over. In the account of the dreadful events subsequently given by the Duke of Anjou he alludes to a single conversation between Catherine and Charles IX on 23 August, but Tavannes and Margaret of Valois mention two, the second of which took place late at night. As to the decisive interview there is conflicting testimony. The Duke of Anjou claims that Charles IX, suddenly converted to the cause by Catherine's ardent importuning, cried out: "Good God! since you deem it well to kill the Admiral, I agree, but all the Huguenots in France must likewise perish, so that not one be left later to upbraid me." Cavalli, the Venetian Ambassador, maintained in his report that the king held out for an hour and a half, finally yielding because of Catherine's threat to leave France and the fear that his brother, the Duke of Anjou, might be named captain-general of the Catholics. Margaret of Valois stated in her account that it was Rets, his former tutor, whom Catherine sent to reason with him, who eventually succeeded in obtaining the king's consent. Is it then true, as certain documents claim, that, toward midnight, Charles IX again hesitated? Perhaps. At any rate, it was he who, on 24 August, a little after midnight, ordered Le Charron, Prévot des Marchands, in charge of the Paris police, to call to arms the captains and bourgeois of the quarters in order that he (the king) and the city might be protected against the Huguenot conspirators. Catherine and the Duke of Anjou had previously secured the assistance of Marcel, former Prévot des Marchands. Whilst Le Charron, without any great enthusiasm, marshalled the bourgeoisie who were to quell a possible uprising of Huguenots, Marcel drew up the masses, over whom he had unlimited influence, and who, together with the royal troops, were to attack and plunder the Huguenots. The royal troops were especially commissioned to kill the Huguenot nobles; the mob, mobilized by Marcel, was to threaten the bourgeois troops in case the latter should venture to side with the Huguenots. Charles IX and Catherine decided that the massacre should not begin in the city till the admiral had been slain, and afterwards Catherine claimed that she took upon her conscience the blood of only six of the dead, Coligny and five others; however, having deliberately fired the passions of the multitude, over whom Marcel had absolute control, she should be held responsible for all the blood shed. THE MASSACRE Toward midnight the troops took up arms in and around the Louvre, and Coligny's abode was surrounded. A little before daybreak the sound of a pistol-shot so terrified Charles IX and his mother that, in a moment of remorse, they despatched a nobleman to Guise to bid him refrain from any attack on the admiral, but the order came too late; Coligny had already been slain. Scarcely had the Duke of Guise heard the bell of Saint-Germain l'auxerrois than he started with a few men toward the Coligny mansion. Besme, one of the duke's intimates, went up to the admiral's room. "Are you Coligny?" he asked. "I am," the admiral replied. "Young man, you should respect my years. However, do as you please; you will not be shortening my life to any great extent. Besme plunged a dagger into the admiral's breast and flung his body out the window. The Bastard of Angoulême and the Duke of Guise, who were without, kicked the corpse and an Italian, a servant of the Duke of Nevers, cut off its head. Immediately the king's guards and the nobles on the side of the Guises slew all the Protestant nobles whom Charles IX, but a few days previously, when he wanted to protect the admiral against the intrigues of the Guises, had carefully lodged in the admiral's neighbourhood. La Rochefoucauld, with whom that very night Charles IX had jested till eleven o'clock, was stabbed by a masked valet; Téligny, Coligny's son-in-law, was killed on a roof by a musket-shot, and the Seigneur de la Force and one of his sons had their throats cut, the other son, a child of twelve, remaining hidden beneath their corpses for a day. The servants of Henry of Bourbon and the Prince of Condé who dwelt in the Louvre were murdered under the vestibule by Swiss mercenaries. One nobleman fled to the apartment of Margaret, who had just married Henry of Bourbon, and she obtained his pardon. Whilst their servants were being slaughtered Henry of Bourbon and the Prince of Condé were ordered to appear before the king, who tried to make them abjure, but they refused. After that the massacre spread through Paris, and Crucé, a goldsmith, Koerver, a bookseller, and Pezou, a butcher, battered in the doors of the Huguenot houses. A tradition, long credited, claims that Charles IX stationed himself on a balcony of the Louvre and fired upon his subjects; Brantôme, however, supposed that the king took aim from the windows of his sleeping apartment. But nothing is more uncertain as the balcony on which he was said to have stood was not there in 1572, and in none of the accounts of the Massacre of Saint Bartholomew sent to their governments by the various diplomatists then in Paris does this detail figure. It was first mentioned in a book published at Basel in 1573: "Dialogue auquel sont traitées plusieurs choses advenues aux Luthériens et Huguenots de France" and reprinted in 1574 under the title: "Le reveille matin des Français". This libel is the work of Barnaud, a native of Dauphiné, a Protestant greatly disliked by his co-religionists, and whose calumnies caused a Protestant nobleman to insult him in public. The "Tocsin contre les auteurs du Massacre de France", another narration of the Massacre of St. Bartholomew, that appeared in 1579, makes no allusion to this sinister pastime of Charles IX, and the accounts given of it twenty years afterwards by Brantôme and d'Aubigné do not agree. Moreover, the anecdote quoted by Voltaire, according to which the Maréchal de Tessé had known a gentleman then over a hundred years old who was supposed to have loaded Charles IX's musket, is extremely doubtful, and the absolute silence of those diplomatists who addressed to their respective governments detailed reports of the massacre must ever remain a strong argument against this tradition. On the following morning blood flowed in streams; the houses of the rich were pillaged regardless of the religious opinions of their owners. "To be a Huguenot," emphatically declares Mézeray, the historian, "was to have money, enviable position, or avaricious heirs." When at eleven o'clock in the morning the Prévot Le Charron came to inform the king of this epidemic of crime, an edict was issued forbidding a continuation of the slaughter; but the massacre was prolonged for several days more, and on 25 August Ramus, the celebrated philosopher, was assassinated in spite of the formal prohibition of the king and queen. The number of victims is unknown. Thirty-five livres were paid to the grave-diggers of the Cemetery of the Innocents for the interment of 1100 corpses; but many were thrown into the Seine. Ranke and Henri Martin estimate the number of victims in Paris at 2000. In the provinces also massacres occurred. On the evening of 24 August, a messenger brought to the Provost of Orléans a letter bearing the royal seal and ordering him to treat all Huguenots like those of Paris and to exterminate them, "taking care to let nothing leak out and by shrewd dissimulation to surprise them all". Only that day the king had written to M. d'Eguilly, Governor of Chartres, that there was question merely of a quarrel between Guise and Coligny. On 25 August an order was issued to kill the factious; on the next day the king solemnly announced in open session that his decision of 24 August was the only means of frustrating the plot; on 27 August he again began to prohibit all murder; and on the following day he solemnly declared that the punishment of the admiral and his accomplices was due not to their religion but to their conspiracy against the Court, and he despatched letters bidding the governors to repress the factionists; on 30 August he ordered the people of Bourges to kill any Huguenots who should congregate, but revoked "all verbal commands that he had issued when he had just cause to fear some sinister event". In this series of contradictory instructions may be detected the ever-slumbering antagonism between Catherine's fixedness of purpose and the vacillation of Charles IX, but almost everywhere in the country the policy of bloodshed prevailed. The general opinion throughout France was that the king had to kill Coligny and the turbulent in self-defence. President de Thou publicly praised Charles IX; Attorney-General du Faur de Pibrac wrote an apology for the massacre; Jodelle, Baïf, and Daurat, poets of the "P1éiade", insulted the admiral in their verse; a suit was entered in the Parlement against Coligny and his accomplices whether living or dead, and its immediate result was the hanging of Briquemaut and Cavaignes, two Protestants who had escaped the massacre. This protracted severity on the part of the Parlement of Paris set the pace for outside places, and in many places an excess of zeal led to an increase of brutality. Lyons, Toulouse, Bordeaux, and Rouen all had their massacres. So many Lyonese corpses drifted down the Rhône to Arles that, for three months, the Arlesians did not want to drink the river water. At Bayonne and at Nantes compliance with royal orders was refused. The intervals between these massacres prove that on the first day the Court did not issue formal orders in all directions; for instance, the Toulouse massacre did not occur till 23 September and that of Bordeaux till 3 October. The number of victims in the provinces is unknown, the figures varying between 2000 and 100,000. The "Martyrologe des Huguenots", published in 1581, brings it up to 15,138, but mentions only 786 dead. At any rate only a short time afterwards the reformers were preparing for a fourth civil war. From the foregoing considerations it follows: + That the royal decision of which the St. Bartholomew massacre was the outcome, was in nowise the result of religious disturbances and, strictly, did not even have religious incentives; the massacre was rather an entirely political act committed in the name of the immoral principles of Machiavellianism against a faction that annoyed the Court. + That the massacre itself was not premeditated; that, up to 22 August, Catherine de' Medici had only considered — and that for a long time — the possibility of getting rid of Coligny; that the criminal attack made on Coligny was interpreted by the Protestants as a declaration of war, and that, in the face of impending danger, Catherine forced the irresolute Charles IX to consent to the horrible massacre. Such, then, are the conclusions to be kept in view when entering upon the discussion of that other question, the responsibility of the Holy See. THE HOLY SEE AND THE MASSACRE A. Pius V (1566-May 1, 1572) Pius V, being constantly informed in regard to the civil wars in France and the massacres and depredations there committed, looked upon the Huguenots as a party of rebels who weakened and divided the French Kingdom just when Christianity required the strength of unity in order to strike an effective blow against the Turks. In 1569 he had sent Charles IX 6000 men under the command of Sforza, Count of Santa-Fiore, to help the royal troops in the third religious war; he had rejoiced over the victory at Jarnac (12 March, 1569), and on 28 March had written to Catherine de' Medici: "If Your Majesty continues openly and freely to fight (aperte ac libere) the enemies of the Catholic Church unto their utter destruction, divine help will never fail you." After the Battle of Moncontour in October, 1569, he had begged the king thenceforth to tolerate in his states the exercise of Catholicism only; "otherwise," he said, "your kingdom will be the bloody scene of continual sedition". The peace concluded in 1570 between Charles IX and the Huguenots caused him grave anxiety. He had endeavoured to dissuade the king from signing it and had written as follows to the Cardinals of Bourbon and Lorraine: "The King will have more to fear from the hidden traps and knavishness of the heretics than from their barefaced brigandage during the war." What Pius V wanted was an honest, open war waged by Charles IX and the Guises against the Huguenots. On 10 May, 1567, he said to the Spanish Ambassador, Don Juan de Luniga: "The masters of France are meditating something which I can neither advise nor approve and which conscience upbraids: they want to destroy by underhand means the Prince of Condé and the Admiral." To reestablish political peace and religious unity by the royal sword was the inexorable dream of Pius V who must not be judged according to our modern standards of toleration; but this end, worthy as he deemed it, could not justify the proposed means of attainment; he would sanction no intriguing, and five years previous to the Massacre of St. Bartholomew's Day, he disapproved the dishonest "means" by which Catherine dreamed of getting rid of Coligny. B. Cardinal Alessandrino, sent from the Holy See to Paris, in 1572 Some historians have wondered whether Cardinal Alessandrino, sent by Pius V to Charles IX in February, 1572, to persuade the king to join a Catholic league against the Turks, was not an accomplice in Catherine's murderous designs. In February Alessandrino, who had vainly endeavoured to prevent the marriage of Margaret of Valois with the Protestant Henry of Bourbon, closed his report with these words: "I am leaving France without accomplishing anything whatever: I might as well not have come." Let us be mindful of this tone of discouragement, this acknowledgment of failure. In March he wrote: "I have other special matters to report to His Holiness but I shall communicate them orally . . . ." When the cardinal returned to Rome Pius V was dying, and he expired without learning what were the "special matters" to which Alessandrino had alluded. Whatever they may have been they certainly have no bearing upon the conclusion that Pius V had been previously informed of the massacre. A life of this pontiff, published in 1587 by Girolamo Catena, gives a conversation that took place a long time afterwards between Alessandrino and Clement VIII in which the cardinal spoke of his former ambassadorship. When he was endeavouring to dissuade the king from Margaret's marriage to Henry, the king said: "I have no other means of revenging myself on my enemies and the enemies of God." This fragment of the interview has furnished those who hold that the massacre was premeditated with a reason for maintaining that the solemnizing of the nuptials in Paris was a snare prearranged with the concurrence of the papal nuncio. The most reliable critics contest the perfect authenticity of this interview, chiefly because of the very tardy account of it and of its utter incompatibility with the discouragement manifested in Alessandrino's notes written the day after the conversation had taken place. The arguments against the thesis of premeditation as we have considered them one by one seem to us sufficiently plausible to permit us to exclude all hypothesis according to which, six months ahead of time, Alessandrino was confidentially apprised of the outrage. C. Salviati, Nuncio at Paris in 1572 At the time of the Massacre of St. Bartholomew, Salviati, a relative of Catherine de' Medici, was the pope's nuncio at Paris. In December, 1571, Pius V had entrusted him with a first extraordinary mission, and at the time Catherine, according to what was subsequently related by the Venetian Ambassador, Michaeli, "had secretly bade him tell Pius V that he would soon see the vengeance that she and the king would visit upon those of the religion (of the Huguenots)". Catherine's conversation was so vague that the following summer, when Salviati came back to France as nuncio, she thought he must have forgotten her words. Accordingly she reminded him of the revenge that she had predicted, and neither in December, 1571, nor in August, 1572, was Salviati very explicit in his correspondence with the Court of Rome as, on 8 September, 1572, three weeks after the massacre, Cardinal Come, Secretary of State to Gregory XIII, wrote to Salviati: "Your letters show that you were aware of the preparations for the blow against the Huguenots long before it was dealt. You would have done well to inform His Holiness in time." In fact on 5 August, Salviati had written to Rome: "The Queen will rap the Admiral's knuckles if he goes too far" (donnera à l'Admiral sur les ongles), and on 11 August: "Finally, I hope that God will give me the grace soon to announce to you something that will fill His Holiness with joy and satisfaction." This was all. A subsequent letter from Salviati revealed that this covert allusion was to the scheme of vengeance that Catherine was then projecting in regard to Coligny's assassination and that of a few Protestant leaders: however, it seems that at the Court of Rome the reference was supposed to be to a re-establishment of cordial relations between France and Spain. The replies of the Cardinal of Come to Salviati show that this last idea was what absorbed the attention of Gregory XIII and that the Court of Rome gave but little heed to Catherine's threats against the Protestants. Notwithstanding that Salviati was Catherine's relative and that he was maintaining a close watch, all documents prove, as Soldan, the German Protestant historian, says, that the events of 24 August were accomplished independently of Roman influence. Indeed, so little did Salviati foresee the Massacre of St. Bartholomew itself that he wrote to Rome the day after the event: "I cannot believe that so many would have perished if the Admiral had died of the musket-shot fired at him . . . . I cannot believe a tenth of what I now see before my very eyes." D. The attitude of Gregory XIII on receiving the news of the Massacre of St. Bartholomew It was on 2 September that the first rumours of what had occurred in France reached Rome. Danes, secretary to Mandelot, Governor of Lyons, bade M. de Jou, Commander at Saint-Antoine, to inform the pope that the chief Protestant leaders had been killed in Paris, and that the king had ordered the governors of the provinces to seize all Huguenots. Cardinal de Lorraine, when thus informed, gave the courier 200 écus and Gregory XIII gave him 1000. The pope wanted bonfires lighted in Rome, but Férals, the French Ambassador, objected on the ground that official communication should first be received from the king and the nuncio. On 5 September Beauvillier reached Rome, having been sent thither by Charles IX. He gave an account of the Massacre of St. Bartholomew and begged Gregory XIII to grant, antedating it, the dispensation required for the legitimacy of the marriage of Margaret of Valois and Henry of Navarre, solemnized three weeks previously. Gregory XIII deferred discussing the subject of the dispensation and a letter from the Cardinal de Bourbon dated 26 August and a despatch from Salviati, both received at this time, duly informed him of what had taken place in France. Wrote the Cardinal de Bourbon, Said Admiral was so wicked as to have conspired to kill said King, his mother, the Queen and his brothers . . . . He (the Admiral) and all the ringleaders of his sect were slain . . . . And what I most commend is the resolution taken by His Majesty to exterminate this vermin. In his letter describing the massacre Salviati said: "I rejoice that it has pleased the Divine Majesty to take under His protection the King and the Queen-mother." Thus all the information received from France gave Gregory XIII the impression that Charles IX and his family had been saved from great danger. The very morning of the day that Beauvillier had brought him Salviati's letter, the pope held a consistory and announced that "God had been pleased to be merciful". Then with all the cardinals he repaired to the Church of St. Mark for the Te Deum, and prayed and ordered prayers that the Most Christian King might rid and purge his entire kingdom of the Huguenot plague. He believed that the Valois had just escaped a most terrible conspiracy which, had it succeeded, would have unfitted France for the struggle of Christian against Turk. On 8 September a procession of thanksgiving took place in Rome, and the pope, in a prayer after mass, thanked God for having "granted the Catholic people a glorious triumph over a perfidious race" (gloriosam de perfidis gentibus populo catholico loetitiam tribuisti). A suddenly discovered plot, an exemplary chastisement administered to insure the safety of the royal family, such was the light in which Gregory XIII viewed the St. Bartholomew massacre, and such was likewise the idea entertained by the Spanish Ambassador who was there with him and who, on 8 September, wrote as follows: "I am certain that if the musket-shot fired at the Admiral was a matter of several days' premeditation and was authorized by the King, what followed was inspired by circumstances." These circumstances were the threats of the Huguenots, "the insolent taunts of the whole Huguenot party", alluded to by Salviati in his despatch of 2 September; to put it briefly, these circumstances constituted the conspiracy. However, the Cardinal of Lorraine, who belonged to the House of Guise and resided in Rome, wished to insinuate that the massacre had been planned long ahead by his family, and had a solemn inscription placed over the entrance to the Church of St. Louis des Français, proclaiming that the success achieved was an answer "to the prayers, supplications, sighs and meditation of twelve years"; this hypothesis, according to which the massacre was the result of prolonged hypocrisy, the outcome of a protracted ruse, was shortly afterwards maintained with great audacity in a book by Capilupi, Catherine's Italian panegyrist. But the Spanish Ambassador refuted this interpretation: "The French," wrote he, "would have it understood that their King meditated this stroke from the time that he concluded the peace with the Huguenots, and they attribute to him trickery that does not seem permissible even against heretics and rebels." And the ambassador was indignant at the Cardinal of Lorraine's folly in giving the Guises credit for having set a trap. The pope did not believe any more than did the Spanish Ambassador in a snare laid by Catholics, but was rather convinced that the conspiracy had been hatched by Protestants. Just as the Turks had succumbed at Lepanto, the Protestants had succumbed in France. Gregory XIII ordered a jubilee in celebration of both events and engaged Vasari to paint side by side in one of the Vatican apartments scenes commemorative of the victory of Lepanto and of the triumph of the Most Christian King over the Huguenots. Finally, he had a medal struck representing an exterminating angel smiting the Huguenots with his sword, the inscription reading: Hugonottorum strages. There had been a slaughter of conspirators (strages) and the information that reached the pope was identical with that spread throughout Europe by Charles IX. On 21 September Charles IX wrote to Elizabeth of England concerning the "imminent danger" from the plot that he had baffled; on the next day he wrote as follows to La Mothe-Fénélon, his ambassador at London: "Coligny and his followers were all ready to visit upon us the same fate that we dealt out to them"; and to the German princes he sent similar information. Certainly all this seemed justified by the decree of the French magistracy ordering the admiral to be burned in effigy and prayers and processions of thanksgiving on each recurring 24 August, out of gratitude to God for the timely discovery of the conspiracy. It is not surprising, therefore, that, on 22 September, Gregory XIII should have written to Charles IX: "Sire, I thank God that He was pleased to preserve and defend Your Majesty, Her Majesty, the Queen-mother and Your Majesty's royal bothers from the horrible conspiracy. I do not think that in all history there is mention of such cruel malevolence." Nor again is it astonishing that the pope should have despatched Cardinal Orsini to Charles IX with congratulations on his escape. From Rome again Cardinal de Pellevé wrote to Catherine de' Medici: "Madame, the joy of all honest people in this city is complete, and never was there more glad-some news than that of Your Majesty being free from danger." The discourse delivered 3 December by Muret, the Humanist, was a veritable hymn of thanksgiving for the discovery of the plot contrived against the king and almost all the royal family. The Huguenot party having plotted regicide had to be punished, and its punishment seemed once more to put France in condition to combat the Turks; such was the twofold aspect under which Rome considered the massacre. Besides, the pope's joy did not last long. A rather involved account by Brantôme leads us to think that, becoming better informed, he grew angry at the news of such barbarity, and it is certain that when, in October, 1572, the Cardinal of Lorraine wished to present Maurevel, who had fired on Coligny on 22 August, Gregory XIII refused to receive him, saying: "He is an assassin." Doubtless by this time the vague despatches sent by Salviati during the weeks preceding the massacre had, in the light of events, become more comprehensible and rendered it clearer that the origin of these tragic events was the assault of 22 August; without ceasing to rejoice that Charles IX had eventually escaped the conspiracy then commonly asserted in France and abroad, Gregory XIII judged the criminal, Maurevel, according to his deserts. The condemnation by Pius V of the "intrigues" against Coligny and the refusal of Gregory XIII to receive Maurevel "the assassin" establish the unbending rectitude of the papacy, which, eager as it was for the re-establishment of religious unity, never admitted the pagan theories of a certain raison d'état according to which the end justified the means. As to the congratulations and the manifestations of joy which the news of the massacre elicited from Gregory XIII, they can only be fairly judged by assuming that the Holy See, like all Europe and indeed many Frenchmen, believed in the existence of a Huguenot conspiracy of whose overthrow the Court boasted and whose punishment an obsequious parliament had completed. Earlier authorities: Mémoires de Marguerite de Valois (coll. Petitot, XXXVII); Discours du Roi Henri III (coll. Petitot, XLIV); Mémoires de Tavanne (coll. du Panthéon littéraire); Correspondance de la Mothe-Fénelon, VII (Paris, 1840); ed. LA FERRIÈRE, Lettres de Catherine de Médicis, IV (Paris, 1891); Négociations diplomatiques de la France avec la Toscane, III; THEINER, Annales ecclesiastici, I (Rome, 1856); MARTIN, Relations des ambassadeurs vénétiens Giovanni Michieli et Sigismond Cavalli (Paris, 1872); Archives curieuses de l'histoire de France (series I, VII, 1835). Modern works: SOLDAN, La France et la St. Barthélemy, tr. SCHMIDT (Paris, 1855); WHITE, The Massacre of Saint Bartholomew, preceded by a History of the Religious Wars in the Reign of Charles IX (London, 1868); BORDIER, La St. Barthélemy et la critique moderne (Geneva, 1871); LOISELEUR, Trois énigmes historiques (Paris, 1883); LA FERRIÈRE, La Saint Barthélemy, la veille, le jour, le lendemain (Paris, 1892); VACANDARD, Etudes de critique et d'histoire religieuse (3rd ed., Paris, 1906). GEORGES GOYAU Medal of Saint Benedict Medal of Saint Benedict A medal, originally a cross, dedicated to the devotion in honour of St. Benedict. One side of the medal bears an image of St. Benedict, holding a cross in the right hand and the Holy Rule in the left. On the one side of the image is a cup, on the other a raven, and above the cup and the raven are inscribed the words: "Crux Sancti Patris Benedicti" (Cross of the Holy Father Benedict). Round the margin of the medal stands the legend "Ejus in obitu nro praesentia muniamus" (May we at our death be fortified by his presence). The reverse of the medal bears a cross with the initial letters of the words: "Crux Sacra Sit Mihi Lux" (The Holy Cross be my light), written downward on the perpendicular bar; the initial letters of the words, "Non Draco Sit Mihi Dux" (Let not the dragon be my guide), on the horizontal bar; and the initial letters of "Crux Sancti Patris Benedicti" in the angles of the cross. Round the margin stand the initial letters of the distich: "Vade Retro Satana, Nunquam Suade Mihi Vana — Sunt Mala Quae Libas, Ipse Venena Bibas" (Begone, Satan, do not suggest to me thy vanities — evil are the things thou profferest, drink thou thy own poison). At the top of the cross usually stands the word Pax (peace) or the monogram I H S (Jesus). The medal just described is the so-called jubilee medal, which was struck first in 1880, to commemorate the fourteenth centenary of St. Benedict's birth. The Archabbey of Monte Cassino has the exclusive right to strike this medal. The ordinary medal of St. Benedict usually differs from the preceding in the omission of the words "Ejus in obitu etc.", and in a few minor details. (For the indulgences connected with it see Beringer, "Die Ablässe", Paderborn, 1906, p. 404-6.) The habitual wearer of the jubilee medal can gain all the indulgences connected with the ordinary medal and, in addition: (1) all the indulgences that could be gained by visiting the basilica, crypt, and tower of St. Benedict at Monte Cassino (Pius IX, 31 December, 1877); (2) a plenary indulgence on the feast of All Souls (from about two o'clock in the afternoon of 1 November to sunset of 2 November), as often as (toties quoties), after confession and Holy Communion, he visits any church or public oratory, praying there according to the intention of the pope, provided that he is hindered from visiting a church or public oratory of the Benedictines by sickness, monastic enclosure or a distance of at least 1000 steps. (Decr. 27 February, 1907, in Acta S. Sedis, LX, 246.) Any priest may receive the faculties to bless these medals. It is doubtful when the Medal of St. Benedict originated. During a trial for witchcraft at Natternberg near the Abbey of Metten in Bavaria in the year 1647, the accused women testified that they had no power over Metten, which was under the protection of the cross. Upon investigation, a number of painted crosses, surrounded by the letters which are now found on Benedictine medals, were found on the walls of the abbey, but their meaning had been forgotten. Finally, in an old manuscript, written in 1415, was found a picture representing St. Benedict holding in one hand a staff which ends in a cross, and a scroll in the other. On the staff and scroll were written in full the words of which the mysterious letters were the initials. Medals bearing the image of St. Benedict, a cross, and these letters began now to be struck in Germany, and soon spread over Europe. They were first approved by Benedict XIV in his briefs of 23 December, 1741, and 12 March, 1742. GUERANGER, Essai sur l'origine, la signification et les privileges de la medaille ou croix de S. Benoit (Poitiers, 1862; 11th ed., Paris, 1890); CORBIERRE, Numismatique Benedictine (Rome, 1901); KNIEL, Die St. Benediktsmedaille, ihre Geschichte, Bedeutung, Ablasse u. wunderbare Wirkungen (Ravensburg, 1905). MICHAEL OTT College of Saint Bonaventure College of Saint Bonaventure At Quaracchi, near Florence, Italy, famous as the centre of literary activity in the Order of Friars Minor, was founded 14 July, 1879, by Mgr. Bernardino del Vago, Archbishop of Sardis, then minister general of the order. The first director and superior of the college was Father Fidelis of Fauna, under whose scholarly and energetic management the new edition of the works of St. Bonaventure was inaugurated. Upon his death in 1881, Father Fidelis was succeeded by Ignatius Jeiler, of the province of Saxony. Besides being a man of profound piety, Father Jeiler possessed an intimate knowledge of scholastic philosophy and theology, especially that of St. Bonaventure, and was thus eminently fitted to take up the work of his predecessor. Two years before his death in 1904 Father Jeiler was succeeded by Leonard Lemmens, already well-known for his many contributions to Franciscan history. The series of works that have in recent years been published at Quaracchi, and edited by the "Patres editores", as they are usually called, have gained for them an enviable reputation for critical scholarship. Foremost among these, besides the "Opera Omnia" of St. Bonaventure, is the "Analecta Franciscana", edited in greatest part by Quinctianus Muller, O.F.M. (d. 1902), which contains a collection of chronicles relating to the early history of the order and of which four volumes have thus far (1885-1907) appeared. Besides these, the "Bibliotheca Franciscana scholastica medii aevi", of which three volumes have been published (1903-04), and the "Bibliotheca Franciscana ascetica medii aevi", inaugurated in 1904 with a critical edition of the writings of St. Francis, have placed the student of medieval literature under heavy obligations to the Quaracchi friars. As well as continuing the "Annales" of Wadding, the twenty-fifth volume of which appeared in 1899, the Fathers of the college have edited a number of other publications of a purely devotional and literary character. In 1903 a new critical edition of the work of Alexander of Hales was undertaken, which is to be followed by the other Franciscan scholastics. The "Acta Ordinis", a monthly in Latin, and the official organ of the order, and the new "Archivum Franciscano-Historicum", are published at Quaracchi. St. Anthony's Almanac (1906); CARMICHAEL in The Month (Jan., 1904). STEPHEN M. DONOVAN Archdiocese of St. Boniface Saint Boniface (SANCTI BONIFACII) Archdiocese; the chief ecclesiastical division of the Canadian West, so-called after the patron saint of the German soldiers who were among its first settlers. SUCCESSIVE AREAS It commenced its official existence as the vicariate-apostolic of the north-west in 1844, though Bishop Provencher, its titular, had been there with episcopal rank since 1822. At that time it comprised the entire territory west of the Great Lakes and as far north as the Pole. The same circumscription became a diocese without changing name on 4 June, 1847, but received in 1852 the title of Diocese of St. Boniface. In May, 1862, all the territory tributary to the Arctic Sea was detached therefrom and made into the Vicariate-Apostolic of Athabasca-Mackenzie. On 22 Sept., 1871, the See of St. Boniface was raised to the rank of an archbishopric, while, out of the north-western portion of its territory, a new diocese was being carved, with headquarters at St. Albert, near Edmonton. The northeastern part of this area further became in 1890 the Vicariate-Apostolic of the Saskatchewan, and this arrangement left to the Archdiocese of St. Boniface 109° W. long. for its western boundary, while in the north this ran along 52° N. lat. as far as the eastern limit of Manitoba, following afterwards the northern end of Lake Manitoba and the Nelson River to Fort York. The eastern boundary was 91° W. long. With the formation of the Diocese of Regina (4 March, 1910) new delimitations became necessary. They are the following: in the south the international boundary as far as 91° W. long.; thence north to a line continuous with the northern limits of Manitoba, as far as the line dividing this province from Saskatchewan, which now becomes the western limit of the archdiocese. POPULATION AND ORGANIZATION The Catholic population within the present area is 87,816. Though partaking of the cosmopolitan character proper to the Canadian West, the various groups in this population are more compact. Thus the 29,595 diocesans of French extraction control four counties absolutely. The nationality most numerously represented is that of the Galicians, who number 32,637. The English speaking Catholics live mostly in towns, and are estimated at 9485. The same might almost be said of the Poles, who number 9369. The Germans count 2062 souls, and the Indians about 2000. In 1853, when Mgr Taché succeeded Bishop Provencher, the entire diocese, vast as it then was, counted but two parishes with as many unorganized annexes, and three Indian missions with resident priests, Besides the bishop, 4 secular and 7 Oblate priests attended to the spiritual needs of the Catholic population. At the time of the accession of the present archbishop the number of parishes had grown to thirty-five, though the area of the diocese had in the meantime been considerably diminished. There were then 85 churches or chapels, with 67 priests, of whom 31 belonged to the secular clergy. To-day, with a still more reduced territory, the archdiocese counts 1 archbishop, 1 Roman prelate, and 162 priests, of whom 95 are members of the regular clergy. Apart from the two dignitaries, 138 of the priests have French for their mother-tongue; 9 are English-speaking; 6 are Poles, 5 Germans, 2 Dutch, 2 Galicians, and 1 Italian. The religious orders of men in the archdiocese are the following: Oblates of Mary Immaculate, 47 priests; Jesuits, 12; Canons Regular of the Immaculate Conception, 11; Trappists, 10.; Sons of Mary Immaculate, 9; Redemptorists, 4; Clerics of St. Viator, 2; Basllians of the Ruthenian Rite, 2. Independently of these two last, the Galician population is ministered to by 2 French priests who have adopted the Ruthenian Rite, as well as by a few Redemptorists and some Oblates, while 3 more French priests are in Austria preparing for the same ministry. INSTITUTIONS The institutions of the archdiocese are: 1 college under the Jesuits, with 350 pupils; 1 lower seminary (founded 1909) with 45 pupils; 1 Oblate juniorate; 2 general hospitals; 1 maternity hospital; 1 house of refuge for girls; 3 orphan asylums; 1 asylum for old people; and 6 Indian boarding schools. The State-supported Catholic schools having been officially abolished in 1890 (see Manitoba), the two cities of Winnipeg and Brandon, where the majority of the population is Protestant, force the Catholics to pay double taxes, since the latter have to maintain their own schools as well as those of the Protestants. But, in virtue of an agreement between the present archbishop and the Government, the country schools continue to be conducted along Catholic lines. The American Brothers of the Society of Mary direct the English parochial schools of Winnipeg and St. Boniface, while French Brothers of the Cross of Jesus render the same services at St. Pierre. As to the Orders of women within the archdiocese, they are: Grey Nuns (first arrived in 1844); Sisters of the Holy Names of Jesus and Mary; Sisters of Notre Dame des Missions; Sisters of Providence; Sisters of St. Joseph; Sisters of Our Lady of the Cross; Sisters of the Five Wounds of Our Saviour; Sisters of Mercy; the Franciscan Missionaries Of Mary, and the Oblate Sisters of the Sacred Heart and Mary Immaculate, founded by the present archbishop. HISTORY The principal events in the history of the archdiocese are intimately connected with the lives of its bishops, which will be found under the heads Provencher and Taché. In addition to these and to the data already furnished in the course of the article are to be mentioned the burning (14 Dec., 1860) of the first stone cathedral, whose "turrets twain" have been sung by the poet Whittier. A new and somewhat more modest edifice was soon after put up, which had to be razed to make room for the monumental cathedral erected by Taché's successor, Archbishop Adélard L. P. Langevin, O.M.I. The new temple is a massive stone building of Byzantine style, with a reproduction of the "turrets twain) if the poet. With its sacristy it measures 312 feet in length and 280 feel along, inside with a proportionate width. Its first stone was laid on 15 Aug., 1906, and the edifice was solemnly blessed 4 Oct. 1908. In the modest church which it replaced the First Provincial Council of St. Boniface took place in 1889, with six bishops in attendance. The present incumbent of the see was b. at St. Isidore de Laprairie, Diocese of Montreal, 24 Aug., 1855, he became an oblate 25 July, 1882, and was consecrated at St. Boniface 19 March, 1895. Quite a galaxy of brilliant public men have shed lustre on the still young Diocese of St. Boniface. Without mentioning several French half-breeds who occupied high posts on the bench or in the provincial legislature, we may name M. A. Girard, who was successively Member of Parliament, speaker of the Assembly and Premier of Manitoba; Joseph Royal, a writer of note, who, after having been a member of the Manitoba Government was appointed Governor of the North-West Territories; James McKay, a convert, who filled the role of President of the Council in the Girard Cabinet; Joseph Dubuc, who was successively legislator, Crown minister, and speaker of the legislature, and ended his public career as Chief Justice of his adoptive province. The Official Catholic Directory (New York, 1911); and especially unpublished documents furnished by the Archdiocese of St. Boniface; MORICE E, History of the Catholic Church in Western Canada (Toronto, 1910). A.G. MORICE Diocese of Saint-Brieuc Saint-Brieuc ( Briocum) Diocese; comprises the Department of the Côtes du Nord. Re-established by the Concordat of 1802 as suffragan of Tours, later, in 1850, suffragan of Rennes, the Diocese of Saint-Brieuc was made to include: (1) the ancient diocese of the same name; (2) the greater portion of the diocese of Tréguier; (3) a part of the old Diocese of St. Malo, Dol, and Quimper, and the (4) parishes of the of the Diocese of Vannes. In 1852 the Bishops of Saint-Brieuc were authorized to add to their title that of the ancient See of Tréguier. [Ancient] Diocese of Saint-Brieuc An Irish saint, Briocus (Brieue), who died at the beginning of the sixth century founded in honour of St. Stephen a monastery which afterwards bore his name, and from which sprang the town of Saint-Brieuc. An inscription later than the ninth century on his tomb, at Saint-Serge at Angers, mentions him as the first Bishop of Saint-Brieuc. According to Mgr. Duchesne certain trustworthy documents prove that it was King Nomenoe who, about the middle of the ninth century, made the monastery the seat of a bishopric. Among the Bishops of Saint-Brieue, the following are mentioned: St. Guillaume Pinchon (1220-34), who protected the rights of the episcopate against Pierre Mauclerc, Duke of Brittany, and was forced to go into exile for some time at Poitiers; Jean du Tillet (1553-64), later Bishop of Meaux; and Denis de La Barde (1641-75) Diocese of Tréguier St. Tudgual, nephew of St. Brieuc, was appointed by the latter at the close of the fifth century, superior of the monastery of Tréguier, which he had founded. The biography of St. Tudgual, composed after the middle of the ninth century, relates that King Childebert had him consecrated Bishop of Tréguier, but Mgr Ducheane holds that it was King Nomenoe who, in the middle of the ninth century, raised the monastery of Tréguier to the dignity of an episcopal see. The Diocese of Saint-Brieuc and Tréguier pays special honour to the following saints: St. Jacut, first Abbot of Landouart (died about 440); St. Mandez, member of a princely Irish family (sixth century); St. Briac, disciple of St. Tudgual; founder of the monastery around which the town of Boulbriac grew up (sixth century): St. Osmanna, an Irish princess, who took refuge and died near Saint-Brieue (seventh century); St. Maurice of Cornwall (1117-91), founder and first Abbot of Carnoet, in the Diocese of Quimper; St. Yves (1253-1303), born near Tréguier, ecclesiastical judge of the Diocese of Rennes, then of the Diocese of Tréguier, where he gained the name of "advocate of the poor". He was patron of the lawyers' confraternity, erected at Paris in the church of St. Yves des Bretons. His tomb, destroyed during the Revolution, was re-erected in 1890 in the cathedral of Tréguier, whither it draws many pilgrims. Numerous synods were held at Tréguier in the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries, and passed important regulations for the discipline of the Breton churches. Among the natives of the Diocese of Saint-Brieue are — Duclos (b. 1700 d. 1772), the historian of Louis XI (b. at Dinan); Ernest Renan (b. at Tréguier, 1823; d. 1892). The Benedictine historian Dom Lobineau died at the Abbey of St. Jacut, 1727. The town of La Roche Derrien, in the diocese, was the scene of the great battle between Jean de Montford and Blessed Charles of Blois (1346), after which the latter was taken as prisoner to England. The principal pilgrimages in the Diocese of Saint-Brieuc are: Notre-Dame de Bon Secours at Guingamp the sanctuary of which was enriched by the munificence of the Dukes of Brittany; Notre Dame d'Espérance, at Saint-Brieuc, a pilgrimage dating from 1848; Notre Dame de La Fontaine at Saint-Brieuc, dating from the establishment of an oratory by Saint-Brieuc, and revived in 1893 to encourage devotion to that Saint; Notre Dame de Guyaudet, near St-Nicholas du Pélem. Notre Dame de LaRonce, at Rostrenen, a sanctuary raised to the collegiate dignity by Sixtus IV in 1483. Before the application of the law of 1901 against the congregations there were in the Diocese of Saint-Brieuc, Eudists, Franciscans, Priests of the Immaculate Conception, Marists, Marianites, Salesians, Fathers of the Holy Ghost and the Holy Heart of Mary, Hospitaller Brothers of St. John of God, and various orders of brothers. Several congregation of nuns were founded in the diocese, particularly the Filles du Saint Esprit, hospitallers, teachers and nurses of the poor, founded in 1706 at Plerin by Mme. Balavoine and Renée Burel, with their mother-house at Saint-Brieuc; the Filles de Ste Marie de la Présentation, teachers and hospitallers, founded in 1836 by Abbé Fleury, their mother-house at Broons; the Filles de La Providence, a teaching body, founded by Abbé Jean-Marie de Lamennais, with its mother-house at Saint-Brieuc; the Filles de La Divina Providence, teachers and hospitallers, with their mother-house at Crehen. The Franciscan Missionaries of Mary was founded in 1880 at St. Joseph des Châtelets, near St-Brieuc, to assist the missionaries. It has (1911) seminary to prepare sisters for the foreign missions; houses of the institute have been established in China, India, Japan, Canada, Belgian Congo, and Madagascar. At the close of the nineteenth century the redirected in the diocese of Saint-Brieuc, 1 crèche, 33 schools, 1 school for the deaf and dumb, 2 boy' orphanages, 13 girls' orphanages, 1 penitentiary for boys, 7 homes for the poor, 13 hospitals or hospices, 6 houses of nuns devoted to nursing the sick the their own homes, 2 houses of retreat, 1 hospice for incurables, and 2 asylums for the insane. At the time of the destruction of the Concordat (1905) the Diocese of Saint-Brieuc contained 609,349 inhabitants, 48 parishes, 354 succursal parishes, 395 vicariates, towards the support of which the State contributed. Galla christ (nova, 1856) XIV, 1085-1106; 1119-36; instrum., 261-7 RUFFLET, Annales Briochines ou abrégé chronologique de l'histoire ecclésiastique, civile et littéraire du diocèse de St-Brieuc, ed. ROPARTZ (Saint-Brieuc, 1850); GUIMART, Histoire des évêques de Saint-brieuc (Saint-Brieuc, 1852); GESLIN DE BOURGOGNE AND DE BARTHÉLEMY, Anciens évêché de Bretagne: Diocèse de Saint-Brieuc (6 vols., Paris, 1855-64); TREVAUX, L'Eglise de Bregagne, (Paris, 1939); CHEVALIER, Topo-bibl., pp. 2676-77; 3154. GEORGE GOYAU Saint-Claude Saint-Claude ( Sancti Claudii). The Diocese of Saint-Claude comprised in the eighteenth century only twenty-six parishes, subject previously to the Abbey of Saint-Claude, and some parishes detached from the Dioceses of Besançon and Lyons. By the Concordat of 1802, the territory of this diocese was included in that of Besançon. Later the Concordat of 1817 re-erected the Diocese of Saint-Claude giving it as territory the Department of Jura, and making it suffragan to Lyons. The Abbey of Saint-Claude, the cradle of the diocese, was one of the most distinguished in the Christian world. Between 425 and 430 the hermits of Saint Romanus and Saint Lupic withdrew into the desert Condat, where Saint-Claude now stands, and there founded the monastery of Condat: other monks were; attracted to them, the land was cleared, and three new monasteries were founded: those of Lauconne, on the site of the present village of Saint Lupicin; La Balme, where Yole, the sister of Sts. Romanus and Lupicinus, assembled her nuns; and Romainmoutier, in the present Canton of Vaud. After the death of St. Romeanus (d. about 460), St. Lupicinus (d. about 480), St. Mimausus, St. Oyent (d. about 510), St Antidiolus, St. Olympus, St. Sapiens, St. Thalasius, St. Dagamond, St. Auderic, and St. Injuriosus were abbots of Condat, which was distinguished also by the virtues of the holy monks, St=2E Sabinian, St. Palladius, and St. Valentine (fifth century), St. Justus, St. Hymetierus, and St. Point (sixth century). The rule which was followed at the beginning in the monastery of Condat was drawn up between 510 and 515 and adopted by the great monastery of Agaune; later the rule of St. Benedict was introduced at Condat. Flourishing schools arose at once around Condat and from them came St. Romanus, Archbishop of Reims, and St. Viventiolus, Archbishop of Lyons. In the early years of the sixth century the peasants who gathered around the monastery of Condat created the town which was to be known later by the name of Saint-Claude. The Life of St. Claudius, Abbot of Condat, has been the subject of much controversy. Dom Benott says that he lived in the seventh century; that he had been Bishop of Besançon before being abbot, that he was fifty-five years an abbot, and died in 694. He left Condat in a very flourishing state to his successors, among whom were a certain number of saints: St. Rusticus, St. Aufredus, St. Hipplytus (d. after 776), St Vulfredus, St. Bertrand, St. Ribert, all belonging to the eighth century. Carloman, uncle of Charlemagne, went to Condat to become a religious; St Martin, a monk of Condat was martyred by the Saracens probably in the time of Charlemagne. this Emperor was a benefactor of the Abbey of Condat; but the two diplomas of Charlemagne, formerly in possession of the monks of Saint-Claude, and now preserved in the Jura archives, dealing with the temporal interests of the abbey, have been found by M. Poupardin to be forgeries, fabricated without doubt in the eleventh century. A monk of Condat, Venerable Manon, after having enriched the abbey library with precious manuscripts was, about 874, appointed by Charles the Bald, head of the Palace school where he had among his pupils, St. Radbod, Bishop of Utrecht. Two abbots of Condat, St. Remy (d. 875) and St. Aurelian (d. 895), filled the archiepiscopal See of Lyons. In the eleventh century the renown of Abbey of Condat was increased by St. Stephen of Beze (d. 1116) by St. Simon of Crepy (b. about 1048), a descendant of Charlemagne; this saint was brought up by Mathilda, wife of William the Conqueror, was made Count of Valois and Vexin, fought against Philip I, King of France, and then became a monk of Condat. He afterwards founded the monastery of Monthe, went to the court of William the Conqueror to bring about reconciliation with his son, Robert, and died in 1080. The body of St. Claudius, which had been concealed at the time of the Saracen invasions, was discovered in 1160, visited in 1172 by St. Peter of Tarentaise, and solemnly carried all through Burgundy before being brought back to Condat. The abbey and the town, theretofore known as Oyent, were thenceforeward called by the name of Saint-Claude. Among those who made a pilgrimage to Saint-Claude were Philip the bold, Duke of burgundy, in 1369, 1376, and 1382, Philip the Good in 1422, 1442, and 1443, Charles the Rash in 1461, Louis XI in 1456 and 1482, blessed Amadeus IX, Duke of Savoy, in 1471. In 1500 Anne of Brittany, wife of Louis XII, went there in thanksgiving for the birth of her daughter Claudia. The territory of Saint-Claude forme a veritable state; it was a member of the Holy Empire, but it was not a fief, and was independent of the Countship of Burgundy. In 1291, Rudolph of Hapsburg named the dauphin, Humbert de Viennois, his vicar, and entrusted him with the defense of the monastery of Saint-Claude. In the course of time, the Abbey of Saint-Claude became a kind of Chapter, to enter which it was necessary to give proof of four degrees of nobility The system of "commendam" proved injurious to the religious life of the abbey. Among the commendatory abbots of Saint-Claude were Pierre de la Baume (1510-44) during whose administration Geneva fell away from the faith; Don Juan of Austria, natural son of Philip IV (1645-79), and Cardinal d'Estrées (1681-1714). The Abbey of Saint-Claude and the lands depending on it became French territory in 1674, on the conquest of La Franche-Comté. At that the inhabitants of La Franche-Comté took him as their second regional patron, and associated him everywhere with St. Andrew, the first patron of the Burgundians. Benedict XIII prepared and Benedict XIV published a Bull on 22 January, 1742, decreeing the secularization of the abbey and the erection of the episcopal See of Saint-Claude. The bishop, who bore the title of count, inherited all the seignorial rights of the abbot. Moreover the bishop and the canons continued to hold the dependents of the old abbey as subject to the mortmain, which meant that these men were incapable of disposing of their property. The lawyer, Christian, in 1770, waged a very vigorous campaign in favour of six communes that protested against the mortmain, and disputed the claims of the canons of Saint-Claude to the property rights of their lands. Voltaire intervened to help the communes. The Parliament of Besançon, in 1775, confirmed the rights of the Chapter; but the agitation excited by the philosophers apropos of those subject to the mortmain of Saint-Claude, was one of the signs of the approaching French Revolution. In March, 1794, the body of St. Claudius was burnt by order of the revolutionary authorities. Dole, where Frederick Barbarossa constructed in the twelfth century an immense castle in which he sojourned from time to time, but which has now disappeared, and where Philip the Good, Duke of Burgundy, established in 1422 a parliament and a university -- transferred in 1691 to Besançon by Louis XIV -- deserves mention in religious history. The Jesuits opened at Dole, in the sixteenth century, a celebrated establishment known as the Collège de l'Arc, the most important in France after the Collège de la Flèche. Anne de Sainctonge (1567-1621) founded there an important branch of the Ursulines, which left its mark in the history of primary education in France. The celebrated chemist, Pasteur (1822-95), was a native of Dole. Among the saints connected with the history of the diocese are: St. Anatolius, Bishop of Adana, in Cilicia, who died a hermit near Salins in the diocese (fifth century); St. Lautenus (477-547), founder of the monastery bearing his name; St. Bernond, who established the Benedictine abbey of Gigny and rebuilt in 926 the Benedictine abbey of Baume-les-Moines (ninth-tenth century); St. Colette of Corbie (1381-1447) (q.v.), foundress of the Poor Clare convent at Poligny in which town her relics are preserved; her friend Blessed Louise of Savoy (1462-1503), niece of Louis XI, King of France, and daughter of Blessed Amadeus IX of Savoy, wife of Hugue de Chalon, Lord of Nozeroy, then a Poor Clare in the monastery of Orbe founded by St. Colette; her relics were transferred to Nozeroy, and afterwards to Turin; Blessed John of Ghent, surnamed the hermit of Saint-Claude, celebrated in the fifteenth century for his prophecies in 1421 and 1422 to Charles VII and Henry V, King of England, relative to the deliverance of France and the birth of a dauphin; St. Francis de Sales; Ste Jane de Chantal, whose important interview at Saint-Claude in 1604 determined the foundation of the Visitation order; Venerable Frances Monet, in religion Françoise de Saint-Joseph (1589-1669); Carmelite nun at Avignon and miracle worker, born at Bonas in the diocese; Blessed Pierre François Néron, martyr, a native of the diocese (nineteenth century). The principal pilgrimages in the Diocese of Saint-Claude are: the Church of St-Pierre at Baume-les-Moines, where numerous relics are preserved; Notre-Dame-de-Mont-Roland, end of the eleventh century; Notre-Dame-Miraculeuse, at Bletterans, 1490; Notre-Dame-de-la-Balme at Epy, sixteenth century; Notre-Dame-Libératrice, at Salins, 1639; Notre-Dame-de-Mièges, 1699; Notre-Dame-de-l'Ermitage, at Arbois, seventeenth century; Notre-Dame-du-Chêne, at Cousance, 1774. Before the application of the Law of 1901 against the congregations there were in the Diocese of Saint-Claude, Jesuits, and various teaching orders of brothers; the Trappists still remain there. Among the congregations of nuns which were first founded in the diocese are: the Soeurs du Saint-Esprit, teachers and hospitallers, with their mother-house at Poligny, and the Sisters of the Third Order of St. Francis of the Immaculate Conception, teachers and hospitallers, with their mother-house at Lons-le-Saunier. At the close of the nineteenth century the religious congregations directed in the diocese 39 day nurseries, 2 asylums for invalids, 6 boys' orphanages, 1 home for the poor, 1 asylum for Magdalenes, 14 hospitals or hospices, 3 dispensaries, 23 houses of nuns devoted to nursing the sick in their own homes, 1 house of retreat, 2 hospices for incurables, and 1, asylum for the insane. At the end of the Concordat period (1905) the Diocese of Saint-Claude contained 261,288 inhabitants, 34 parishes, 356 sucursal parishes, 24 vicariates, towards the support of which the State contributed. Gallia christiana (nova, 1728), IV, 241-254; BENOÎT Hist. de l'abbye et de la terre de S. Claude, (Montreuil-sur-mer, 1890); POUPARDIN, Etude sur les deux diplômes de Charlemagne pour l'abbaye de S. Claude in Moyen-âge (1903); LARBEY DE BILLY, Hist. de l'Université du comté de bougogne, (Bresançon, 1814); BEAUNE AND D'ARBAUMONT, Les universités de Franche-Comté, (Dijon, 1870); PUFFENEY, Hist. de Dole, (Besançon, 1882); PIDOUX, Hist. de la confrérie de Saint Yves des avocats, de la Sainte Hostie miraculeuse et de la confrérie du Saint Sacrement de Dole, (1902). GEORGES GOYAU Saint Cloud, Diocese of Diocese of Saint Cloud (SANCTI CLODOALDI), A suffragan of the Archdiocese of St. Paul, Minn., comprises the counties of Stearns, Sherburne, Benton, Morrison, Mille Lacs, Kanabec, Grant, Pope, Stevens, Isanti, Traverse, Douglas, Wilkin, Otter-Tail, Todd, Wadena, in the State of Minnesota, an area of 12,251 square miles. The bishop resides in St. Cloud, Stearns county. In 1680 Father Hennepin visited the Indians at Mille Lacs, and for one hundred and seventy years no other priest came to these regions. In 1851, when this part of Minnesota was thrown open to white settlers, the history of the Diocese of St. Cloud begins. In 1852 Rev. Francis Pierz (Pirc), a native of Carniola, Austria, came from his former Indian missions at Lake Superior to Minnesota to labour among the Chippewa Indians. Finding the country well adapted to agriculture, he announced the fact in some Catholic German papers, and thus caused a large immigration of German Catholics, especially to Stearns county. In 1856 Bishop Cretin of St. Paul sent three Benedictines, Fathers Demetrius de Marogna, Cornelius Wittmann, and Bruno Riss, to attend the ever-ìncreasing numbers of settlers. They settled on a piece of land near the present city of St. Cloud, where they built a small log house and chapel. In 1857 they erected a college, and opened a school with five pupils. A change of location, however, was desirable, hence land was secured around St. John's Lake, and in 1866 a college and monastery were permanently established. They have now flourishing parishes and a university with more than three hundred students. The first abbot, Rt. Rev. Rupert Seidenbusch, was made Vicar Apostolic of Northern Minnesota (1875). He resided in St. Cloud until 1888 when, on account of poor health, he resigned. He built the present pro-cathedral and died 3 June, 1895. The present Diocese of St. Cloud was created in 1889 with Rt. Rev. Dr. Otto Zardetti as its first bishop. Dr. Zardetti, a native of Switzerland, was born 24 Jan., 1846. He was ordained priest 21 Aug., 1870, and in 1881 became professor of dogma in the St. Francis Seminary, near Milwaukee. In 1886 he was made vicar-general of Bishop Marty of Yankton. As Bishop of St. Cloud, he was extremely active, and renowned as a pulpit orator. In Feb., 1894, he was made Archbishop of Bucharest in Rumania and died at Rome 9 May, 1902. When he took charge of the Diocese of St. Cloud, he found about 30,000 souls in the charge of 69 priests, 52 religious and 17 diocesan. When he resigned, there were about 40,000 souls in the charge of 33 secular priests and 16 religious, besides 19 religious in the monastery. His successor was Rt. Rev. Martin Marty, O.S.B., also a native of Switzerland. In 1879 he was appointed Vicar Apostolic of Dakota, residing in Yankton, in 1889 first Bishop of Sioux Falls, South Dakota, and 31 Dec., 1894, was transferred to St. Cloud. He took charge of the new see 12 March, 1895, but died 19 Sept., 1896. Rt. Rev. Mgr. Jos. Bauer was administrator of the diocese until 28 Sept., 1897, when the present bishop, James Trobec, arrived as third bishop of the diocese. There are about 62,000 souls; 125 priests, 78 secular and 47 religious; 115 churches and 12 chapels; 1 university; 2 academies; 4 hospitals; 1 home for old people; 1 orphan asylum; parochial schools wherever possible. The religious communities represented in the diocese are the Benedictines and the Holy Cross Fathers; the Benedictine Sisters, who number about 400 and have charge of parochial schools, a hospital, and a home for the aged; the Sisters of St. Francis, who have charge of an orphan asylum and three hospitals; the Sisters of St. Mary of the Presentation. The Diocesan Chronicle. JAMES TROBEC. Jean-Francois Buisson de Saint-Cosme Jean-François Buisson de Saint-Cosme (Or JEAN-FRANÇOIS BISSON DE SAINT-COSME) Born in Quebec, Canada, February, 1667; killed, 1707. Entering the SÈminaire des Missions Etrangères of Quebec, he was ordained in 1690 and after serving for a time at Minas, Nova Scotia (then Acadia), was assigned to the western mission. He laboured for a time at the Cahokia (Tamaroa) mission in Illinois, until succeeded by Father Jean Bergier, probably about 1698, after which he followed Fathers Montigny and Davion, of the same seminary, to the lower Mississippi, and took up his residence among the Natchez, about the present Natchez, Mississippi, establishing the first mission in the tribe, apparently about the end of 1699. The tribes of this region, however, were generally obdurate and neither secular missionaries nor Jesuits met with success, so that by the end of 1704 all but the Natchez mission had been abandoned, leaving Father St-Cosme alone. After several years of unrequited labour, he was finally murdered, with three French companions and a slave, while descending the Mississippi, being attacked while asleep by a party of the savage Shetimasha. To avenge this death, Bienville, Governor of Louisiana, summoned the Natchez and other friendly tribes to take up arms against the Shetimasha, with the result that the latter tribe was almost exterminated. A cousin of the same name was also a priest in Quebec (b. 1660; d. 1712). Shea, Catholic Missions (New York, 1854); Jesuit Relations, ed. Thwaites, LXV, note (Cleveland. 1896-1901); La Haye, Journal historique (New Orleans, 1831). JAMES MOONEY Abbey of Saint-Denis Abbey of Saint-Denis The Abbey of Saint-Denis is situated in a small town to which it has given its name, about four miles north of Paris. St-Denis (Dionysius), the first bishop of Paris and his companions martyred in 270, were buried here and the small chapel built over the spot became a famous place of pilgrimage during the fifth and sixth centuries. In 630 King Dagobert founded the abbey for Benedictine monks, replacing the original chapel by a large basilica, of which but little now remains. He and his successors enriched the new foundation with many gifts and privileges and, possessing as it did the shrine of St-Denis, it became one of the richest and most important abbeys in France. In 653 it was made exempt from episcopal jurisdiction. A new church was commenced in 750 by Charlemagne, at the consecration of which Christ, according to popular tradition, was supposed to have assisted in person. During the ninth century irregularities crept in and the monks transformed themselves into canons with a relaxed rule. Abbot Hilduin tried in vain to reform them and was obliged to retire for a time, with a few of the more fervent monks, to a neighboring priory. At length, however, he succeeded in bringing about a better state of things and was able to resume the government of his abbey. From that time forward its splendour and importance continued to increase under the wise rule of a succession of great abbots, to whom the right of pontificalia was granted by Alexander III in 1179. Most famous perhaps amongst these was Suger, the thirty-sixth of the series (1122-52). Besides being a great ecclesiastic he was also a great statesman and acted as Regent of France whilst King Louis VII was absent on the Crusades. The present church of St-Denis was commenced by him about 1140 and marks the beginning of the Gothic tendency in architecture and its transition from the Romanesque style. Further additions and alterations under succeeding abbots resulted in producing one of the finest Gothic buildings in France (see GOTHIC ARCHITECTURE). The abbey figured prominently in the history of France and its abbots were for several centuries amongst the chief seigneurs of the kingdom. The "Oriflamme", originally the banner of the abbey, became the standard of the kings of France and was suspended above the high altar, whence it was only removed when the king took the field in person. Its last appearance was at the battle of Agincourt in 1415. Joan of Arc hung up her arms in the church of St-Denis in 1429. Many kings and princes and other noble persons were buried there and three of the Roman pontiffs stayed in the abbey at different times: Stephen II in 754, Innocent II in 1131, and Eugenius III in 1146. Another great abbot, Matthieu de Vendome, acted as administrator of the kingdom when St. Louis went to the Crusades in 1269. After the Council of Trent the Abbey of St-Denis became the head of a congregation of ten monasteries, and in 1633 it was united, with its dependent houses, to the new Congregation of St-Maur, when its conventual buildings were entirely reconstructed. In 1691 Louis XVI suppressed the abbacy and united the monastery with its revenues to the royal house of noble ladies at St-Cyr, founded by Madame de Maintenon. The abbey was finally dissolved at the revolution, when much damage was done to the church and tombs. It was subsequently restored, under Napoleon III, by Viollet-le-Duc. The relics of St-Denis, which had been transferred to the parish church of the town in 1795, were brought back again to the abbey in 1819. It is now a "national monument" and one of the show-places of Paris. Many of the chartularies and other manuscripts relating to its history are now either in the Archives Nationales or the Bibliotheque Nationale. STE. MARTHE, "Gallia Christiana," VII (Paris, 1744); DOUBLET, "Histoire de l'abbaye de Saint-Denys" (Paris, 1625); FELIBEIN, "Histoire de St-Denys" (Paris, 1706); DAVID, "Les Grandes Abbayes de l'Occident" (Lille, 1907); BEALE, "The Churches of Paris" (London, 1893). G. CYPRIAN ALSTON Saint-Denis Saint-Denis Diocese erected in 1850 as suffragan of Bordeaux, includes the Island of Réunion in the Indian Ocean about 350 miles cast of Madagascar. This island is 1000 sq. miles in area, and was discovered by the Portuguese, 8 February, 1513; it was originally called Sancta Appollonia, and later changed to Mascareigne from the name of their leader Mascarenhas. In 1638 a Frenchman named Gaubert hoisted the French flag there, and in 1642 Pronis, representing the Compagnie de Lorient, took possession of it in the name of the King of France. In 1646 twelve Madagascar colonists who had revolted were transported there, and in 1649 Flacourt, Pronis's successor, changed the name from Mascareigne to Island of Bourbon; from 1654 to 1658 an attempt was made by Antoine Thaureau, seven Frenchmen, and six negroes to colonize the west coast; in 1665 Regnault, who had been appointed governor of the island by the King, arrived with three ships bringing 20 labourers, a merchant, and 200 sick People, the first colonists of the island. The first apostles of Réunion were P. Louis de Matos, a Portugese, who on his return journey from Brazil built the chapel of Our Lady of the Angels (1667), and P. Jourdié, a Lazarist father, who remained on the island from 1667 to 1670. In 1674 P. Bernardin, a Capuchin, arrived from India; he drew up laws for hunting, planted cotton, taught the young girls to sew and spin, and was governor of the island from 1686 to 1689. In 1689 he went to France to lay the needs of the island before Louis XIV. In 1703 Cardinal MailIard de Toumon, on his way to India, called at Réunion and administered confirmation. In 1711 Clement XI entrusted the island to Lazarist missionaries, who began work there in 1714. In 1848 the island took the name of Réunion, slavery was abolished, and two years later the see was established. The first bishop was Julien Desprez (1850-57), afterwards Archbishop of Toulouse and cardinal. In March, 1851, he set out in the corvette "Cassini". The captain in charge, François de Plas, the ensign Jaussier, and the lieutenant Alexis Clerc, afterwards became Jesuits; Clerc died a victim of the Paris Commune. Gauléjac, a midshipman on the same vessel, in after life became a Carthusian. The Réunion priests are trained in Paris at the Seminary of the Fathers of the Holy Ghost and Sacred Heart of Mary which serves as diocesan seminary. In 1905 (at the breach of the Concordat) the island contained one parish served by the Holy Ghost Fathers; the Sisters of St. Joseph of Cluny, a nursing and teaching order, had 28 establishments there, and the Daughters of Mary, also a nursing and teaching order, conducted 10 establishments; the population was 173,000; there were 54 parishes and 74 priests. Histoire abrégé de l'Ile Réunion, depuis sa découverte jusqu'en 1880 (Saint-Denis, 1883); GUET, Les origines de l'Ile Bourbon (Paris, 1885); Histoire du Cardinal Desprez (Paris, 1897). GEORGES GOYAU Saint-Die Saint-Dié (SANCTI DEODATI) Diocese comprising the Department of the Vosges. Suppressed by the Concordat of 1802 and then included in the Diocese of Nancy, it was re-established nominally by the Concordat of 1817, and in fact by a papal Bull of 6 October, 1822, and a royal ordinance of 13 January, 1823, as a suffragan of Besançon. The Treaty of Frankfort (1871) cut eighteen communes from the Department of the Vosges, and added them to the Diocese of Strasburg. The Diocese of St-Dié originated in the celebrated abbey of that name. St. Deodatus (Dié) (b. towards the close of the sixth century; d. 679) came from Le Nivernais, or, according to some authorities, from Ireland; attracted by the reputation of St. Columbanus he withdrew to the Vosges, sojourning at Romont, and Arentelle, and made the acquaintance of Sts Arbogast and Florentius. For some time he was a solitary at Wibra, doubtless the present Katzenthal on Alsace, but being persecuted by the inhabitants, he went to the Vosges and founded a monastery, which he named Galilée on lands (called "Juncturae") given to him by Childeric II. The town of St-Dié now stands on this site. At the same time, Leudin Bodo, Bishop of Toul, founded to the north of Galilée the monastery of Bonmoutier and to the south that of Etival; Saint Gondelbert, perhaps after resigning the Archbishopric of Sens, had just founded the monastery of Senones to the east. These four monasteries formed, by their geographical position the four extremities of a cross : Later, Saint Hidulphus, Bishop of Treves (d 707), erected between them at the intersection. of the two arms of the cross, the monastery of Moyenmoutier. Villigod and Martin (disciples of St-Dié), Abbot Spinulus (Spin), John the priest, and the deacon Benignus (disciples of St. Hidulphus) are honoured as saints. in the tenth cent of the Abbey of St-Dié grew lax, a Frederick I, Duke of Lorraine, expelled the Benedictines, replacing them by the Canons Regular of St Augustine. Gregory V, in 996, agreed to the change and decided that the grand preévôt, the principal dignitary of the abbey should depend directly upon the Holy See. During the sixteenth century, profiting by the long vacancy of the See of Toul, the abbots of the several monasteries in the Vosges, without actually declaring themselves independent of the Diocese of Toul, claimed to exercise a quasi-episcopal jurisdiction as to the origin of which, however, they were not agreed; in the eighteenth century they pretended to be nullius dioceseos. In 1718, Thiard de Bissy Bishop of Toul, requested the election of a see at St-Dié Leopold; Duke of Lorraine, was in favour of this step, but the King of France opposed it; the Holy See refrained for the time from action. In 1777 a Bull of Pius VI erected the abbey of St-Dié into an episcopal see, and cut off from the Diocese of Toul (see NANCY, DIOCESE OF) the new Diocese of St-Dié, which, until the end of the old régime, was a suffragan of Trier. Louis Caverot, who died as Cardinal Archbishop of Lyons, was Bishop of St-Dié from 1849 to 1876. The Abbey of Remiremont was founded about 620 by Saint Romaric, a lord at the court of Clotaire II, who, having been converted by Saint Amé, a monk of Luxeuil, took the habit at Luxeuil; it comprised a monastery of monks, among whose abbots were Sts. Amé (570-625), Romaric (580-653), and Adelphus (d. 670), and a monastery of nuns, which numbered among its abbesses Sts. Mactefelda (d. about 622), Claire (d. about 652), and Gébétrude (d. about 673). At a later period the Benedictine nuns were replaced by a chapter of ninety-eight canonesses who had to prove 200 years of nobility, and whose last abbess, under the old régime, was the Princess de Bourbon Condé, sister of the Duke of Enghien; she was prioress of the Monastery of the Temple at her death. Besides the saints mentioned above and some others, bishops of Nancy and TouI, the, following are honoured in a special manner in the Diocese of St-Dié; St Sigisbert, King of Austrasia (630-56); St. Germain, a hermit near Remiremont, a martyr, who died Abbot of Grandval, near Basle (618-70); St. Hunna, a penitent at St-Dié (d. about 672); St. Dagobert, King of Austrasia, slain by his servant Grimoald (679) and honored as a martyr; St. Modesta, a nun at Remiremont, afterwards foundress and abbess of the monastery of Horren at Trier (seventh century); St. Goéry, Bishop of Metz (d. about 642), whose relics are preserved at Epinal and who is the patron of the butchers of the town; St. Simeon, Bishop of Metz (eighth century), whose relics are preserved at Senones; Sts. William and Achery, hermits near Ste. Marie aux Mines (ninth wife of Charles the Fat, who died as Abbess of Andlau in Alsace; Blessed Joan of Arc, b. at Domremy in the diocese; Venerable Mére Alix le Clerc (b. at Remiremont, 1516; d. 1622) and St. Peter Fourier (b. at Mericourt, 1555; d. 1640), curé of Mattaincourt, who founded the Order of Notre-Dame. Elizabeth de Ranfaing (b. at Remiremont, 1592; d. 1649) founded in the Diocese of Toul the congregation of Our Lady of Refuge; Catherine de Bar (b. at St-Dié, 1614; d. 1698), known as Mére Mechtilde of the Blessed Sacrament, at first an Annunciade nun and then a Benedictine, founded at Paris, in 1654, the Order of the Benedictines of the Perpetual Adoration of the Blessed Sacrament; following in her footsteps Elizabeth Brem (1609-68) known as Mother Benedict of the Passion (1609-68), a Benedictine nun at Rambervillers, established in that monastery the Institute of the Perpetual Adoration. The remains of Brother Joseph Formet, known as the hermit of Ventron (1724-84), are the object of a pilgrimage. Venerable Jean Martin Moye (1730-93), founder in Lorraine of the Congrégation de la Providence for, the instruction of young girls and apostle of Su-Tchuen, was director for a brief period of the seminary of St-Dié, and established at Essegney, in the diocese, one of the first novitiates of the Soeurs de la Providence (hospitallers and teachers), whose, mother-house at Portieux ruled over a large number of houses before the Law of 1901. Grandclaude, a village teacher who was sent to the Roman College in 1857 by Bishop Caverot, contributed, when a professor in the grand seminaire of St-Dié, to the revival of canon law studies in France. It is interesting to note how at St-Dié, about the beginning of the sixteenth century, the newly discovered continent received the name of America. Vautrin Lud, Canon of St-Dié and chaplain and secretary of Renée II, Duke of Lorraine, set up a printing-establishment at St-Dié in which two Alsatian geographers, Martin Waldseemüller and, Mathias Ringmann, began at once to produce an edition of a Latin translation of Ptolemy's "geography". In l5O7 Renée II received from Lisbon the abridged account, written in French, of the four voyages of Vespucci. Lud had this translated into Latin by Basin de Sandaucourt. The printing of the translation was completed at St-Dié on 24 April, 1507; it was prefaced by a short writing entitled " Cosmographiae introductio", certainly the work of Waldseemüler, and was dedicated to Emperor Maximilian. In this preface Waldseemüller proposed the name of America. A second edition appeared at St-Dié in August, 1507, a third at Strasburg in 1509, and thus the name a of America was spread about. The work was re-edited with an English version by Charles Herbermann (New York, 1907). M Gallois has proved that in 1507 Waldseemüller inserted this name in two maps, but that in 1513, in other maps Waldseemüller, being better informed, inserted the name of Columbus as the discoverer of America. But it was too late; the name of America had been already firmly established. The principal pilgrimages of the diocese are: Notre-Dame de St-Dié, at St-Dié, at the place where St. Dié erected his first sanctuary; Notre-Dame du Trésor, at Remiremont; Notre-Dame de Consolation, at Epinal; Notre-Dame de la Brosse, at Bains; Notre-Dame de Bermont, near Domremy, the sanctuary at which Joan of Arc prayed; and the tomb of St. Peter Fourrier at Mattaincourt. There were in the diocese before the application of the Law of 1901 against the congregations: Canons of Lateran; Clerks Regular of Our Saviour; Eudistes; Franciscans, Fathers of the Holy Ghost and the Holy Heart of Mary; various teaching orders of brothers. Among the congregations of nuns founded in the diocese may be mentioned besides the Sisters of Providence, the Soeurs du Pauvre Enfant Jésus (also known as the Soeurs de la bienfaisance chrétienne), teachers and hospitallers, founded in 1854 at Chemoy l'Orgueilleux; the mother-house was transferred to Remiremont. At the close of the nineteenth century the religious congregations in the diocese directed: 7 créchés; 55 day nurseries; 1 orphanage for boys and girls; 19 girls' orphanages; 13 workshops; 1 house of refuge; 4 houses for the assistance of the poor, 36 hospitals or hospices; 11 houses of nuns devoted to the care of the sick in their own homes; and 1 insane asylum. The Diocese of St-Dié had, in 1905 (at the time of the rupture of the Concordat), 421,104 inhabitants; 32 parishes; 354 succursal parishes; and 49 vicariates supported by the State. Gallia christ. nova, XIII (1785), 1064-7, 1377-83, 1407-19; MARTIN, Hist. des dioceses de Toul, de Nancy et de St-Dié (3 vols., Nancy, 1900-3); DIDELOT, Remiremont, les saints, le chapitre, la revolution (Nancy, 1888); L'HOTE, La vie des Saints, bienheureux, venerables et autres pieux personnages du diocese de St-Die (2 vols., St-Dié, 1897); GALLOIS, Americ Vespuce et les géographe de St-Dié in Bull. de la Soc. de Géogr. de l'Est (1900). GEORGES GOYAU Charles Sainte-Claire Deville Charles Sainte-Claire Deville Geologist, b. at St. Thomas, West Indies, 26 February, 1814; d. in Paris 10 October, 1876. Going to Paris at an early age, he entered the Ecole des Mines and studied there. His first work in the scientific field included a series of explorations in the Antilles, in which he gave special attention to seismic and volcanic phenomena. He returned in 1855, and three years later visited Vesuvius and Stromboli in pursuit of his volcanic studies. He evolved the theory that volcanic eruptions are due to the entrance of sea water into the fissures of the earth's crust; coming in contact with hot rocks, it produces the explosive and eruptive manifestations. This was confirmed in his mind by the fact that so many volcanoes are near the sea-coast. In 1857 he became a member of the Académie des Sciences of Paris. He was an assistant to Elie de Beaumont in the Collége de France, and succeeded him as professor in 1875. Previous to this (in 1872) he had been made Inspector General of the Meteorological Service. He established a chain of meteorologic stations through France and Algiers, and was first president of the observatory in Mountsouris, one of this chain. He replaced Dufrémy in the Académie des Sciences. He also did much work in chemistry, notably in the analysis of minerals and also in molecular physics. Since 1862 he had been an officer of the Legion of Honour. His works, including papers and notes in "Comptes Rendus" and in the "Annales de Chimie" are very numerous; the most important are the following: "Etudes géologiques sur les Iles de Ténériffe et de Fogo" (1846), not completed; "Voyage géoIogique aux Antilles et aux Iles de Ténériffe et de, Fogo" (1847); "Lettres à M. Elie de Baumont sur l'éruption du Vésuve"; "Comptes Rendus d l'Académie des Sciences" (1855); "Eruptions actuelles du volcan de Stromboli"; "Recherches sur les principaux phénomènes de metéorologie et de physique terrestre aux Antilles" (1861). POGGFENDORFF, Biograph. lliterar. Handwörterbuch, III (1898), 2; VAPEREAU, Dict. univ. des contemporains, V (1st ed.); KNELLER, Das Christentum u. die Vertreter der neueren Naturwissenchaften (Freiburg, 1904), tr. KETTLE (St. Louis, 1911). T. O'CONOR SLOAN Henri-Etienne Sainte-Claire Deville Henri-Etienne Sainte-Claire Deville Chemist, b. at St. Thomas, West Indies, 11 March, 1818; d. at Boulogne, 1 July, 1881; brother of the preceding. Finishing his classical studies in Paris, he built himself a laboratory there and worked for eight years without teachers or students. He acquired much fame by his work, and in 1844 the government entrusted him with the organization of the faculty of sciences of Besançon. He was professor and dean there from 1845 to 1851. In 1851 he was called to Paris as maître des conférences in the Ecole Normale Supérieure replacing Balard. In 1853 he replaced Dumas in the Sorbonne and succeeded him as professor in 1859. In 1861 he was made a member of the Academy of Sciences. His work in mineral chemistry entitles him to be considered one of the great chemists of the second half of the nineteenth century. He discovered the phenomenon of dissociation, his first notion of this going back to 1857. He discovered nitrogen pentoxide, the anhydride of nitric acid. Woehler, the great German chemist, had discovered aluminum in 1827. Deville worked on the metallurgy of the metal, and devised a means of preparing it by decomposing aluminium sodium chloride with metallic sodium. This was the first commercial process of producing the metal, which was for some time almost a curiosity, but whose uses are now so extensive. Napoleon III was greatly interested in the new metal, the "silver of clay". Debray was associated with him in his work; and it is interesting to see how, after over fifty-six years, the metal has been introduced on a large scale into mechanical use. In the technical field he worked upon the use of petroleum and heavy oils as fuels, where he was also a leader in one of the prominent movements of the present day, the use of crude petroleum as fuel for the production of steam. Many of his memoirs are published in the "Comptes rendues" and "Annales". Among his works we may cite: "De l'aluminium, ses propriétés, sa fabrication" (Paris, 1859); Métallurgie du platine et des métaux qui l'accompangnent" (Paris, 1863). GAY, Henri St. Claire-Deville, sa vie et ses travaux (Paris, 1889); VAPEREAU, Dictionnaire universel des contemporains; POGGENDORFF, Biographisches literarisches Handworterbuch, III (1898) 2. T. O'CONOR SLOANE Abbey of Sainte-Genevieve Abbey of Sainte-Geneviève The Abbey of Sainte-Geneviève, in Paris, was founded by King Clovis who established there a college of clerics, later called canons regular. How long these clerics observed the regular life is unknown, but in 1147 secular canons officiated in the church. King Louis VII and Pope III, having witnessed some disorders, determined to restore the regular discipline and at first thought to call monks, but as the canons preferred some of their own order, the pope consented. At the request of Sugerus and St. Bernard, Gildwin, the first Abbot of St-Victor's, St. Bernard, Gildwin, the first Abbot of St-Victor's where the canonical rule had been recently established, consented to send Odo, the Prior of his abbey. There were difficulties, but order finally prevailed and some of the canons joined the reform. Among these was the young Canon William, already known for his virtues and learning. At the request of Absalon, Bishop of Roskild, in Denmark, who when a student at Ste-Geneviève's had known him, William was sent to that country to reform a monastery of canons in the Isle of Eskil. In spite of untold trials, obstacles, and persecutions he succeeded in his enterprise and even founded another monastery, which he dedicated to the Holy Paraclete. He died in 1206, and was canonized by Honorius III. It was natural that close relations should exist between Ste-Geneviève's and its foundations in Denmark. Peter, a young man who made his profession at the abbey, became Bishop of Roskild; Valdemar, brother of King Knut, died at Ste-Geneviève's; and Abbot Stephen of Tournai wrote to William and his friends to obtain lead for the roof of his abbey. Like the Abbey of St-Victor, Ste-Geneviève's became a celebrated seat of learning. St-Victor's, Ste-Geneviève's, and Notre-Dame were the cradle of the University of Paris. Abelard at different epochs lectured in this abbey-school. By right and custom the two sister-abbeys frequently exchanged subjects. Peter de Ferrière, Abbot of St-Victor's was at one time prior of Epinay, a priory of Ste-Geneviève's; William of Auxerre, a professed canon of St-Victor's in 1254, held the office of cellarer, and became Abbot of Ste-Geneviève's; and Marcel, successively canon at St-Victor's and Ste-Geneviève's, was in 1198 made Abbot of Cisoing. Like most religious houses, this abbey, falling into the hands of abbots in commendam, relaxation and disorders were the consequence. In the beginning of the seventeenth century Cardinal de La Rochefoucauld undertook its reform. He brought from Senlis a holy man, Charles Faure, who had already restored the canonical rule in the ancient Abbey of Silvanect. Once more the Rule of St. Augustine was faithfully observed at Ste-Geneviève's which became the mother-house of the Gallican congregaton. Charled Faure, died in 1644. The second spring of the abbey was perhaps even more glorious than the first. By the middle of the seventeenth century the abbot-general of the congregation had under his jurisdiction more than one hundred abbeys and priories. Men like Fronteau, chancellor of the university and author of many works, Laleman, Chapponel, Reginier, Chengot, Beurier, du Moulinet, founder of the national library, and Augustine Hay, a Scotchman who wrote the "Scotia sacra" and officated at Holyrood, Scotland, in 1687, were sons of the French congregation. When in 1790 the revolutionary assembly declared all religious vows void, and opened the doors to all the inmates of the monasteries, there were thirty-nine canons at Ste-Geneviève's. This was the end of that illustrious abbey and school. BONNARD, Histoire de l'abbaye de St-Victor de Paris (1907); Gautier, Adam de St-Victor (Paris, 1858; Marion Histoire de l'Eglise (Paris, 1908); Vuillemin, Vie de S. Peirre Fourier (Paris, 1897). A. ALLARIA Saint-Flour Saint-Flour ( Floropolis) Diocese comprising the Department of Cantal, and is suffragan of the Archbishopric of Bourges. Re-established by the Concordat of 1802, by which the Department of Haute-Loire was brought into this diocese, this department was detached from it in 1823 by the reestablishment of the See of Le Puy. The traditions relative to St. Florus (Flour), who is said to have been the first Bishop of Lodève and to have died at Indiciat (later Saint-Flour) while evangelizing Haute-Auvergne, have been the subject of numerous discussions. In two documents concerning the foundation of the second monastery of St-Flour, drawn up in 1013 and 1031, and in a letter written to Urban IV in 1261 by Pierre de Saint-Haon, prior of Saint-Flour, St. Flour is already considered as belonging to the Apostolic times, and the "Speculum sanctorale" of Bernard Gui in 1329 relates at length the legend of this "disciple of Christ". M. Marcellin Boudet believes it more likely that St. Flour lived in the fifth century, and that it was he who attended the Council of Arles in 450 or 451. At the close of the tenth century there was already a monastery at Indiciat. A local seigneur, Astorg de Brezons, surnamed "the Red Bull", gave this monastery to Odilo, Abbot of Cluny, and the donation was confirmed by Gregory V (996-99). Amblard de Brezons, his nephew, surnamed "le Mal Hiverné", seized the monastery and destroyed all of it except the church. Amblard and Astorg, from 1010 to 1013, gave this church and its fief to St. Peter's at Rome, together with the monastery of Sauxillages, governed by Odilo; but later Amblard considered this donation as void, and constructed a fortress, a remnant of which is now the sacristy of the cathedral, upon the site of the old monastery; afterwards Amblard, seized with remorse at Rome, between 1025 and 1031 gave back to Odilo all he possessed, and a large monastery was again founded. Urban II, after the Council of Clermont (1095), consecrated the church of this new monastery. The church collapsed in 1396, and no remains of it exist. Pope Callistus II passed some time there. In August, 1317, John XXII detached Haute-Auvergne from the see of Clermont and raised St-Flour to the rank of a bishopric, the first ordinary of which was his chaplain Raymond de Montuéjols. Among his successors were Pierre d'Estaing (1361-67), afterwards Archbishop of Bourges and cardinal in 1370; Louis-Siffrein-Joseph de Salamon (1820-29), former counseiller-clerc to the Parliament of Paris, who during the Revolution had secretly acted in France as the pope's agent, a rôle concerning which he has left very important memoirs. The Abbey of Aurillac was celebrated: it was founded by St. Géraud, Count of Aurillac, who in 898 brought thither monks from Vabres; it soon became well known, according to John of Salisbury, as a centre of literacy and scientific studies: Gerbert (later Sylvester II), and Guillaume d'Auvergne, friend and confidant of Saint Louis, studied there. St. Odo, Abbot of Cluny, from 926 to 943, was at first a monk at Saint-Pierre de Mauriae, and, according to some, Abbot of Aurillac. St. Peter Chavanon, founder in 1062 of the monastery of Pébrac, in the Diocese of Le Puy, was for some time superior of the Abbey of Chazes, near Vic. The tragic poet de Belloy (1727-95), author of the celebrated tragedy on the Siege of Calais, was born at Saint-Flour. Louis-Antoine de Noailles (1651-1729), Archbishop of Paris, was born at Laroquebrou in the diocese. Abbé Jean Chappe d'Auteroche (1722-69), astronomer, who in 1769 went to California to observe the transit of Venus and died there of a contagious disease, was a native of Mauriae. Abbé de Pradt (1759-1837) was born at Allanche. The Diocese of Saint-Flour is remarkable among the French dioceses for the great number of its sanctuaries and pilgrimages dedicated to the Blessed Virgin. There are sixty-five, of which the following are the more important: Notre-Dame de Claviers, at Moussages, the statue of which is the most ancient in the diocese; Notre-Dame des Miracles, at Mauriac, sixth century; o Notre-Dame de Frodière, at Saint-Flour, eleventh century; Notre-Dame de' Laurie, at Laurie, an eleventh-century sanctuary; Notre-Dame de Bon Secours at Marmanhac; Notre-Dame de Quezac, which is visited annually by between 20,000 and 30,000 pilgrims; Notre-Dam de Vau Claire, at Molompise — these three dating-back to the twelfth century; Notre-Dame de Valentines at Ségur, belong to the thirteenth century; Notre-Dame de Turlande at Paulhenc, Notre-Dame de Villedieu, both dating to the fourteenth century; Notre-Dame de Pitié at Chaudesaigues; Notre-Dame de Puy Rachat, at Nieudan; Notre-Dame des Oliviers, at Marat, all three dating back to the fifteenth century; Notre-Dame d'Aubespyre, at Aubespeyre; Notre-Dame dela font Sainte, at St. Hippolyte, visited annually by between 10,000 and 12,000 pilgrims; Notre-Dame de Pailherols; Notre Dame aux Neiges, at Aurillac, all four dating back to the sixteenth century; Notre-Dame de Guérison, at Enchanet; Notre-Dame de Lescure, both dating back to the eighteenth century. The "Revue catholique des églises" published in 1905, an interesting monograph of the diocese; it shows that 50 percent of the men go to Mass each Sunday, 25 per cent go every second Sunday, and 70 per cent fulfill their Easter duty. An interesting work is the "Œuvre des bergers", which assembles several hundred shepherds from the neighbouring regions each year at Pailherols and La Font Sainte for a day's religious exercises, the only one which they can have during the five months that they pass alone in the mountains. Before the application of the law of 1901 on the associations, there were in the Diocese of Saint-Flour Lazarists and various teaching orders of brothers. Some congregations of nuns have their mother-houses in the diocese, in particular: the Soeurs de Saint Joseph, with their mother-house at Saint-Flour; the Petites Soeurs des Malades, with their mother-house at Mauriac; the Soeurs de l'Enfant Jesus, dites de l'instruction; and the Soeurs de la Sainte Famille, with their mother-house at Aurillac. At the close of the nineteenth century the religious congregations directed in the diocese, 1 crèche, 12 refuge halls, 1 school for the deaf and dumb, 1 boys' orphanage, 6 girls' orphanages, 1 home for honest poor girls, 1 hospice for incurables, 1 asylum for the insane, 1 dispensary, 1 house of retreat, I house of nuns devoted to nursing the sick in their own homes, 13 hospitals or hospices. At the time of the destruction of the concordat (1905) the Diocese of Saint-Flour contained 230,511 inhabitants, 24 parishes, 288 succursal churches, and 190 vicariates towards the support of which the State contributed. Gallia Christiana nova (1720), 419-437. and instr., 127-162: BOUDET, La lgene de St. Florus d'après les textes les plus anciens; additions aux nouveax Bollandistes in Annales du Midi (1895); IDEM, La Légende de St. Florus et ses fables (Clermont,1897); CHAUMEIL, Biographie des personnes remarquables de la Haute Auvergne, précédé d'un essai sur l'histoire religieuse de cette demi-province, (Saint-Flour, 1867); FROMENT, Esquisse historique sur le monastère et la ville de St-Flour in Revue d'Auvergne (1885); CHABAU, Pèlerinages et sanctuaires de la Sainite vierge dans le diocèse de St-Flour, (Paris, 1889); ROUCHY, Le diocèse de St. Flour in Revue catholique des èglises (1905). GEORGES GOYAU Saint Francis Mission Saint Francis Mission (Properly Saint François de Sales, Quebec) A noted Catholic Indian mission village under Jesuit control near Pierreville, Yamaska district, Province of Quebec, Canada. It was originally established (1683) at the falls of the Chaudière, on the south side of the St. Lawrence, above Quebec, as a refuge for the Abnaki and Pennacook Indians who were driven from New England by the wars of that and the subsequent colonial period: these tribes were French in sympathy and, especially the Abnaki, largely Catholic in religion through the efforts of the Jesuit missionaries. The Algonquin, Montagnais, and Micmac of Canada as well as the Nipmuc and others of southern New England were also largely represented, but from the final preponderance of the Abnaki their language became that of the mission. In 1700 the mission was removed to its present situation. After the destruction of Norridgewock and the death of Father Sebastian Rasle at the hands of the New England men in 1724, the majority of the Abnaki removed to Canada and settled at Saint Francis, which became thenceforth a centre of Indian hostility against New England. In 1759 a strong New England force under Major Rogers surprised and destroyed the settlement, including the mission church and records, killing 200 Indians. It was soon rebuilt and still exists as one of the oldest mission settlements of Canada. In the war of the Revolution and again in the war of 1812, a number of the men fought on the British side. Among the Jesuit workers at St. Francis the most distinguished name is that of the venerable Father Joseph AubÈry, in charge from 1709 until his death in 1755, who before coming to the mission had served ten years with the Micmac of Nova Scotia. Having mastered the Abnaki language he wrote much in it, his most important contribution being a manuscript French-Abnaki dictionary, which is still preserved in the archives of the mission. Owing to the former migratory habit of the Indians the population of the mission varied greatly at different periods, but is estimated to-day (1911) at approximately three hundred souls, all of mixed blood, and more French than Indian in characteristic, although they still retain their old language in their homes. Their chief industry is basket-making, which furnishes a comfortable income. (See also PENOBSCOT INDIANS; MISSIONS, CATHOLIC INDIAN, OF THE UNITED STATES. — New England.) Jesuit Relations, ed. Thwaites (73 vols., Cleveland, 1896-1901), particularly Abnaki, Lower Canada, Quebec; Annual Reports of Dept. of Ind. Affairs, Ottawa (Canada); Maurault, Hist. des Abenakis (Quebec, 1866); Shea, Catholic Missions (New York, 1855); Pilling, Bibliography of the Algonquian Languages (Bur. Amer. Ethnology. Washington, 1891). JAMES MOONEY Saint Gall Saint Gall (The Diocese of Saint Gall; Sangallensis) A Swiss bishopric directly subject to the Holy See. It includes the Canton of St. Gall and, as a temporary arrangement, the two half-cantons of Appenzell Outer Rhodes and Appenzell Inner Rhodes. In 1910 its statistics were: 9 deaneries, each directed by a dean; 117 parishes; 116 additional cures of souls; 128 Catholic teachers; 233 secular priests; 46 regular priests; about 169,000 Catholics; and a non-Catholic population of 152,000. The bishop is elected by the cathedral chapter within three months after the see falls vacant. According to the concordat of the Canton of St. Gall with the Holy See, he must be a secular priest of the diocese and must be approved by the Catholic collegium of the cantonal great council. The bishop has a cathedral chapter of five resident and eight honorary canons, with a cathedral dean as its head. The resident canons have charge of the cathedral services and the care of the cathedral parish, in which they are aided by 3 coadjutors and 3 vicars. Besides the chapter there is also a vicar-general. For the training of the clergy there is a seminary for priests at St. Gall which, however, is limited to the actual practical seminary course of a six months term. As a rule the students of theology attend for their academic training the theological faculties of the Universities of Innsbruck and Fribourg in Switzerland. The male orders are represented in the diocese only by 4 Capuchin monasteries. The female orders in the diocese are: 1 house of Benedictine nuns; 2 of Cistercian nuns; 2 of Dominican nuns; 8 of Franciscan nuns; 1 of the Sisters of the Good Shepherd; 2 of the School Sisters of the Holy Cross; 1 of Premonstratensian nuns; 1 of the Italian-Missionary Sisters of St. Francis; and numerous houses of Sisters of Charity of the Holy Cross (Ingenbohl Sisters). The most noted church of the diocese is the cathedral, the church of the former Benedictine abbey (see above). Among other of pilgrimage are: the Wildkirchlein, on the Santis; the little monastery of Notkersegg, near St. Gall; the parish church at Kirchberg, in the District of Toggenburg; and Dreibrunnen, near Wil. Catholic associations are highly developed; a Catholic congress is held annually in the diocese. There are 12 Catholic newspapers, of which the "Ostschweiz", published at St. Gall, is the most important. HISTORY The Abbots of St. Gall had exercised nearly all the rights of episcopal jurisdiction within their territory. After the suppression of the ancient abbey. there was evident need of a reorganization of ecclesiastical affairs, which had sunk into a deplorable decay, and the plan was proposed to replace the abbey by a Diocese of St. Gall. At that era a part of the present territory of the diocese belonged ecclestically to the Diocese of Chur, and another part to the Diocese of Constance. In 1815 the Swiss part of the Diocese of Constance was separated from Constance by Pope Pius VII, and placed under the provisional administration of Provost Goldin of Beromüster, in the Canton of Lucern. On the death of the provost in 1819 this district fell to the Diocese of Chur. The arrangement, however, was only intended to be a temporary one. After long negotiations the desired Diocese of St. Gall was established in 1823, but it was connected by personal union with the Diocese of Chur. However, the abbey church of St. Gall that was raised to a cathedral received a separate cathedral chapter and an independent seminary. The Bishop also was obliged to live alternately at Chur and at St. Gall. This double diocese satisfied neither the inhabitants of the Grisons nor those of St. Gall. The former wanted their bishop for themselves, the latter feared that the Bishop of Chur might regard St. Gall merely as an appendage of his old diocese and look down on it. Moreover, the government of the Canton of St. Gall meddled incessantly in ecclesiastical matters and in the Church's right of jurisdiction, and demanded for itself the right of approval (placetum regium) in all more important discipline. When therefore the bishop, Count von Buolschauenstein (1823-35), died, the governments of both cantons refused to recognize his successor, and the Catholic collegium of the great council of St. Gall appointed an episcopal administrator, Father Zürcher, for the Catholics of the canton. Finally Gregory XVI, at the request of the Canton of St. Gall, suppressed the double diocese and erected in 1836 a Vicariate Apostolic of St. Gall; the vicar Apostolic was Johann-Peter Mirer of Upper Saxony, parish priest of Sargans. Negotiations concerning the erection of a separate Diocese of St. Gall were soon begun with Rome in order to bring this state of affairs to an end. It was, however, only after great difficulties that an agreement was made that was satisfactory both to the Holy See and to the Canton of St. Gall. In 1845 the Concordat was signed by the papal nuncio and the authorities of the canton; on 12 April, 1847, Pius IX issued the Bull of circumscription, and on 29 June Mirer was consecrated in the cathedral as first Bishop of St. Gall. The new bishopric had soon a hard fight to wage with the Liberal party, which had gained ascendancy in the canton from 1855, as to the rights and liberties of the Church. The bishop, a highly talented and very orthodox man, was ably and vigorously supported in this struggle by Father Greith, Gallus Baumgartner (father of the celebrated Jesuit Alexander Baumgartner) the jurist Leonhard Grün (president of the Catholic administrative council), and the advocate J.J. Müller. Yet, notwithstanding all their efforts, they could not prevent the suppression of the newly-established Catholic lyceum, the wasting of a part of the diocesan funds, or the combination of the Catholic cantonal school with the Protestant town gymnasium to form a school in which both religions were placed on a parity, to put an end to ecclesiastical influence in education. These actions were the result of the terrorism of the Liberal Party (see on these events Greith, "Die Lage der katholischen Kirche unter der Herrschaft des Staatskirchentums in Sankt Gallen", St. Gall, 1858). The diocese, however, maintained itself notwithstanding the storms, and Catholic religious life developed and flourished greatly. A large part of the credit for this prosperity was due to Karl Johann Greith, who was elected bishop after Mirer's death in 1862. Not long after his consecration Greith was also made provisional administrator of the Canton of Appenzell, which, after the dissolution of the Diocese of Constance, had up to then been administered by Chur. This provisional administration has become in fact, although not legally, a permanent condition. After a few years of quiet new discords broke out in the diocese in connection with the Old-Catholic movement in Switzerland, and Greith was accused of contravening the concordat and the constitutional oath. It did not, indeed, go as far as the deposition of the bishop, as Liberals demanded, but the episcopal seminary for boys, which Greith had founded and maintained at a great sacrifice of money and time, was closed in 1874 by the government, and has not so far been reopened. Soon after this, civil marriage was introduced by the law of the Swiss Confederation, and the religious education of the young was endangered by the introduction of irreligious school books, and by forcibly putting both religions on a parity in the schools. Greith was succeeded by his vicar-general Augustinus Egger (1882-1906). A widely-read author and a skilful orator, he deserves much credit for what he did to encourage Catholic life, not only in his own diocese but also in the whole of Switzerland. During his administration the extreme Radical government of the Canton of St. Gall was replaced by a moderate one, and the new constitution of 1890 has brought about a more satisfactory state of affairs between Church and State. According to Article 24 of the constitution the ecclesiastical authorities alone have charge of religious and purely ecclesiastical matters. The Catholic and Protestant districts of the canton settle their own denominational organization subject to the approval of the great council, the Catholic organization being in harmony with the laws of the Catholic Church. Authorities chosen by each denomination have charge of denominational matters of a mixed nature as well as of the administration of the denominations, of the state. Augustine Egger was succeeded in 1906 by the present bishop, Ferdinand Rüegg, b. 20 Oct., 1847, consecrated 10 June, 1906. BAUMGARTNER, Geschichte des schweizerischen Friestaats und Kantons Sankt Gallen (3vols., Zurich and Einsiedeln, 1868-90) ZARDETTI, Requies Sancti Galli (Einsiedln, 1881); BAUMGARTNER, Gallus Jakob Baumgartner, Landammann von Sankt Gallen, und die neuere Staatsentwicklung der Schweiz 1797-1869 (Freiburg im Br., 1892); DIERAUER, Politische Geschichte des Kantons Sankt Gallen 1803-1903 (St. Gall, 1904); OESCH, Dr. Karl Johann Greith, Bischof van Sankt Gallen (St. Gall, 1909); GSCHWEND, Die Echtung des Bistums Sankt Gallen (2 vols., Stans, 190.0); Mitteil ungen zur vaterlandichen Gechichte, herausgegeben vom Historischen Verein Sankt Gallen (St. Gall, 1862-); FÄH, Die Kathedrale in St. Gallen (2 pts., St. Gall, 1896 and 1900). JOSEPH LINS Orders of St. George Orders of St. George Knights of St. George appear at different historical periods and in different countries as mutually independent bodies having nothing in common but the veneration of St. George, the patron of knighthood. St. George of Lydda, a martyr of the persecution of Diocletian in the fourth century, is one of those military saints whom Byzantine iconography represented as a horseman armed cap-à-pie, like the flower of the Roman armies after the military reform of Justinian in the sixth century. The pilgrim knights of Europe, encountering in the East these representations of St. George, recognized their own accoutrements and at once adopted him as the patron of their noble calling. This popularity of St. George in the West gave rise to numerous associations both secular and religious. Among secular orders of this name which still exist must be mentioned the English Order of the Garter, which has always had St. George for its patron. Though Protestantism suppressed his cult, the chapel of St. George at Windsor has remained the official seat of the order, where its chapters assemble and where each knight is entitled to a stall over which his banner is hung. A second royal order under the double patronage of St. Michael and St. George was founded in England in 1818 to reward services rendered in foreign or colonial relations. In Bavaria a secular Order of St. George has existed since 1729, and owes its foundation to the prince elector, better known by the title of Charles VII which he bore as emperor for a brief period. The present Russian Order of St. George dates from 1769, having been founded in the reign of Catherine II, as a military distinction. There formerly existed regular orders of St. George. The Kingdom of Aragon was placed under his patronage, and in gratitude for his assistance to its armies King Pedro II founded (1201) the Order of St. George of Alfama in the district of that name. Nevertheless this order received the approbation of the Holy See only in 1363 and had but a brief existence. With the approval of antipope Benedict XIII it was amalgamated with the Aragonese Order of Montesa, and thereafter known as the Order of Montesa and St. George of Alfama. Equally short-lived was the Order of St. George founded in Austria by the Emperor Frederick III and approved by Paul II in 1464. This needy prince was unable to assure a sufficient endowment for the support of his knights, and the pope gave him permission to transfer to the new order the property of a commandery of St. John and a Benedictine abbey in the town of Milestadt, to which the emperor added some parishes in his patronage. Nevertheless the knights had to rely for support on their personal possession, therefore they did not make a vow of poverty, but simply of obedience and chastity, and, owing to this lack of resources, the order did not survive its founder. It was succeeded by a secular Confraternity of St. George founded under the Emperor Maximilian I with the approbation of Alexander VI in 1494, which likewise disappeared, in the disturbances of the sixteenth century. CH. MOELLER Diocese of Saint George's Saint George's (SANCTI GEORGII) Diocese in Newfoundland. Beginning at Garnish it takes in the western portion of the south coast and then stretches along the Gulf of St. Lawrence, northwards, almost as far as the Straits of Belle Isle, lying between 55° 20' and 59° 30' west longitude and between 47° 30' and 51° 20' north latitude. Until 1892 the diocese was practically confined to the historic French shore, so long the bone of contention between politicians, and repeatedly the subject of international conferences. In consequence of the provision of Anglo-French treaties, any attempt to establish permanent settlement on the coast was for along time discountenanced; but the lucrative herring fishery encouraged adventurers to ignore the treaties, and by 1850 a population of about 2000 had pitched their log cabins in its landlocked bays, beyond the reach of civilization and civil authority. Until 1850 there was no resident Catholic priest on the coast. Religious consolation the people had not, except when the chaplain of the French warship paid a visit, at long intervals. Dr. Mullock of St. John's visited the coast in 1848, and again in 1852. On 7 Sept., 1850, the first resident priest arrived, Rev. Alexandre Belanger (d. 7 Sept.1868). Owing to the difficulty of traveling, his missionary activities were confined to St George's bay. He visited the Bay of Islands in 1863 and again in 1868. Mgr Sears in his report to the Society for the Propagation of the Faith informs us that the hardships attending the latter visit ended the career of the heroic Frenchman. On 2 November, 1868, the real apostle and social reformer of this unknown wilderness arrived in the person of the Rev. Thomas Sears of the Antigonish diocese. Enthusiastic and practical, he recognized the resources and the possibilities of the West, and pleaded the claims of the Coast so successfully with the Insular Government, that a mail steamer was despatched in May, 1872. In 1878 the magistracy and the police were established. In 1870 the territory was erected into a prefecture, and in 1871 Father Sears was nominated prefect Apostolic; in 1881 he received the dignity of domestic prelate. During the seventeen years of his apostolate, churches, presbyteries, and schools were built, but the hardships, then inseparable from missionary adventures on the coast, shattered his constitution, never very rugged, and he died 7 Nov., 1885. He was succeeded by Dr. M. F. Howley. In 1892 the prefecture was elevated to the rank of vicariate and Dr. Howley became titular Bishop of Amastrio. At the same time the extensive district of Fortune Bay was placed under his jurisdiction. In 1893 he introduced a new foundation of Sisters of Mercy for which the diocese is indebted to the generosity of a wealthy convert, Mrs. Henrietta Brownell of Bristol, Rhode island. He was transferred to St. John's (25 Dec., 1894) and on 20 Oct., 1895, his successor, Dr. McNeil, was consecrated at Antigonish. A period of great material progress followed the completion of the transinsular railway. In 1904 the vicariate was made a diocese and he became its first bishop. He was transferred to the See of Vancouver in Feb., 1910, and was succeeded by Rt. Rev. M. F. Power, whose consecration took place 25 July, 1911. The diocese has 10 priests; 36 churches and chapels; 2 convents; 51 schools attended by 1659 pupils; a population of about 11,000. M.G. SEARS Diocese of Saint Hyacinthe Saint Hyacinthe (SANCTI HYACINTHI) Diocese in the Province of Quebec, suffragan of Montreal. In answer to a petition from the Fathers of First Council of Quebec to the Holy See, portions of the Dioceses of Montreal and Quebec were formed into a separate bishopric by a papal Bull dated 8 June, 1852. At first the new diocese was limited to the south side of the Richelieu River, and contained the greater portion of the Eastern Townships, a tract of land granted in the latter part of the eighteenth century to the American loyalists, but now a part of the Sherbrooke Diocese. Later three parishes on the north side of the Richelieu River were annexed. To-day the diocese embraces the counties of Bagot, Iberville, Missisquoi, Richelieu, Rouville, Saint Hyacinthe, and a part of the counties of Brome (2 parishes), and Verchères, (3 parishes). St. Hyacinthe, the titular city, is a typical French Canadian industrial town; it stands on the banks of the Yamaska, thirty-five miles from Montreal, and has a population of 10,000. Right Rev. J. C. Prince, Coadjutor Bishop of Montreal, was the first Bishop of St. Hyacinthe. Bishop Prince took possession on 3 November, 1852, and from the outset encountered great difficulties. The old seminary building was turned into a cathedral and residence; unfortunately, it was burned in May, 1854. The bishop built a new residence as well as a chapel-cathedral. Bishop Prince showed untiring activity, founding twenty new parishes, establishing several missions, and in 1853 introducing from France the Sisters of the Presentation. He died on 5 May, 1860, at the age of fifty-six. By papal Decree dated 22 June of the same year, Right Rev. Joseph La Rocque, titular bishop of Cydonia, and Coadjutor of Montreal, the second bishop, was appointed. From November, 1856, to July, 1857, he had administered the diocese during the prolonged illness of Bishop Prince, but now, overwhelmed by the responsibility forced on him, and suffering from a series he petitioned the Holy See to be relieved of this burden. His request was granted on 17 August, 1865. As titular Bishop of Germanicopolis and vicar-general, he remained in his diocese, at the monastery of the Sisters of the Precious Blood (a community which honoured him as its founder), until his death on 18 November, 1887, at the age of seventy-nine. The vacancy was filled on 20 March, 1866, by the Right Rev Charles La Rocque, cousin of the former bishop, who for twenty-two years was pastor of St. John's. The new bishop was a highly-cultured man with rare financial ability; realizing that the debts of his cathedral called for unusual measures, he closed the episcopal palace and retired with his staff to Beloeil, where he combined the duties of bishop and pastor of this parish till his death on 25 July, 1875. Bishop La Rocque assisted at the Vatican founding the Sherbrooke Diocese. He opened the first house of the Dominicans in Canada by giving them a parish in his titular city, and had the satisfaction of effectively reducing the cathedral debt and placing the diocese on a satisfactory money basis. The fourth bishop, Mgr. Louis-Zéphirin Moreau, was consecrated on 16 January, 1876. He had come from Montreal in 1852 as secretary to Bishop Prince. Bishop Moreau reopened the episcopal residence and on 4 July, 1886, dedicated the stone cathedral which he had built with the money amassed by the economy of his predecessor. His cathedral chapter was installed in August, 1876, by the Most Rev. Dr. Conroy, Bishop of Ardagh and first Papal Delegate to Canada. On Bishop Moreau's invitation the Marist Brothers came from France and established their novitiate in the diocese; he also founded a community to take charge of rural schools for boys and girls, under the name "Les Soeurs de St. Joseph". After seventeen years of administration he was given as coadjutor the Right Rev. Maxime Decelles (d. July 1905); the latter was consecrated titular bishop of Druzipara on 9 March 1893, and entered on his administration of the Diocese of St. Hyacinthe immediately on the death of Bishop Moreau (24 May, 1901). During his administration he opened the patronage of St. Vincent de Paul, and agitated the question of a new and larger cathedral. The execution this idea was left to his successor, who was consecrated by Archbishop Bruchesi on 15 February, 1906. Bishop Bernard is now in his sixty-third year. From 1876, either as secretary, archdeacon, or vicar general, he was constantly a member of the administration. In a series of ten volummes he has compiled and published with additional biographical notes the letters of the preceding bishops of St. Hyacinthe to the clergy and faithful of the diocese. Notwithstanding delicate health, since his elevation to the episcopate he has proved himself an indefatigable worker and an ardent apostle of temperance. He placed the patronage of St. Vincent de Paul on a stable basis, and, at the cost of $200,000, completely and beautifully restored and enlarged the old cathedral. In the episcopal city of St. Hyacinthe are the following: College-Seminary (dating from 1811) with 400 students, all following a classical curriculum; the mother house of the Sisters of Charity (the Grey Nuns) with 400 members who have charge of the Hotel Dieu; the mother house of the Sisters of the Presentation, with 600 members; the mother-house of Sisters of the Precious, Blood; the central monastery of the Dominican Fathers; the mother-house of the Sisters of St. Joseph; the convent of the Sisters of St. Martha, a community in charge of the domestic arrangements of the seminary; the novitiate of the Marist Brothers; the Institute of St. Vincent de Paul; a commercial college and an academy, both conducted by the Brothers of the Sacred Heart. The Diocese of St. Hyacinthe has 74 parishes, and a population of about 120,000, of whom 108,000 are Catholics. The clergy number 183 secular and 18 regular priests. The religious communities number 337 men and 861 women. In the diocese are: 2 superior teaching institutions, the Seminary of St. Hyacinthe and the Petit Séminaire de Sainte-Marie de Monnoir, both under the direction of secular priests; 6 commercial colleges; 56 academies; 435 primary schools. Six hospitals and asylums provide for charitable wants. Mandements des Evêques de St. Hyacinthe; Histoire du Séminaire de St. Hyacinthe; the Catholic Directory, (1911); Le Canada ecclésiastique, (1911). C.P. CROQUETTE College of Saint Isidore College of Saint Isidore The College of Saint Isidore, in Rome, was originally founded for the use of Spanish Franciscans during the pontificate of Gregory XV. In the year 1625 the buildings passed into the hands of Father Luke Wadding, who, after making numerous additions and alterations, and with the sanction of the General of the Friars Minor and of the Sovereign Pontiff, converted them into a college for the education of Irish Franciscan students. Within a few years, Wadding had provided accommodation for, and had gathered within the walls of the new college, a community of over thirty religious; and some years later the number had increased to fifty. Wadding was fortunate in being able to assure the success of the new undertaking by attracting to the college as professors some of the ablest members of the order at the time, all of them countrymen of his own. These included such men as Hickey, Fleming, Ponce, Walsh, and some years later Harold, Molloy, and Bonaventure Baron. The last mentioned alone has to his credit no fewer than twenty-two volumes, in the various domains of philosophy, theology, history, and poetry. It is easy to understand what prestige such distinguished teachers must have brought to the college. In fact, within thirty years of its foundation, we find no fewer than seventy of its alumni engaged as professors in various schools of the order. But its claim to recognition does not rest less in the stimulus which it gave to the study of Scotistic philosophy and theology during the seventeenth century than in the number of highly trained and efficient teachers which it sent forth. Its professors were all convinced adherents of the Franciscan school and it is no exaggeration to say that, at a time when the doctrines of Scotus were beginning to lose favour even amongst Franciscans themselves, they found no more ardent nor able defenders than the professors of St. Isidore's College. It is to Wadding and his fellow-workers in the college that we owe the first complete edition of the Subtile Doctor's works, namely, the Lyons edition of 1639. While sending forth, year after year, numbers of zealous workers into the Irish mission, the college continued to possess amongst its professors men of acknowledged learning and merit. On the occupation of Rome by the French in 1798, St. Isidore's suffered the fate of other British institutions in the city. The friars were expelled, and the college and adjoining garden confiscated and put up for auction. They were bought in by the Prince of Piombino, who let the rooms out to lodgers, with the exception of a few which were reserved for one of the fathers who had volunteered to keep watch over the place until the advent of better times. These came with the return of the pope in 1814. The college was soon restored to its rightful owners, and the year 1819 saw Father Hughes installed as superior over a fresh band of students who had come from Ireland to fill the places of those who had been expelled in 1798. Since then St. Isidore's has remained in undisturbed possession of the Irish Franciscans, for whom it still serves as the theological and philosophical training-house of their students. Amongst its alumni may be mentioned Dr. Egan (d. 1814), first Bishop of Philadelphia; Drs. Lambert (d. 1817), Scallan (d. 1830), and Mullock (d. 1869), the two former vicars Apostolic, and the latter second Bishop of St. John's, Newfoundand; Dr. Hughes, Vicar Apostolic of Gibraltar; and Drs. Geoghegan (d. 1864) and Shiel (d. 1872), bishops of Adelaide, Australia. The college library is famous for its collection of rare and valuable books. Owing to Wadding's position as annalist of the Franciscan Order and agent with the Holy See for his native country during the stormy period of the Insurrection of 1641, the archives of St. Isidore's became the repository of many precious documents relating to Franciscan subjects and to the civil and ecclesiastical history of Ireland during the seventeenth century. Such among the valuable MSS. belonging to the sister college of St. Anthony's, Louvain, as escaped destruction or dispersion during the French Revolution also found, for a time, a domicile in St. Isidore's. They included many of those old Irish MSS. saved from destruction by Brother Michael O'Clery, during his tours of Ireland in search of material for the "Annals of the Four Masters". They are sometimes referred to as the "St. Isidore MSS." After the taking of Rome by the Piedmontese in 1870, these, together with such others as had any bearing on the civil or ecclesiastical history of Ireland, were for greater security removed to the convent of the order at Merchant's Quay, Dublin, where they are now preserved. HAROLD, Life of Wadding, prefixed to his Epitome Annalium Ordinis Minorum (Rome, 1662); MSS. materials in the College Archives; GAMS, Series Episcoporum (Ratisbon, 1873). J.C. HANRAHAN Order of Saint James of Compostela Order of Saint James of Compostela (SANTIAGO DE LA ESPADA). Founded in the twelfth century, owes its name to the national patron of Spain, St. James the Greater, under whose banner the Christians of Galicia began in the ninth century to combat and drive back the Mussulmans of Spain. Compostela, in Galicia, the centre of devotion to this Apostle, is neither the cradle nor the principal seat of the order. Two cities contend for the honour of having given it birth, León in the kingdom of that name, and Uclés in Castile. At that time (1157-1230) the royal dynasty was divided into two rival branches, which rivalry tended to obscure the beginnings of the order. The Knights of Santiago had possessions in each of the kingdoms, but Ferdinand II of León and Alfonso VIII of Castile, in bestowing them, set the condition that the seat of the order should be in their respective states. Hence arose long disputes which only ended in 1230 when Ferdinand III, the Saint, united both crowns. Thenceforth, Uclés, in the Province of Cuenca, was regarded as the headquarters of the order; there the grand master habitually resided, aspirants passed their year of probation, and the rich archives of the order were preserved until united in 1869 with the "Archivo historico nacional" of Madrid. The order received its first rule in 1171 from Cardinal Jacinto (later Celestine III), then legate in Spain of Alexander III. Unlike the contemporary orders of Calatrava and Alcántara, which followed the severe rule of the Benedictines of Citeaux, Santiago adopted the milder rule of the Canons of St. Augustine. In fact at León they offered their services to the Canons Regular of St. Eloi in that town for the protection of pilgrims to the shrine of St. James and the hospices on the roads leading to Compostela. This explains the mixed character of their order, which is hospitaller and military, like that of St. John of Jerusalem. They were recognized as religious by Alexander III, whose Bull of 5 July, 1175, was subsequently confirmed by more than twenty of his successors. These pontifical acts, collected in the "Bullarium" of the order, secured them all the privileges and exemptions of other monastic orders. The order comprised several affiliated classes: canons, charged with the administration of the sacraments; canonesses, occupied with the service of pilgrims; religious knights living in community, and married knights. The right to marry, which other military orders only obtained at the end of the Middle Ages, was accorded them from the beginning under certain conditions, such as the authorization of the king, the obligation of observing continence during Advent, Lent, and on certain festivals of the year, which they spent at their monasteries in retreat. The mildness of this rule furthered the rapid spread of the order, which eclipsed the older orders of Calatrava and Alcántara, and whose power was reputed abroad even before 1200. The first Bull of confirmation, that of Alexander III, already enumerated a large number of endowments. At its height Santiago alone had more possessions than Calatrava and Alcántara together. In Spain these possessions included 83 commanderies, of which 3 were reserved to the grand commanders, 2 cities, 178 boroughs and villages, 200 parishes, 5 hospitals, 5 convents, and 1 college at Salamanca. The number of knights was then 400 and they could muster more than 1000 lances. They had possessions in Portugal, France, Italy, Hungary, and even Palestine. Abrantes, their first commandery in Portugal, dates from the reign of Alfonso I in 1172, and soon became a distinct order which Nicholas IV in 1290 released from the jurisdiction of Uclés. Their military history is linked with that of the Spanish states. They assisted in driving out the Mussulmans, doing battle with them sometimes separately, sometimes with the royal armies. They also had a regrettable share in the fatal dissenssions which disturbed the Christians of Spain and brought about more than one schism in the order. Finally they took part in the maritime expeditions against the Mussulmans. Thus arose the obligation imposed upon aspirants to serve six months in the galleys, which obligation still existed in the eighteenth century, but from which exemption was easily purchased. Authority was exercised by a grand master assisted by a Council of Thirteen, which elected the grand master and had the right to depose him for due cause; they had supreme jurisdiction in all disputes between members of the order. The first grand master, Pedro Fernández de Fuente Encalato, died in 1184. He had had 39 successors, among them several Spanish Infantes, when, in 1499, Ferdinand the Catholic induced the pope to assign to him the administration of the order. Under Charles V, Adrian VI annexed to the crown of Spain the three great military orders (Alcántara, Calatrava, and Santiago) with hereditary transmission even in the female line (1522). Thenceforth the three orders were united under one government, though their titles and possessions remained separate. To discharge the detail of this administration, Charles V instituted a special ministry, the Council of Orders, composed of a president named by the king, whom he represented, and six knights, two delegates from each order. To this council belonged the presentation of knights to vacant commanderies and jurisdiction in all matters, civil or ecclesiastical, save the purely spiritual cases reserved for ecclesiatical dignitaries. Thus ended the autonomy of the orders (see CALATRAVA, MILITARY ORDER OF). Their symbol was a red cross terminating in a sword, which recalls their title de la Espada, and a shell (la venera), which they doubtless owed to their connection with the pilgrimage of St. James. ISLA, Regla de la Orden y cavalleria de Santiago (Antwerp, 1598); Bulario de la Orden de Santiago (Madrid, 1791); LLAMAZARES, Historia de las cuatro ordenes militares (Madrid, 1862); DE LA FUENTE, Historia eclesiatica de Espana (Madrid, 1874). CH. MOELLER Saint-Jean-De-Maurienne Saint-Jean-de-Maurienne (DIOCESE OF MAURAMANENSIS) Includes the arrondissement of Saint Jean-de-Maurienne in the Department of Haute Savoie. The diocese was suppressed by the Concordat of 1802, and its territory joined to the Diocese of Chambéry under the French Empire, then in 1825 under Piedmontese rule it was cut off from Chambéry and made a special diocese, which with the rest of Savoy became French territory, 14 June, 1860. It is suffragan of Chambéry. Gregory of Tours, in his "De Gloria Martyrum", relates how the church of Maurienne, belonging then to the Diocese of Turin, became a place of pilgrimage, after the holy woman Thigris or Thecla, who was a native of Valloires, had brought to it from the East a finger of St. John the Baptist. Saint Gontran, King of Burgundy, took from the Lombards in 574 the valleys of Suse and Maurienne, and in 576 founded near the shrine a bishopric, which was suffragan of Vienne. Its first bishop was Felmasius. In 599 Gregory the Great made futile attempts to make Queen Brunehaut listen to the protests of the Bishop of Turin against this foundation. A letter written by John VIII in 878 formally designated the Bishop of Maurienne as suffragan of Tarentaise, but the metropolitans of Vienna continued to claim Maurienne as a suffragan see, and under Callistus II (1120) they carried their point. Local tradition claims as bishops of Maurienne: St. Emilianus, martyred by the Saracens (736 or 738); St. Odilard, slain by the Saracens (916) together with St. Benedict, Archbishop of Embrun. After the Saracens had been driven out, the temporal sovereignty of the Bishop of Maurienne appears to have been very extensive, but there is no proof that such sovereignty had been recognized since Gontran's time. At the death of Rudolph III, Bishop Thibaut was powerful enough to join a league against Conrad II of Franconia. The emperor suppressed the See of Maurienne, and gave over its title and possessions to the Bishop of Turin (1038); but this imperial decree was never executed. Among the bishops of Maurienne were: St. Ayroldus (1132-46), once a monk of the Charterhouse of Portes; Louis de La Palud (1441-50), who as Bishop of Lausanne had taken an active part at the Council of Basle in favour of the antipope, Felix V, who named him Bishop of Maurienne in 1441; and afterwards cardinal; he was confirmed in both appointments by Nicholas V in 1449; John of Segovia (1451-72), who at the Council of Basle as representative of the King of Aragon had also worked for Felix V, and was appointed by him cardinal in 1441; ten years later Nicholas V gave him the See of Maurienne; he is the author of "Gesta Concilii Basileensis"; William d'Estouteville (1473-80) was made cardinal in 1439 and as a pluralist held among other titles those of Maurienne and Rouen; Louis de Gorrevod (1499-1550) was made cardinal in 1530; Hippolyte d'Este (1560), made cardinal in 1538, acted as legate of Pius IV to the Council of Poissy, and built the famous Villa d'Este at Tivoli; Charles Joseph Fillipa de Martiniana (1757-79), made cardinal in 1778, was the first to whom Bonaparte, after the battle of Marengo, confided his intention of concluding a concordat with Rome; Alexis Billiet (1825-40), made cardinal in 1861. Emmanuel Philibert, Duke of Savoy, took solemn possession of a canonry in the cathedral of Maurienne in 1564. Among the saints specially honoured in, or connected with, the diocese are: Saint Aper (Avre), a priest who founded a refuge for pilgrims and the poor in the Village of St. Avre (seventh century); Blessed Thomas, b. at Maurienne, d. in 720, famous for rebuilding the Abbey of Farfa, of which the third abbot, Lucerius, was also a native of Maurienne; St. Marinus, monk of Chandor, martyred by the Saracens (eighth century); St. Landry, pastor of Lanslevillard (eleventh century), drowned in the Arc during one of his apostolic journeys; St. Bénézet, or Benoit de Pont (1165-84), b. at Hermillon in the diocese, and founder of the guild of Fratres Pontifices of Avignon; Blessed Cabert or Gabert, disciple of St. Dominic, who preached the Gospel for twenty years in the vicinity of AiguebelIe (thirteenth century). The chief shrines of the diocese are: Notre Dame de Charmaise, near Modane, Notre Dame de Bonne Nouvelle, near St-Jean-de-Maurienne, which dates from the sixteenth century, and Notre Dame de Beaurevers at Montaimon, dating from the seventeenth century. The Sisters of St. Joseph, a nursing and teaching order, with mother-house at St-Jean-de-Maurienne, are a branch of the Congregation of St. Joseph at Puy. At the end of the nineteenth century, they were in charge of 8 day nurseries and 2 hospitals. In Algeria, the East Indies, and the Argentine they have houses controlled by the motherhouse at Maurienne. In 1905 (end of the Concordat), the Diocese of St-Jean-de-Maurienne had 61,466 inhabitants, 10 parishes, 76 auxiliary parishes, and 28 curacies, remunerated by the State. Gallia christ., nova, XVI (1865), 611-52, and instr. 289-322; DUCHESNE, Fastes épiscopaux, I, 207-10, 233-35; ANGLEY, Hist. du diocese de Maurienne (S. Jean de Maurienne, 1846); TRUCHET, Hist. hagiologique du diocése de Maurienne (Chambéry, 1867); DE MARESCHAL DE LUCIANE, Souveraineté temporelle des évêques de Maurienne au moyen age in Mémoires de l'académie des sciences de la Savoie (1892); PASCALEIN, Le pouvoir temporal des évêques de Maurienne in Revue Savoisienne (1899); CHEVALIER, Topo-bibl., 1877-78. GEORGES GOYAU Ambrose Saint-John Ambrose Saint-John Oratorian; b. 1815; d. at Edgbaston, Birmingham, 24 May, 1875; son of Henry St. John, descended from the Barons St. John of Bletsoe. He was educated at Westminster School, and Christ Church, Oxford, where he graduated M. A. and where he formed his lifelong, intimate friendship with Newman. In 1841 he became curate to Henry Wilberforce, first at Walmer, subsequently at East Farleigh. He then joined Newman at Littlemore which he left, to be received into the Church about a month before Newman's conversion in October, 1845. After a short time spent with Newman at Maryvale he accompanied him to Rome where they were ordained priests. Having become Oratorians they began mission work in Birmingham (1847), removing to the suburb of Edgbaston in 1852. There he devoted himself entirely to zealous missionary labours, taking a leading part in the work of the Oratory and its famous school. He was an excellent classical scholar and a remarkable linguist both in Oriental and European tongues. His death was caused by overwork in translating Fessler's book on infallibility when Newman's discussion with Gladstone was pending. He was a man of marked individuality and Newman's tribute to him in the "Apologia" will never be forgotten. Except the biographical sketch prefixed to the new edition of the Raccolta, which work he originally compiled, there is no connected sketch of his life, but references to him will be found in Gasquet, Lord Acton and his Circle (London, 1906). The information given above has been kindly supplied by the Rev. F. Bacchus, Cong. Orat. See also Gorman, Converts to Rome (London, 1910). Edwin Burton Saint John (Canada) Saint John (SANCTI JOANNIS) Diocese in the Province of New Brunswick, Canada. The diocese includes the following counties: Albert, Carleton, Charlotte, Kings, Queens, St. John, Sunbury, Westmoreland, York, and a portion of Kent. The City of St. John is the oldest incorporated city in British North America, its charter dating back to 1785; it is also the largest city in New Brunswick. Among the earliest Catholic missionaries to visit New Brunswick, which was then part of Acadia, were the Jesuit Fathers, Biard and Massé, in 1611. They remained until after the destruction of Port Royal by Argall in 1613, and were succeeded by Recollects. With the erection of Quebec into a diocese, special interest was attached to the Acadian missions. Mgr. St. Vallier left the St. Lawrence, 7 May, 1686, proceeded to the St. John, and reached Medoetec, an Indian village eight miles below Woodstock. There the bishop established a mission, and left it under the direction of Father Simon, a Recollect. Subsequently another mission was formed at Aukpaque. After the death of Fathers Simon and Moireau, the missions on the St. John passed into the hands of the Jesuits, among whom were Fathers Aubery, Loyard, Danielou, Loverga, Audren, and Germain. The Indian church at Medoctec was probably the first erected in New Brunswick. On the original site of this church a small stone tablet was discovered in June, 1890, bearing a Latin inscription the translation of which reads: "To God, most Good and Great, in honour of St. John the Baptist, the Maliseets erected this church A.D. 1717, while Jean Loyard, a priest of the Society of Jesus, was Procurator of the mission." After the Peace of St. Germain-en-Laye (1632), and notably after the Treaty of Breda (1667), there arrived from France colonies of Catholic immigrants, the progenitors of the Acadians now scattered over New Brunswick and Nova Scotia. About 1767 Rev. Charles-Franqois Bailly, afterwards Coadjutor Bishop of Quebec, ministered to the Catholics along the St. John River. The first native Acadian priest was Rev. Joseph M. Bourg. Born in 1744, he fled during the expulsion (1755) with his parents to the Isle of St. John, but was eventually deported to France; after some years he returned to Quebec, where he was ordained by Mgr. Briand in 1773. Appointed Vicar-General of Acadia, he had an immense area to govern, with little assistance. In 1813 Bishop Plessis of Quebec received into his diocese an Irish Dominican, Rev. Charles D. Ffrench. a convert and son of an Anglican bishop, and assigned him to duty in St. John. He celebrated Mass in the City Court Room on Market Square. A church was built soon afterwards, and at the suggestion of Bishop Plessis it was dedicated to St. Malachy: it was opened for worship on 1 Oct., 1815. With the influx of Irish immigrants the number of Catholics rapidly increased. The first resident priest of St. John was Rev. Joseph Morrisset; he was succeeded by Rev. Patrick McMahon, and in 1828 Rev. John Carroll, the last priest prior to the establishment of a diocese in the Maritime Provinces, was sent from Quebec. Between 1820 and 1827 the Micmac Indians and Acadian settlers at Richibucto were ministered to by Rev. Franeois-Norbert Blanchet, who afterwards became first Archbishop of Oregon City. In Aug., 1829, Charlottetown (Prince Edward Island) was created an episcopal see, with New Brunswick under its jurisdiction. Thirteen years later New Brunswick - was formed into a separate diocese; its first bishop. was Dr. William Dollard (b. in Ballytarina, Co. Kilkenny, Ireland; d. 29 Aug., 1851), a man of apostolic virtue and a typical pioneer bishop. He made his theological studies at Quebec, and was sent as a missionary to Cape Breton, and afterwards to Miramichi. He was Vicar-General of the Diocese of Charlottetown, and was consecrated bishop at Quebec, 11 June 1843. His successor was Right Rev. Thomas L. Connolly (b. at Cork, Ireland), who, after receiving his preliminary education at Cork became a novice in the Capuchin Order, and was sent to Rome to complete his studies. He was ordained in the cathedral at Lyons in 1838, and for the next four years was stationed at the Capuchin Church, Dublin. In 1842 he volunteered for the Foreign Missions, and his services were accepted by the Right Rev. William Walsh (afterwards Archbishop of Halifax). Consecrated Bishop of New Brunswick 15 Aug., 1852, Dr. Connolly arrived in St. John, his episcopal city, 11 Sept., of the same year. One of the first duties he undertook was the building of a cathedral; but it was not until Christmas Day, 1855, that the building was ready for Divine service. In June 1854, the cholera appeared at St. John, and did not abate until after the middle of August. It is estimated that 600 Catholics died of it; as a consequence, about 150 orphans were thrown on the bishop's hands. To care for them, he organized a diocesan sisterhood known as the Sisters of Charity. In 1859 Dr. Connolly was promoted to Halifax in succession to Archbishop Walsh. A division was then made of the Diocese of New Brunswick; the southern portion (the present See of St. John) being assigned to Right Rev. John Sweeny (b. in 1821 at Clones, Co. Monaghan, Ireland; d. 25 March, 1901). John Sweeny had emigrated with his parents in 1828; his classical studies were made at St. Andrew's College, near Charlottetown, Prince Edward Island, after which he went to Quebec for theology. He was ordained in Sept., 1844, and was first assigned to St. John, whence he went from time to time throughout the country on missions. His next labours were at Chatham and Barachois. He was vicar-general successively under Bishops Dollard and Connolly, and administrator of the diocese on both occasions where the see was vacant. On 15 April, 1860, he was elevated to the episcopate; and in 1870 he went to Rome to attend the Vatican Council. Under him the cathedral was completed; it was consecrated on 16 July, 1885. Bishop Sweeny was noted for his wisdom, tact, and administrative abilities. The Catholic settlement of Johnville, Carleton County, was established by him, and grew into a flourishing colony under his encouragement. In the summer of 1899 he applied to Rome for a coadjutor, and Rev. Timothy Gassy, pastor of St. Dunstan's Church, Fredericton, was appointed. In Jan., 1901, Bishop Sweeny retired to St. Patrick's Industrial School, Silver Falls. Bishop Casey, the present incumbent (b. at Flume Ridge, Charlotte County, New Brunswick, 1862), received his early education in the public schools of St. Stephen, New Brunswick, and afterwards studied at St. Joseph's College, Memramcook, and at Laval University, Quebec; he was ordained priest 29 June, 1886. His consecration as titular Bishop of Utina and coadjutor to Bishop Sweeny took place in the cathedral at St. John, 11 Feb., 1900. since the beginning of Bishop Casey's administration a new school has been erected in the city; and fifteen new churches in different parishes have been dedicated. There are two religious orders of men in the diocese: the Redemptorists, who arrived in July, 1884, and who are in charge of St. Peter's Church in North St. John; and the Fathers of the Holy Cross at Memramcook, who have conducted the University of St. Joseph's College since 1864. There are three communities of women: the Sisters of Charity, the Religious of the Good Shepherd, and the Little Sisters of the Holy Family. Diocesan priests number 52; priests of religious orders, 25. There are 2 orphan asylums; 2 academies, 1 home for the aged, and 1 college. The Catholic population is about 58,000. RAYMOND, Glimpses of the Past (St. John, 1905); Jesuit Relations (Cleveland, 1896-1901); CAMPBELL, Pioneer Priests of North America (New York, 1909); MACMILLAN, History of the Church in Prince Edward Island (Quebec, 1905); CLEMENT, History of Canada (Toronto, 1897) HAY, A History of New Brunswick (Toronto, 1903); LAWRENCE, Footprints (St. John, 1883); MAGUIRE, The Irish in America (New York, 1868); The Freeman, files; PLESSIS, Journal de la Mission de 1811 et de 1812; IDEM, Journal de la Mission de 1815; Le Foyer Canadien (Quebec, May-Nov., 1865); La Semaine Religieuse (Quebec, March, April, May, 1904) CHOUINARD, Histoire de la Paroisse de Saint-Joseph de Carleton, Baie des Chaleurs (Rimouski, 1906). ANDREW J. O'NEILL Saint Joseph, Missouri Diocese of St. Joseph ( Sancti Josephi) The City of St. Joseph, Missouri, was founded by Joseph Robidoux, a Catholic, who in 1830 became sole proprietor of the trading post at the mouth of what is now called Roy's Branch, just above the Blacksnake Hills. In 1838 an itinerant Jesuit visited the obscure trading post at this place and said Mass in the rude log house of Robidoux. In 1840 Rev. Father Vogel administered to the spiritual wants of the faithful. Robidoux, alive to the importance of his trading post, began preparations to form a town. The population was about two hundred at that time. He had surveys and plats made by Fred W. Smith, a Catholic. Smith named his plat St. Joseph; it was taken to St. Louis and recorded on 26 July, 1843. The first permanent pastor was the Rev. Thomas Scanlon, who began his labours in 1847. On 17 June, 1847, a brick church was begun and in September of the same year was dedicated by Archbishop P.R. Kenrick of St. Louis. The "Overland Period" was the most important one in the infancy of St. Joseph. Early in the spring of 1849 began the rush to California. As a starting point St. Joseph offered advantages which no other place possessed. There was at that time a population of 1900 souls. At the Second Plenary Council of Baltimore in 1866, St. Joseph was among the new episcopal sees proposed. Rev. John J. Hogan was chosen its first Bishop, 3 March, 1868. The area assigned to the new diocese was that part of the State of Missouri lying between the Missouri and Chariton Rivers. On Investigation the bishop-elect found that there were in the Diocese of St. Joseph 600 families, about 3000 souls, attended by five secular priests. The church edifices were of the poorest kind; the largest (pro-cathedral) was a low, narrow, brick building, built at three different times. Bishop Hogan was consecrated by Archbishop P. R. Kenrick, 13 September, 1868, and at once took charge of his new field of labour. In 1869 ground was broken for a new cathedral which, three years later, was opened for Divine service. The number of priests increased gradually, religious consciousness and enthusiasm were awakened, churches were built, parish schools erected, and charitable institutions founded. On 10 September, 1880 Bishop Hogan was transferred to the newly-erected Diocese of Kansas City, Mo., and appointed Administrator of St. Joseph. When he resigned his administration of the Diocese of St. Joseph, in 1893, the Rt. Rev. M. F. Burke, D.D., was transferred from the Diocese of Cheyenne, Wyoming, to St. Joseph. His reception by clergy and laity was most enthusiastic. Under his able administration great progress has been made in the material to well as in the spiritual upbuilding of the diocese. A heavy debt on the cathedral has been liquidated, an episcopal residence built, a school of the cathedral parish erected at a cost of $60,000, new missions opened and new parishes organized. The City of St. Joseph has at present 8 parishes with 12 resident pastors, 6 parish schools attended by 1340 pupils, 1 commercial-college conducted by the Christian Brothers, 1 academy for the education of young ladies conducted by the Ladies of the Sacred Heart conducted by the Sisters of Charity. Catholic population: 10,000. Outside of the City of St. Joseph may be mentioned the Benedictine Abbey at Conception, established in 1874; the Conceptión Classical College conducted by the Fathers of the Abbey; the Franciscan Fathers at Chillicoth and Wien; two charitable hospitals, one at Chillicoth conducted by the Sisters of St. Mary, the other at Maryville conducted by the Sisters of St. Francis; an academy for the education of young ladies at Chillicothe conducted by the Sisters of St. Joseph; the mother-house and academy of the Benedictine Sisters of Perpetual Adoration at Clyde; an orphan asylum at Conception; twenty churches with resident priests; thirty-two mission stations; and seven parochial schools. By a decree of the Sacred Congregation of the Consistory, dated Rome, 16 June, 1911, the territory containing the Counties of Adair, Clark, Knox, Lewis, Macon, Marion, Monroe, Ralls, Radolph, Shelby, Schuyler, Scotland, and that part of Chariton County east of the Chariton River was detached from the Archdiocese of St. Louis and attached to the Diocese of St. Joseph. By reason of this extension the Diocese of St. Joseph now comprises the whole northern part of the State of Missouri, extending from the Missouri to the Mississippi River, and is bounded on the south by the Counties of Howard, Boone, Audrain, and Pike. By the increase of territory 16 parishes have been added, and 20 more priests have been affiliated with the diocese. The Catholic population is (1911) about 34,000. HOGAN, On the Mission in Missouri (Kansas City, 1892); LINNENKAMP, Historical Souvenir of the Immaculate Conception Parish (St. Joseph, 1907); Official Catholic Directory (1910). C. LINNENKAMP Archdiocese of Saint Louis (Missouri) St. Louis (Missouri) (SANCTI LUDOVICI) Created a diocese 2 July, 1826; raised to the rank of an archdiocese 20 July, 1847. It comprises that portion of the State of Missouri bounded on the north by the northern lines of the Counties of Pike, Audrain, Boone, and Howard, on the west by the western lines of the Counties Howard, Boone, Cole, Maries, Phelps, Texas and Howell, on the south by the State of Arkansas, and on the east by the Mississippi River, a territory of 26,235 square miles. HISTORY The City of St. Louis was founded in 1764 by Pierre Liguest Laclède, a French nobleman, who came to Louisiana in 1755 and entered commercial life in New Orleans. In 1762 the firm of Maxent, Laclède and Co. were given the exclusive privilege of treating with the Indians of the North-west, and in the same year Monsieur Laclède with some companions came p to Fort Chartres in the interest of the firm. The Treaty of Paris in 1763 put an end to the privilege, and Monsieur Laclède purchased the interest of his partners, left Fort Chartres and landed on the west bank of the Mississippi, where in 1764 he selected a spot, at that time a wilderness, and here laid the foundation of St. Louis. He built the first house, employing Indian women and children in digging out the cellar and carrying the earth away in their blankets. By the Treaty of Paris, France ceded to Spain all of Louisiana west of the Mississippi, but there was no formal occupation by the Spanish until 1770. St. Louis therefore during the first years of its existence belonged to the Diocese of Santiago de Cuba, a jurisdiction that extended throughout Louisiana. There were but two priests in the St. Louis territory: Father Luke Collet, a Recollect, and the Jesuit Father Meurin; the former died in 1765 leaving but one priest in the Mississippi Valley, the veteran Father Sebastian Louis Meurin. The story of good old Father Meurin is replete with tales of hardship and sacrifice made for the French and Indians of Illinois and Missouri. In 1766, finding the task too great, he wrote the Bishop of Quebec: "Ste Geneviève is my residence. Thence I go every spring and visit the other villages. I return again in the autumn and whenever I am summoned on sick calls. I am only sixty-one years old, but I am exhausted, broken by twenty-five years of mission work in this county and of these nearly twenty years of malady and disease show me the gates of death. I am incapable, therefore, of long application or bodily fatigue. I cannot accordingly supply the spiritual necessities of the country, where even the stoutest men could not endure. It would need four priests. If you can give me only one, he should be appointed to Cahokia, and with the powers of vicar-general." In 1768 Fr. P. Gibault, Vicar General of Quebec, was sent to his aid and laboured with him until the formal occupation of Louisiana by the Spaniards. Father Gibault continued his visits until the coming of the Capuchin Fathers from New Orleans in 1772, and Father Meurin remained on the east side of the Mississippi River. Prior to Father Gibault's coming, there was no church building in this territory. The records at Cahokia show that at St. Louis Father Meurin in 1766 baptized, under condition, in a tent for want of a church, Marie, lawful daughter of John Baptiste Deschamp and of Marie Pion; and again, that he conferred the same sacrament upon Antoine, son of Lisette, a Pawnee slave, on 9 May of the same. year, Father Gibault, soon after his arrival, undertook the erection of a small church built of upright logs. This modest edifice was rapidly completed and dedicated on 24 June, 1770. With the advent of the Capuchins in 1772, Father Valentine of that order became the flat resident priest of St. Louis and remained until 1776. He was succeeded by Father Bernard, also a Capuchin, who remained for thirteen years and during his stay organized St. Charles and St. Ferdinand. From 1789 to 1793 there are no records to show that St. Louis had a resident priest. In 1793 Pierre Joseph Didier, a Benedictine monk, assumed charge and remained until 1799. In 1800 the territory of Louisiana was receded to France and three years later transferred by Napoleon to the United States. Thus we find that St. Louis and the Louisiana territory during its early days was subject to the jurisdiction of: the Vicariate Apostolic of Canada, 1658-1674; the Diocese of Quebec, 1674-1759; the Diocese of Santiago in Cuba, 1759-1787; the Diocese of Havana, 1787-11793; the Diocese of Louisiana and the Floridas, 1793-1826. The territory east of the Mississippi was subject to: the Vicariate Apostolic of Canada, 1658-1674; the Diocese of Quebec, 1674-1784; the Prefecture Apostolic of the thirteen states of the Union, 1784-1789; the Bishop of Baltimore, 1789-1808; the Diocese of Bardstown, 1808-1834. In 1800 Rev. Thomas Flynn was made parish priest of St. Louis, remaining in that position until 1808 when he removed to Ste Geneviève. Again from 1808 until 1811, when Father Savigne took charge, we find the parish without the service of a priest. Father Savigne's ministry extended over a period of six years, and during these years the city grew to such an extent as to require the labours of a priest who could devote to it his entire time and attention. In 1810 the population numbered 1400 — mostly French with some Spaniards and a constantly increasing influx of Americans. Thus far St. Louis had been but a struggling village, the surrounding country but a wilderness that re-echoed to the warwhoop of the savage or resounded with the crack of the ranger's rifle. Now things were to assume a more important aspect, so that five years later we hear of the Diocese of St. Louis. St. Louis as a diocese had its origin amidst the early ecclesiastical troubles and disputes of the Diocese of Louisiana and the Floridas. The Diocese of St. Christopher of Havana, Louisiana, and the Floridas was erected in 1787, and Rt. Rev. Joseph de Trespalatios was appointed the first bishop; thus St. Louis was under the jurisdiction of the Bishop of Havana. On 25 April, 1793, the Diocese of Louisiana and both Floridas was created; New Orleans was designated as the cathedral city, and the Rev. Louis Peñalver y Cardenas was appointed the first bishop. He arrived at New Orleans on 17 July, 1795. On 24 Sept., 1815, Rt. Rev. Louis William Du Bourg was consecrated Bishop of Louisiana and the Floridas, and immediately after proposed the erection of the See of St. Louis then in Upper Louisiana (sometimes called Louisiana Superior, sometimes "Alta Louisiana"). Very soon after, however, he requested the withdrawal of this proposal owing to the serious and complicated troubles caused by the trustees (Marguilliers and three misguided priests of the cathedral church in New Orleans). Open menaces of violence and other serious threats prompted him to solicit the Propaganda to permit him to take up his residence at St. Louis and to continue St. Louis as part of the Louisiana jurisdiction. Rome granted the request, and on 5 Jan., 1818, he came to St. Louis accompanied by Bishop Flaget, of Bardstown, Ky. He was received here with Mat welcome, was installed with the usual solemnities by Bishop Flaget, and took possession of the pro-cathedral, a poor wooden structure in ruinous condition. The same year he founded at St. Louis a Latin Academy which later developed into the University of St. Louis (q.v.). On 13 Aug., 1822, the Very Rev. Joseph Rosati, vicar-general for Bishop Du Bourg, was appointed by Pius VII titular Bishop of Tenagre, and created Vicar Apostolic of the territories of Mississippi and Alabama. This appointment Father Rosati declined, giving to the Propaganda as reasons the paucity and penury of the people of Mississippi and Alabama; the utter impossibility of a priest being able to sustain himself at Natchez; Bay St. Louis being too poor to erect even an unpretentious church building, and no other city in the two states being sufficiently well-equipped with church or resources worthy of a bishop. He also emphasized the importance of his continuing as president of the seminary, as no priest was at hand equal to the task of assuming its direction. His arguments and the protests of the Bishop of Baltimore prevailed. The Brief "Quum superiori anno" dated 14 July, 1823, addressed to Bishop Du Bourg, revoked the appointment and suppressed the vicariate. Father Rosati, however, was not to escape episcopal honours. He was appointed coadjutor to Bishop Du Bourg by Apostolic Brief dated 22 June, 1823, and by instructions of said Brief was to reside in St. Louis. The Brief recited that after three years the Diocese of Louisiana was to be divided, New Orleans and St. Louis to be named episcopal sees, Bishop Du Bourg to have his choice of either, and Bishop Rosati preside over the destinies of the other. Father Rosati received these documents on 4 Dec., 1823, and letters from the Propaganda told him that he must submit to the dignity he had thus far sought to escape. Bishop Du Bourg was then in Louisiana, and selected for the consecration services the Church of the Ascension in Donaldsonville, La., a central position, where many clergy might assemble. Here the Very Rev. Father Rosati was consecrated titular Bishop of Tenagre on 25 March, 1824, by Bishop Louis-Guillaume-Vatentin Du Bourg, assisted by the Very Rev. Louis Sibourd, V.G., and the Rev. Anthony de Sedella, O.M. Cap., rector of the cathedral church of New Orleans. Not long after, Bishop Du Bourg found the task imposed upon him beyond his strength, and, discouraged by the difficulties which arose to thwart his projects and harassed by bitter opposition in his own city (which in some of his writings he styled "vera nova Babylonia"), he resigned his see and departed for Europe in April, 1826. Pending this the Propaganda had, on 26 June, 1826, voted the erection of S. Louis as a diocese, which action was approved of by the pope on 2 July, of the same year. On the same day the resignation of Bishop Du Bourg was formally accepted, and letters were forwarded to Bishop Rosati, asking him to accept the vacant see. This he earnestly requested to be allowed to decline, pleading his lack of acquaintance with the clergy and people of Louisiana and his familiarity with the districts of Missouri, Illinois, and Arkansas. He urged the appointment of Rev. Leo de Neekere, a Belgian Lazarist, as Bishop of New Orleans, and sought the intervention of Bishop Du Bourg to have this effected. His objection was sustained, and finally on 20 March, 1827, Pope Leo XII transferred him from the See of Tenagre to that of St. Louis, and requested him to continue the administration of New Orleans until such time as other provision might be made. At this period the Diocese of Louisiana comprised, roughly speaking, the territory extending from the Gulf of Mexico to the Dominion of Canada and from the Mississippi River to the Rocky Mountains. Owing to the existing indefinite lines of demarcation it was at times difficult and even impossible to decide with certainty the exact confines of the diocese. The uncertainty of jurisdiction, which necessarily arose from this, influenced Rome to advise all bishops in the United States and Canada to constitute their neighbouring bishops their vicars-general; so in the archives of the diocese we find documents appointing Bishop Rosati vicar-general to the Bishops of Quebec, Bardstown, St. Boniface, New Orleans, Cincinnati and Dubuque. The State of Illinois was part of the Diocese 1808, yet Bishop Flaget in exercising his episcopal functions along the Mississippi in the State of Illinois ministered to the wants of Catholics on the western side of the river, and so also Bishop Du Bourg, when residing at St. Louis, gave his attention to the faithful in Illinois, and in this Bishop Rosati also followed the example set. However, in the year 1832, Bishop Rosati wrote to Rome that as the western half of Illinois had hitherto been cared for by the ordinary of St. Louis it would prove more expedient to attach it to the See of St. Louis not only de facto but also de jure. Pursuant to this suggestion Rome, when erecting the See of Vincennes, in the year 1834, divided the State of Illinois and attached the western half to St. Louis and the eastern half to Vincennes; thus it remained until the year 1844 when the Diocese of Chicago was established. The Diocese of St. Louis at the time of its erection, as is found in Bishop Rosati's report to the Propaganda, dated 1 Nov., 1825, comprised the northern portion of the so-called "Louisiana Purchase" including Arkansas. In Missouri Bishop Rosati mentions the city, St. Louis, where there was but a single priest, and, as he says, need of at least two more. Here the church begun by Bishop Du Bourg was still unfinished. Financial depression having driven away some and prevented others from paying their subscriptions, suit was entered for payment of the church debt and permission asked of the State to sell the bishop's house and other church properties to meet the obligation. Thus the conditions prevalent were by no means encouraging; finally, in 1822, part of the church property was sold, including the parochial residence, as also a building in course of construction for an academy. The purchaser gave Bishop Rosati a time in which to redeem it, and to secure necessary means he sent to Europe Rev. Francis Neill, in the hope that generous Catholics there would aid him in saving the property. In his report to Rome, Bishop Rosati (besides St. Louis, which he styled the most important city of the State and one of great possibilities) mentions the following others: Carondelet, or Vide Poche, with a hundred very poor families of French origin; Florissant, cared for by Father Van Quickenbom S.J., who was in charge of five scholastics, and at the same time directed a school for Indian boys; St. Charles, Portage des Sioux, Dardenne (now St. Peter's); Côte sans Desain, a French village distant about ninety miles from St. Louis; La Mine di Plumb (Old Mines, with about 200 French families; St. Michael's (Fredericktown); Ste Geneviéve with resident priest; the Barrens (French Bois Brulé, Latin Sylva Cremata), consisting then of about 200 families attended by one of the Fathers of St. Mary's Seminary, with 16 students of theology in attendance. Here too was located the Loretto Convent with 17 sisters and some postulants; though struggling with difficulties and lack of funds the sisters maintained a free school and cared for 24 orphans. The last Louisiana town mentioned in the report was New Madrid, with 80 French families. In Illinois Bishop Rosati notes Kaskaskia with 150 families, and Prairie du Rocher, with church and resident priest, the Rev. Father Olivier, aged seventy-five years, who was almost blind and unable to render any services to the parish. "I have offered him a room in the seminary", writes the bishop, "he is a saint who has spent, himself for many years in the service of Catholics about these parts." Aside from this report we find, in other documents extant, mention made of Ap Creek (1816); Cape Girardeau (1816); Potosi (1816); Mine La Motte (1816); Harrisonville (1818); Osage Indian Nation Missions in Kansas (1822) with Rev. Ch. de La Croix as pastor. In 1818 Rev. Michael Portier was resident at Brazeau, Mo., and in 1822 Rev. Hercules Brassock at Drury, Ill., but as no mention of these names is found before or after this time we can only conclude that these fathers were residing with English-speaking families with the purpose probably of learning English. The report of Bishop Rosati was dated 1825, the diocese was established in 1826; yet the parishes and missions remain the same in 1826 as in 1825 and so continue until 1831. In 1827 we count 1 bishop, 4 secular priests, 8 Lazarist fathers, 8 Jesuit fathers; a total of 20 priests. In 1831 there were 11 churches with and 8 churches without resident priests; 20 missions; 1 bishop; 16 secular priests; 8 Lazarist Fathers; 11 Jesuits; a total of 35 priests. The Catholic population numbered 8000. It should be noted that on 20 Aug., 1818, Ladies of the Society of the Sacred Heart, including Madame Philippina Duchesne, Superior, Octavia Berthold, and Eugenia Audet, with two lay sisters arrived in St. Louis and soon after located at St. Charles, Mo. In October of the same year the Lazarist Fathers came from Bardstown, Ky., and settled permanently at the Barrens. On 31 May, 1823, two Jesuits, Fathers Charles vanQuickenborn and Peter Timmermans, with seven scholastics and three lay brothers, arrived, and soon after located in Florissant, Mo., while on the same day of the same year twelve Sisters of Loretto took up their permanent residence at the Barrens in Perry County. On 25 November, 1829, four Sisters of Charity arrived at St. Louis from Emmitsburg Maryland, and began their labours in conducting a Hospital, to found which Mr. John Mullanphy had given houses and lots and other properties: On 30 May of the same year Bishop Rosati approved of the foundation of the Visitation Nuns at Kaskaskia, Ill.; these later, in 1844, settled at St. Louis, being compelled to leave Kaskaskia because of the great flood of that year. On 5 March, 1836, Rev. James Fontbonne arrived at St. Louis with seven Sisters of St. Joseph from the Diocese of Lyóns, France. Four Ursuline Nuns arrived on 4 Sept., 1848. The Rev. Joseph Paquin was the first priest to own Missouri as his native state. He was born at New Madrid, 4 Dec., 1799. The first bishop to be consecrated in the Cathedral of St. Louis by the Rt. Rev. Bishop Rosati was the Rt. Rev. Michael Portier, titular Bishop of Oliensis an Vicar Apostolic of Alabama and the two Floridas, the consecration taking place 5 Nov., 1826. Joseph Rosati Born at Sora in the Kingdom of Naples on 12 Jan., 1789, he resolved even in his early days to consecrate his life to the service of God. In his youth be entered the novitiate of the Fathers of the Congregation of the Mission at Rome, was there professed, and ordained a priest. No record of his ordination is extant, due, no doubt, to the fact that Napoleon at the time held sway in the Eternal City and he commanded the expulsion and suppression of the Lazarist Fathers. It is evident, however, that it must have been either in 1811 or 1812, as documents show that on 19 Nov., 1812, the usual sacerdotal faculties were given him by the Cardinal Vicar of Rome. His first charge was as assistant to the Rev. Felix de Andreis, C.M. This we find him occupying when in the year 1815 Bishop Du Bourg was consecrated in Rome. A few days after his consecration Bishop Du Bourg arranged with the cardinal prefect to have a colony of Lazarist Fathers go to America to found a seminary and take up missionary work in his new diocese. Rev. Felix de Andreis was appointed superior of this band, and he selected as his associate the Rev. Joseph Rosati and the Rev. John B. Aquaroni. They, together with four lay brothers and two secular priests, the Revs. Joseph Carreti and Andrew Ferrari, and also four ecclesiastical students, on 18 Oct., 1815, departed from Rome for their future field of labour. Bishop Du Bourg, detained at Rome on important and serious business, could not accompany them. He, therefore, before their departure, appointed Father de Andreis his vicar-general and Father Rosati director of the seminarians, noting in the appointment of the latter that, should Rev. de Andreis die, Father Rosati was to succeed him as vicar-general. On 7 Jan., 1816, the colonists arrived at Bordeaux, took up their residence in the archiepiscopal palace and remained there several months, applying themselves to the study of the French and English languages. Finally, 12 June, 1816, they embarked at Bordeaux for Baltimore and landed there 27 July, 1816; thence they proceeded by stage to Pittsburg, and here were delayed several weeks because low water in the Ohio River, finally arriving at Bardstown during October of 1817. Bishop Flaget received them most cordially and with every mark of affection, and placed at their disposal part of his seminary. Here they remained studying English under the tutorship of Bishop David, then coadjutor to Bishop Flaget. Father Rosati in a very short time had advanced sufficiently to be able to preach and hear confessions in the English language, and aside from his occupation as professor of philosophy and theology in the seminary, devoted himself to parochial work. When in June 1817, word was received that Bishop Du Bourg had sailed from Bordeaux and would arrive at Annapolis about 14 September on his way to St. Louis, Bishop Flaget and Fathers de Andreis and Rosati, with one lay brother, set out on horseback from Bardstown, Ky., to St. Louis, a distance of over three hundred miles, there to arrange a reception for the bishop. After the installation of Bishop Du Bourg at St. Louis, Bishop Flaget and Father Rosati returned to Bardstown, leaving Father de Andreis and Brother Blanca at Ste Geneviève, Mo. Father Rosati remained at Bardstown as rector of the seminary until October, 1818, when by order of Bishop Du Bourg the seminary was transferred to the Barrens, Perry County, Mo. Father Rosati was its first president and also pastor of the village church. On 15 Oct., 1820, the venerated de Andreis died and was succeeded by Father Rosati as superior of the Lazarist Fathers and as vicar-general of Bishop Du Bourg. Admirably did he accomplish the work devolving on him by virtue of his new appointment. Soon, without any conscious effort, he found himself surrounded by a body of enthusiastic and willing colabourers, and his ability and scholarship were soon manifest throughout the land. In 1821 Bishop Du Bourg intended separating Mississippi and other territory from his diocese and pleaded for the appointment of Father Rosati as vicar Apostolic. This dignity of the latter's humility prompted him to decline, but later on Rome nominated him titular Bishop of Tenagre, and coadjutor to Bishop Du Bourg. He was enjoined under obedience to accept the nomination, and he remained in this office until the establishment of the Diocese of St. Louis, when he was placed in charge of its destinies and entrusted with the administration of the See of New Orleans. His worth as bishop can be gleaned from the results of his administration. Numerous religious orders were introduced, and during his time and partly by his efforts, the Jesuit Fathers established their novitiate at Florissant, Mo., and founded the western province of the order. In 1827 Bishop Rosati transferred to them the College at St. Louis which has since grown into the present University of St. Louis. The Religious of the Sacred Heart, the Visitation Nuns, and the Sisters of St. Joseph grew and developed by his advice and under his guidance. A home for the orphans, an institute for deaf-mutes and the St. Louis Mullanpby Hospital were made possible by his zeal and untiring efforts. In the year 1831 he began the building of the cathedral church, a beautiful, stately, and at the same time costly, structure, the cornerstone of which was solemnly blessed and laid by him on 1 Aug., 1831. The solemn consecration of the cathedral took place on 26 Oct., 1834, Bishop Rosati himself being the consecrator, assisted by Bishops Flaget of Bardstown, Purcell of Cincinnati, and Bruté of Vincennes in presence of many priests and a great concourse of people. Here too, only two days later, he consecrated the venerated Bishop Bruté. Even to-day the cathedral stands, a monument of the faith and devotion of the Catholics of old St. Louis, the wonder and the admiration of all because of its purity of architecture and solidity of construction. In the midst of his distracting and arduous duties Bishop Rosati yet found time for study and literary work. As a writer he was clear and convincing and many of the ablest and most learned documents of the Four Provincial Councils of Baltimore are the results of his pen. He was a prudent, efficient administrator and an eloquent speaker, speaking equally well in Italian, French, and English. His audiences included men of every rank and station and so convincing were his words and so impressive his personality, that his converts during the year 1839 numbered 299. His confessional was always surrounded by penitents and in and out of the confessional he was accessible to all who sought his friendship or advice. He permitted himself to call no time his own, but at all hours was upon any person; thus be came to wield a might influence for good. On 25 April, 1840 the Fourth Provincial Council of Baltimore and after its close departed for Rome, where he was most graciously received by Pope Gregory XVI. Appointed by the pope Apostolic Delegate to Hayti, he was commissioned to adjust the relationship between the Holy See and the Republic of Hayti; he accepted the appointment. In doing so, however he did not fail to note the danger of leaving his far extended and yet undeveloped diocese during so long a time without a leader; consequently he so advised the appointment of a coadjutor. This Rome agreed to and asked him to name his choice, he thereupon proposed the name of the Very Rev. Peter Richard Kenrick, vicar-general to the Rt. Rev. Francis Patrick Kenrick of Philadelphia; at the same time he drew attention to the fact that only a short time before he had petitioned Rome to appoint as his coadjutor the Very Rev. John Timon, C.M., and that Father Timon had declined the honour. Now, he argued, in order to prevent a recurrence, of the same nature it might be well to oblige Father Kenrick under obedience to accept the office. That Rome acted on the suggestion is clear from a letter of the Rt. Rev. Francis Patrick Kenrick, dated Philadelphia, 4 June, 1841, addressed to Bishop Rosati in which we read: "the positive wishes of His Holiness have, I believe, secured my brother's full acquiescence". Before going to Hayti Bishop Rosati returned to the United States, and on 30 Nov., 1841, at the cathedral church at Philadelphia, he consecrated the Rt. Rev. Peter Richard Kenrick titular Bishop of Drass and coadjutor of the Diocese of St. Louis. Having arranged the affairs of his diocese, and informed himself as well as possible regarding matters at Hayti, he set sail from New York, 15 Jan., 1942, and landed at Port au Prince on the twenty-ninth day of the same month, where he was received with every mark of respect. Success crowned his efforts in so far as he was able to convince the president of the advisability of signing a Concordat which should be submitted to the Holy See for approval. He left Hayti 22 February, 1842, landed at Brest, France, on Easter Sunday, and from there proceeded to Rome to report the result of his endeavours to the pope. The remainder of the year he spent in Europe. In the spring of 1843, the Concordat having been signed at Rome, he journeyed to Paris to arrange for his return trip to Hayti. It is of interest to note that on his trip to Paris he met and travelled with the papal nuncio to Brussels, the Most Rev. Vincenzo Gioacchino Pecci, titular Archbishop of Damietta, afterwards the illustrious Leo XIII, and that the latter in 1881, in speaking of this meeting, said that never during his days had he met with a prelate so saintly (nessuno si santo) and so imbued with filial love and respect for the pope. When Bishop Rosati reached Paris his health, long before undermined by the privations and exposures of his missionary life in the Far West, gave way; he was stricken with an acute attack of lung trouble, which he had contracted during the previous month of February, and, acting on the advice of his physicians, he returned to Rome, where he died in the House of the Congregation of the Fathers of the Mission on 25 Sept., 1843. Coming to Missouri in the primeval days of its settlement, when it had scarcely a vestige of Catholicity, he left the diocese in a flourishing and prosperous condition. Preparatory to the first Diocesan Synod of St. Louis, convoked by him, and opened 21 April, 1839, he issued a call for a diocesan census, the result of which shows: a Catholic population of 31,503; 3 convents of the Ladies of the Sacred Heart, with 42 sisters; 1 orphan asylum and hospital in charge of the Sisters of Charity (19 sisters); 4 convents of the Sisters of Loretto, with 30 sisters; 2 convents of the Sisters of St. Joseph, with 11 sisters; 1 convent of Visitation Nuns, with 19 sisters; 4 ecclesiastical seminaries, with 30 clerics; 3 colleges; 7 charitable institutions. In 1842 we find 39 churches with resident priests; 6 chapels; 36 churches without resident priests; 60 missions; 2 Bishops; 29 secular priests; 21 Lazarist Fathers; 28 Jesuits; a total of 80 priests. The Catholic population at this time is give as 100,000. Bishop Rosati died 25, Sept. 1843, and was succeeded by Peter Richard Kenrick. First Archbishop, Peter Richard Kenrick (1841-1895) Some lives there are that mark an epoch — lives which by virtue of their striking power or unique position, or both, stand apart and form landmarks in history. Such was the life of Peter Richard Kenrick, the Second Bishop and the first Archbishop of the Diocese of St. Louis. On 20 July, 1847, St. Louis was raised to the rank of an archdiocese and Bishop Kenrick became its first archbishop. No suffragans, however, were assigned to him as at the time other archiepiscopal sees were under contemplation in the territory. On 25 May, 1850, he issued a call for the Second Diocesan Synod and on the twenty-fifth of the following August, 43 priests of the diocese assembled in council. This synod, which was the only one held during his life, passed regulations which obtained during his administration. He also presided at the two Provincial Councils convoked by him, the first 7 Sept., 1855, the second, 5 Sept., 1858; a third was called for May, 1861, but was postponed because of the impending Civil War. On 3 May, 1857, Archbishop Kenrick consecrated the Rt. Rev. James Duggan his coadjutor. One year later Bishop Duggan was transferred to the See of Chicago. In the spring of 1872 Archbishop Kenrick secured the appointment of the Very Rev. Patrick J. Ryan as his second coadjutor. The consecration services were held in St. Louis and Father Ryan, on 14 February, 1872, was consecrated titular Bishop of Tricomia and coadjutor to the Archbishop of St. Louis with the right of succession. Bishop Ryan remained coadjutor until 8 June, 1884, when he was promoted to the Archiepiscopal See of Philadelphia. After the departure of Archbishop Ryan, Archbishop Kenrick resumed, unaided, the administration of his diocese. In 1893, because of age and infirmities incidental thereto, he found it impossible to continue alone the administration and Rome sent him as coadjutor with the right of succession, the Right Rev. John J. Kain, Bishop of Wheeling, W. Va. Three years later, on 3 March, 1896, Archbishop Kenrick died in the archiepiscopal residence at St. Louis. He was a man of great learning, of modest, unassuming manner, never too reserved and never too familiar, in fact a spiritual man, a man of great soul, to whom littleness and meanness were unknown. He seldom came forward except in defence of Catholic truth and of Catholic interests that were attacked, and then rather in writing than in public meetings. His main work lay hidden from the public eye; this work was to organize, consolidate, and expand his diocese; to foster the ecclesiastical spirit among his priests; to counsel wisely and prudently his brother bishops, his clergy and people of every rank and condition. For such work it was that he became so well-known and so highly esteemed, and that his name ranks so high in the history of the Church in America. During the life of Archbishop Kenrick the expansion of the Church in the Diocese of St. Louis was unprecedented. Prior to 1843 there were but three churches in the City of St. Louis: the cathedral, SS. Mary's and Joseph's, and the Church of St. Francis Xavier, and only 39 throughout the entire diocese. At the time of his death we find 58 parish churches in the City of St. Louis and 108 outside the city a 26 chapel, and 97 mission churches, with a Catholic population of nearly 200,000. In 1849, he introduced the Christian Brothers; in 1862, the Franciscan Fathers; in 1866, the Redemptorist Fathers; in 1869, the Alexian Brothers; in 1884, the Passionist Fathers; in 1848, the Sisters of the Good Shepherd; in 1849, the Ursuline Nuns; in 1856, the Sisters of Mercy; in 1858, the Notre Dame Sisters; in 1863, the Discalced Carmelites in 1869, the Little Sisters of the Poor; in 1872, the Sisters of St. Mary and the Sisters Of St. Francis; in 1880, the Oblate Sisters of Providence, and in 1882, the Sisters of the Precious Blood. In 1843 he founded a monthly Catholic magazine, "The Catholic Cabinet and Chronicle of Religious Intelligence", in 1850 a weekly publication called "The Shepherd of the Valley", which was discontinued in 1854. To systematize works of charity he established in 1847 the St. Vincent de Paul Society, which organization grew and expanded and still continues its noble work in aiding the destitute and distressed. In 1892 "The Queen's Daughters" were organized, a society of ladies who devote their energies to forming sewing classes among the poorer people, teaching the scholars useful and beneficial arts, and providing clothing and other necessaries for the poor and deserving. Archbishop Kenrick furthermore organized the New Cathedral Board, the Catholic Orphan Board, the Calvary Cemetery Board, and the Diocesan Seminary Board, each of which he duly incorporated. He secured the property and building of the Visitation Nuns in the City of St. Louis for the new Kenrick Seminary and began the fund for the erection of a new cathedral. During his episcopate sixteen new sees were formed and established out of the original Diocese of St. Louis: Little Rock, 1843; Santa Fé and St. Paul, 1850; Leavenworth, 1851; Alton and Omaha, 1857; Green Bay, La Crosse, St. Joseph, and Denver, 1868; Kansas City, 1880; Davenport, 1881; Wichita, Concordia, Cheyenne, and Lincoln, 1887: At the time of his death in 1896 diocesan statistics show: city parishes, 61; parishes outside the City of St. Louis, 114; missions with churches, 94; stations, 40; chapels with attending chaplains, 27; archbishops, 2; diocesan priests, 229; regulars, 121; total priests, 350; Catholic population, 200,000. Second Archbishop, John Joseph Kain (1895-1903) He was born at Martinsburg, Berkeley County, W. Va., 21 31 March, 1841. After attending the Martinsburg Academy, he entered St. Charles College at Ellicott City, Md., where he finished his Classical studies. He made his theological studies at St. Mary's Seminary, Baltimore, and was there ordained priest on 2 July, 1866. His first appointment was as pastor of Harper's Ferry, W. Va., and with it as a centre he ministered to the spiritual wants of the Catholics of eight counties. After nine years' pastorate, when only thirty-four years of age, he was selected by Rome to succeed Bishop Whelan of Bishop of Wheeling, W. Va. He was consecrated in the Cathedral of Wheeling 23 May, 1875. In 1893 Rome created him Archbishop of Oxyrynchia and coadjutor to Archbishop Kenrick, and on 31 Aug., of the same year, he came to St. Louis. He was appointed to the see of the Diocese of St. Louis, 21 May, 1895. During his administration he manifested the same strenuous and efficient efforts that had characterized his labours in his former diocese. During Sept, 1893, he opened the new Kenrick Seminary and in Sept., 1896 he presided over the Third Diocesan Synod. At this Synod he introduced into the diocese the Third Baltimore Council legislations, and redistricted and readjusted parish boundaries and regulated diocesan matters in general. He also began the reorganization of the parochial school system. In September, 1902 he held the Fourth Diocesan Synod in which diocese legislation was further perfected. Other notable works of this energetic prelate were the purchasing of the new cathedral site on Lindell Boulevard, the establishment of the new cathedral parish, the erecting of the new cathedral chapel and parochial residence, and the preliminary financing of the new cathedral project. In all his works he showed himself possessed of a great courage and determination, and accomplished for the diocese by his energy, labour and endurance that which his venerable predecessor had during his late years planned, but because of his great age failed to accomplish. Archbishop Kain was a man of great earnestness and prudence of his counsels as well as for the intensity of his convictions; an admirable exemplar of progressive conservatism and conservative progressiveness. He held a high place in the American hierarchy, as is evidenced fm the fact of his being chosen from among the bishops of the country in 1884 as procurator of the Third Council of Baltimore, and that in 1895 he was selected to deliver the sermon in the cathedral at Baltimore on the occasion of the conferring of the cardinal's biretta on His Eminence Cardinal Satolli, the first Apostolic Delegate to America. In 1902 his health failed, and Rome sent him at his request as coadjutor, with right of succession, the Rt. Rev. John Joseph Glenon, D.D., titular Bishop of Pinara, and coadjutor Bishop of Kansas City. Mo. Archbishop Kain died at Baltimore, 13 Oct., 1903. At the time of his death the diocesan census showed: city churches, 68; churches outside the city with resident pastors, 124; missions 58; 1 archbishop; 1 bishop; 268 diocesan priests; and 174 regulars; total 442. Catholic population, 220,000. Third Archbishop, John Joseph Glennon (1903-) He was born Kinnegad, Parish of Clonard, Co. Meath, Ireland. He completed his studies at All Hallows College, Ireland, came to America in 1883, and was ordained a priest of the Diocese of Kansas City in the cathedral of that city on 20 Dec., 1884. In 1893 he was appointed vicar-general of the diocese, and on 29 June, 1896, was consecrate titular Bishop of Pinara and coadjutor to Bishop Hogan of Kansas City, Mo. He was transferred to St. Louis as coadjutor with the right of succession on 27 April, 1903, and succeeded to the See of St. Louis on 13 October of the same year. During the time of his administration the Archdiocese of St. Louis has advanced with rapid strides, both in temporal and spiritual matters. Many churches and institutions have been established and built, and Church legislation has been amplified and perfected by the Fifth and the Sixth Diocesan Synods called and presided over by him during the months of September of the years 1905 and 1908; also various charity organizations have been systematically perfected, and new ones founded to answer the needs of the poor, especially in congested districts. During his time we note the organization of the "Ephpheta Society" (1909), a society whose object is to care for the Catholic deaf-mute children of the poor and provide means for their education; the establishment of Father Dunne's Newsboys' Home in 1905; Father Dempsey's Hotel for Homeless Men in 1906; the introduction of the Helpers of the Holy Souls in 1903; the Brothers of Mary (Western Province College and novitiate in 1908); and the establishment of Catholic settlement schools, and day nurseries in 1910. To this prelate has been entrusted the task of giving to St. Louis what had been the dream of Kenrick and the ambition of Kain — a cathedral worthy of the name and prestige of the Archdiocese of St. Louis. Soon after taking up Archbishop Kain's crosier, he set to work drafting plans and collecting funds for the erection of the cathedral, the corner-stone of which was laid on Sunday, 18 Oct., 1908, by the Most Rev. Apostolic Delegate Diomede Falconio, D.D., titular Archbishop of Larissa. On this occasion seventy-nine city parishes participated in the grand parade, making the largest demonstration ever seen in the city; it was also of extraordinary character in the nationalities represented. The exterior of the cathedral is an original conception, Byzantine in sentiment, developed in a beautiful gray granite which lends itself happily to majestic piling, and is simple but romantic in expression. The openings are treated in receding colonnades, architraves, and archivolts, with profuse and elaborate carved and sculptured decorations, each motif being from a special design, original in character. The great central dome, forming the main central feature and rearing its cross 247 feet above the terrace, the main facade with its imposing gable and deep receding central rose-window, and three great main entrances below, flanked on either side with imposing isolated towers giving great breadth to the facade, present a front of great dignity and charm. The sides, with many gabled entrances, one-story chapels and great clerestory windows, the suppressed towers at the angle of the dome and central transepts form a beautiful combination, giving fine light-and-shadow effects. The building is roofed with a sea-green glazed tile; the typana of all the arches, illuminated with mosaics in subdued colours, impart warmth and interest to the whole. The building has great bronze doors with sculptured panels depicting Biblical subjects. The interior is of a purely Byzantine type, an original composition in colours never before attempted in this type of church architecture. The general plan consists of two minor domes, a large central dome, and a nave, with transepts and apse, surrounded with spacious ambulatories, through which the circuit of the church may be made without crossing the more sacred parts of the building. There are spacious chapels with groined and vaulted ceilings to the right and left of the sanctuary; these are dedicated to the Blessed Sacrament and the Blessed Virgin. Other chapels of equal importance are on either side of the front minor dome, while, two transepts form chapels dedicated to St. Louis and St. George. In the ambulatory circling these transepts are Stations of the Cross in bronze. The colonnades are of rare imported coloured marbles, the caps and bases of which are finished in gold with shadowed blues and reds. The ceilings, spandrels and arch balustrade are decorated with highly illuminated glass mosaics, of varied interlacing geometric patterns and religious emblems. The interior presents an ever-changing, vista of design and colour when observed from different points of view. The statistics of the diocese (1911) are as follows: archbishop, 1; diocesan priests, 314; regular clergy, 214; Jesuits, 83; Passionists, 12; Redemptorists, 40; Franciscans, 32; Lazarists, 42; Servite Fathers, 2; Brothers of Mary, 3; total priests, 528; churches in city, 83; churches outside city with resident priests, 151); total, 242; churches without resident priests, 98; total churches, 340; stations, 66; chapels, 120; seminary for diocesan clergy, 1; students, 250; seminaries of religious orders, 7; students, 900; colleges and academies for boys, 8; students, 2500; academies for young ladies, 22; other institutions of higher education for females, 15; females educated in higher branches, 5000; parishes with parochial schools in the city, 69; number of pupils in city, 20,936; parochial schools outside of city, 110; pupils, 9645; total schools, 179; total pupils, 30,581; newsboys' home, 1; hotel for working men, 1; orphan asylums, 7; orphans, 1500; House of the Good Shepherd, 1; children in preservation class, 250; deaf-mute asylums, 2; pupils, 190; industrial schools, 3; pupils, 300; total number of young people under Catholic care, 40,321; hospitals and infirmaries, 16; patients during the year about 10,000; asylums, 4; homes for aged, 2; Catholic population, about 375,000. The statistics of the diocese at the time of this writing, June, 1911, are as above quoted, but by "Brief of the Consistorial" dated Rome, 16 June, 1911, the northern portion of the diocese has been detached and affiliated to the Diocese of St. Joseph, Mo. This will necessitate a readjustment of the above figures which cannot just now be done with any degree of accuracy. The territory affected comprises 11 counties: Clark, Adair, Knox, Lewis, Macon, Shelby, Marion, Chariton, Randolph, Monroe, and Ralls. In the counties named there are numbered 15 parishes with 16 missions and 20 diocesan and 3 regular priests. ROSATI, Relazione, letters to the Propaganda and Private Letters; IDEM, Diocesan Archives; SHEA, Hist. of the Catholic Church in the U.S., I (Akron, 1888), passim; THORNTON, Historical Sketch of the Church in St. Louis; WALSH, Jubilee Memoirs (St. Louis, 1891); Encycl. of the Hist. of St. Louis (St. Louis, 1899); Catholic Directory (Milwaukee). JOHN J. TANNRATH University of Saint Louis University of St. Louis The University of St. Louis, probably the oldest university west of the Mississippi River, was founded in the City of St. Louis in 1818 by the Right Reverend Louis William Du Bourg, Bishop of Louisiana. Since 1827 the institution has been under the direction of the Society of Jesus. On 16 November, 1818, Bishop Du Bourg opened St. Louis Academy, putting it in charge of the Reverend Francois Niel and others of the secular clergy attached to St. Louis Cathedral; in 1820 the name of the institution was changed to St. Louis College. The college was successful, but the secular clergy, owing to their numerous ecclesiastical duties, found it difficult to attend to this professorial work. In consequence Bishop Du Bourg, who had been President of Georgetown College, soon began to formulate plans to put St. Louis College in care of the Society of Jesus, for he realized that its existence would be precarious without some such guarantee for supplying a corps of trained professors. He therefore made application to the Provincial of the Jesuits in Maryland, but his request could not be granted, as the establishments of the Society at Georgetown and elsewhere in the eastern states fully occupied all the members at that time. However, early in 1823, Bishop Du Bourg visited Washington to consult with James Monroe, President of the United States, and John C. Calhoun, Secretary of War, on the Indian affairs of his diocese. Mr. Calhoun suggested that he invite the Maryland Jesuits to give him their assistance in this difficult pioneer work. Bishop Du Bourg thereupon once more entered into negotiations with the Provincial of Maryland offering to make over to the Society of Jesus his cathedral property in St. Louis, which comprised church and college, as well as a farm near Florissant, Mo., for an Indian seminary, if the Jesuits would establish themselves in his diocese. The provincial accepted that part of the proposition which referred to the Indian seminary, but stated that priests could not be spared for the St. Louis educational project. Accordingly in June, 1823, the Jesuits from Whitemarsh, Md., took up their abode in Florissant where they opened an Indian seminary. In 1824 they yielded to Bishop Du Bourg's earnest solicitations to take over St. Louis College, but the transfer was not actually effected until 1827. The last session of St. Louis College under the management of the secular clergy was that of 1826-27. The Jesuits decided to erect new college buildings on property given by Bishop Du Bourg, and in the interval the pupils of St. Louis College were accommodated at Florissant. Thence they were transferred to the new establishment in St. Louis where classes were opened under Jesuit masters on 2 November, 1829. In its new environments the college flourished, and in 1832 received its charter as a university by act of the Missouri Legislature. President Verhaegen at once began to organize the post-graduate faculties. In 1834 the school of divinity was established, which continued its courses until 1860. A faculty of medicine was constituted in 1836 and was eminently successful until 1855 when, owing to the Know-Nothing movement, its separation from the university was deemed advisable. A law school was organized in 1843 but was closed four years later. In 1889 the work of reconstructing these faculties was begun. The school of philosophy and science was opened in 1889; the school of divinity in 1899; the school of medicine in 1903; the dental college, school of advanced science, and institute of law in 1908; the department of meteorology and seismology in 1909; and the school of commerce and finance in 1910. Although founded in the pioneer days of education in the West, the old professional schools of the university did excellent work. Dr. William Beaumont, widely known for his observations in the case of Alexis St. Martin, was among the first professors of the medical school. Rush Medical College of Chicago owes its existence to an early professor at the school, Dr. Brainard, and the Cooper Medical College of San Francisco was founded by an alumnus, Dr. Cooper. Another student of those early days, Dr. L.C. Boisliniere, wrote a text-book on obstetrics, which is still of considerable value. In 1848 Dr. M.L. Linton organized the first medical monthly in America, "The St. Louis Medical and Surgical Journal." Buckner, Barret, Garesche, and Sharp, of the old Law School, were men of national prominence in their day. Eight American prelates have had intimate connections with the university: Du Bourg of Louisiana, as founder; Rosati of St. Louis, as patron and benefactor; Van de Velde of Chicago and Carrell of Covington, as presidents; Miège, Vicar Apostolic of Indian Territory, as a professor; de Neckere of New Orleans, Harty of Manila, and Chartrand, Auxiliary of Indianapolis, as students. Other students of the university who rose to prominence in ecclesiastical affairs are the Very Rev. A.M. Anderledy, General of the Society of Jesus, and the Reverends Joseph Keller and R.J. Meyer, English assistants to the General of the Society. Fathers Carrell, Heylen, Smarius, Damen, and Conway were noted preachers connected with the university. From an early date, members of the faculty devoted themselves to writing. Walter H. Hill, S.J., was among the first to write text-books on scholastic philosophy in English, and his works are still widely used. "The Happiness of Heaven," by Florentine Boudreaux, S.J., and "The Imitation of the Sacred Heart," by Peter Arnoudt, S.J., have gone through many editions (the most recent, 1910), and have been translated into most modern languages. Joseph Keller, R.J. Meyer, F. Garesché, and Joseph Fastre, all of the Society, wrote on ascetical subjects, while the writings of Pierre Jean de Smet did much to bring the Indian Missions into public notice. Within recent years books and studies on philosophy, theology, apologetics, ecclesiastical history, pedagogy, and canon law have been published by the Jesuit professors, Poland, Otten, Higgins, Coppens, Gruender, Conway, Rother, Martin, Conroy, and Fanning. Fathers Coppens and McNichols have issued textbooks on English literature. Father Thomas Hughes is well known as an authority on the history of the Jesuits, and is the author of "Loyola and the Educational System of the Jesuits." Fathers Finn, Copus, and Spalding are the authors of books of fiction for the young which have an extensive circulation. Professors Harris and Steele have published text-books on law, Professor Harris' work on "Wills" being noteworthy among recent contributions on the subject. Professors Eycleshymer, Thompson, Lyon, Neilson, Chaddock, Engman, and Loeb have written on medical topics. Scientific studies have been published by the Jesuit professors, de Laak, Monaghan, Borgmeyer, and Coony. Among the alumni who have won distinction in the field of history may be mentioned, E.B. O'Callaghan, Lucien Carr, Paul Beckwith, and Firmin Rozier; and in general literature, John Lesperance, Conde B. Pallen, and Irwin Russell. Through its early missionaries who founded many settlements throughout the West, and through its alumni, many of whom have risen to high rank in civil and professional life, the university has contributed much to the upbuilding of Church and State in the West. Within a few years after the coming of the Jesuits to St. Louis more than forty establishments had been made; the work of de Smet, who founded missions as far to the North-west as Oregon, is famous. Adrian and Christian Hoecken, Ponziglione and others from the university evangelized Indians and whites throughout the West; many of these early missions became the centres of flourishing communities. In education the direct influence of the university has been wide, no less than thirteen colleges and professional schools having been founded by its professors or alumni. Degrees have been conferred from 1834 to 1911 as follows: Doctors, Ph.D., 27; LL.D, 33; M.D., 935; D.D.S., 107; Mus.D., 1; total, 1103. Masters, M.A., 175; M.S., 1; total, 176. Bachelors, B.A., 402; B.S., 75; Ph.B., 5; LL.B., 59; B.F.A., 2; B.C.S., 1; total, 544. Grand total of degrees conferred, 1823. During this period 722 members of the Society of Jesus completed the full courses of the schools of divinity and philosophy. PRESENT STATUS St. Louis University consists of the college, the school of divinity, the school of philosophy, the school of advanced science, the department of seismology and meteorology, the school of medicine, the school of dentistry, the institute of law, and the school of commerce and finance. In December, 1910, the General of the Society of Jesus, Very Rev. F.X. Wernz, by official act constituted St. Louis University a collegium maximum. This is a title conferred in recognition of the university's rank among Jesuit educational institutions. The University Library contains more than 70,000 volumes, among them many rare and valuable works. There are also special libraries in each department of the university. The museum contains specimens illustrating the fields of geology, palaeontology and ethnology; the art collection though small contains some paintings of considerable merit. The "Fleur de Lis," a literary publication, and a number of philosophical, literary, and scientific societies, several of which publish their proceedings, furnish the student added opportunities for mental development; the Sodality of the Blessed Virgin Mary and other religious organizations offer additional aids to piety. University athletics are controlled by a students' association working in connection with the Faculty Board of Athletics. The gymnasium is fairly equipped and a splendid campus has been recently secured. The Alumni Association with records dating from 1828 is well organized and helps much to promote loyalty to the university. The General Catalogue, issued annually, and the Announcements published by the schools from time to time during the year, furnish detailed information in regard to the university. FANNING, Hist. Sketch of St. Louis Univ. (St. Louis, 1908); IDEM, Diamond Jubilee of St. Louis Univ. (St. Louis, 1904); HILL, Hist. Sketch of St. Louis Univ. (St. Louis, 1879); KENNY in The Catholic Church in the U.S. (New York, 1910); BILLON, Annals of St. Louis (St. Louis, 1886); CHITTENDEN AND RICHARDSON, Life of Pierre Jean De Smet (New York, 1905); CLARKE, Bishops of the Catholic Church in the U.S. (New York, 1889); HOGAN, Thoughts about St. Louis (St. Louis, 1854); HYDE AND CONARD, Hist. of St. Louis (St. Louis, 1891); SCHARF, Hist. of St. Louis (Philadelphia, 1883); SHEPARD, Autobiography (St. Louis, 1869); ed. THORNTON, Catholic Institutions in St. Louis (St. Louis, 1911); ed. THWAITE, Early Western Travels (Cleveland, 1906); Annales de l'Association de la Foi (March, 1825, Nov., 1827); Archives of the Province of Missouri (1826); Donahoe's Magazine (Nov., 1904); Fleur de Lis (1898), passim; Woodstock Letters (1876), passim; Missouri Republican, files for 1818; Catalogues, Bulletins, Announcements of St. Louis University. PAUL L. BLAKELY Monastery of Saint Lucius Monastery of Saint Lucius (LUZI) Located in Chur, Switzerland. The Church of St. Lucius was built over the grave of this saint, whose relics were preserved in it until the sixteenth century. Originally the church was the cathedral. St. Valentinian enlarged it in the first half of the sixth century and built the crypt which is still in existence. In the ninth century a new cathedral was built by Bishop Tello in a former Roman fortress and St. Luzi was temporarily a branch of the Benedictine Abbey of Pfäfer. About 1140 it became a Premonstratensian abbey. At the time of the schism of the sixteenth century Theodore Schlegel, Abbot of St. Luzi, was especially energetic and skillful in defending the Catholic Faith. He was executed by the Protestants after terrible torture on 23 January, 1529. The monks were driven out and the monastery remained empty for a hundred years, the relics of St. Lucius being taken to the cathedral. Community life was continued at Bendern in Liechtenstein. In 1624 the monastery was restored and continued to exist until the beginning of the nineteenth century. By the decision of the Imperial Delegates at Ratisbon the possessions of the monastery in Liechtenstein and Vorarlberg were given in 1802 to the Prince of Orange. Consequently the monastery had no further means of existence. In 1806, therefore, the abbot and community transferred the monastery and all its rights to the episcopal seminary; this transfer was confirmed in the same year by Pius VII. The seminary was transferred to the former monastery, where it still exists; it has four courses of theology and seven professors. MAYER, St. Luzi bei Chur (Einsiedeln, 1907). J.G. MAYER University of Saint Mark University of Saint Mark The highest institution of learning in Peru, located at Lima, under the official name of Universidad Mayor de San Marcos. It is reputed as being the oldest university in the New World having been created by a royal decree of 12 May, 1551, wherein Charles V granted 350 gold dollars to the priors of the Dominican order to establish in Lima an Estudio General, and conferred upon it all the prerogatives enjoyed by the University of Salamanca. This decree was confirmed by a Bull of Pope Pius V, dated 25 July, 1571. Until 30 December of the same year, the school remained under the control of the Dominican fathers, when it became independent with the right to choose its own rector. The first one elected was Dr. Gaspar de Meneses, a layman. In 1574, after a new site had been purchased at a cost of 600 gold dollars, the name Saint Mark was chosen by lot for the institution. Thenceforward, the university acquired a greater importance, and two years later a new plan of studies adequate to the times, was adopted, with the following classes: two of Spanish grammar; one of native languages, which were then considered necessary for the propagation of the Gospel; three of theology; three of jurisprudence; two of canon law, and two of medicine. The number of students who came to Lima to follow the courses of the university increased rapidly and at one time reached 1200. As the cost of graduation was exceedingly high (about $10,000), instruction in Saint Mark, as in other colonial universities of the times, was confined to the aristocratic and wealthy classes, among which there prevailed an intense fondness for literary pursuits. These fees have been gradually reduced and the total now amounts to 50 soles ($25) for the degree of Bachelor, and 100 ($50) for that of Doctor. The popularity of the institution continued until the time when Peru became independent (1825) and then followed a short period of inactivity, after which the university was reorganized by President Ramon Castilla (28 Aug., 1861). From the year of its autonomy, the university has been directed by a council composed of the rector as its chairman, a vice-rector, the dean and a delegate from each faculty, and the secretary of the University. The rector is elected by the professors with the approval and consent of the council, and each faculty chooses its own dean, regulates its course of studies, and issues its respective degrees. As at present constituted, Saint Mark consists of six faculties. Jurisprudence confers the degree of Doctor of Laws, with a course of five years comprising the following subjects: philosophy of law, civil law, criminal law, ecclesiastical law, mercantile law, mining and agricultural laws, law procedure, Roman law, and forensic practice. Medicine grants the diploma of Bachelor of Medicine in five years, and the title of "physician and surgeon" after two additional years of hospital practice, the subjects covered being descriptive anatomy, medical physics, public, private and international hygiene, medical and analytical chemistry, natural and medical history, general anatomy and microscopic technique, pharmacy, physiology, pathology, clinics, bacteriology, therapeutics, materia medica, surgery, nosography, ophthalmology, operative medicine, gynaecology, pediatrics, obstetrics, legal medicine, etc.; this same faculty issues the titles of pharmacist, dentist, and obstetrician, with courses of studies covering three years. In theology the degree of Doctor is obtained after a six years' course in the subjects of dogmatic theology, moral theology, church history, liturgy and ecclesiastical calculation, sacred oratory, the Bible and pastoral theology. The faculty of sciences is divided into three separate sections: (1) mathematical sciences, (2) physics, and (3) natural sciences, the course in each of which comprises a period of three years. Before admission to the faculty of medicine, students are required to pass two years in natural sciences, and likewise, those desiring to enter the school of engineers (independent of the university) must have studied mathematics two years. The faculty of letters confers the degree of Doctor, its course covering four years with these subjeots: philosophy, history of ancient and modern philosophy, aesthetics and history of art, Spanish literature, sociology, history of civilization, history of Peruvian civilization, and pedagogy; two years in this faculty are required for admission to that of jurisprudence. The faculty of administrative and political economy confers the degree of Doctor, and its course of three years includes the following studies: constitutional law; public and private international law, administrative law, political economy and economical legislation of Peru; maritime law, diplomacy, history of the treaties of Peru, consular legislation, finance, financial legislation of Peru, and statistics. The official organ of the university is the "Revista Universitaria", a monthly publication, which has since 1906 replaced the "Anales". At the present time the number of professors of the University of Saint Mark is 80. GARLAND, Peru in 1906 (Lima, 1907), 111; Report of the U. S. Commissioner of Education (Washington, l908), l51, WRIGHT The Old and New Peru (Philadelphia, 1908). JULIAN MORENO-LACALLE College of Saint Omer College of Saint Omer The well-known Jesuit college at St. Omer -- oftener spoken of under the anglicized form of St. Omers or St. Omer's -- was founded by Father Parsons in 1592 or 1593. All Catholic education having been prohibited in England, several colleges had been founded by Englishmen on the Continent -- at Douai, Rome, and Valladolid; their primary object was the education of the clergy. Father Parsons recognized the need of a college intended in the first instance for the laity, and for this purpose he chose a spot as near as possible to England. St. Omer was twenty-four miles from Calais, in the Province of Artois, then subject to the King of Spain. The first students were obtained by the removal of a small establishment which had been set up by Father Parsons at Eu, in Normandy. Other boys quickly arrived from England and within ten years of its foundation the college numbered over a hundred scholars. Thirty years later this number had been doubled. The character of the college was kept as English as possible, notwithstanding that several of the early rectors were Spanish. The buildings consisted of a large house joined to several smaller ones, and in 1610 a regular chapel was added. The whole was burnt down in 1684; but it was rebuilt on a comprehensive scale. A second fire, in 1725, led to further improvements in rebuilding and the greater part of the college then constructed is still standing. The college continued its work for over a century and a half. Many devout Catholics received their education within its walls, over twenty of whom won the crown of martyrdom. In 1678 the Province of Artois passed into the hands of the French; but the Government was friendly to the college, which continued to prosper till the year 1762, when the Parliament of Paris decreed the expulsion of all Jesuits from France, and proposed to place the college under the direction of secular priests. In order to defeat this scheme, the Jesuits determined to remove the whole establishment. The boys expressed their willingness to accompany their masters, and by one of the most dramatic adventures in the history of any school, they succeeded in escaping from France, and reassembling at Bruges. Here the college was carried on until the suppression of the Society throughout the world in 1773. Even then, the college did not finally come to an end. Most of the boys escaped, and many of them reassembled in the academy carried on by English ex-Jesuits under the protection of the prince-bishop at Liège. From there they were driven by the Revolution in 1794, and the Penal Laws in England having by that time been modified, they returned to their own country, where by the generosity of Mr. Thomas Weld, one of their former pupils, they were presented with the mansion and property at Stonyhurst, which celebrated college thus claims a descent from that established at Saint Omer by Father Parsons. In the meantime, the French Government finding itself in possession of the building at St. Omer, but without either masters or scholars, invited the clergy of the English College at Douai to undertake its management. After some hesitation, they consented to do so, feeling that this was the only way to save it from the French, and hoping some day to restore it to its rightful owners. They accordingly transferred their preparatory school there and this became the nucleus of what was practically a new college. Their action was much traversed by the Jesuits, and a long altercation ensued. The facts were laid before the Holy See, and though no final decision was given, the Roman authorities refused to censure the action of the Douai clergy. In its new form, the college became fairly prosperous, the scholars numbering over one hundred. The learned Alban Butler was president from 1766 to 1773, and died in the college. At the outbreak of the Revolution, however, it came to an end. The students and professors were imprisoned at Anas, in August, 1793, whence they were afterwards removed to Doullens, in Picardy, and joined to the Douai community. After the fall of Robespierre, they were removed to Douai, and in February, 1795, they were set at liberty. They returned to England, and the president, Dr. Stapleton, became the head of the new College of St. Edmund at Old Hall. He was followed by two of the professors and a few of the scholars; but the college there was based chiefly on the traditions of Douai, and the secular College of St. Omer practically came to an end. After the restoration of the French monarchy, the building was restored to the executors of Dr. Stapleton, and by them sold to the French Government. It is used to this day as a military hospital. GERARD, Stonyhurst College (London, 1894); KEATING AND GRUGGEN, Stonyhurst (London, 1901); FOLEY, Records S. J. (London, 1877-83); DODD, Church Hist. of England, ed. TIERNEY (London, 1839-43); WARD, History of St. Edmund's College (London, 1893); BURTON, Life of Challoner (London, 1909); IDEM, Dawn. of Catholic Revival (London, 1909); PETRE, English Colleges on the Continent (Norwich, 1849); BLED, Les Jesuits Anglais a St. Omer; DESCHAMPS DE PAS, Historie de St-Omer (Arras, 1880). Several contemporary pamphlets concerning the dispute between the Jesuits and Seculars when the latter accepted the college: HOSKINS, Expulsion of English Jesuits out of St. Omer's; REEVE, Plain and Succinct Narrative etc.; HODGSON, Dispassionate Narrative etc. BERNARD WARD Abbey of Saint-Ouen Abbey of Saint-Ouen Located in Rouen, France, this abbey was a Benedictine monastery of great antiquity dating back to the early Merovingian period. Its foundation has been variously credited, among others, to Clothair I and to St. Clothilda, but no sufficient evidence to settle the question is forthcoming. It was dedicated at first to St. Peter when the body of St. Ouen, Archbishop of Rouen (d. 678), was buried there; the name of St. Peter and St. Ouen became common and finally St. Ouen only. The history of the abbey, on record from A.D. 1000, presents nothing of an exceptional nature. The list of abbots is in "Gallia Christiana" XI, 140. In 1660 the monastery was united to the Congregation of St. Maur, and when suppressed, in 1794, the community numbered twenty-four. The chief interest of Saint-Ouen lies in its glorious church, which surpasses the Cathedral of Rouen in size and beauty, and is one of the few among the greater French churches completely finished. The present building, the third or fourth on the same site, was begun in 1318 by Abbot Jean Roussel, who had completed the choir with its chapels in the Decorated style, and a large portion of the transepts, by his death, twenty-one years later. The nave and central tower, more flamboyant in design, were finished early in the sixteenth century after the original plan. Unhappily the west facade, which had been planned on a unique and most beautiful scheme, was left unfinished. Although nothing could have been simpler than to execute the original designs still existing, the whole of the old work was swept away about the middle of the last century and an ugly pretentious modern design put up instead. Internally the church is 416 feet long, 83 feet wide, and 104 feet high, the central tower, crowned with an exquisite octagonal lantern, being 285 feet in height. Within, the effect is remarkably light and graceful, "the windows seem to have absorbed all the solid wall", and the roof rests simply on the pillars and buttresses, the intervening spaces being huge masses of glass. Fortunately most of the old glass has been preserved, and its silvery white and jewels of color give the final touch to one of the finest interiors in-the world. POMMERAYE, Historie de l'abbaye royale de S.-Ouen de Rouen (Rouen, 1662), Gallia Christiana, XI (Paris, 1759), 135-55; Antiqua statuta archimonasterii Rotomagensis S. Audoeni in MARTENE, Thes. nov. anecdot. (Paris, 1717), IV, 1205; Chronique des abbes de S. Ouen de Rouen, ed. MICHEL (Rouen, 1840); GILBERT, Description historique de l'eglise de St-Ouen de Rouen (Rouen, 1822); COOK, The story of Rouen (London, 1899). G. ROGER HUDLESTON Archdiocese of Saint Paul Saint Paul (Minnesota) (SANCTI PAULI) Archdiocese comprising the counties of Ramsey, Hennepin, Chisago, Anoka, Dakota, Scott, Wright, Rice, Lesueur, Carver, Nicollet, Sibley, Meeker, Redwood, Renville, Kandiyohi, Lyon, Lincoln, Yellow Medicine, Lac-Qui-Parle, Chippewa, Swift, Goodhue, Big Stone, and Brown, which stretch across the State of Minnesota from east to west, in about the center of its southern half. During the Seventh Provincial Council of Baltimore (5-13 May, 1849) the fathers petitioned the Holy See to erect a bishopric in what was then the village of St. Paul. No action was taken on the matter in Rome for over a year, owing to revolutionary disturbances and the absence of Pope Pius IX (1846-78) in Gaeta consequent thereon. The See of St. Paul was actually established on 19 July, 1850. Its jurisdiction extended over an area of some 166,000 square miles, i.e. over what was then the Territory of Minnesota (established 3 March, 1849). The constituent parts were: a larger western part, to the west of the Mississippi, formerly part of the Diocese of Dubuque, and a smaller eastern part, between the Mississippi and St. Croix rivers, formerly part of the Diocese of Milwaukee. The size remained the same even after the admission of the State of Minnesota into the Union (11 May, 1858), and up to the erection of the Vicariate Apostolic of Northern Minnesota (12 Feb., 1875), of the Vicariate Apostolic of Dakota (12 Aug., 1879), and of the Diocese of Winona (3 Oct., 1889), when it was reduced to its present area. At the time of its erection the Diocese of St Paul was assigned to the province of St. Louis, afterwards (12 Feb., 1875) to that of Milwaukee. On 4 May, 1888, it became itself an archdiocese, and as such comprises at present the suffragan Sees of Duluth, Crookston, St. Cloud, and Winona, in Minnesota; Fargo and Bismarck, in North Dakota; Sioux Falls and Lead, in South Dakota. The diocese was named after the town of St. Paul, which had its origin late in the thirties of last century, along the left or eastern bank of the Mississippi, near the military post of Fort Snelling. Father Lucien Caltier had built a log chapel there, and had opened it for services on 1 Nov., 1841. The rude oratory was placed under the invocation of St. Paul, the Apostle of the Gentiles, and the name was then attached to the settlement itself. The earliest Catholic record of what became afterwards the Diocese of St. Paul is in the Rune Stone, discovered in 1898 near Kensington, Minnesota. A strange inscription on it tells us of a visit made in 1362 by thirty Norsemen to the above locality, where ten of them were slain by the natives, and the remainder addressed a salutation to the Blessed Virgin Mary and called upon her for protection. Although not all the Scandinavian scholars are agreed on the authenticity of this text, still the internal evidence seems to be all in its favour; and nothing has been found so far to contradict its contents. Minnesota is a classic land in the history of early Catholic voyageurs and missionaries. The first, as far as records go, were Groseilliers and Radisson, who spent some time on Prairie Island (1654-56) and in the neighbourhood of Knife lake, Kanabee County (1659-60). In 1679-80 Du Lhut visited the countries around Lake Mille Lacs, the western extremity of Lake Superior, and the Mississippi. It was during these journeys that he met the Recollect Father Louis Hennepin and his two companions Michel Accault and Antoine Auguelle, and rescued them from their captivity among the Sioux Indians. During an excursion down the Mississippi Hennepin beheld and named the Falls of St. Anthony in what is now Minneapolis. Nicolas Perrot, in 1683, established a small trading post, Fort Perrot, near the site of the present town of Wabasha, Minnesota; and in 1689 he proclaimed the sovereignty of the French king over the regions of the upper Mississippi. In his company was the Jesuit Father Joseph-Jean Marest, who spent considerable time among the Sioux about the years 1689 and 1702. A contemporary of Perrot, Le Sueur, established in 1695 a trading on Prairie Island, and in 1700 another, Fort L'Huillier, on the Blue Earth River, about three miles from its junction with the Minnesota. In 1727 a post, Fort Beauharnois, was established on the western shore of Lake Pepin, near the present town of Frontenac, Minnesota; the missionaries stationed there were the Jesuit Fathers Michel Guignas and Nicolas de Gonnor. Another, Fort St. Charles, was erected in 1732 on the southern shore of Northwest Angle Inlet, Lake of the Woods, by the explorer de Lavérendrye. The missionaries of the post were the Jesuit Fathers Messaiger and Aulneau, the latter of whom met a cruel death at the hands of savage Sioux. Religious ministrations were, of course, the chief object of the missionaries. Even the lay voyageurs did what they could towards the religious betterment of the natives. Groseilliers and Radisson instructed the older people in the elements of Christianity, and baptized a number of children whom they believed in danger of death. No permanent settlements were made within the area of the Diocese of St. Paul until some time after the organization of the Government of the United States. In Sept., 1818, a mission was opened at Pembina, North Dakota, for the Catholic settlers, who had gone there from Lord Selkirk's colony near St. Boniface, Manitoba. The first priest, Father Dumoulin, and his immediate successors were sent from St. Boniface, the nearest episcopal see. Within the years following upon 1826 many settlers of the Red River valley were compelled to depart, owing to floods, grasshoppers, and other afflictions; and a number of them, generally Canadian and Swiss French, came to the vicinity of what is now St. Paul. Bishop Loras of Dubuque, accompanied by Father Pelamourgues, visited the few Catholics in 1839; in 1840 he sent them a resident priest in Father Lucien Galtier, who in 1844 was replaced by Father Augustine Ravoux, for more than sixty years a priest in the Diocese of St. Paul. The first Bishop of St. Paul was Rt. Rev. Joseph Cretin (1851-57), Vicar-General of the Diocese of Dubuque, appointed 23 July, 1850. His consecration took place at Belley, France, 26 Jan., 1851; on 2 July of the same year, he took possession of his episcopal see; his death occurred on 22 Feb., 1857. The small log chapel built by Father Galtier was soon, replaced by a large structure of brick and stone, which contained accommodations for church, school, and residential purposes. Another stone building was begun in 1855, but not finished until after the bishop's death; it is still used as the cathedral of St. Paul. The Catholic population, which consisted of several hundred, or perhaps a thousand, grew considerably in numbers, and counted about 50,000 at the end of the bishop's career. The increase was largely due to the bishop's own efforts, who invited Catholic settlers to the fertile plains of Minnesota. In addition to the French Canadians large contingents of Irish and German Catholics arrived, who located in St. Paul, in places along the Mississippi, St. Croix, and Minnesota Rivers. Wherever it was possible parishes or missions were organized, and provided with resident priests, or at least visited occasionally by priests from other stations. At his arrival in St. Paul Bishop Cretin found only a couple of priests with small congregations at St. Paul, Mendota, and Pembina; at his death there were 29 churches and 35 stations with about 20 priests attending to the spiritual needs of the Catholic people. Great efforts were made for the education of the young and for the preparation of worthy candidates for the priesthood. in Pembina there were the Sisters of the Propagation of the Faith. The Sisters of St. Joseph of Carondelet came to St. Paul 3 Nov., 1851, and soon opened schools for both elementary and higher education at St. Paul and St. Anthony Falls. In 1855 the Brothers of the Holy Family took charge of a school at St. Paul for boys in both the grammar and higher grades. The Benedictine Fathers from St. Vincent, Pennsylvania, sent some of their men to Minnesota in 1856, and soon a college was opened near St. Cloud in Stearns County. A seminary was conducted in the bishop's own house, where the necessary training was imparted to young Levites of the sanctuary. Works of charity or of general benefit to society were not neglected. A hospital was founded at St. Paul by the Sisters of St. Joseph; the St. Vincent de Paul Society and other similar associations were organized; and a Catholic temperance society was established in 1852. Among the more noteworthy Catholic pioneers were Jean-Baptiste Faribeault, Antoine Pépin, Vital and Gervais Guérin, Joseph Turpin, Abraham Perret, Benjamin and Pierre Gervais, Joseph and his son Isaac Labissonniére, Pierre and Sévère Bottineau, August L. Larpenteur, Louis Robert, Charles Bazille, and William F. Forbes. Of the early priests, apart from Fathers Galtier and Ravoux, the following may be mentioned: Thomas Murray, Daniel J. Fisher, John McMahon, Francis de Vivaldi, Dennis Ledon, Marcellin Peyragrosse, George Keller, Claude Robert, Louis Caillet, Felix Tissot, Anatole Oster, Francis Pierz, Michael Würzfeld, Demetrius Marogna, O.S.B., and Cornelius Wittman, O.S.B. After the death of Bishop Cretin tho of St. Paul remained vacant for over two years. Father Augustine Ravoux was appointed administrator; under his regime the present stone cathedral was completed and opened for service in 1858. The second Bishop of St. Paul was Rt. Rev. Thomas Langdon Grace, O.P. (1859-84). He was born, 16 Nov., 1814, at Charleston, South Carolina, entered the seminary at Cincinnati in 1829, and the priory of St. Rose, Kentucky, in 1830, where on 12 June, 1831, he made his religious profession as a member of the Order of St. Dominic. In 1837 he went to Rome for further studies, and was ordained there to the priesthood by Cardinal Patrizi, 21 Dec., 1839. After his return to America in 1844 he was employed in the ecclesiastical ministry first in Kentucky, and afterwards for thirteen years at Memphis, Tennessee. In 1859 he. was called to the Bishopric of St. Paul by Pius IX; his consecration took place at St. Louis, 24 July, 1859; and on 29 July following he took possession of his see, over which he presided until the day of his resignation, 31 July, 1884. He was then made titular Bishop of Menith, and afterwards, 24 Sept., 1889, titular Archbishop of Siunia; his death occurred on 22 Feb., 1897. Several modifications were introduced in the territorial arrangement and the direction of the diocese during his incumbency. By the creation of the Vicariates of Northern Minnesota and Dakota the northern part of Minnesota and the territory west of Minnesota were erected into new ecclesiastical jurisdictions. In 1875 Bishop Grace received a coadjutor in the person of Rev. John Ireland, then rector of the cathedral. The number of the Catholic people in the diocese continued to grow, largely through the bishop's activity in inviting settlers; at the time of his resignation in 1884 it amounted to about 130,000. In addition to the races already represented there came also many Catholics from Bohemia and Poland. The number of priests grew with the increase of the people, and they were so chosen as to correspond to the needs of the flock; in 1884 they were 153 in all. Side by side with the diocesan clergy there laboured fathers of the Benedictine Order, Jesuits, Franciscans, Dominicans, and Oblates. Charitable institutions were kept up and multiplied wherever necessary. Hospitals were opened at Minneapolis and New Ulm, orphan asylums were erected at St. Paul and Minneapolis, and homes were established for the aged poor. The education of the children was promoted in all possible ways. Catholic schools were founded and provided with Catholic teachers; the Brothers of the Christian Schools were called to St. Paul; and new academies for girls were opened. The growing needs in the field of charity and education necessitated the coming of more religious women. In the course of time the Congregations of St. Benedict, St. Dominic, St. Francis, Notre Dame, the Visitation the Grey Nuns, the Good Shepherd, the Sisters of Christian Charity, the Poor Handmaids of Jesus Christ, and the Little Sisters of the Poor furnished their quota. Like his predecessor, Bishop Grace never lost sight of the education of candidates for the priesthood. In 1860 he opened a preparatory school for young boys who felt a vocation for the priesthood. Among its pupils was Rt. Rev. John Shanley, late Bishop of Fargo. Unfortunately, after some years of existence it had to be given up for lack of accommodations. To Bishop Grace succeeded his coadjutor, the Rt. Rev. John Ireland, D.D. (1884-). He was born at Burnchurch, Co. Kilkenny, Ireland, 11 Sept., 1838, and came to St. Paul with his parents in 1852. Bishop Cretin sent him to Meximieux and Hyres, France, where he completed his college and seminary course; he was ordained to the priesthood at St. Paul, 21 Dec., 1861. During the Civil War he served as chaplain to the Fifth Minnesota Regiment, and was afterwards stationed at the cathedral. In 1875 he was appointed titular Bishop of Maxonea and coadjutor to Bishop Grace of St. Paul, in whose cathedral he received the episcopal consecration, 21 Dec., 1875. Upon the resignation of his predecessor he became Bishop of St. Paul; and on 15 May, 1888, he was raised to the metropolitan dignity as Archbishop of St. Paul. The ecclesiastical Province was organized with the suffragan Sees of Duluth, St. Cloud, Winona, Jamestown (Fargo), and Sioux Falls, to which were added afterwards those of Lead (1902), Crookston, and Bismarck (1910). The creation of the Diocese of Winona diminished the territory of the archdiocese by the southern section of Minnesota. In 1910 an auxiliary bishop was appointed in the person of Rt. Rev. John J. Lawler, titular Bishop of Greater Hermopolis. The Catholic population kept steadily on the increase, so that at present it numbers about 260,000. Much of this growth is due to the archbishop's own efforts. From the day of his consecration as bishop he organized a systematic movement for the colonization of different parts of Minnesota. Various settlements such as De Graff, Clontarf (Swift Co.), Adrian (Nobles Co.), Avoka, Fulda (Murry Co.), Graceville (Big Stone Co.), Minneota, and Ghent (Lyon Co.), owe their origin and prosperity to his labours. With the increase of the people grew also the number of priests, which at present exceeds 300. Of the religious orders, one, that of the Marist Fathers, was added to the existing ones. The charitable institutions were maintained and increased. The work of temperance found always a most zealous advocate in the archbishop. Catholic education received from him a liberal and wise patronage. Catholic grammar and high schools were multiplied and rendered more efficient. A new departure in the higher education of women was made by the Sisters of St. Joseph in the opening of St. Catharine's College in 1905. To the religious communities engaged in teaching was added another, that of the Felician Sisters. The training of the candidates for the priesthood is imparted in two institutions. On 8 Sept., 1885, the Seminary of St. Thomas opened its gates to students of both the college and seminary curriculum, with an attendance of 27 in theology and philosophy, and of 39 in the classics. St. Thomas continued to house the two departments until in 1894, when it was continued as a college; and its growth has been so marvellous, that during the past year it enrolled nearly 700 students. The seminary was transferred, in Sept., 1894, to new quarters, the St. Paul Seminary, built and endowed by the munificence of St. Paul's great citizen, James J. Hill. In the year of its opening it numbered about 60 students, and last, year it had on its list 165 seminarians, representing 19 dioceses in the United States. In 1905 the St. Paul Catholic Historical Society was organized with headquarters in the seminary. The following events illustrate the growth of the Diocese and the Province of St. Paul within recent years. On 2 June, 1907, the corner-stone was laid for the new cathedral of St. Paul; and a year afterwards, 31 May, 1908, a similar ceremony was performed with reference to the new pro-cathedral of Minneapolis. The chapel of the Seminary of St. Paul witnessed, 19 May 1910, a scene extremely rare, if not unique, in the annals of ecclesiastical history. Six bishops received on that day their consecration, all six destined for service in the one Province of St. Paul. The present condition of the diocese may best be gauged from the following statistics: archbishop, 1; bishop, 1; diocesan priests, 275; priests of religious orders, 40; churches with resident priests, 188; missions with churches, 62; chapels, 17; theological seminary, 1; college, 1; commercial schools, Christian Brothers, 2; number of pupils in parochial schools, 21,492; boarding-schools and academies for girls, 7; orphan asylums, 3; hospitals, 3; homes for the aged poor, 2; house of the Good Shepherd, 1. The Metropolitan or American Catholic Almanac; The Official Catholic Directory (Baltimore, New York, Milwaukee); SHEA, The Hierarchy of the Catholic Church in the United States (New York, 1886); REUSS, Biographical Cyclopedia of the Catholic Hierarchy of the United States (Milwaukee, 1898); HOFFMANN, St. John's University (Collegeville, 1907); Acta et Dicta (St. Paul, 1907-11),; UPHAM, Minnesota in Three Centuries, I (St. Paul, 1908); FOLWELL, Minnesota, the North Star State (Boston and New York, 1908); WILLIAMS, A History of, the City of St. Paul (St. Paul, 1876). FRANCIS J. SCHAEFER St. Paul-Without-The-Walls St. Paul-without-the-Walls ( San Paolo fuori le mura). An abbey nullius. As early as 200 the burial place of the great Apostle in the Via Ostia was marked by a cella memoriæ, near which the Catacomb of Comodilla was established. Constantine, according to the "Liber Pontificalis", transformed it into basilica; in 386 Theodosius began the erection of a much larger and more beautiful basilica, but the work including the mosaics was not completed till the pontificate of St. Leo the Great. The Christian poet, Proudentius, describes the splendours of the monument in a few, expressive lines. As it was dedicated also to Saints Taurinus and Herculanus, martyrs of Ostia in the fifth century, it was called the basilica trium Dominorum. Of the ancient basilica there remain only the interior portion of the apse with the triumphal arch and the mosaics of the latter; the mosaics of the apse and the tabernacle of the confession of Arnolfo del Cambio belong to the thirteenth century. In the old basilica each pope had his portrait in a frieze extending above the columns separating the four aisles and naves. In 1823 a fire, started through the negligence of a workman who was repairing the lead of the roof, resulted in the destruction of the basilica. Alone of all the churches of Rome, it had preserved its primitive character for one thousand four hundred and thirty-five years. The whole world contributed to its restoration. The Khedive of Egypt sent pillars of alabaster, the Emperor of Russia the precious malachite and lapis lazuli of the tabernacle. The work on the principal facade, looking toward the Tiber, was completed by the Italian Government, which declared the church a national monument. The interior of the walls of the nave are adorned with scenes from the life of St. Paul in two series of mosaics (Gagliardi, Podesti, Balbi, etc). The graceful cloister of the monastery was erected between 1220 and 1241. The sacristy contains a fine statue of Boniface IX. In the time of Gregory the Great there were two monasteries near the basilica: St. Aristus's for men and St. Stefano's for women. Services were carried out by a special body of clerics instituted by Pope Simplicius. In the course of time the monasteries and the clergy of the basilica declined; St. Gregory II restored the former and entrusted the monks with the care of the basilica. The popes continued their generosity toward the monastery; the basilica was again injured during the Saracen invasions in the ninth century. In consequence of this John VIII fortified the basilica, the monastery, and the dwellings of the peasantry, forming the town of Joannispolis, which was still remembered in the thirteenth century. In 937, when St. Odo of Cluny came to Rome, Alberico II, patrician of Rome, entrusted the monastery and basilica to his congregation and Odo,/a> placed Balduino of Monte Cassino in charge. Gregory VII was abbot of the monastery and in his time Pantaleone of Amalfi presented the bronze gates of the basilica, which were executed by Constantinopolitan artists. Martin V entrusted it to the monks of the Congregation of Monte Cassino. It was then made an abbey nullius. The jurisdiction of the abbot extended over the districts of Civitella San Paolo, Leprignano, and Nazzano, all of which formed parishes; the parish of San Paolo in Rome, however, is under the jurisdiction of the cardinal vicar. U. BENIGNI Basilica of Saint Peter Basilica of St. Peter TOPOGRAPHY The present Church of St. Peter stands upon the site where at the beginning of the first century the gardens of Agrippina lay. Her son, Caius Caligula, built a circus there, in the spina of which he erected the celebrated obelisk without hieroglyphics which was brought from Heliopolis and now stands in the Piazza di S. Pietro. The Emperor Nero was especially fond of this circus and arranged many spectacles in it, among which the martyrdoms of the Christians (Tacitus, "Annal.", XV, 44) obtained a dreadful notoriety. The exact spot in the circus of the crucifixion of St. Peter was preserved by tradition through out the centuries, and in the present Church of St. Peter is marked by an altar. Directly past the circus of Nero ran the Via Cornelia which, like all Roman highways, was bordered with sepulchral monuments. In Christian times a small city of churches and hospices gradually arose here, but without this part of Rome being included in the city limits. When in the year 847 the Saracens pillaged the Basilica of St. Peter and all the sanctuaries and establishments there, Leo IV decided to surround the extensive suburb with a wall, interrupted at intervals by exceedingly strong and well-fortified towers. Two of these towers, as well as a fragment of the wall, are still preserved in the Vatican gardens and afford an interesting picture of the manner of fortification. Owing to this circumvallation by Pope Leo the Vatican portion of the city received the name Civitas Leonina, which it has preserved to the present day (Leonine City). The Vatican Hill rises in close proximity to the river Tiber. Between it, the river, and the mausoleum of Hadrian (Castle of Sant' Angelo) lies a small plain which was not filled with houses until the early Middle Ages. The Vatican territory did not assume a throughly urban character until the end of the fifteenth century. BASILICA OF CONSTANTINE The simple sanctuary of the Prince of the Apostles gave place under Constantine the Great to a magnificent basilica, begun in the year 323 but not completed until after his death. The southern side of the ancient basilica was erected upon the northern side of the circus, which in the Middle Ages bore the name Palatium Neronis. It was built in the form of a cross and divided into five naves by four rows of twenty-two columns each. Vast treasures were collected in the course of centuries in this principal sanctuary of Western Christendom: precious mosaic decoration internally and externally, offerings of great value surrounding the tomb of the Prince of the Apostles, magnificent vestments in the wardrobes of the sacristy, richly decorated entablature, and bright but harmoniously coloured pavements, paintings, and whatever else the love and veneration of high and low could conceive in the way of adornment. Connecting the basilica with the Porta di S. Pietro at the Castle of Sant' Angelo was a covered colonnade, through which innumerable pilgrims passed. Provision was made in the Vatican territory for their shelter, and the necessity soon arose of building a palace near the basilica in which the pope could live and receive visitors when sojourning at St. Peter's. Churches and monasteries, cemeteries and hospices arose in great numbers around the tomb of the "fisher of men". Twelve centuries elapsed between the building of St. Peter's and the first demolition of an important part of the basilica. Its rebuilding during the Early Renaissance is to be regretted, for the plan of the new church became the plaything of artistic humours. It is due to Michelangelo, who saved all that was possible of Bramante's original plan, that something aesthetically satisfactory was created. HISTORY OF THE BUILDING Owing to the neglect of the churches at Rome during the papal residence at Avignon, by the fifteenth century the decay of Saint Peter's had progressed to an alarming extent. Nicholas V, an enthusiastic Humanist, therefore conceived the plan of levelling the old church and erecting a new structure in its place. Bernardo Rossellini of Florence was intrusted with the undertaking and in accordance with his plans the new basilica was to completely surround the choir and transept of the old, and to have the ground plan of a Latin cross with an elongated nave. But with the exception of the tribune begun in 1450 and the foundations of the wall surrounding the transept nothing further was built, as the pope died in 1455. Julius II, adopting the idea of reconstructing the basilica, instituted a competition in which Bramante, as is related, gained the prize. His unlimited enthusiasm for the mighty conception of the impetuous pope is attested by his numerous plans and drawings, which are still preserved in the Uffizi Gallery, Florence. Bramante wished to pile the Pantheon upon the Constantinian basilica, so that a mighty dome would rise upon a building in the form of a Greek cross. In the spring of the year 1506 Julius, in the presence of thirty-five cardinals, laid the foundations of this imposing structure, which posterity has spoiled and changed for the worse in an inexcusable manner. Bramante died in 1514. Giuliano da Sangallo and Fra Giacondo da Verona, who together with Raphael continued his work, died in 1516 and 1515 respectively. Raphael, yielding to all manner of influences, undertook changes but did not promote the building to any considerable extent. After his death in 1520 a sharp conflict arose whether the church should remain in the form of a Greek cross, or the nave be extended so as to form a Latin cross. Antonio da Sangallo, who was appointed architect in 1518, and Baldassari Peruzzi, appointed in 1520, were without fixed plans and attempted all manner of experiments, of which Michelangelo, when he received control in 1548, made an end so far as this was still possible. Bramante's plan seemed to him so excellent that he built in accordance with it. By strengthening the central piers he made it possible for them to bear a dome. He did not live to see the completion of his artistic conception, since only the drum was completed when he died. But in the years which followed the present dome, a sublime masterpiece of unsurpassed beauty, was constructed in accordance with his designs. The faithfulness with which, after the great master's death (1546), Giacomo della Porta continued the building of the dome in accordance with Michelangelo's intentions should be especially emphasized. The building might have been completed at the beginning of the following century if in 1606 Paul V had not decided to carry out the form of the Latin cross. During the twenty years which followed Carlo Maderna constructed the present by no means unobjectionable facade and Bernini wasted time and money in adorning the front with bell-towers, which for artistic reasons had to be removed, in so far as he had completed them. At length on 18 November, 1626, Urban VIII solemnly dedicated the church, of which the actual construction, excepting certain unimportant details, may be considered as completed. Three clearly defined stages in the construction of St. Peter's must therefore be distinguished: (1) Bramante's Greek cross with the dome; (2) Michelangelo, a Greek cross with dome, and in addition a vestibule with a portico of columns; (3) Paul V, a Latin cross with Baroque facade. The longer they built the more they spoiled the original magnificent plans, so that the effect of the exterior as a whole is unsatisfactory. The principle mistake lies naturally in the fact that the unsuitable extension of the nave conceals the dome from one observing the basilica from a near point of view. Only at a considerable distance is Michelangelo's genial creation in its pure and beautiful design revealed to the astonished observer. All the external walls are constructed of splendid travertine, now become gold in colour, which even in bright sunlight gives a quiet, harmonious effect. ARCHITECTURE Statistics The construction of St. Peter's, in so far as the church itself is concerned, was concluded within a period of 176 years (1450-1626). The cost of construction including all the additions of the seventeenth century amounted to about $48,000,000. The yearly cost of maintenance of the gigantic building, including the annexes (sacristy and colonnades), amounts to $39,500, a sum that is only exceeded when actual renewals of the artistic features (such as gilding, repairing the pavement, and extensive marble work on the pilasters) becomes necessary. The basilica is endowed with extensive properties at Rome, wide landed possessions in Middle Italy, and other capital from the income of which the entire support of the Divine Service, the clergy, and the large number of employees, as well as the costs of the building requirements are derived. In accordance with the most reliable contemporary calculations, those of Carlo Fontana, the proportions of the building are as follows: height of the nave, 151.5 feet; width of the same at the entrance, 90.2 feet; at the tribune, 78.7 feet; length of the transepts in interior, 451 feet; entire length of the basilica including the vestibule, 693.8 feet. From the pavement of the church (measured from the Confession) to the oculus of the lantern resting upon the dome the height is 404.8 feet, to the summit of the cross surmounting the lantern, 434.7 feet. The measurements of the interior diameter of the dome vary somewhat, being generally computed at 137.7 feet, thus exceeding the dome of the Pantheon by a span of 4.9 feet. The surface area of St. Peter's is 163,182.2 sq. feet. Comparative measurements (length): + Length of St. Paul's, London, 520.3 feet; + Cathedral of Florence, 490.4; + Cathedral of Milan, 444.2; + Basilica of St. Paul, Rome, 419.2; + St. Sophia, Constantinople, 354. Comparative measurements (surface area): + Milan, 90,482 sq. ft.; + St. Paul's, London, 84,766.5; + St. Sophia, 74,163; + Cologne, 66,370.8; + Antwerp, 53,454. The vestibule of the basilica is 232.9 feet wide, 44.2 deep, and 91.8 high. On the facade are five portals; in the chapel of the Blessed Sacrament is a door which leads directly into the Apostolic Palace; in the choir chapel and in the vestibule of the left transept are doors leading to the sacristy, besides which there are four others generally used for building and administrative purposes. Besides the two low galleries for the singers in the choir chapel, there are four others of restricted size in the piers of the dome. In addition to the principal altar in the tribune and the four altars in the crypts, the basilica contains twenty-nine altars, under most of which bodies of saints, including several of the Apostles, repose. Annex Buildings The colonnades which enclose the most beautiful public place in the world, the Piazza di S. Pietro, form an organic part of the basilica. Constructed in 1667 by Bernini, they surround the piazza in elliptical form, the major axis 1115.4 feet, the minor axis 787.3 feet. For the construction of the colonnades and the equipment of the Piazza di S. Pietro about a million dollars were expended. The covered colonnades which consist of four rows of columns in the Doric style form three passages, the central one of which is the width of an ordinary wagon road. The 248 columns and 88 pilasters are entirely of travertine. Adjoining the elliptical place is a square one which diminishes in extent towards the church. Its sides consist of extensive corridors, of which the one on the right belongs to the Apostolic Palace of the Vatican. The colonnades and corridors are surmounted by 162 figures of saints after designs by Bernini. In the middle of the ellipse towers the celebrated obelisk of Heliopolis. Its removal to the present site took place in 1586. On both sides of the obelisk are two beautiful fountains 45.9 feet in height. The obelisk is 836 feet high, and weighs 360.2 tons. Its apex is adorned with a bronze cross containing a fragment of the True Cross. The irregular quadrangle between the ellipse and the basilica is for the most part occupied by the monumental stairway and its approach, which lead pilgrims to the higher level of the church. The area of this approach alone is greater than that of most churches of Christendom. The sacristy of St. Peter's, the house of the canons and beneficiaries, as well as the papal hospice of Santa Marta are connected with the basilica by two covered passages. The sacristy, which contains very remarkable art treasures, was built in 1775 under Pius VI by Carlo Marchione. The Palazzina, which stands on the Piazza di Santa Marta behind the basilica, belongs directly to St. Peter's. It is for the time being the official residence of the archpriest of St. Peter's, who is always a cardinal. Description of the Basilica As may be seen in the accompanying plan, the four principal divisions of the basilica extend from the dome and are connected with each other by passages behind the dome piers. To the right and the left of the nave lie the smaller and lower aisles, the right of which is bordered by four lateral chapels, the left by three chapels and the passage to the roof. The general decoration consists of coloured marble incrustations, stucco figures, rich gilding, mosaic decoration, and marble figures on the pilasters, ceiling, and walls. The panelling of the pavement in geometric figures is of coloured marble after the designs of Giacomo della Porta and Bernini. The extremely long sweep of the nave is closed by the precious bronze baldachino 95 feet high, which Urban VI caused to be erected by Bernini in 1633. Beneath it is the Confession of St. Peter, where the body of the Prince of Apostles reposes. No chairs or pews obstruct the view; the eye roves freely over the glittering surface of the marble pavement, where there is room for thousands of people. The centre of the entire structure is the tomb of St. Peter (see Confession; Saint Peter, Tomb of). Very interesting also are the high altar in the tribune, enclosing the chair of the Prince of Apostles, and the mighty slab of porphyry upon which the German emperors were formerly crowned. The magnificent holy water basins to the right and to the left, well known from numerous illustrations, are supported by gigantic putti. The barrel vaulting reposes in a beautiful curve upon the pillars and the arches connecting them. Proceeding forwards we also perceive the marble reliefs of many popes on the piers while many of the pier niches contain heroic statues of the founders of the orders, a decoration which extends also over the transepts and the nave of the tribune. At the fourth pier to the right is a very important sitting statue of St. Peter, which has been erroneously ascribed to the thirteenth century, but in truth dates from the fourth or fifth. This is no adaptation of another statue, but was intended to be a statue of the Prince of the Apostles. In the left transept the confessionals of the penitentiaries of St. Peter's reveal in the most beautiful manner the unity of the Faith, by offering the opportunity for confession in the most important civilized tongues of the world. Facing the Confession there stand obliquely before the dome piers the colossal marble statues of Sts. Longinus, Helena, Veronica, and Andrew. From the gallery above the statue of St. Helena the so-called great relics are displayed several times during the year. The most important of these is a large fragment of the True Cross. Above the four galleries of the dome the four Evangelists are depicted in magnificent mosaics after the designs of Cavaliere d'Arpino. In the frieze above stand the proud Latin inscription, the letters of which are six feet high: "Thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build My Church, and I will give thee the keys of Heaven". In the tribune of the left transept are three altars of which the middle one is particularly noteworthy because, in the first place, the tomb of the immortal composer Pierluigi da Palestrina lies before it; secondly, because the bodies of the two Apostles Simeon and Judas Thaddeus repose in a stone sarcophagus beneath the altar; and thirdly, because, as the altar-piece of Guido Reni records, the altar marks the spot in the circus of Nero where the cross stood upon which St. Peter breathed his last. The right transept has attained a special importance in most recent ecclesiastical history because in 1870 the Vatican Council held its sessions here until dispersed by the march of the crowned revolution upon Rome. Returning to the entrance we find in the first lateral chapel of the right aisle the place made famous by Michelangelo's "Pietà" (1498). Beside it in the chapel of St. Nicholas is the treasury of the relics of St. Peter, then follows the chapel of St. Sebastian, and finally the roomy chapel of the Sacrament. Among the art treasures here is the tomb of Sixtus IV, a thoroughly simple and impressive bronze monument by Antonio Pollajuolo. From the multitude of sepulchral monuments which adorn the right transept, those of Leo XII, of Countess Matilda of Tuscany, the powerful friend of Gregory VII, and of Gregory XIII, the reformer of the calendar, deserve special mention. Against the dome pier, directly in front of us, stands an altar with the "Communion of St. Jerome" after Domenichino. The passage around the dome to the right is called the Gregorian chapel, because it was decorated under Gregory XIII after the designs of Michelangelo. Next to the monument of Gregory XVI is the altar of the Madonna dell Soccorso, whose picture is from the ancient church of St. Peter. Under the altar-piece reposes the body of St. Gregory of Nazianzus and adjoining it is the colossal tomb of Benedict XIV. In the opposite passage of the dome pier are Canova's masterpiece, the monument of Clement XIII, and the altar-piece after Guido Reni, representing the Archangel Michael. In the same division on the left side of the church, the monument of Alexander VIII gleams in the distance, and under the altar of the Madonna della Colonna, in an early Christian sarcophagus the mortal remains of Sts. Leo II, Leo III, and Leo IV repose. The altar of St Leo I is surmounted by the colossal marble relief by Algardi, the "Retreat of Attila from Rome", the proportions of which seem too large, even for the Basilica of Saint Peter. Farther on is the monument of Alexander VII, and opposite this is the only oil-painted altar-piece—one by Vareni—of St. Peter's. All the remaining altar-pieces within the church are of mosaic. Passing through the left transept we approach the passage around the fourth dome pier, where on the right, under the monument of Pius VIII, is the entrance to the sacristy, and directly in front, under the monument of Pius VII by Thorwaldsen, is the stairway to the gallery of the singers in the choir chapel. Here the left transept begins, the first lateral chapel of which is used for the prayers of the canons, while the last serves as a baptistery. Adjoining the choir chapel beyond the entrance, at a height of fifteen feet above the pavement, is an enclosed niche in which each deceased pope is interred until his body can be taken to the sepulchre definitively assigned for it. At the present time the body of Leo XIII still reposes here, although his sepulchre in the Lateran has long been finished. The uncertainty of conditions at Rome has rendered it inadvisable as yet to undertake the removal of the body. On the tomb of Leo XI our attention is attracted by an excellent marble relief representing King Henry IV of France abjuring Protestantism. Of similar importance is another relief here upon the monument of Innocent XI, relating to the raising of the Turkish siege of Vienna by John Sobieski, King of Poland. Among the most beautiful funeral monuments of the entire basilica is that of Innocent VIII by Antonio and Pietro Pollajuolo. Adjoining these are the two important tombs of Urban VIII by Bernini and Paul III by Guglielmo della Porta. Sagre Grotte Vaticane is the name applied to the extended chambers under the pavement of St. Peter's. They are distinguished as the old and the new crypts. The former lie principally under the nave, and are 59 feet wide and 147.6 feet long. They represent the pavement of the old Basilica of St Peter. Numerous graves of popes and emperors, which were in the Basilica of Constantine, are here, so that the low and extended place, 11.4 feet in height, is of the greatest historic interest. Among many others are the graves of the popes: Nicholas I, Gregory V, a German, Adrian IV, an Englishman, Boniface VIII, Nicholas V, Paul II, Alexander VI, and the Emperor Otto II. The heart of Pius IX also reposes here in the simple urn. The new crypts extend about the tomb of the Apostle and lie under the dome. Adjoining the horse-shoe-shaped passage are a number of chapels in which very remarkable antiquities and works of art from the old basilica are preserved. In the middle of the passage just mentioned is the most magnificent of all the early Christian sarcophagi, that of Junius Bassus, to which Waal has dedicated a detailed and richly illustrated monograph, sympathetic in treatment. Two altars are placed here in the closest possible proximity to the sarcophagus in which the body of St. Peter reposes. Admission to the crypts and to Holy Mass at the altar of the Confession which was formerly very difficult, especially to women, is now easy to obtain. The Ascent of the Dome It was the former custom to ascend an easy stairway to the roof of the church, but now a spacious elevator carries visitors to the heights. From the roof, which is enlivened with many small cupolas and a few guards' houses, there is a fine panorama and a view of the Eternal City. The great dome has a circumference of about one hundred paces, and if one wishes to mount higher, a stairway between the inner and outer casing of the dome, 308.3 feet in height, leads into the lantern. Entering the external gallery of the lantern, the beholder is astonished by the view that greets the eye. It looks down into the gardens of the Vatican Palace, in which the people walking about seem like dwarfs. The panorama of the city unfolds itself in plastic forms. To the left tower the Sabine mountains; and beyond the extensive sun-bathed Campagna are the beautiful Alban hills with their highest peak, Monte Cavo. On the slope of this chain lie the attractive suburban towns Frascati, Marino, Albano etc., and on the right gleams a silver streak—the sea. Encircling the gallery towards the west, the Vatican gardens lie beneath us, rich and varied in plan, although not artistically laid out. The entire panorama is one of greatest interest. DIVINE SERVICE IN ST. PETER'S Although the Lateran Basilica bears the honorary title of the cathedral of the Bishop of Rome, mother and head of all the churches of the earth, this basilica, as Waal correctly observes, has for a thousand years been an isolated church which played a very modest part in the devotions of the Roman pilgrims. It is very different with St. Peter's. The great wealth of the basilica has always made it possible to maintain most magnificent ritual; and its proximity to the inner city, its great size, and its art treasures have always attracted everyone. Besides numerous canons, beneficiaries, and chaplains, the church has at its disposal the Vatican Seminary, the students of which always assist in the church in the celebration of Divine Service. The performances of their vocal choirs, the Capella Giulia, are of a very high artistic order. One liturgical celebration takes place only in St. Peter's and in no other church in the whole world: the Washing of the Altar on Maundy Thursday. At the close of the Matins on this day the so-called papal altar under the great bronze baldachino is sprinkled with oil and wine. In an extended procession the archpriest, his vicar, the canons, the beneficiaries, the chaplains, and the entire clergy approach in order, and symbolically wash the altar with a sprinkler. A solemn benediction with the great relics from the gallery of St. Helena terminates this very impressive ceremony. The great papal functions which Leo XIII was the first to resume after the sad year of 1870 have since then taken place in St. Peter's with a few exceptions, when the Sistine Chapel or the Sala Ducale were used. Jubilees, canonizations, coronations, and other events in which the pope solemnly presides assemble 40,000 to 50,000 people in the gigantic halls of St. Peter's. They wait patiently for hours until at the appointed time the Vicar of Christ, loftily enthroned upon the sedia gestatoria, blesses the worshipping throng, while in measured steps he is born to the papal altar. A perfect silence prevails, when after long preparations the pope in full pontifical attire begins the actual service. Suddenly the magnificent tones of the Kyrie are intoned by the choir of the Sistine Chapel, who alone have the privilege of singing in the presence of the pope, and always without the accompaniment of an organ. Then the pope turns for the first time to the faithful and chants "Pax vobis" (Peace be with you). At the Elevation silver trumpets resound from Michelangelo's dome. CHIMES OF ST. PETER'S As in many cathedral churches, the bells of St. Peter's possess an ample endowment of their own. This serves for their maintenance and to defray the cost of the complicated programme of the chimes. The usual daily service is simple but far more complicated are the chimes for Sundays, fast days, feast days, ember days, feasts with octaves, the anniversary of the death, election, and coronation of the present and the preceding pope, and finally, as a climax, the feast of St. Peter with its chimes seven days before and during its octave. Different chimes are prescribed at the death of a canon than at that of the pope. THE MAINTENANCE OF THE BASILICA A building of such colossal extent requires a corps of architects, who conduct the ordinary, as well as the unusual, works on the basilica. They are directed by a head architect, who in conjunction with the economist of St. Peter's, a canon, discusses and arranges everything as far as no special question requires the vote of the chapter. A staff of selected artisans of all kinds, who are in permanent service and are called sampietrini, is directed by a head master, and there are few great institutions in the world which have such a chosen body of clever, reliable, and fearless workmen. Only in the rarest cases is the management of St. Peter's compelled to seek assistance of artisans or workmen who do not belong to the sampietrini. The maintenance of the mighty building is exemplary throughout. PAUL MARIA BAUMGARTEN Tomb of St. Peter Tomb of St. Peter The history of the relics of the Apostles Peter and Paul is one which is involved in considerable difficulty and confusion. The primary authorities to be consulted are in opposition to one another, or at least appear to be so. There is no doubt where the bodies now are -- in the tombs of the Vatican and the Ostian Way respectively -- but there is another tomb at the Catacombs of S. Sebastiano which also claims the honour of having at one time received them, and the question is as to the period at which this episode occurred, and whether there was only one or a double translation of the relics. Whatever conclusion we come to, we shall have to discard, or at least to explain away, some of the evidence which exists. The account which we give here is the simplest theory consistent with the evidence, and is based upon one consistent principle throughout; namely, to assume only one translation of the relics -- the one which took place at a known historical date, and for historical reasons which we can understand -- and to refer to this all the allusions to a translation which occur in early authorities, even though some of them seem to have been misplaced in date. There would have been no difficulty in obtaining the bodies of the Apostles after their martyrdom, and the bereaved Christians seem to have followed their usual custom in burying both as near as possible to the scene of their sufferings. Each was laid in ground that belonged to Christian proprietors, by the side of well-known roads leading out of the city; St. Paul on the Via Ostiana and St. Peter on the Via Cornelia. In each case the actual tomb seems to have been an underground vault, approached from the road by a descending staircase, and the body reposed in a sarcophagus of stone in the centre of this vault. We have definite evidence of the existence of these tombs (trophoea) in these places as early as the beginning of the second century, in the words of the priest Caius (Euseb., "Hist. Eccl.", II, 28). These tombs were the objects of pilgrimage during the ages of persecution, and it will be found recorded in the Acts of several of the martyrs that they were seized while praying at the tombs of the Apostles. For two centuries the relics were same enough in these tombs, public though they were, for the respect entertained by the Romans for any place where the dead were buried preserved them from any danger of sacrilege. In the year 258, however, this protection was withdrawn. Christians from henceforth were specially excepted from the privilege which they had previously enjoyed on account of the use they had made of it to enable them to carry on religious worship. Hence it became necessary to remove the sacred relics of the two great Apostles in order to preserve them from possible outrage. They were removed secretly by night and hidden in the Catacombs of S. Sebastiano, though, probably the fact of their removal was known to very few, and the great body of Roman Christians believed them still to rest in their original tombs. At a later date, when the persecution was less acute, they were brought back again to the Vatican and the Via Ostiana respectively. When the Church was once more at peace under Constantine, Christians were able at last to provide themselves with edifices suitable for the celebration of Divine Service, and the places so long hallowed as the resting places of the relics of the Apostles were naturally among the first to be selected as the sites of great basilicas. The emperor himself not only supplied the funds for these buildings, in his desire to honour the memories of the two Apostles, but actually assisted in the work of building with his own hands. At St. Paul's, where the tomb had remained in its original condition of a simple vault, no difficulty presented itself, and the high altar was erected over the vault. The inscription, dating from this period, "Paulo Apostolo Martyri", may still be seen in its place under the altar. At St. Peter's, however, the matter was complicated by the fact that Pope St. Anacletus, in the first century, had built an upper chamber or memoria above the vault. This upper chamber had become endeared to the Romans during the ages of persecution, and they were unwilling that it should be destroyed. In order to preserve it a singular and unique feature was given to the basilica in the raised platform of the apse and the Chapel of the Confession underneath. The extreme reverence in which the place has always been held has resulted in these arrangements remaining almost unchanged even to the present time, in spite of the rebuilding of the church. Only, the actual vault itself in which the body lies is no longer accessible and has not been so since the ninth century. There are those, however, who think that it would not be impossible to find the entrance and to reopen it once more. A unanimous request that this should be done was made to Leo XIII by the International Archaeological Congress in 1900, but, so far, without result. ARTHUR S. BARNES Saint Petersburg Saint Petersburg Saint Petersburg, the imperial residence and second capital of Russia, lies at the mouth of the Neva on the Gulf of Finland. In 1899, including the suburbs, it had 1,439,600 inhabitants; of these 81.8 per cent belonged to the Orthodox Greek Church, 4.8 per cent were Catholics, 7.03 per cent were Protestants, and 1.4 per cent were Jews. As regards nationality 87.5 per cent were Russians, 3.3 per cent were German, 3.1 per cent were Poles, 1.03 per cent were Finns, and 1.03 per cent were Esthonians. In 1910 the population was estimated at over 1,900,000 persons. The district of Ingermannland, that is, the territory between Lake Peipus, the Narova River, and Lake Ladoga, in which St. Petersburg is situated, belonged in the Middle Ages to the Grand Duchy of Novgorod, and later to Moscow. In 1617 the district was given by the Treaty of Stolbovo to Sweden; in 1702 it was rewon by Peter the Great. When Peter in 1703 formed the daring plan to transfer the centre of his empire from the inaccessible Moscow to the Baltic and to open the hitherto isolated Russia to the influence and cultivation of Western Europe by means of a large fortified commercial port, he chose for his new creation the southern end of the present island of Petersburgsky. At this point the Neva separates into two branches, the big and the little Neva; here on 16 (27) May, 1703, he began the citadel of Peter and Paul, the fortifications of which were built first of wood and in 1706 of stone. The Troitzki church was the first wooden church of the imperial city; around it were erected houses in Dutch architectural style for Peter and his friends. As early as 1704 the first habitations were built on the northern bank of the Neva. Some 40,000 men drawn from all parts of the empire worked for several years in the erection of the new city; a large number of them succumbed to the extreme severity of their labours and the deadly mists of the marshy ground. In 1708 St. Petersburg was unsuccessfully besieged by the Swedes. The Russian victory over Charles XII at Pultowa put an end to any danger that might have arisen from Sweden. In 1712 the city was formally made the residence of the Court. It was Peter's desire that his new capital should not be surpassed in brilliance by the capitals of Western Europe. He intended to follow in its construction the plans of the architect and sculptor Andreas Schlüter, who was called to St. Petersburg in 1713 but died in the following year. In order to make the new capital the equal of Moscow in religious matters, Peter and his successors built a large number of churches and monasteries, often equipped with the most lavish splendour. Peter sought, above all, to establish veneration for the national saint, Alexander Newski, Grand duke of Novgorod, who died in 1261. He therefore built a church near Neva, on the spot where Alexander in 1241 gained the traditionally celebrated victory over the united forces of the Swedes, Danes, and Finns; this victory cannot be proved historically. The bones of the saint were placed in the church with much pomp in 1724. The tsar himself drew up a plan for a monastery and gave to its construction 10,000 roubles from his private fortune, besides state revenues. At Peter's death the city had 75,000 inhabitants. However, a pause now occurred in its development as Catherine I and Peter II preferred the old capital Moscow. Anna Ivanovna (1730-40) was the first ruler to live again at St. Petersburg. During her reign and that of her successor, Elizabeth Petrovna, the city grew greatly and was adorned with striking buildings. Most of the older public buildings, however, belong to the reigns of Catherine II and Paul I, who were great builders. By the favour of the tsars who competed with one another in adorning it with schools and collections, as well as by its advantageous position for commerce and intercourse with Western Europe, St. Petersburg has gradually surpassed its rival Moscow. It has developed into the largest city of the empire, but has assumed more the character of a city of Western Europe than that of a national Russian one. The history of the Catholic Church at St. Petersburg goes back to the era of the founding of the city. As early as 1703 there were a few Catholics in the city. In 1704 one of the Jesuits, who since 1684 had been able to maintain themselves at Moscow, came to St. Petersburg in order to make the observance of their religious duties easier to the officers and soldiers stationed on the Neva; he had also the spiritual care of over 300 Catholic Lithuanians who had been taken prisoners. From 1710 the Catholics had a little wooden chapel, called the Chapel of St. Catherine, not far from the spot where the monument to Peter the Great now stands. The parish register of the chapel goes back to this year. Later, Franciscans and Capuchins took the place of the Jesuits. Although Peter the Great was kindly disposed to the Catholic community, the Holy Synod, an administrative ecclesiastical board that he had created, was constantly suspicious of them. National disputes having arisen between the Franciscans and Capuchins, the Holy Synod was able to obtain an imperial decree in 1725, compelling all the Capuchins but one to leave the city. This one remained behind in the employ of the French embassy and was permitted to hold services for his countrymen in a chapel designated for the purpose. In 1737 the wooden church burnt down. It was decided to rebuild it in stone and a temporary chapel was arranged. Although the Empress Anna Ivanovna gave a piece of ground, the corner-stone of the new Church of St. Catherine was not laid until 1763 on account of the national feuds within the Catholic community of Germans, French, Italians, and Poles. The construction of the church advanced slowly because of lack of funds. It was built in the Renaissance style by the Italian architect, Vollini de la Mothe, and was formally consecrated by the papal nuncio Archetti in 1783. In 1769 Catherine II confirmed the gifts of her predecessors and released the church, school, and dwelling of the Catholic priests from all taxes and imposts. In the same year she issued the "Ordinatio ecclesiæ petropolitanæ", which settled the legal status of the parish and was a model for the other Catholic parishes of Russia. This ordinance raised the permitted number of Catholic priests from four to six. These were generally Franciscans, who had charge of the welfare of souls at Kronstadt, Jamburg, Riga, and Reval. The number of Catholics was considerably increased by the French emigrants whom the French Revolution caused to flee to St. Petersburg. Further, the fact that the first archbishop of the newly founded Archdiocese of Mohileff soon transferred his residence to the capital of the empire also contributed to the strengthening of the Catholic Church in St. Petersburg. In October, 1800, the Church of St. Catherine was confided to the Jesuits at the request of the Emperor Paul. The Jesuits opened a school that was soon very prosperous, but their success and the many following conversions aroused the jealousy of the Orthodox. The Jesuits were expelled from St. Petersburg on 22 December, 1815, and from the whole of Russia in 1820. The parochial care of the Catholics of St. Petersburg was given to secular priests, and in 1816 to the Dominicans who have been in the city continuously until the present time. A Catholic Rumanian church was built during the reign of Alexander I. During the forties the number of Dominicans increased to twenty; but the closing of the Polish monasteries, from which they drew new members, reduced their number, and it became necessary to call fathers from Austria and France. Since 1888 secular priests have also been admitted to the cure of souls; still the present number of ecclesiastics is hardly sufficient to meet the needs of the entire Catholic community, the pastoral care, schools, and charitable demands. In addition, there still remains the old limitation of administration by the governmental church consistory, the Catholic collegium, and the department of the state ministry for foreign religions, which exerts a zealous care that an active Catholic life, religious freedom, and efforts for the conversion of those of other faiths should be and remain impossible. Ecclesiastically, as regards Catholicism, St. Petersburg is the see of the Metropolitan of Mohileff, of the general consistory, of the Roman Catholic ecclesiastical collegium (the highest collegiate church board of administration, which, however, has to obtain the consent of the minister of the interior in all more important matters), of a Roman Catholic preparatory academy for priests, and of an archiepiscopal seminary. The Cathedral of the Assumption of Mary was built in the Byzantine style in 1873 and was enlarged 1896- 1902. The parish Church of St. Catherine was erected in 1763, that of St. Stanislaus in 1825, that of Our Lady in 1867, that of St. Casimir in 1908, and the German parish Church of St. Boniface in 1910. In addition there are 4 public and 10 private Catholic chapels in the city. The cure of souls is under the care of 6 parish priests and administrators, and 15 vicars and chaplains; there are also 2 military chaplains for Catholic soldiers. The orders settled in the city are the Dominicans, Assumptionists, Oblates, Franciscans, and the Sisters of St. Joseph. Besides the clerical educational institutions there is a Catholic gymnasium for boys and one for girls, and a higher school for boys. Catholic religious instruction is given in 30 public intermediate schools for boys, 11 military schools, and 28 schools for girls. According to the year-book of the Archdiocese of Mohileff the number of Catholics is 87,500. St. Petersburg, published by the city government in Russian (St. Petersburg, 1903); Suworin, Ganz Petersburg (St. Petersburg, 1906), in Russian; Baumgartner, Durch Skandinavien nach Sankt Petersburg (3rd ed., Freiburg, 1901); Zabel, St. Petersburg (Leipzig, 1905), in the compilation Berühmte Kunststätten; Aminoff, St. Petersburg (Stockholm, 1910); de Harnen and Dobson, St. Petersburg Painted and Described (London, 1910). Concerning the Catholic Church in St. Petersburg see Theiner, Die neuesten Zustande der katholischen Kirche beider Ritus in Polen u. Russland (Augsburg, 1841); Tolstoi, Le catholicisme romain en Russie (Paris, 1863); Literæ secretæ Jesuitarum (St. Petersburg, 1904); Encyclopedia Koscielna, XIX, s. v.; Godlewski, Monumenta ecclesiastica petropolitana, III (St. Petersburg, 1906-09); Elenchus omnium ecclesiarum, etc. archidiœ;cesis Mohylovensis (St. Petersburg, 1910); various articles in periodicals, especially in Echos d'Orient, Bessarione, and Revue catholique des églises. Joseph Lins Saint-Pierre and Miquelon Saint-Pierre and Miquelon (INSULARUM S. PETRI ET MIQUELONENSIS). Prefecture apostolic comprising the only French possession in North America, a group of islands situated 48°46' N. lat., and 58°30 W. long. (Paris standard), having an area of 177 square miles. Geologically and geographically connected with Newfoundland, it was once likewise so historically. Known to the earliest Breton and Basque fishermen, this group already bore its present name when Jacques Cartier identified it in 1535, The first settlement dates from 1604. In 1689 Bishop St-Vallier visited it from Placentia, blessed a chapel, and left a priest in charge. The Recollects sent to Placentia (1691) attended this mission. The islands were successively ceded to England (Treaty of Utrecht, 1712), restored to France (Treaty of Paris, 1763), thrice captured by the English (1778, 1793, and 1808), and thrice retroceded to France (Treaties of Versailles, 1783, of Amiens, 1802, and of Ghent, 1814). Many Acadians fled thither after the dispersion of Grand Pré (1755) and the fall of Louisbourg (1757). The first missionaries who came after the Treaty of Paris were the Jesuits Bonnecamp and Ardilliers, with dubious jurisdiction from the Bishop of La Rochelle (1765). The islands now separated from the jurisdiction of Quebec were erected by Propaganda into a prefecture Apostolic, and formed the first mission confided by Rome to the Seminary of the Holy Ghost. MM. Girard, prefect, and de Manach, who sailed the same year, were driven by a storm to Martinique. They were replaced (1766) by MM. Becquet and Paradis, likewise of the Holy Ghost Seminary, or Spiritains, as well as several of the following. In 1775 the prefect, M. Paradis, with his companion and 300 families were expelled by the English. M. de Longueville succeeded him in 1788. In 1792 M. Allain, vice-prefect, and his companion, M. Le Jamtel, were forced by the French Revolution to leave for the Magdalen Islands, with a number of Acadians who, remaining faithful to the King of France, refused to take the oath of the Constitution. The former inhabitants returning in 1816, M. Ollivier, who accompanied them, applied for jurisdiction to the Bishop of Quebec. He was appointed vice-prefect in 1820. His successors, with the same title, were MM. Charlot (1841), Le Helloco (1854), Le Tournoux (1864), Tiberi (1893); the two last named belonged to the newly-restored Congregation of the Holy Ghost. The present titular is Mgr Christophe-Louis Legasse, b. at Bassussary, France, 1859, appointed in 1898, prelate of His Holiness in 1899. His chief work was the erection of the cathedral of St-Pierre, his residential town. The population, almost exclusively Catholic, varies from 4000 in winter to 8000 in summer, owing to the presence of the fishing crews. They are all Bretons, Normans, and Basques. Besides the six resident missionary priests, the fishermen, on the great banks are visited every month by a chaplain on board a hospital ship which also distributes their mail. There are 7 churches or chapels, 4 stations, 6 schools, those for boys managed until 1903 by 16 Brothers of Ploermel (Christian Instruction); 37 Sisters of St. Joseph of Cluny (teaching and nursing) were subsidized by the Government until 1903. A classical college opened by the Holy Ghost Fathers in 1873 was closed in 1892. ROY, Une epave de 1763 in Le Journal de Quebec (1888): GOSSELIN, Mgr de St-Vallier (Evreux, 1898); Archives of Propaganda, of the archbishopric (Quebec), of the Seminary of the Holy Ghost, of La Marine (Paris). LIONEL LINDSAY Duc de Saint-Simon Louis de Rouvroy, Duc de Saint-Simon Born 16 January, 1675; died in Paris, 2 March, 1755. Having quitted the military service in 1702, he lived thereafter at the Court, becoming the friend of the Ducs de Chevreuse and de Beauvilliers, who, with Fenelon, were interested in the education of the Duke of Burgundy, grandson of Louis XIV. At the death of Louis XIV, he was named a member of the council of regency of the young king, Louis XV, and in 1721 was sent as ambassador to Madrid. When the Duke of Bourbon became minister, December, 1723, Saint-Simon went into retirement. It was principally between 1740 and 1746 that he wrote his celebrated "Memoirs". As a history of the reign of Louis XIV they are an ex- tremely precious document. The edition with commentary by Boislisle, and of which twenty-two volumes have already appeared (1911), is an incomparable monument of learning. Saint-Simon aired his hatreds, which were bitter and numerous; he was an adversary of equality, which he described as "leprosy"; he dreamt of a kind of chamber of dukes and peers which would control and paralyze royal despotism, and allow the States-General to assemble every five years to present the humble remonstrances of the people. Whatever the historical value of the "Memoirs" may be, they are, by their sparkling wit, one of the most original monuments of French literature; and the "Parallele des trots premiers rois Bourbons", written by Saint-Simon in 1746, the year in which he finished the record of the reign of Louis XIV, is an admirable piece of history. On all religious questions he should be read with great precaution. Very hostile to the Jesuits, and favorable to the Jansenists, he contributed greatly to the creation of legends concerning personages such as Mme de Maintenon and Michel Le Tellier. These legends had a long existence. The reproach, historically false, of having instigated the violent measures of persecutions against the Jansenists, which he hurled against Le Tellier, was all the more strange coming from his pen, since Saint-Simon himself, on the day following the death of Louis XIV, was one of the most rabid in demanding of the regent severe measures against Le Tellier and other Jesuits. Father Bliard has shown how much care is necessary in judging Saint-Simon's assertions regarding the religious questions of his day. The historian Emile Bourgeois, who can not be charged with prejudice in favor of religion, wrote in his turn, in 1905: "History has given up the habit, too hastily acquired, of pinning her faith to the word of Saint-Simon." And Bourgeois proved how inaccurate were the statements of Saint-Simon by showing what use the latter made in his "Memoirs" of documents of the diplomatist Torcy. SAINT-SIMON, Memoires, ed. BOISLISLE (22 vols., Paris 1876-1911); SAINT-SIMON, Ecrits inedits, ed. FAUGERE (6 vols. Paris, 1880-3); SAINT-SIMON, Lettres et depeches sur l'ambassade d'Espagne, 1721 1722, ed. DRUMONT (Paris, 1880); BASCHET, Le duc de Saint-Simon, son cabinet et ses manuscrits (Paris, 1874); CHERUEL, Saint-Simon considere comme historien de Louis XIV (Paris, 1865); BOISSIER, Saint-Simon (Paris, 1892); BLIARD, Les memoires de Saint-Simon et le Pere Le Tellier (Paris, 1891); BOURGEOIS, La collaboration de Saint-Simon et de Torcy, etude critique sur les Memoires de Saint-Simon in Revue historique, LXXXVII (1905; PILASTRE, Lexique de la langue de Saint-Simon (Paris, 1905). GEORGES GOYAU Saint-Simon and Saint-Simonism Saint-Simon and Saint-Simonism Claude Henri de Rouvroy, Comte de Saint-Simon, was born in Paris, 17 Oct., 1760; died there, 19 May, 1825. He belonged to the family of the author of the "Memoirs". At an early age he showed a certain disdain for tradition; at thirteen he refused to make his first Communion and was punished by imprisonment at Saint Lazare, whence he escaped. During the War of Independence he followed his relative, the Marquis de Saint-Simon, to America, took part in the battle of Yorktown, was later made prisoner, and recovered his liberty only after the Treaty of Versailles. Before leaving America, being as yet only twenty-three years old, he presented to the Viceroy of Mexico the plan of a canal between the two oceans. In 1788 he drew up important schemes for the economic improvement of Spain. During the Revolution he grew rich by speculation, was imprisoned for eleven months, and under the Directory, though leading a prodigal and voluptuous life, continued to dream of a scientific and social reform of humanity, gathering about him such scholars as Monge and Lagrange, and capitalists with whose assistance he proposed to form a gigantic bank for the launching of his philanthropic undertakings. He married Mlle. de Champgrand in August, 1801, and divorced her less than a year later in the hope of marrying Mme. de Staël, who had just become a widow, but she refused. In 1805, completely ruined by his disordered life, he became a copyist at the Mont de Piété, relying for his living on his activity as a writer; failing in this, he led a life of borrowings and make-shifts, and in 1823 attempted to kill himself. Fortunately for him he made the acquaintance of the Jew Olinde Rodrigues who became enamoured of his social ideas and assured him his daily bread till the end of his life. When dying, Saint-Simon said to Rodrigues: "Remember that to do anything great you must be impassioned". Ardent passion is what characterized Saint-Simon and explains the peculiarities of his life and of his system. This precursor of socialism was not afraid to be a fanatic and even to pass for a fool, while he retained his feudal pride and boasted of having Charlemagne among his ancestors. The "Lettres d'un habitant de Genève à ses contemporains" (1803), the "Introduction aux travaux scientifiques du XIXe siècle" (1808), and the "Mémoire sur la science de l'homme" (1813) show his trust in science and savants for the regeneration of the world. The second of these works is a hymn to Bonaparte who created the university and the institute. In 1814, assisted by the future historian, Augustin Thierry, Saint-Simon published a treatise entitled, "De la réorganisation de la société européene," in which he dreamed of a politically homogeneous Europe, all of whose nations should possess the same institutions, relying on England to take the initiative in this federation. Later he turned his attention to political economy. The "Industrie", which he founded, brought out in relief the conflict waged throughout Europe between the military and feudal class on the one hand and the working class on the other. The same idea was emphasized in the "Censeur européen", edited by Charles Comte and Dunoyer, but while the "Censeur européen" distrusted scholars and learned men, Saint-Simon's originality consisted in trying to combine manufacturing industry and what he called "literary industry", and create a moral code which all men should study. idea displeased Augustin Thierry and he abandoned Saint-Simon, who in 1817 (the date set by Monsieur Pereire) took as his secretary, Auguste Comte, then 18 years old, the future founder of Positivism. Influenced by the writings of Joseph de Maistre, whose "Le Pape" appeared in 1819, and by those of Bonald, Saint-Simon and Auguste Comte, reacting against the individualist ideas of the French Revolution, recognized the necessity in modern society of a power similar to the medieval theocracy. The "positive scientific capacity" was to replace the ancient ecclesiastical power; there should be "no more governors to command" but "administrators to exercise a directing function"; in a society become an industrial association; the governmental, or military régime under which the people was "subject" should give way to the administrative or industrial régime in which the people is to be associated. Saint-Simon drew political conclusions; he found that the working people occupied too small a place in the electoral body and desired that power should be vested in committees composed of the directing elements of the industrial world. Thus he was in no wise a democrat; he would have only the heads of the industrial hierarchy elected by the people, but would have them recruited by co-option by choosing from the lower ranks of society those who deserve an elevation of their condition. Liberal economists long considered that between their liberalism and Saint-Simon's industrialism, which accorded so many prerogatives to an industrial hierarchy, there was little difference; but Saint-Simonism as it was developed by his disciples was destined to be a socialist school. In Saint-Simon there was always a double tendency: his positivist and scientific studies impelled him to found a purely practical and demonstrable moral code, while his sentimental and mystical tendencies led him to desire a religion. He believed that Christianity had greatly forwarded morality, but he declared that its reign was at an end. His religious tendency grew by degrees; he declared that the crisis was reached which had been predicted by the Old Testament, prepared for by the Biblical societies, and expected by the Jews for eighteen centuries, which was to end in the establishment of a truly universal religion, in the adoption by all nations of a pacific social organization and the speedy betterment of the condition of the poor. Such was the dream developed in his book, "Le nouveau christianisme", which death prevented him from finishing. The Saint-Simonian School under the influence of the book in which Sismondi made known the great labour crisis of England, considered it necessary to perfect their master's doctrine. In making the most intense industrial production the unique aim of society, Saint-Simon had not foreseen that the problem was much more complex. Must production be carried on even when there are no consumers? The liberals replied in the affirmative for there are always consumers; but Fourier said no, the necessary condition of an increased production is a better distribution of labour and of wealth among the workers. The former Carbonaro, Bazard (1791-1832), Enfantin (1796-1864); and Olinde Rodrigues, in the review "Le Producteur", which they founded, attacked the regime of competition and went so far as to aim at the theories of Adam Smith; then in 1829 Bazard's conferences published under the title, "Exposition de la doctrine de Saint-Simon" marks the Credo of the School. The Saint-Simonians thought that two survivals of the feudal system enslaved the working-man— at interest and inheritance; these two survivals should disappear. By degrees the Saint-Simonian School became a sort of Church. Enfantin assumed the rôle of pope; Bazard and later Rodrigues separated from him when preaching the rehabilitation of the flesh, he wished to associate with him the "priest-woman", the "mother", in the government of Saint Simonism. The ceremonies he performed at Menilmontant, his trial and imprisonment in 1832, the journey to Constantinople undertaken by his disciple Barrault in search of the "woman-mother" excited ridicule. Nevertheless Enfantin, whose last work only appeared in 1861, exercised great influence over many of the best minds. Saint-Simonism left its mark on such men as the philosopher Jean Reynaud, Buchez, who in 1848 played an important political part, the religious critic Gustave d'Eichthal the economists Barrault and Michel Chevalier, the publicists Edouard Charton and Maxime du Camp, General Lamoricière and Baron Blanc, future minister of Italy. The industrial movement of the nineteenth century was to a large extent promoted by engineers imbued with Saint-Simonian doctrines; the railways of France, the financial establishment of the Second Empire were due to Saint-Simonian influences. The Saint-Simonians foresaw that industry would be more and more concentrated in great syndicates and that the State as the organ of social centralization would intervene more and more. What they did not foresee was that industrial production would become democratic. They had, beforehand, intuition of what we call trusts and deals, but they did not foresee labour unions, and they were thus less clear-sighted than Ketteler, Manning, and Leo XIII. Lamartine describes Saint-Simonism as "a daring plagiarism which emerges from the Gospel and will return thither", and Isaac Pereire, the last of the Saint-Simonians, in a work entitled, "La question religieuse" (1878), urged the recently-elected Pope Leo XIII to undertake the direction of universal social reform. This, the last echo of Saint-Simonism was, as it were, an appeal to the "Rerum Novarum". Expos. de la doctrine saint-simonienne (Paris. 1829); Œuvres de Saint-Simon et d'Enfantin, XLVII (Paris, 1865-78); WEILL, Un précurseur du socialisme: Saint-Simon et son œuvre (Paris, 1894); IDEM, L'école saint-simonienne, son histoire, son influence jusqu'à nos jours (Paris, 1896); PEREIRE, Des premiers rapports entre Saint-Simon et Auguste Comte in Revue Historique, XCI (1906); GEORGE DUMAS, Psychologie de deux messies positivistes, Saint-Simon et Auguste Comte (Paris, 1905); WEISENGRÜN, Die socialwissenschaftlichen Ideen Saint Simon's; ein Beitrag zur Geschichte des Socialismus (Basle, 1895); CHARLETY, Hist. du saint-simonisme, 1825-1864 (Paris, 1896); HALÉVY, La doctrine économique de Saint-Simon et des Saint-Simoniens in Revue du mois (1908); BOOTH, Saint Simon and Saint Simonism (London, 1871). GEORGES GOYAU. Society of Saint-Sulpice Society of Saint-Sulpice Founded at Paris by M. Olier (1642) for the purpose of providing directors for the seminaries established by him (see OLIER). At the founder's death (1657) his society, approved by religious and civil authority, was firmly established. The Paris seminary and three in the provinces (Viviers, Le Puy, Clermont) were opened to young ecclesiastics to give them besides the elements of the clerical sciences lessons and examples in sacerdotal perfection. The work in Montreal was inaugurated and four priests appointed to carry it on, while a novitiate called the Solitude had been opened to recruit directors for the seminaries. Alexandre Le Ragois de Bretonvilliers, the successor of Olier (1657-76) drew up the Constitution of the Society and secured its approval by Cardinal Chigi, legate a latere and nephew of Alexander VII. The object of the society was to labor, in direct dependence on the bishops, for the education and perfection of ecclesiastics. They were to be taught philosophy and theology, chant and liturgy, but especially mental payer and the Christian virtues. Several chapters dealt with the organization and government of the society. The number of subjects should be restricted, fervour being worth more than number. The spiritual and temporal government is vested in a superior general assisted by twelve assistants, like him elected for life. Together they constitute the general assembly empowered to elect by majority of votes the superior-general, his assistants, and among the latter four consultors, who shall be his constant advisers, sign the public acts, and represent the whole society. The other members are admitted by the superior and his council. They take no vows, but renounce all prospect of eccelesiastical dignities. Changes and appointments are made by the superior-general. Every Sulpician should be animated by great zeal for the glory of God and the sanctification of the clergy, should profess detachment and abnegation, practice poverty, be submissive especially to bishops. De Bretonvilliers transferred the Solitude of Vaugirard to the Château d'Avron, which was a family possession, where it remained until M. Tronson, his successor, established it at Issy, where it is at present. He enacted that the community of priests of the parish of Saint-Sulpice should continue subject to a superior. This community numbered from sixty to eighty members until the French Revolution. There Fénelon exercised the sacred ministry for three years and he spoke from experience when he declared that there was nothing he venerated more than Saint-Sulpice. M. Tronson assumed the direction of the society in 1676 and retained it until 1700. He was remarkable for the breadth of his knowledge, his practical mind, and his deep piety. He was jealously vigilant to ward off the Jansenistic scourge from his society and the ten seminaries under his care. At a time when the error since called Gallicanism spread everywhere he was a Roman, as the present expression is, in as far as was compatible with the submission to the bishops which his society professed. During the eighteenth century the society carried on its work amid the difficulties which Jansenism and philosophism, by corrupting minds, incessantly aroused. Francois Leschassier (1700-25) had to defend the seminary of Paris against Archbishop de Noailles, an avowed and militant Jansenist. Under his successors, Maurice Le Peletier (1725-31) and Jean Couturier (1731-70), although new seminaries were opened in the dioceses of France, the spirit of the age crept into that of Paris, in consequence of the weakening of morals at the Court, contact with the world, and the great number of sons of the nobility who had become seminarians. At this period Saint-Sulpice was charged with the spiritual direction of schools of philosophy and even of petits séminaires both at Paris and Angers, always with the object of preparing the pupils for the priesthood. When the Revolution broke out the seminary of Paris alone had trained more than five thousand priests, and more than half the bishops who faced that dreadful tempest (about fifty) had been in Sulpician seminaries Claude Bourachot (1770-77) and Pierre Le Gallic (1777-82), who governed with the mournful presentiment of the Revolution, were succeeded by Andre Emery, the man providentially chosen to guide the society during those dark days. He beheld the seminaries closed, his brethren scattered, hunted, and compelled to seek safety in exile, but he had the great consolation, at a time of frequent defections, of seeing them all faithful to their promises. Not one of them took the oath to the Civil Constitution of the Clergy, and eighteen of them died for their faith. The life of this illustrious priest belongs to the whole Church, whose rights he defended with unshakable firmness against Napoleon I (see EMERY). After the Concordat he reopened the seminary of Paris. He should be regarded as the restorer of the Society of M. Olier. During the nineteenth century the Society of Saint-Sulpice has quietly continued its work of clerical training while sharing all the vicissitudes of the Church in France. The following superiors general have governed it: M. Duclaux (1811-26); Garnier (1826-45), a noted Hebrew scholar; de Courson (1845-50); Carriere (1850-64), an eminent theologian; Caval (1864-75); J. H. Icard (1879-93); and Captier (1893-1900), the founder and first superior of the procure of Saint-Sulpice at Rome. Living within the walls of its seminaries, which, constantly increasing, numbered twenty-six in 1900, the Society of Saint-Sulpice has, so to speak, no history. Its mem- bers, absorbed in their professional duties, share the life of the seminarians, being solicitous to train them not only in the ecclesiastical sciences, but also in priestly virtues, and this more by their own daily examples than by the lessons which they teach. A good Sulpician constitutes himself everywhere and always the companion and the model of the future priests, in their pious exercises, recreations, meals, and walks, briefly in all the details of their life. That such a life is eminently fruitful is proved by the numerous prelates, distinguished priests, founders of religious orders, missionaries and religious from Sulpician seminaries, but it will be readily understood that it furnishes few facts of history. For the Church of France Saint-Sulpice has been a great school of ecclesiastical dignity, love of study, regularity, and virtue. Pius X paid the society this tribute: "Congregatio Sulpicianorum fuit salus Galliae" (Audience of 10 Jan., 1905, to the pastors of Paris). The recent persecutions brought about in France by the separation of Church and State did not fail to attack it. A circular of Minister Combes (1904) declared Saint-Sulpice unfitted to teach in seminaries. At the same time the old seminary of Paris was taken away from it. Nevertheless the society was not dissolved. It subsists in its essential organs, and its members, in most instances in the seminaries of their native dioceses, continue work of devotion to the clergy and the Church. At different dates the society extended branches to American soil, to Canada in 1657, to the United States in 1791. (See SULPICIANS IN THE UNITED STATES.) M. Olier had desired to go to Canada to work for the conversion of the savages; this he was unable to do, but in union with several pious persons, among them Jérôme Le Royer de la Dauversière, he founded the Society of Notre-Dame de Montréal. The undertaking was inspired by the desire to found a city in honor of the Blessed Virgin (Villemarie in the Island of Montreal) which should serve as headquarters for the Indian missions and as a stronghold against the Iroquois. The manner in which Maisonneuve accomplished this foundation is well known. In 1657 the dying Olier sent four of his disciples to the mission of Villemarie, where the colonists were asking for them. They were led by M. De Queylus and thenceforth the Sulpicians shared the vicissitudes of the Montreal colony. Two of them, Vignal and Lemaitre, were slain by the Iroquois (1660). In 1663 the associates of Notre-Dame, reduced to eight by death and weary of a colony which yielded only expenses, ceded their rights and duties to the Society of Saint-Sulpice, which was thenceforth owner and lord of the Island of Montreal. It paid 130,000 livres in debts and pledged itself never to alienate the property of the island. M. de Bretonvilliers gave no less than 400,000 livres of his personal fortune for the maintenance of the colony and M. Faillon has calculated that from 1657 to 1710 the seminary of Paris transmitted to that of Montreal not less than 900,000 livres or one million dollars. Personal devotion was added to these expenses. Eleven Sulpicians were laboring at Montreal in 1668, teaching boys, exercising the sacred ministry, or doing missionary work among the savages. MM. Trouvé and de Fénelon founded the mission of Kenté on Lake Ontario. Dollier de Casson and Brehan de Gallinée explored the region of the Great Lakes (1669), of which they made a map. In 1676 was opened the mission of the Mountain on the site of the present seminary, where M. Belmont built a fort (1685). The brandy traffic necessitated the removal of this fixed mission and in 1720 it was transferred to Lac-des-Deux-Montagnes, where it is at present. At the end of the seventeenth century the Sulpicians had created and organized in the vicinity of Montreal six parishes which they zealously administered, besides supplying them with churches, presbyteries, and schools. During the eighteenth century the history of the society in Canada continued closely linked with that of Montreal, in all of whose works it assisted by its resources and devotion. The number of priests increased to meet the needs of the time, and at the conquest (1760) they numbered thirty. They were headed by worthy men: Vachon de Belmont (1700-31), who succeeded Dollier de Casson; Louis Normant du Faradon (1731-59), who assisted Ven. Mère d'Youville in the foundation of the Grey Nuns; Etienne Montgolfier, who had the difficult task of governing his community during the period of conquest. To the Sulpicians who remained after the Treaty of Paris (1763) the seminary of Saint-Sulpice ceded its possessions in Canada on condition that they would carry on the work of M. Olier. Being unable to recruit their numbers the Sulpicians of Montreal would have become extinct had not the English Government humanely opened Canada to the priests persecuted by the French Revolution. Twelve Sulpicians reached Montreal in 1794. After lengthy disputes the possessions of the society coveted by the English agents were recognized by the British Crown (1840) and the Sulpicians were free to continue undisturbed their work for the Church and society. Besides the Collège de Montréal, founded in 1767, and which performed important services after the conquest, they founded a higher seminary (1840) for the education of the clergy. In this house several thousand priests have been trained for the priesthood. They have since founded (1894) for the benefit of the clergy a seminary of philosophy at Montreal, opened the Canadian College at Rome for higher ecclesiastical study, and quite recently (1911) have organized the School of St. John the Evangelist for the recruiting of clergy in the Archdiocese of Montreal. Since 1866 the society has gradually abandoned the administration of its parishes in Montreal, at present retaining only those of Notre-Dame and Saint-Jacques in the city and that of Oka in the diocese. That it does not, nevertheless, stand aloof from any of the great undertakings in the city which it founded is manifested by the Laval University and the public library. Separated from Saint-Sulpice as regards material possessions, the Montreal community maintains its spiritual alliance with Paris. The superior-general or his representative makes periodically the canonical visitation of the Canadian houses. They are governed by a superior elected every five years, who is assisted by a council of twelve, four of whom, called assistants, are his habitual advisers. As will be readily perceived the principal Sulpician work in both France and America is that of seminaries. The Sulpician is either the model of the pastor in the ministry or the trainer of the priest within the seminaries. His manner of life has been described above; his instruction and method will here be treated briefly. The sole directing principle of the studies at Saint-Sulpice is the most filial docility of judgment and will towards the pope, not only when he defines, but when he expresses a preference or gives directions and counsels. Mindful of their responsibility for priestly souls the Sulpicians teach their pupils, not the novelty which may send them astray, nor their personal opinions which have no guarantee of certitude, but the truth stamped with the seal of the Church and issuing thence warranted and authentic. In Holy Scripture they treat the books they explain as Divine books, avoiding the exaggerations of critical research and abiding by the interpretation of the text. In dogmatic theology they set forth the truth, at the same time warning their pupils against Rationalistic and Modernistic theories and minimizing insinuations. In apologetics they follow the historical method; in philosophy they recognize no master save St. Thomas. Although the kind of instruction given at Saint-Sulpice tends to produce men whose knowledge is more solid than brilliant, more deep than extensive, there has been no lack of remarkable professors in any branch of ecclesiastical learning. Out of the seven hundred and thirty members which the society had numbered down to 1790 no less than one hundred and fifteen had secured their doctor's degree at the Sorbonne. Doctrine is surely more valuable than learning, and no book written by a Sulpician has ever been placed on the Index. Among the theologians were Delafosse (1701-45) and de Montaigne (1687-1767), who wrote remarkable dogmatic treatises published in the theology of Honoré Tournely; Legrand (1711-87), as famous for his dogmatic writings as for his refutation of the philosophical errors of his time, Rey and Rony, authors of valuable treatises published at Lyons; Peala (1787-1853), the continuator of the ecclesiastical conferences of Le Puy; Vieusse (1784-1857), author of the "Compendiosae institutiones theologicae" of Toulouse; Carrière (1795-1864), author of authoritative treatises on marriage, contracts, justice, etc.; Vincent (1813-69), author of the so-called "Clermont Theology". De Lantages (1616-94) and De la Chétardye (1634-1714) wrote justly-esteemed catechisms and conversations or ecclesiastical instructions. Among the Sulpicians whose works were addressed to the general faithful were Blanlo (1617-57), author of "Enfance chrétienne"; Guisain (1627-82), author of the "Sages entretiens" of a soul desirous of salvation; Lasausse (1740 1826), author of many works of piety; Hamon (1795-1874), whose "Meditations" are much used; Riche (1824-92), author of works intended to assist piety. Among those who had chiefly in view the perfection of the clergy were, after Olier himself, M. Tronson (1622-1700), whose "Examens particuliers" is a masterpiece of spiritual psychology and whose "Forma cleri", treatise on obedience, and other works are useful to the clergy; Fyot de Vaugimois (1689-1758), who wrote "Conversations with Jesus Christ before and after Mass" (1721), very popular at that time, and a host of other works for the sanctification of priests; Boyer (1768-1842), the author of ecclesiastical retreats; Vernet (1760-1843), who wrote many works to enliven the piety of religious and priests, such as the "Nepotien"; Hamon (1795-1870), the biographer of Cardinal Cheverus and St. Francis de Sales; Galais (1802-54), "Le bon séminariste" (1839); Renaudet (1794-1880), wrote various works on asceticism, also meditations; Gamon (1813-86), author of the lives of holy priests; Bacuez (1820-92), "Manuel du séminariste en vacances". Among the scholars and learned men in various branches were: Laurent-Josse Le Clerc (1677-1736), historian, theologian, controversialist, and author of the "Bibliothèque de Richelet" (1727), of a "Lettre critique sur le Dictionnaire de Bayle" (1731), and of various and learned writings; Grandet (1646-1724), who wrote "Les saints prêtres français du XVIIe siècle", and numerous historical or devotional works; Emery (q.v.); Gosselin (1787-1858), who published the life and works of Fénelon, and wrote numerous historical works; Le Hir (1811-68), one of the most learned Hebrew scholars of the nineteenth century; Pinault (1793-1870), who composed remarkable physical and mathematical treatises; Faillon (1800-70), author of the lives of de Lantages and Olier, of "Monuments inédits sur l'apostolat de Marie-Madeleine en Provence", and of numerous historical works on Canada and Montreal; Moyen (1828-99), who compiled a "Flora of Canada" and various scientific works; Grandvaux (1819-85), who published Le Hir's works after his death, and was very learned in all branches of ecclesiastical knowledge; Richou (1823-87), noted for his works on church history and Scripture; Brugere (1823-88), a theologian and historian of wide knowledge; Icard (1805-93), known for his writings on catechisms, canon law, and various spiritual subjects. To these names must be added those of Caron (1779-1850), a liturgist, who published the "Manuel de cérémonies selon le rit de Paris" (1846); Parisis (1724-81); and Manier (1807-71), who issued philosophical courses. GOSSELIN, Vie de M. Emery (Paris, l861), Introduction, 1-102; ICARD, Traditions de la compagnie des pretres de Saint-Sulpice (Paris, 1886); BERTRAND, Bibliothèque sulpicienne ou Histoire litteraire de la comp. de Saint-Sulpice (Paris, 1900); Bulletin trimestriel des anciens eleves de Saint-Sulpice (1896-1911); Memorial volume of the centenary of St. Mary's Seminary of St Sulpice (Baltimore, 1891); Golden Jubilee of St. Charles' College (Baltimore, 1898); SHEA, History of the Catholic Church in the United States (New York, 1886-92). A. FOURNET Saints Vincent and Anastasius Abbey of Saints Vincent and Anastasius (TRIUM FONTIUM AD AQUAS SALVIAS, TRE FONTANE, or THREE FOUNTAINS). Located near Rome. Connected with, and belonging to the monastery are three separate sanctuaries. The first, the Church of St. Paul of Three Fountains, was raised over the spot where St. Paul was beheaded by order of Nero. Legend says that the head severed from the body, rebounded, striking the earth in three different places from which fountains sprang forth, flowing to the present day, and located within the sanctuary itself. The second, originally dedicated to the Blessed Virgin, under the title "Our Lady of Martyrs", is built over the relics of St. Zeno and his 10,203 legionaries, who were martyred here at the order of Diocletian, in 299. In this church is the altar "Scala Coeli", from which the church receives its present name. Within is the church and monastery dedicated to Sts. Vincent and Anastasius, built by Pope Honorius I in 626, and given to the Benedictines, who were to care for the two older sanctuaries, as well as their own church. The abbey was richly endowed, particularly by Charlemagne, who bestowed on it Orbitello and eleven other towns, with a considerable territory, over which its abbot exercises ordinary jurisdiction (abbatia nullius). Towards the middle of the seventh century the persecutions inflicted on the Eastern monks by the Monothelites obliged many of them to seek shelter in Rome, and to them this abbey was committed as a refuge. These continued in possession until the tenth century, when it was given to the Cluniacs. In 1140 Pope Innocent II withdrew the abbey from them, and entrusted it to St. Bernard, who sent there a colony from Clairvaux, with Peter Bernard of Paganelli as their abbot, who five years later became Pope Eugene III. At the time Innocent granted the monastery to the Cistercians, he had the church repaired and the monastic quarters rebuilt according to the usages of the order. Of the fourteen regular abbots who governed the abbey, several, besides Blessed Eugene III, became cardinals, legates, or bishops. Pope Honorius III, in 1221, again restored the Church of Sts. Vincent and Anastasius and personally consecrated it, seven cardinals at the same time consecrating the seven altars therein. Cardinal Branda (1419) was the first commendatory abbot, and after him this office was often filled by a cardinal. Popes Clement VII and VIII as cardinals held this position. Leo X, in 1519, authorized the religious to elect their own regular superior, a claustral prior independent of the commendatory abbot, who from this time forward was always to be a cardinal. From 1625, when the abbey was affiliated to the Cistercian Congregation of St. Bernard in Tuscany, until its suppression at the Napoleonic invasion (1812) the local superior was a regular abbot, but without prejudice to the commendatory abbot. The best known of this series of regular abbots was the second, Dom Ferdinand Ughelli, who was one of the foremost literary men of his age, the author of "Italia Sacra" and numerous other works. From 1812 the sanctuaries were deserted, until Leo XII (1826) removed them from the nominal care of the Cistercians, and transferred them to the Friars Minor of the Strict Observance. The purpose of the pontiff, however, was not accomplished; the surroundings were so unhealthful that no community could live there. In 1867 Pius IX appointed his cousin Cardinal Milesi-Ferretti, Commendatory Abbot of Sts. Vincent and Anastasius, who endeavored to restore, not only the material desolation that reigned in the neglected sanctuaries, but also to provide that they be suitably served by ministers of God. To further this end he obtained that their care be again committed to the Cistercians. A community was sent there in 1868 from La Grande Trappe to institute the regular life and to try to render more healthful the lands, which from long neglect had been called the tomba (graveyard) of the Roman Campagna. Assisted by Pius IX, so long as he held the temporal sovereignty, and by other friends, especially Mgr de Mérode, they were able to supply their ordinary needs. The usurpation of 1870 deprived Pius IX of the power to aid them, and later, when the Italian Government confiscated religious properties, they suffered with the others. They remained at Three Fountains, at first renting and later (1886) definitively purchasing it from the Government, with an additional tract of 1234 acres. They inaugurated modern methods for the elimination of the malarial conditions that had been such an obstacle to health in the past, especially by planting a large number of eucalyptus and other trees, an experiment insisted upon by the Government in the contract of sale. The trial proved a success, so that the vicinity is now nearly as healthful as Rome itself. The present commendatory abbot is Cardinal Oreglia di S. Stephano, dean of the Sacred College; and the Administrator is the Most Reverend Dom Augustine Marre, Abbot-General of the Reformed Cistercians. UGHELLI, Italia Sacra (Venice 1717-21); BACCETI, Septimianae Historiae libri septem (Rome, 1724); BLESER, Guide du voyageur catholique a Rome (Louvain, 1881); MONBET, L'Abbaie des Trois Fontaines situee aux Eaux Salviennes (Lyon, 1869); MANRIQUE Annales Cist. (Lyon, 1642); LE NAIN, Essai sur 1'histoire de l'Ordre de Citeaux (Paris, 1696); JANAUSCHEK, Originum Cisterciensium, I (Vienna, 1878); OBRECHT, The Trappists of the Three Fountains in Messenger of the Sacred Heart (New York, 1894); LISI, Trappa delle Tre Fontane (Rome 1883); GAUME, Les Trois Rome (Paris, 1842); Archives of the Abbey of Tre Fontane. EDMOND M. OBRECHT Order of Saint Sylvester Order of Saint Sylvester The Order of Saint Sylvester is neither monastic nor military but a purely honorary title created by Gregory XVI, 31 Oct., 1841. The idea of placing this title, borrowed from the Middle Ages, under the patronage of a pope of the fourth century is explained by the existence of a fabulous order of Constantine the Great claiming the approval of his contemporary, Sylvester I, which enjoyed a usurped authority at Rome from the seventeenth century. To end this abuse, Gregory XVI created an authentic title of Knights of St. Sylvester, to be conferred in recognition of some service rendered to the Church, the order being limited to 150 commanders and 300 Roman knights, besides foreigners of whom the number is unlimited. The members have no privileges beyond that of wearing a decoration which consists of a gold enamelled Maltese cross with the image of St. Sylvester on one side and the other the inscription: "1841 Gregorius XVI restituit." CH. MOELLER Diocese of Saint Thomas Diocese of Saint Thomas (SANCTI THOMAE IN INSULA) The Diocese of Saint Thomas, comprising the Islands of São Thomé and Principe, in the Gulf of Guinea, was erected on 23 November, 1584, as suffragan of Lisbon; in 1676 it was made subject to the Metropolitan of San Salvador, Brazil, and in 1844 to Lisbon once more. The last bishop, Bartolomeo de Martyribus, a Carmelite of Sandomir, was preconized on 8 March, 1816, and died in 1847. The see then remained vacant. Since 1865 it has been ruled as a vicariate. São Thomé, lying one hundred and fifty miles off the African mainland at 0°28' N. lat. and 6°42" E .long., has an area of three hundred and fifty-eight square miles and a population of 37,776 inhabitants (in 1900). It is very fertile, and is noted for its cocoa. The capital, São Thomé, situated on the Bay of Santa Anna, contains 6000 inhabitants. The island, when discovered on 21 December, 1470, by João de Santarem, was uninhabited; in 1485 João de Paiva and in 1493 Pereira attempted to colonize it. Most of the present inhabitants are of African slave origin. About 1544 a ship carrying a cargo of Angolares was wrecked at Sete Pedras and 3000 of their descendants still live in the south-west. The Capuchins arrived in 1659 and established a definite mission in 1688. Principe, lying ninety miles north-east of São Thomé and discovered in 1471, had an area of 42 square miles and a population of 4327. Its chief town is São Antonio. The diocese contains 8 parishes and 22,000 Catholics. Owing to the development of the cocoa trade in recent years the population, recruited chiefly from Africa, is estimated to have increased by over 20,000 since the last official census (1910). NEGREIROS, Ila de San Thomé (Paris, 1901). A.A. MACERLEAN University of Saint Thomas University of Saint Thomas (SANTO TOMÁS) University in Manila, founded in 1619 by the Dominican Miguel de Benavides, Archbishop of Manila. In 1645 Innocent X granted it the title of pontifical university, and in the same year it received the title of royal university from Philip IV of Spain. Attached to the university is the College of San Juan de Letran. After a five years' course in this college, including Latin, Greek, English, mathematics, natural history, botany, mineralogy, physics, chemistry, and philosophy, the successful student receives the Degree of Bachelor of Arts. The university has the right of conferring the doctorate in theology, philosophy, in civil and canon law, medicine, pharmacy, literature, and science. The departments of the university are all within the "walled city". The university attained its greatest prosperity in 1897, just at the commencement of the Spanish-American war. In that year the number of students enrolled in the various courses was as follows: divinity, 15; canon law, 5; civil law, 572; medicine, 361; pharmacy, 90; philosophy and literature, 51; sciences, 14; that year, however, owing to the revolution, the numbers very notably decreased until within the last two years, when there was a marked increase in attendance, the schools of medicine and pharmacy being particularly well attended. In connection with the university there is an excellent museum of natural history. The exhibits of this museum have been awarded special premiums at the expositions of Paris, Madrid, the Philippine Islands, Hanoi in Cochinchina, and St. Louis. The museum contains excellent material for the study of anatomy, anthropology, diplogenesy, Philippine ethnology, zoology, botany, mineralogy, and numismatics. The zoological specimens and their varieties number over 10,000. These have been carefully catalogued in a notable work, "Catálogo sistemático de toda la fauna de Filipinas", arranged by the Reverend Casto de Elera, O.P., who for many years held the chair of natural history in the university. The classes of medicine are held in St. Joseph's College and in the San Juan de Dios hospital, both founded in the seventeenth century. The medical department has well-equipped laboratories. The courses of pharmacy are given in St. Joseph's College. The library contains more than 25,000 volumes. The university is under the direction of a corporation formed by Dominicans; the rector is always a member of that order, though secular professors are appointed for the chairs of civil law, medicine and pharmacy. The faculty numbers 60 professors and 220 assistant teachers and masters in the various departments of the university. JOHN J. THOMPKINS Diocese of Saint Thomas of Guiana Saint Thomas of Guiana (GUAYANA; DE GUAYANA). Diocese; suffragan of Caracas, erected by Pius VI on 19 Dec., 1791, comprises the former state of Bermúdez, districts of Nueva Esparta and Guayana, and territories of Amazonas, Caura, Colón, Orinoco, and Yuruary, in the south and east of Venezuela. The first bishop was Mgr. Francisco de Ybarra, born at Guacata, Venezuela; his successors were: (1) José Antonio Mohedano (1800), born in the Diocese of Toledo; (2) Mgr. José de Silva y Olave (15 March, 1815). After the troubles caused by the wars of independence Leo XII named (3) Mgr. Mariano Talavero, of Santa Fé, vicar Apostolic and titular Bishop of Tricala. Gregory XII restored the episcopate, appointing (4) Mgr. Antonio Fortique (12 July, 1841); (5) José Emanuel Arroyo (1856); and (6) Mgr. Antonio Maria Duran (25 Sept., 1891), the present bishop. The diocese contains over 400,000 Catholics, and a few alien Jews and Protestants; 60 parishes (20 filial); 36 priests; 50 churches and chapels. The Carib Indians occupying Eastern Venezuela were civilized and Christianized by the early Spanish Franciscan missionaries. The episcopal city, Ciudad Bolívar (population 12,000) was established in 1764 by two Jesuits under the governorship of Joaquín de Mendoza, on the right bank of the Orinoco, and called San Tomás de la Nueva Guayana; but owing to a narrowing of the river was commonly known as Angostura. It played an important part in the national history, and Simón Bolivar was elected president there by the Congress of February, 1819; in his honor the city has been renamed Ciudad Bolivar. MOZANS, Up the Orinoco and Down the Magdalena (New York, 1910). A.A. MACERLEAN Saint Thomas of Mylapur Saint Thomas of Mylapur DIOCESE OF SAINT THOMAS OF MYLAPUR (SANCTI THOMAE DE MELIAPOR). Suffragan to the primatial See of Goa in the East Indies; it, derives its name from the site of its cathedral in which the Apostle, St. Thomas was interred on his martyrdom and the Tamil word Mailapur (i.e. the town of peacocks), which the Greeks rendered as Maliarpha the Portuguese Meliapor, and the English Mylapore. EARLY HISTORY The local Indian tradition, largely corroborated by collateral evidence is that the Apostle St. Thomas, after preaching on the west coast of India, passed on to the east coast and fixed his see at Mylapur, which was then a flourishing city. The number of converts, be made having aroused the hostility of the heathen priests, he fled from their anger to the summit of what is now known as St. Thomas's Mount situated in a direct line four miles to the southwest, of Mylapur. Thither he was followed by his persecutors, who transfixed him with a lance as he prayed kneeling on a stone, A.D. 68. From the facts that the Roman Breviary declares St. Thomas to have "crowned the glory of his Apostleship with martyrdom at Calamina" and that no traces of any CaIamina exist, various theories -- some of them probably absurd -- have been put forward to identify Calamina with Mylapur, or with St. Thomas's Mount. The writer of this article once suggested that Calamina might be a modification of Cholamandalam (i.e. the kingdom of the Cholas as the surrounding country was in the beginning of the Christian era). On maturer reflection he has found it far more reasonable to believe that Calamina was an ancient town at the foot of the hill at St. Thomas's Mount, that has wholly disappeared, as many more recent, historic Indian cities have disappeared, built as they were of mud, except for their temples arid palaces which were of exquisitely wrought stone. This much is certain: till Europeans settled in the place there was no Indian name even for the hill. This is shown by the present, Indian name, Faranghi Malai (i.e. hill of the Franks), used to denote both the bill and the town around its base, a service which the English name -- St. Thomas's Mount equally renders. His body was brought to Mylapur and buried in the house in which he had lived, and which was used as a place of worship. A notable portion of the relics of the Apostle was obtained for the church of Edessa, at an early period, by Christian traders from Persia. The Edessene relics were in course of time conveyed to Chios, and finally to Ortona in Italy, where they are yet venerated. India's maritime trade languished and died out about the fourth century. Though the country was thus cut off from all communication with the external world, the succession of bishops was kept up till the revival of Brahminism at Mylapur in the seventh century, when there was a ruthless massacre of Jains and Christians. The Bishop of Mylapur and his priests were put to death, and the remnant of his flock fled across the country to the mountains of the west. As the sees on the west coast were vacant at the time, the Apostolic succession was interrupted, and on the death of the priests then living, the Christians kept the light of their faith burning by lay baptism, the recitation of their prayers, by wearing a cross, and by surreptitious visits to the tomb of the Apostle in the ruined church at Mylapur; in this they were helped by the fact that shortly after the massacre, Mylapur had been overwhelmed by the sea, which returned to its bed after wrecking the city and causing the Brahmins to flee and build a new Mylapur a mile further inland. This new Mylapur is to this very day almost purely Brahmin. The site of old Mylapur is now a sand dune, and would have been wholly forgotten but for the interest it possessed for the early Indian Christians and their successors. NESTORIAN PERIOD India's maritime trade began to revive in the ninth century. The Nestorian merchants from Persia, finding that there were Christians in India, brought out their own priests and subsequently bishops to minister to them, whom the Indian Christians for want of instruction did not know to be in heresy. Presently, a new Nestorian town began to rise on the sand dune that covered old Mylapur, the most prominent feature of which was a chapel over the site of the Apostle's tomb. Hence the Persian and Arabian traders called the town Betumah (i.e. house, church, or town of Thomas. But the Indian Christians called it Tirumailapur (i.e. Holy Mylapur). It is this chapel that the ambassadors of Alfred the Great of England are supposed to have visited (A.D. 883), and which John of Monte Corvino (1200), Marco Polo (1220), Blessed Oderic di Perdone (1318), and Conti (1400) did for a certainty visit. Later Betumah declined, and about 1500 was only a heap of ruins. FIRST PORTUGUESE MISSIONARIES Shortly after the discovery of the Cape route to India, caravels of Portuguese Franciscans and Dominicans set out to evangelize the no longer sealed lands of the East, and traversed their surf-beaten coasts in search of suitable centres for their operations. There is a legend which tells how, when a caravel with some Franciscan missionaries engaged in such a search was cruising up the Coromandel Coast, one day towards nightfall their attention was attracted by a light on shore and they decided to land there. They did, without knowing then or for some time after, that they had landed at the ruins of Betumah. But when they attempted to approach the light, it preceded them inland, across the ruins of the Nestorian town, over an empty stretch of ground, past (new) Mylapur and into a forest, where the light vanished. Here the Franciscans established a mission and built a church (still extant) in honour of Our Lady of Light in 1516, whence the locality, no longer a forest, but a wealthy residential quarter, is still known as The Luz -- after Nossa Senhora da Luz (that is, Our Lady of Light). The Dominicans followed in their wake, and in 1520 Fre. Ambrosio, O.P., was consecrated bishop for the Dominican missions at Cranganore and Mylapur. The following year King John III of Portugal ordered a search to be instituted for the tomb of the Apostle St. Thomas. As long as the tomb, with the counterpart of the Ortona relics, was looked for, nothing was found; however when the search was given up, both were accidentally discovered. The royal commission found traces of the old Nestorian chapel, but nothing of the tomb. But while directing operations to build an oratory commemorative of the spot, and digging deeply in the sandy soil to lay its foundations, it found a masonry tomb, containing what might have been expected to be found in the Apostle's tomb: some bones of snowy whiteness, the head of a lance, a pilgrim's staff, and an earthen vase. This was in 1522. The fact brought ruined Betumah into popularity with the Portuguese, who settled here in large numbers and called the new European town San Thomé (after St. Thomas) and San Thomé de Meliapor, when they wanted to distinguish it from São Thomé the African island, though the town was somewhat distant from Mylapur. The Portuguese Augustinians were the next missionaries to follow; they took charge of the oratory built over the grave of the Apostle, and built their priory and church adjoining it. In the meantime the Dominican missions in the surrounding country gained so much in importance, that in 1540 Fre. Bernardo da Cruz, O.P., was consecrated and sent out to tend them. There is nothing to show when the Fathers of the Society of Jesus settled at Saint Thomas, but by 1648 they had a college in the place and a church and residence at Mylapur, while St. Francis Xavier spent three months in 1545 at Saint Thomas praying at the grave of the Apostle for light in regard to his projected mission to Japan. All of these missionaries, and those who came after them, had no definite spheres of work, but worked side by side and in dependence on the local ordinaries, when these were in due course appointed. By the end of the sixteenth century they had extended their operations to Bengal and Burma. In 1552 the Diocese of Cochin was erected, and made to include, among other places, Ceylon and the countries bordering the Bay of Bengal. Saint Thomas was thus constituted a parish of the Diocese of Cochin; and the Augustinian church adjoining the chapel over the grave of the Apostle was designated the parish church of Saint Thomas. CREATION OF THE DIOCESE At the instance of King Philip II of Portugal, Paul V, on 9 January, 1606, separated rated the Kingdom of Tanjore and the territories to the north of the Cauvery River and bordering the Bay of Bengal, from the Diocese of Cochin and constituted them a distinct diocese with Saint Thomas of Myrapur as the episcopal city and the parish church of Saint Thomas as the cathedral. At the same time the pope appointed Dom Sebastião de San Pedro, O.S.A., who had been presented by the King of Portugal, to be the first bishop of Saint Thomas of Mylapur, and granted Philip and his heirs and successors in perpetuity the right of patronage and presentation to the see, and the benefices that might be created therein, by the mere facts of their creation and dotation. This right and obligation the Crown of Portugal has exercised and discharged to the present, by making the bishops a princely allowance, paying a certain number of priests' salaries, with periodical increases, leave with free passages and pensions, on the lines of the Portuguese Civil Service Code, and contributing to the support of a still larger number of priests on a graduated scale. Bishop Sebastião de San Pedro arrived at Saint Thomas in 1611, but in 1614 was promoted to the See of Cochin. In 1615 he was succeeded by Luiz de Brito e Menezes, likewise an Augustinian, who was transferred in 1628 to the See of Cochin. His successor was Luiz Paulo Paulo de Estrella, O.S.F., appointed in 1534, who died at Saint Thomas on 9 January, 1637. During the next fifty-six years the see continued vacant; for, though no less than nine personages were selected by the Crown for the honour, they either declined it, or were promoted, or died before their election was confirmed by the Holy See. So in the interval the diocese was governed by administrators selected chiefly from the various religious orders and appointed by the archbishops or vicars capitular sede vacante of Goa. But it was only natural that the members of the religious orders as also secular priests of other nations should have desired to share in the work of preaching the Gospel to the heathen; hence in 1622 Gregory XV created the Sacred Congregation de propaganda fide to distribute infidel regions among the religious orders and missionary societies of other nationalities as assistants to the local ordinaries, where there were any, and to supervise their operations. But occasionally the Congregation was misled -- a thing that was easy enough when geographical knowledge was neither as correct nor as extensive as at the present time and this occasioned trouble. The foundations of the British Indian Empire of the present day were laid, so to say, by Sir Francis Day in the sandy delta of a tiny river, some three and a half miles north of Saint Thomas, with the beginnings of Fort St. George. The British invited the Portuguese of pure and mixed descent to settle in the new township; and as the Portuguese were Catholics, they were ministered to by the clergy from Saint Thomas. In 1642, the Congregation of Propaganda sent out two French Capuchins to establish a mission in Burma. But, when they, landing at Surat and travelling overland, reached Fort St. George, the British persuaded them not to go further, since they judged it prudent to have clergymen differing in nationality from, and independent of, the Portuguese ordinary at Saint Thomas to minister to the Catholics in their settlement. Accordingly, R. P. Ephraim', one of the two, wrote to the Sacred Congregation de propaganda fide representing that there was a prospect of reaping a larger harvest at Fort St. George and the fast rising native town of Madras that was beside it, than in Burma; and in the name of Urban VIII a prefecture Apostolic was established within three and a half miles of the cathedral of Saint Thomas. It is perhaps needless to say that ever after there were continual bickerings between the local ordinaries and the French Capuchins, the former insisting on the Capuchins acknowledging their jurisdiction, a claim which the latter, relying on their papal Brief, refused to recognize. Both the Portuguese and the British had obtained their charters for their respective forts of Saint Thomas and St. George from the local Hindu chiefs. But the Mohammedans were now extending their power southwards; and before laying siege to Fort St. George they, with the help of the Dutch who bombarded the place from the sea, took Saint Thomas and began the work of demolishing its walls in January, 1697. The Mohammedan governors then settled on the waste land, separating Saint Thomas from Mylapur, which was soon covered with the residences of Mohammedan settlers. In the unchanging East these three townships still exist: as a European quarter, as a Mohammedan quarter and as a Brahmin quarter -- while the casual observer fails to see where Saint Thomas ends and Mylapur begins and uses the names as convertible terms. However, having reduced Saint Thomas and deprived it of its battlements, the Mohammedans did not further trouble the resident Portuguese, who regarded the place as still a Portuguese possession and managed its affairs with an elected council of which the ordinary of the place, for the time being, was the president. Dom Gaspar Alfonso Alvares, S. J., was the fourth Bishop of Saint Thomas. His presentation was confirmed by the Holy See in 1691, and he was consecrated at Goa in 1693. In the meantime the Capuchins of the French Prefecture Apostolic of Fort St. George spread apace and took charge of the French settlement of Pondicherry. Not to offend the French, Dom Gaspar allowed them to minister to the Europeans and their descendants, but in order to assert his right, placed the Indian Christians in Pondicherry under the care of members of his own Society from France. This led to a number of complaints being addressed to Rome about the interference of the Bishop of Saint Thomas of Mylapur with the work of the missionaries Apostolic, with the result, however, that Clement XI, by his letters "Gaudium in Domino" of 1704, issued an injunction restraining the missionaries from invading the rights of the diocesan. But the Congregation de propaganda fide seems to have followed an altogether different course. In 1706 it issued a Decree in support of its own missionaries, which reversed what the bishop had ordained. Under these circumstances the bishop again appealed to the pope, who, by the Brief "Non sine gravi" of 1711, annulled the Decree of the Congregation and reaffirmed the right of the diocesan to make what arrangements he chose at Pondicherry, which was situated within the limits of his diocese. Presently Cardinal de Tournon, who was on his way to China as legate of the Holy See, having touched at Pondicherry, hearing of the doings of the Capuchins, placed the French Prefecture Apostolic of Madras, the name by which Fort St. George and its surroundings were coming to be better known, under interdict. The Capuchins must have submitted forthwith and the interdict thereupon been removed, as there appears no record of its removal. In the meantime Dom Gaspar had died (1708). Owing to his advancing years, he had been given a coadjutor with the right of succession, Dom Francisco Laynes, S.J., of the Madura mission, in the Diocese of Cochin. Dom Laynes was consecrated at Lisbon on 19 March, 1708, as Bishop of Sozopolis in partibus. He came out to India the same year, but did not take possession of his see till 1710. Though Bishop Laynes was Portuguese, the Portuguese Augustinians of Bandel defied his authority as their diocesan. He therefore placed Bandel under interdict on 14 July, 1714; on the submission of the Augustinians the interdict was removed (8 October, 1714). Bishop Laynes died at Chandernagore (Bengal) in 1715, and was succeeded by Manoel Sanches Golão, who was appointed in 1717 and reached India in 1719. It was Dom Manoel who welcomed the Italian Barnabites as invaluable co-operators in the work of preaching the Gospel in Burma, though he had regularly served mission stations there. These friendly relations with the Italian Barnabites were always maintained, as they recognized the authority of the diocesans. Bishop Golão was succeeded by Jose Penheiro, S.J., who was consecrated in 1726. He sanctioned the arrangement whereby French Jesuits were to have spiritual charge of Chandernagore, in Bengal. During his time the Barnabite mission in Burma was created a vicariate Apostolic. Bishop Pinheiro died on 15 March, 1744, and was succeeded by Antonio da Incarnacao, O.S.A., who was consecrated at Goa in 1747. It was about this time (1746) that the French marched on Madras and, making Saint Thomas their head-quarters, attacked and took Fort St. George, which they held and improved till August, 1749, when they restored it to Admiral Boseawen under the Treaty of Aix-la-Chapelle. Saint Thomas had been nominally a Portuguese possession from 1697, without the semblance of a military force to resist its occupation by a foreign power, as the French did when operating against Madras. To obviate a recurrence of such an eventuality Admiral Boscawen annexed the place and built a redoubt to the south-east of it, thus rendering it a part of Madras, as it still is. The British now regretted having harboured the French Capuchins, as they suspected that the capture of Fort St. George by the French was largely due to the information supplied by them. Consequently R. P. Rene, on whom the suspicion rested most heavily, was deported to Europe, and the others were expelled from the fort and settled in what is now Georgetown (Madras), where the cathedral of Madras now stands, four miles from the cathedral of Saint Thomas. On the death of Bishop da Incarnacão on 22 November, 1752, Fre. Theodoro de Santa Maria, O.S.A., was presented for the see and confirmed by the Holy See. He belonged to the priory at Saint Thomas, but hesitated to receive episcopal consecration. Two Italian Barnabites destined for the vicariate Apostolic in Burma came with letters of commendation to the bishop-elect, who welcomed and speeded them to their destination. At last Fre. Thedoro, the bishop-elect, renounced the see into the hands of Fre. Bernardo de San Caetano, O.S.A., who was then consecrated bishop. Bishop Bernardo in turn consecrated one of the two Barnabites just mentioned, Dom Percotto, Bishop and Vicar Apostolic of Burma, in 1768. But Bishop Percotto did not reach the field of his labours, as on his voyage back to Burma the vessel foundered. The Diocese of Saint Thomas of Mylapur was ministered to at this period as follows: -- By the Portuguese Franciscans, Portuguese Dominicans, Portuguese Augustinians, and Portuguese Jesuits. Besides these, there were French Jesuits and Italian Barnabites working in the diocese in harmony with the ordinary, And French Capuchins defying their authority, at least occasionally. One drawback of this total manning of the diocese with the religious orders was the absolute neglect to form an indigenous clergy to meet the emergency that presently arose. For it was at about this time that the Marquess of Pombal suppressed the houses of the Society of Jesus in Portugal and thus cut off the supply of Portuguese Jesuits to the diocese. The emergency became still more acute, when, in 1773, Clement XIV suppressed the Society of Jesus. Withal, the situation was not quite so hopeless as to call for drastic measures in regard to the diocese from without. For it was not till 1834 that the houses of the other religious orders in the Portuguese dominions were suppressed. And as the Diocese of Saint Thomas of Mylapur was situated wholly outside of Portuguese territory, there was nothing to prevent the Portuguese religious orders from thriving there. Nevertheless, as at home vocations became fewer, the houses in India gradually died out, the last to be represented in the diocese being the Portuguese Augustinians in Bengal, the last member of the order dying in 1869. On the extinction of a religious house in any place, the property and rights of the religious revert to the Church, as represented by the local diocesans. But all Catholic Europe was so incensed against Portugal for the initiative taken by the Marquess of Pombal against the Society of Jesus, that without waiting to weigh the justice of their action in turn, reprisals became the order of the day in the Diocese of Saint Thomas of Mylapur, the Congregation de propaganda fide supporting the missionaries of other nationalities against the Portuguese. On the suppression of the Society of Jesus by the Holy See, the Fathers of the Missions étrangères of Paris were sent out to take charge of the Society's missions in the Dioceses of Saint Thomas of Mylapur and of Cochin, of which Msgr Champenois, Bishop of Dolichum in partibus, was appointed vicar Apostolic. Bishop San Caetano resented this, as he was filling up the places of the Jesuits with Indian secular missionaries from Goa; but his protests were of little avail. In course of time, as the members of the other religious orders died out, these same Indian missioners from Goa assumed charge of their churches under the order of their diocesans, though more often than not there was a dispute between them and the missionaries Apostolic. The latter did not hesitate to misrepresent the Goan missionaries to be ignorant and immoral as a whole though the diocesan seminary at Goa was conducted by the Jesuits until their suppression, and thereafter by members of the other religious orders till 1835. On the other hand, between 1652 and 1843, no less than seven of their fellow-countrymen were deemed worthy of episcopal consecration by the Crown of Portugal, the Holy See, and the Sacred Congregation de Propaganda Fide, not to speak of the Venerable Joseph Vaz, who was of their race. Howbeit, since then and up to the present time the majority of the priests working in the diocese have be,. Indian Secular missionaries from Goa. Bishop San Caetano died in 1780, and was succeeded by Fre. Manoel de Jesus Marie Jose, O.S.A., a native of Goa and the prior of the Augustinian convent there. He was consecrated in 1788, and died at Saint Thomas in 1800. He was succeeded by Fre. Joaquim de Menezes e Athalde, O.S.A., who was consecrated and took charge of his see by procuration in 1805, but before he could come out he was transferred to the Diocese of Funchal. As a result, Fre. Jose de Garca who on the death of Bishop Jesus Maria Jose had been appointed administrator, continued as such till his death on 14 July, 181.7, when Fre. Clemente de Espiritu Santo, O.S.F., was appointed administrator. During the latter's tenure of his office, Madras was visited by Dom Pedro d'Aleantara, O.C., Bishop of Antipheles in partibus and Vicar Apostolic of the Grand Mogul [sic] and visitor Apostolic of the French Capuchin missions, who "according to the mind of the Sacred Congregation de Propaganda Fide declared the Capuchins of Madras to be independent of the Bishop of Saint Thomas of Mylapur not alone in temporal but also in spiritual matters". But the administrator declined to accept his decision, as being a reaffirmation of the Decree of the same Sacred Congregation, which had been annulled. Fre. Clemente resigned the administration of the diocese to Fire. Manoel de Ave Maria, O.S.A., in 1820. The British power was now paramount on the Coromandel Coast, and English was universally spoken by the Indo-European population that formed the mainstay of the Catholic congregation of Madras, as it always was and still is all over India. Withal, the French Capuchins would not conform to the times, but continued to preach in Portuguese (which had degenerated in Madras to a patois) and Tamil, the language of the Indian Christians. As a result, many Indo-European families gave up the practice of their religion and in time became Protestants. Finding their representations to the Capuchin prefect Apostolic unheeded, a band of young men represented the matter to the Holy See. In response to this appeal the Sacred Congregation de Propaganda Fide raised the French Capuchin prefecture into a vicariate Apostolic and sent out Dr. O'Connor, S A with Irish priests, in 1828 to take over the work of the Frenchmen. PORTUGUESE CIVIL WAR OF 1826, AND ITS CONSEQUENCES On the outbreak of the Peninsular wars, King João VI of Portugal, with his elder son Dom Pedro, sought refuge in Brazil. Presently a movement was set on foot to have his younger son, Dom Miguel, proclaimed king, a movement which had the support of the religious orders, but not of the bishops or of the secular clergy. However, João returned to Portugal and quelled the insurrection. In the meantime Brazil proclaimed its independence with Dom Pedro as its emperor an arrangement in which João acquiesced. On the death of João VI the loyalists in Portugal proclaimed Dom Pedro of Brazil King of Portugal; but, as Dom Pedro preferred staying in Brazil, he ceded his right to Dona Maria da Gloria, his younger daughter, appointing his brother, Dom Miguel, as regent till she should grow up, when the regent was to marry her and thus heal the rupture between the loyalists and the adherents of Dom Miguel. The adherents of Dom Miguel, however, proclaimed him king. Dom Pedro came over to Portugal in 1826 to assert his daughter's rights, and finally defeated his brother in 1834. Dom Miguel was perpetually banished and those who sided with him were punished, amongst those to suffer being the religious orders, whose houses were suppressed and properties confiscated. In consequence of this last measure mainly, diplomatic relations between the Holy See and Portugal were broken off. The Sacred Congregation de Propaganda Fide deemed the moment opportune to extend the jurisdiction of the Vicar Apostolic of Madras to Saint Thomas of Mylapur and its missions southwards to the River Palar (those south of the Palar being assigned to the Vicar Apostolic of Pondicherry), to declare Burma to be an independent vicariate and to create in the northern part of the diocese (Bengal and the adjoining countries) an independent vicariate Apostolic under Dr. St. Leger, with a staff of British priests. From a certain point of view this action was unfortunate, as under the circumstances it caused the loyalist Portuguese to regard these measures as retaliatory and not as prompted by a desire for the spiritual welfare of the regions concerned. And, indeed there was nothing up to this to show that Portugal had shirked her responsibilities in regard to the diocese, or that the successive ordinaries of the diocese had been found wanting, beyond the mere accusation of those missionaries Apostolic who were sent into their territories and, failing to recognize their authority, had received scant courtesy. Howbeit, when called upon by the Vicar Apostolic of Madras to surrender his churches and submit to him, the administrator replied that he would gladly do so when instructed by the authority that placed him there. The vicar Apostolic then called upon the priests and the subjects of the Diocese of Saint Thomas of Mylapur to submit to him, but they all replied in much the same terms. The same thing happened in the parts of the diocese between the Rivers Palar and Cauvery, and in Bengal; whereupon the vicar Apostolic declared the administrator, priests, and people of the Diocese of Saint Thomas of Mylapur schismatics, and from the fact that a large number of the priests in the diocese were from Goa, defined their action as the "Goan schism". However the Holy See seems not to have taken much notice of the " schism " and diplomatic relations were resumed with Portugal in 1841. Then followed a series of acts unworthy of the Church, when both sides strove to capture or recapture churches that they claimed; when church was built against church, altar raised against altar, and violence and police-courts were a common resort. On 14 March, 1836, Dom Antonio Tristão Vaz Teixeira was presented by the Crown of Portugal to the Holy See as Bishop of Saint Thomas of Mylapur, and left Lisbon for India a month later. As the Holy See had in the meantime refused to confirm the presentation, the Vicar Capitular of Goa appointed him administrator of the diocese in place of Fre. Ave Maria, who had died on 5 August of the same year. Dom Antonio assumed charge on 15 October following, and died on 3 September, 1852. He was succeeded by Padre Miguel Francisco Lobo, an Indian from Goa (as were all the administrators of the diocese up to 1886), who was appointed on 3 October, 1852. On the restoration of the Society of Jesus by Pius VII the French Jesuits returned to the parts of the Diocese of Cochin, which their Portuguese brethren had evangelized; though opposed by the authorities of that diocese; and in 1846, the Congregation de Propaganda Fide erected their missions into a vicariate Apostolic. In 1850 the Salesians of Annecy were sent out to take charge of the country between the Rivers Godavery and Mahanuddy, which was at the same time created a vicariate Apostolic. In the same year, the country between the Chittagong and Kabudak River was created a vicariate Apostolic, and committed to the care of the Fathers of the Holy Crow; while at about the same time the Fathers of Missions etrangeres of Paris replaced the Italian Barnabites in Burma. Thus the Diocese of Mylapur was divided up between six vicariates: Madura, Pondicherry, Madras, Vizagapatam, Western Bengal, and Eastern Bengal and Burma. In 1857 a concordat was entered into between the Holy See and Portugal, pending the execution of which both the vicars Apostolic and the authorities of the diocese were to enjoy pacific possession of the places they actually held. But the Crown of Portugal undertook manifestly too great a burden, to wit, to provide for the spiritual needs of the whole of India, and consequently the concordat remained a dead letter. In 1854 the Royal Missionary College of Bomjardim at Sernache, Portugal was founded for the training of secular priests for the Portuguese missions beyond the seas. Meanwhile the missions of the diocese had been greatly weakened by secessions to the vicars Apostolic. The missions were situated in British territory and as beyond the clergy there were scarcely any Portuguese subjects to be found through- out the diocese there was no particular inducement or the people to cling to the see. In Madras itself, the Irish vicars Apostolic and missionaries had been educated at Maynooth College, and almost all of them were doctors of divinity. They were socially and intellectually on an equality with the best British talent. Protestants as well as Catholics crowded to hear their sermons in churches and their lectures on scientific matters. When Dr. O'Connor first came out, he brought letters of introduction to the governor and was a guest at Government House. On the first occasion when he drove to St. Mary's of the Angels, the quasi-cathedral of his vicariate wearing a cocked hat and buckled shoes, long coat and knee-breeches, the old ladies protested that he could be no Catholic bishop but the emissary of the Government to make them all Protestants. These things lent prestige to the Catholic name. One of the first things the Irish missionaries did was to open a seminary (to which a college was attached) and ordain IndoEuropean priests, who proved of invaluable help to them. They also brought out the Irish Presentation nuns, whose schools are yet the best in all Southern India. As a result, almost all the Catholic Indo-Europeans and Indians with pretensions to respectability flocked to the vicars Apostolic, till in the end it was deemed opprobrious to term one as belonging to the Diocese of Saint Thomas of Mylapur. Hence in the course of the negotiations preparatory to the fresh concordat of 1886, the cardinal secretary of State was in a position to show that out of 1,167,975 Catholics in British India, the Portuguese missions of the Diocese of Saint Thomas of Mylapur could actually claim only some 30,000 subjects, with a proportionate number of churches, one seminary from which a priest was occasionally ordained, one high school at Saint Thomas, two middle schools at Tuticorin and Manapad, and a number of elementary schools; while any single vicariate Apostolic had a better equipment. But of these 30,000 souls which were all that were left to the Portuguese of the once flourishing diocese, it has truly, though scarcely laudably, been said that "they loved the Portuguese more than their own immortal souls ". PRESENT CONDITION Such was the state of affairs when in 1886 a fresh concordat was entered into between the Holy See and Portugal, which showed itself disposed to accommodate itself to the changed conditions of the times. The concordat was preceded by negotiations with England, to make sure that the British Government would not object to the continuance of the Portuguese royal patronage in its Eastern possessions. Accordingly, the Primacy of the East of the archbishops of Goa was reaffirmed, while in addition they were accorded the honorary title of Patriarchs of the East Indies and the substantial privilege of presiding at the plenary councils of the East Indies, which were ordinarily to assemble at Goa, while the special relations existing between the Archdiocese of Goa and its suffragan dioceses were to be continued. But the limits of the original Portuguese dioceses were contracted, the Diocese of Saint Thomas of Mylapur being assigned two distinct pieces of territory on the Coromandel Coast, separated from each other by a distance of some 150 miles. The first is a triangle of an area of some 800 square miles, in the northern angle of which Saint Thomas is situated; the other is roughly the ancient Kingdom of Tanjore. In addition, both by the concordat and certain appendixes thereto, the diocese was given five churches in the Archdiocese Of Madras -- the old vicariates Apostolic having been converted into dioceses as a sequel to the concordat by the Constitution "Humanae salutis" of 1886, of Leo XIII -- three churches in the Archdiocese of Calcutta (Western Bengal), five churches in the Diocese of Dacca (Eastern Bengal), and twenty-four churches in the Diocese of Trichinopoly (which originally belonged to the Diocese of Cochin), with their congregations. The first bishop appointed to Saint Thomas of Mylapur on the conclusion of the new concordat was the princely Dom Henrique Jose Reed da Silva, who was at the time coadjutor to the Archbishop of Goa, and who took possession of his see in 1886. He was the first to sign himself for the sake of brevity, Bishop of Mylapur, a practice which his successors have adopted. Hence the diocese is at the present time better known in India as the Diocese of Mylapur. His was the arduous task of gathering the broken shreds of the old historic diocese, putting them together, and rendering it once again the thing of beauty it was. His first care was to reform the diocesan seminary, and in order to have an efficient body of European priests with their heart in their work, he brought out a number of young boys from Portugal and gave them a collegiate course in English, in the college to which he had raised the existing high-school, previous to their entering upon their ecclesiastical course of studies. His successors are reaping the benefit of his policy. He opened a convent of European nuns at Saint Thomas, and another of Indian nuns in Mylapur, which have since thrown out branches into various parts of the diocese. He invited English-speaking priests to join his diocese (a call to which the present writer responded) and established the "Catholic Register", a weekly newspaper. His courtly manners and noble bearing made him a favourite in society. Soon the people felt it an honour to be able to point to him as their bishop. He pulled down the old cathedral, the chapel over the grave -- of St. Thomas, and the old Augustinian priory, that had nothing antique to commend them, and built the present magnificent cathedral in the centre of which, between the nave and chancel, lies the grave of St. Thomas. Despite the good he was accomplishing, he incurred the ill-will of certain parties connected with the churches situated in other dioceses, and when he found the accusations brought against him accepted without demur in Europe, he resigned and retired to Portugal, as titular Bishop of Trajanopolis. He was succeeded by Dom Antonio Jose de Souza Barroso, who, within a few months of his arrival at Saint Thomas, was promoted to the See of Oporto. Bishop Barroso was succeeded by the present bishop, Dom Theotonio Manuel Ribeiro Vieira de Castro, who was presented on 12 June, 1899, and confirmed by Leo XIII ten days later. He was consecrated at Oporto on 15 August, 1899, and reached Saint Thomas on 23 December. The tercentenary of the creation of the diocese occurred in January, 1906, in which almost all of the archbishops and bishops of the vast tract that constituted the original Diocese of Saint Thomas of Mylapur took part in person in addition to the delegate Apostolic and other prelates, numbering fifteen bishops in all. It is instructive to note, that with the single exception of the Archdiocese of Madras, all of the dioceses into which the original Diocese of Saint Thomas of Mylapur is divided are served by non-British clergy, save for the Indian and few Indo-European priests, where there are any. But even in the Archdiocese of Madras, though it is served by the British Missionary Society of St. Joseph, the majority of the priests and the coadjutor bishop are from the Continent. Dacca is served by the Fathers of the Holy Cross from Notre Dame, Indiana, United States of America. According to the latest available statistics, there are in the diocese some 72,000 Catholics, 20 European and 51 Indian priests, I seminary. For boys there are: 2 high schools at Saint Thomas, one being for Indo-Europeans, the other for Indian Christians; 3 orphanages, one for Indo-Europeans at Saint Thomas, another for Indian Christians at Tanjore, managed by the Salesians, and the third at Calcutta for Indian Christians. For girls: 2 convents of the Franciscan Missionary Nuns of Mary, at Saint Thomas and at St. Thomas's Mount, which maintain schools and orphanages attached to them both for IndoEuropeans and Indians, the latter of whom are mainly looked after by Indian Sisters of the Third Order of St. Francis; 6 convents of Indian nuns of the diocesan Institute of Our Lady of Help, in populous centres, with schools and boarding establishments for Indian caste girls; there are also 8 middle-schools and 57 primary schools. The conversions for the year ending 30 September, 1907 totalled about 200, of which 135 were from heathenism, 63 from Protestantism and 8 from Mohammedanism. The catechumens under instruction at the same time numbered 141. Thus is Portugal in the beginning of the twentieth century continuing the work inaugurated on the Coromandel Coast in the beginning of the sixteenth, in the days when the Vasco de Gamas, Cabrals, and de Albuquerques were not the mere shadowy heroes of the past, but walked the earth in living flesh and did their deeds of daring. JAM S. DOYLE Jean-Baptiste de Saint-Vallier Jean-Baptiste de Saint-Vallier Second Bishop of Quebec, b. at Grenoble, France, 14 Nov. 1653; d. at Quebec, Canada, 26 Dec., 1727; son of Jean de La Croix de Chevrières, and Marie de Sayne. He was educated at the local seminary and took the degree of Doctor of Theology at the Sorbonne at the age of nineteen. While acting as almoner to Louis XIV his regularity and piety not only preserved him from the dangers of the Court, but maintained and redeemed others, who were edified by his charity and zeal toward the poor and infirm. He accompanied the king in a campaign to Flanders and devotedly attended the wounded and dying. Through humility he successively refused the Sees of Tours and Marseilles, preferring a field of missionary labor and hardship. He was chosen to replace Bishop Laval on his resignation (1684), and pending the reception of his Bulls, he left for Canada as vicar-general (1685). At first his bearing towards the seminary and the other institutions showed a disposition to continue his predecessor's policy. His zeal moved him to visit every parish between Quebec and Montreal, and even distant Acadia. Under the title "Etat présent de l'Eglise et de la colonie de la Nouvelle-France" (Paris, 1687), he published a glowing account of the piety and devotedness of the clergy, and of the morality of the people. The contrast between Laval's paternal rule, and St-Vallier's often untimely zeal and anxiety to reform caused apprehension. His consecration (1688) promoted the king's liberality in behalf of the incipient Church and the propagation of the Faith. The young pastor's activity spent itself in creating parishes, building churches, and founding homes for the poor, beginning with "La Providence (1689), which was to develop into the general hospital (1692). In 1689 he visited Newfoundland and founded at Placentia a Franciscan convent. When Phipps (1690) besieged Quebec, the bishop hastened back from Montreal to comfort his flock, and published for the occasion a mandement full of faith and patriotism. In 1692, to Laval's displeasure, he altered the system of joint administration of the diocese by bishop and seminary. In 1694 St-Vallier went to France for the third time to exonerate himself from the charges brought against him. In spite of the king's desire to retain him, he returned to Quebec (1697), and finished constructing his spacious palace, destined to give hospitality to all the clergy. That same year, he founded at Three Rivers a monastery of Ursulines, who combined hospital work with teaching. He likewise approved the charitable foundation of the Charron Brothers, which lasted till 1745. In 1689, he had summoned to Quebec the Sisters of Marguerite Bourgeoys who still teach there. He encouraged the extension of the Faith by confiding to the Jesuits the Illinois, Miami, Sioux, and Ottawa missions; Ile Royale to the Recollects, and the Tamarois mission, on the left bank of the Mississippi, to the Quebec seminary (1698), one of whose missionaries represented Mgr SaintVallier as vicar-general for the Louisiana region, then comprised, as well as all the vast territory included in the future "Louisiana Purchase", within the jurisdiction of the Bishop of Quebec. He visited Rome (1701), and on his return voyage was captured by the English. During his five years of captivity he exerted his zeal in behalf of the Catholics of his neighborhood. Although released in 1709, his departure from France, where he again refused to relinquish Quebec for a richer see, was delayed till 1713. His venerable predecessor had died in 1708. St-Vallier was firm in doctrine and in perfect union with Rome. The results of his zeal for ecclesiastical discipline still abide. He published a "Rituel du diocèse de Québec" (Paris, 1703); "Catéchisme de Québec (Paris, 1702), presided at four synods (1690, 1694, 1698, 1700), and issued a great number of mandements, letters, and other episcopal documents, over one hundred of which have been published in the collection of "Les mandements des évêques de Québec". He died after forty years' episcopate, nearly half of which he was forced to spend far from his diocese. Though his overbearing zeal and excessive desire to perform all the good that he had in view occasionally elicited measures that were displeasing and even offensive, these were fully outbalanced by his generosity towards the poor, and his genuine disinterestedness. Mandements des eveques de Quebec (Quebec, 1887); TETU, Les eveques de Quebec (Quebec, 1889); Mgr de St-Vallier et l'Hospital-General de Quebec (Quebec, 1882); GOSSELIN, Mgr de St-Vallier et son temps (Evreux, 1898); HOWLEY, Ecclesiastical History of Newfoundland (Boston, 1888). LIONEL LINDSAY Abbey of Saint-Victor Abbey of Saint-Victor In the year 1108, the famous William of Champeaux, archdeacon of Notre-Dame in Paris, who had been lecturing to crowds of students, relinquishing his chair, retired to a small hermitage dedicated to St. Victor, the martyr soldier, near the city. Here he was followed by many of his disciples, Abelard among them, and induced again to take up his lectures. Hence the origin of the Royal Abbey and School of St. Victor. With some of his followers, William had become a canon regular, but, at the request of St. Bernard he was made Bishop of Chalons in 1113, and was succeeded at St. Victor's by Gildwin, a man, as the "Necrologium" records, of piety and learning, and zealous in promoting the canonical order. The abbey, by the generosity of popes, kings, queens, and noblemen, was soon richly endowed. Numerous religious houses of canons regular were reformed by its canons. Ste. Geneviève (Paris), Wigmore in Wales, St. Augustine's (Bristol), 1148), St. Catherine's (Waterford), St. Thomas's (Dublin), St. Peter's (Aram, Naples) were of the number. No less than forty abbeys of the order of St. Victor are mentioned in his last will by King Louis VIII, who left all his jewels for the erection of the abbey church and 4000 pounds to be equally divided among them. At the general chapter which was convened every year, there were present some 100 abbots and priors. Before the abbey was 160 years old, several cardinals and at least eight abbots, all sons of St. Victor's, were at the head of as many abbeys, among them John, Abbot of Ste. Geneviève (Paris), and Andrew, an Englishman, Abbot of Wigmore. The traditions of William of Champeaux were handed on, and St. Victor's became a centre of piety and learning. The school, with those of Ste Genevieve and Notre-Dame, was the cradle of the University of Paris. To that celebrated school flocked crowds of students from all countries. Among them were men like Hugh of Blankenburg, better known as Hugh of St. Victor, called the St. Augustine of his time; Richard, a Scotchman, the mystic doctor; Adam, the greatest poet of the Middle Ages; Peter Comestor, the historian; Peter Lombard, the magister sententiarum; Thomas, Abbot of St. Andrew's (Verceil), to whom St. Francis sent St. Anthony of Padua for his theological studies; another Thomas, prior at the abbey who, nearly fifty years before his namesake of Canterbury, gave his life for justice sake. To St. Victor's came, only four months before his martyrdom, the same St. Thomas à Becket and addressed his brother canons on the words: "In pace factus est locus ejus". The "Scotichronicon" records that in 1221 a canon of St. Victor's, in his capacity of papal legate, visited Ireland and Scotland, where at Perth he convoked all the ecclesiastical dignitaries to a general convention which lasted four days. The time came when abbots in commendam were introduced and signs of decay were manifested. Towards the end of the fifteenth century some efforts were made to reform the abbey with canons brought from the newly-established Windesheim congregation. A few years later Cardinal de Larochefoucauld again attempted to reform it, but in vain. The canons, moreover, were implicated in the Jansenist movement, only one, the Venerable Jourdan, remaining faithful to the old spirit and traditions. At that time there lived at St. Victor Santeul, the great classical poet, whose Latin proses were adopted by the Gallican Liturgy. The end of the abbey came with the French Revolution. In 1800 the church and the other buildings were sold, the famous library was dispersed, and a few years later everything had disappeared. There are still a few convents of canonesses, at Bruges, Ypres, and Neuilly, who keep the rule and spirit which they originally received from the Abbey of St. Victor's. BONNARD, Ilist. de l'abbaye royale de St. Victor de Paris (1907); GAUTIER, Adam de St. Victor (Paris, 1858); BONNEAU, Notice des chanoines de l'eglise (Paris, 1908). A. ALLARIA Achard de Saint-Victor Achard de Saint-Victor Canon regular, Abbot of St-Victor, Paris, and Bishop of Avranches, b. about 1100; d. 1172. By some authorities he is said to have been of English extraction, by others to be of the noble Norman family of de Pertins, of Domfront. He completed his studies at the school of St-Victor's and entered the cloister there. On the death (1155) of the first abbot, Gilduin, he was elected to fill the vacant post, at a time when the royal abbey was almost at the zenith of its glory and power. Two years later the Cathedral Chapter of Seez, composed of canons regular, elected Achard for their bishop, and the choice was duly confirmed by Adrian IV. But Henry II intervened and intruded his chaplain Frogier, or Roger. However, subsequent relations between Achard and the Plantagenet were quite cordial, and the abbot used his influence at the English Court to compel the royal treasurer, Richard of Ely, to disemburse for the benefit of the poor some moneys which he was unjustly detaining; his letter to Henry II on the matter is still extant. When, in 1162, Achard was raised to the vacant See of Avranches, henry made no objection to his consecration, and that same year Bishop Achard stood godfather to his daughter Elinor born at Domfront. But the French king, Louis VII, was by no means pleased to see such a shining light of the Parisian Church pass over into Norman territory, as is evident from a letter he then addressed to the prior of St-Victor's. In 1163 Achard was in England assisting at the solemn translation of Edward the Confessor in Westminster Abbey. The chief monument of his ten years' episcopate was the Premonstratensian Abbey of the Holy Trinity, Lucerne, the foundation stone of which he laid 91164) and where at his own request he was buried, with this simple inscription: "Hic jacet Achardus episcopus cujus caritate ditata est paupertas nostra." His brethren of St-Victor's celebrated his memory in the following lines: "Huju oliva domus, Anglorum gloria cleri—Jam dignus celesti luce foveri—Felix Achardus florens etate senile—Presul Abrincensis ex hoc signature ovili". Not the least gem in Achard's crown is the memory of his unwavering friendship for St. Thomas a Becket through all the years of his persecution. In the chronicles of St-Victor's Achard is termed "Blessed". One treatise (Latin original and eighteenth-century French translation) of Achard's is extant in the Bibliotheque Nationale. Paris. It is a long commentary or sermon on the Temptation of Christ in the wilderness, and in it Achard discusses seven degrees of self-renunciation, which he calls the seven deserts of the soul. Haureau in his "Histoire literaire du maine", I, quotes several passages and terms the tract vrai morceau de style. BUTLER, Lives of the Saints, 2 May; STANTON, Menology (London and New York, 1892); BONNARD, Histoire de l'Abbaye Royale de St. Victor de Paris (Paris, 1907); PENNOTTO, Hist. Cleric. Canon. (Rome, 1642). VINCENT SCULLY Society of Saint Vincent de Paul Society of Saint Vincent de Paul An international association of Catholic laymen engaging systematically in personal service of the poor, was founded in May, 1833, when eight young men, students at the Sorbonne, assembled in the office of the "Tribune Catholique" to formulate plans for the organization of a society whose object should be to minister to the wants of the Parisian poor. The master-mind conceiving the project, which was destined to make an indelible impress upon the history of modern charity work, was Frederick Ozanam, a brilliant young Frenchman, lawyer, author and professor in the Sorbonne. With Ozanam's name must be linked that of Père Bailly, editor of the "Tribune Catholique", the first president of the society, and whose wise and fatherly counsels did much to direct properly the activities of his more youthful associates. The society's establishment was due partly to the desire of the founders to furnish a practical refutation of the reproaches directed against Christianity by the followers of Saint-Simon, Fourier, and other popular teachers of the day. "Show us your works!" taunted the St. Simonians. "We admit the past grandeur of Christianity, but the tree is now dead and bears no fruit." To this taunt Ozanam and his companions retorted by forming themselves into a Conference of Charity, later adopting the name of the Society of St. Vincent de Paul. In organizing the Society, Ozanam, following the inspiration of its chosen patron St. Vincent de Paul, modelled the rule upon the same principles that were in vogue in the seventeenth century. The rules adopted were very simple; it was forbidden to discuss politics or personal concerns at the meetings, and it was settled that the work should be the service of God in the persons of the poor, whom the members were to visit at their own dwellings and assist by every means in their power. The service of the members was to embrace, without distinction of creed or race, the poor, the sick, the infirm, and the unemployed. It is a noteworthy fact that, at the first Vincentian meeting, there was enunciated by Père Bailly a principle of vital importance, now universally accepted wherever organized charity is known, namely that the service of the poor ought to consist not merely of the doling out of alms, but must be made a medium of moral assistance and that each member should help in his special line. Simplicity characterizes the society. The membership is divided into three classes, active, subscribing, and honorary. The active membership is composed of Christian men who desire to unite in a communion of prayers and a participation in the same works of charity. Subscribing and honorary members are those who "cannot devote themselves to the works in which the society is engaged but who assist the active members by their influence, their offerings and prayers". In the make-up of its membership the society is most democratic. Men of all walks of life are engaged in its service; the lawyer, the doctor, the professional and business man freely mingle with the untutored labouring man in relieving the wants of the poor. The conference is the unit of the society and is an integral part of the parish organization. While the clergy are not included in the normal membership, they are always welcomed in the work. The conference exists only with the approval of the pastor who as spiritual director enters actively into the work. Women are excluded from membership, but through auxiliary associations or as benefactresses they may co-operate in the work and share the numerous indulgences. The business of each conference is administered by a president, a vice-president, a secretary, and a treasurer who constitute the board of the conference. The president is elected by the conference, while the other officers are appointed by the president with the advice of the board. The parish conferences hold weekly meetings. In cities, where there exist several conferences of the society, the control of affairs is vested in a particular council in which the respective conferences have representation. In a number of larger cities a central office is established by the particular council. Special committees are likewise usually created to deal with the larger aspects of charity, relief, and correction, which naturally fall beyond the scope of a parish conference. Over the particular councils and such conferences as are so scattered as to render impracticable the formation of particular councils, there is placed a central or superior council having jurisdiction over a territory embracing within its circumscription the councils of several dioceses or, as in some instances, of an entire country. On each of the four festivals of the society meetings are held by all the conferences embraced in each of the various jurisdictions. Superior councils hold regular monthly meetings and meet oftener as occasion may require. Finally, the scheme of organization provides for the establishment of a council general, which exercises jurisdiction over the entire society, and is established in Paris, France. In outlining the activities of the society, the founders had an eye to the future needs of human kind, and dictated that "no work of charity should be regarded as foreign to the Society, although its special object is to visit poor families". It is plainly evident from this that the society is given the widest latitude in the selection of the works in which the members may engage and in examining the reports of the various superior councils one marvels at the wonderful array of charitable activities which are therein portrayed. There are committees in charge of fresh-air work for poor children, convalescent homes, support of day nurseries, the custody of paroled prisoners, care of homeless boys, clubs for boys, the visitation of prisoners and the sick in hospitals, the maintenance of chaplains for the purpose of serving Catholic inmates in public institutions, employment bureaus, the care of immigrants, the maintenance of sailors' missions, the finding of homes for orphans, and systematic inspection of their care until maturity. The society also co-operates uniformly with Catholic institutions charities and with other organizations of laymen and lay women engaged in relief work. The spiritual note predominates throughout the work of the society. The service of the poor is undertaken as a spiritual duty belonging to the integrity of Christian life. Throughout all the traditions of the society there is an endeavour to hinder every process by which charity might be made identical with philanthropy or by which the supernatural character of the service of the poor might be lost. The conference takes its name from the parish in which it is formed. The meetings are opened and closed with prayer and a short selection from some spiritual treatise is read. The society has its own feast-days, on which occasions the members receive Holy Communion as a body. By Briefs of Popes Gregory XVI, Pius IX, and Leo XIII numerous indulgences are granted to the society, its benefactors, to the poor assisted by it, and to the fathers, mothers, and wives of the members. An endeavour is made uniformly to cultivate the spirit of St. Vincent de Paul and to follow the discriminating principle of relief given in the spirit of faith taught by him. The note of personal service stands out prominently in the work of the society. The duty of serving the poor, and the need of doing it wisely, is looked upon as one which the individual himself should fulfil; in fact, one of the conditions of active membership is that the conference member shall go personally to visit the poor in their own homes. He combines, when he is true to the spirit and teaching of the society, the function of friendly visitor with that of investigator and the work of upbuilding the dependent as well as that of relieving him. The rules of the society require that minutes of all meetings be kept carefully and that the reasons for all relief accorded be stated; the conference members in charge of a family are required to study the condition of the family and to give the reasons for the decision leading them to ask relief. Their reasons and their judgment may be questioned by the other members present. These minutes of the meetings, when taken in conjunction with the personal knowledge of the poor families aided, serve every purpose of record-keeping. Every care is taken to respect the privacy of the poor. The records of relief work are not open to inspection except by those who have a well-founded right to the knowledge, and this spirit is so characteristic of the society that it places at the disposal of the spiritual director certain funds which may be used in relieving exceptional cases from which no report of whatsoever kind is made to the society itself. Another characteristic is that of deep-seated reluctance on the part of the society to make known the extent of the work or the generosity of its members in giving either money or personal service to the cause of charity. While all the work of the society is done by its members voluntarily and without remuneration, a readiness to employ paid workers in the specialized activities is developing under the exacting and complicated conditions of modern relief. The funds of the society are procured in a number of ways. At all conference and particular council meetings secret collections are taken up, the proceeds going into the treasury. A box is located generally in a conspicuous place in the parish church to receive contributions from the charitably-disposed. The amounts thus received are applied to the work of the conference. Committees engaged in special works solicit subscriptions. Considerable amounts are received in donations and from bequests. In addition there are large numbers of generous subscribing members. Two years after the foundation of the society the membership had increased so rapidly that it was no longer possible to continue working alone as one body and in one place; consequently, the founders realized that the time had come when, to regulate matters properly, it was imperative to divide the society into sections or groups arranged geographically. A meeting was held, geographical divisions made, and the rules under which the society has since lived were then adopted. They were of the simplest character, merely embodying in the form of regulations the usages which had been followed and cherished from the inception of the society. There are over 100,000 active members and an equal number of honorary members. The society is represented in every European country, and thriving branches are to be found in China, India, Turkey in Asia, Ceylon, Egypt, Natal, Transvaal, Philippine Islands, Canada. United States, Mexico, Central America, Brazil, Chile, Colombia, Argentine Republic, Peru, Ecuador, Uruguay, Paraguay, and British Guiana. Twelve years after the inauguration of the work, the society was introduced on the American continent. To St. Louis, Missouri, must be given the honour of having established in 1845 the first conference of the Society of St. Vincent de Paul in the United States. In 1846 a conference was organized In New York City. In 1856 the work of the society had grown to such proportions in New York that it became necessary to establish a particular council, through which correspondence was opened with the authorities of every Catholic diocese in the United States. As a result other sections of the country gradually entered into the work, and year by year the society gained headway, making its influence felt and accomplishing wonders in the work of uplifting the poor. The following statistics of the work of the society in the United States for the year 1910 will serve to give some slight conception of the progress made: superior councils, 4; central councils, 4; particular councils, 34; conferences, 730; members, 12,062; families relieved, 24,742; visits made, 233,044; situations procured, 2949; amount received (exclusive of balances), $384,549; amount expended, $387,849. An important step in the reorganization of the administration of the society in the United States was taken at the national conference held in Boston in 1911, when it was unanimously voted to create a council in each archdiocese of the United States, to be known as the metropolitan central council; diocesan councils in each diocese, to be styled diocesan central councils; and one general council for the administration of all, to be known as the superior council of the United States. This plan of reorganization is now being perfected by a committee appointed at the Boston National Conference. Since it has received the unqualified endorsement of the hierarchy of the United States and has been approved by the council general of the society in Paris, the near future probably will see the new plan of administration put into effective operation. While the Society of St. Vincent de Paul quite naturally calls forth a rather extensive literature concerning its spirit, aims, purposes, and works, it produces of itself relatively little literature, owing to its policy of refraining from publishing any extended account of its varied activities. Reports are issued by the local conferences and councils, and the council general in Paris publishes "The Bulletin", which is regarded as the official organ of the society. The official organ of English-speaking countries is "The Bulletin", published monthly by the superior council of Ireland. "The Quarterly", published be the superior council of New York, is the official organ of the society in the United States. Superior councils of the society in some other countries likewise issue similar periodicals. Rules of the Society of St. Vincent de Paul; Manual of the Society of St. Vincent de Paul; The Bulletin (French); The Bulletin (Irish); The Quarterly (U. S.); O'MEARA, Life of Frederick Ozanam (London, 1879); Society Reports. THOMAS M. MULRY George Augustus Henry Sala George Augustus Henry Sala Journalist, b. in London, 24 Nov., 1828; d. at Brighton, 8 Dec., 1895, having been received into the Church before death. His grandfather, a native of Rome, came to England in 1776; the family were connected with the stage. Being an unusually precocious child, young Sala began at fifteen to earn his living by draughtsmanship. His versatile talent then passed to scene-painting, illustrating books, etching and engraving, finally finding its real vocation in journalism. Attracting the notice of Dickens, he became a regular contributor to "Household Words" and "All the Year Round", and was sent as special correspondent to Russia. His literary output was large and various, though his style was criticized as florid. From 1857 he worked for the "Daily Telegraph", acting as special correspondent all over the world. Much of this journalistic work was republished in book form. He was a man of social and convivial habits who prided himself on his extensive knowledge of cookery. Though earning a large income, his expensive tastes caused him frequent embarrassment, and the failure of his magazine, "Sala's Journal", straitened his circumstances in the last years. His love for London, which he knew intimately, characterizes many of his books. Sala, Life and Adventures of George Augustus Sala, (London, 1895); Yates, Edmund Yates: his Recollections and Experiences (London, 1882); Vizetelly, Glances back through Seventy Years (London, 1893); Lee in Dict. Nat. Biog. EDWIN BURTON Salamanca Salamanca (SALMANTICENSIS, SALMANTINA, SALMANTICAE), Diocese in Spain; comprises the civil Provinces of Salamanca, Cáceres, Avila, and LÈon, and is bounded on the north by Zamora, on the east by Avila and Valladolic, on the south by Cáceres, and on the west by Portugal. The episcopal city has a population of 23,000. Its territory formed the southern portion of the ancient Vetonia, and the existence of the city of Salamanca in the Roman period is evidenced by a pretentious bridge over the River Tornes, with twenty-seven arches, measuring 500 paces in length, and probably erected in the time of Trajan. The See of Salamanca is of unknown origin, probably dating back to the generation immediately after the Apostles, in which generation St. Secundus is said to have founded the Diocese of Avila. Signatures of bishops of Salamanca are found in the Councils of Toledo; in the third council is that of Eleutherius; at the coronation of King Gondemar, that of Teveristus; in the fourth and sixth of Hiccila; in the seventh, eighth and tenth, of Egeretus; in the Provincial Council of MÈrida (metropolis of Salamanca) the signature of Justus;in the twelfth of Toledo that of Providentius; in the thirteenth, fifteenth, and sixteenth, of Holemund, probably contemporaneous with the Moslem invasion. Alfonso I the Catholic pushed his conquests as far as Salamanca, and Ordoño I captured the city, but its bishops continued to reside in Asturias, where the Church of San Julian, outside the walls of Oviedo, was assigned to them. Bishop Quindulfus (802) signed a royal deed of gift. Ramiro II, who defeated the Mohammedans at Simancas, began to repeople Saamanca. In 1102 the king's son-in-law Raymond, Count of Burgundy, and his wife Urraca, gave the churces of the city to Don Jerónimo, the count's master, and built the Cathedral of S. María. The celebrated bishop, comrade of the Cid Campeador, died in 1120 and was interred in the newly-built basilica, to which he left the famous "Christ of the Battles" (Cristo de las Batallas). Later bishops were: Gerardo; Munio, a partisan of Alfonso of Aragón: Berengario, consecrated in 1135 and transferred to Compostela in 1151; Navarro; Ordoño Gonzálo; Pedro Suárez, praised by Alexander III for learning and prudence; and Vitalis, who maintained he validity of Alfoonso IX's marriage with his cousin Teresa of Portugal against the censures of Celetine III and the sentence of the bishops presided over by Cardinal Guillermo in 1197. From his period date the university and the most ancient and famous convents of Dominicans, Franciscans, and Clarisses. In October, 1310, the see being vacant, fifteen prelates of the ancient Province of Lusitania, presided over by the Archbishop of Santiago, assembled in the cathedral of Salamanca to try the case of Templars, and found them innocent in Spain of all the atrocities with which they were charged. Bishop Juan Lucero accompanied King Alfonso XI to the conquest of Algeciras. Later on he became subservient to the caprices of Pedro I the Cruel and annulled (1354) his marriage with Blanche of Bourbon in order to unite him with Juana de Castro. Lucero's successsor, Alsonso Barrasa, on the conrary, supported Henry of Trastamare against Pedro. In May, 1382, a council was held at Salamanca to take action in the matter of the schism of Avignon, and Castile decided in favour of the antipope. In another council (1410) Salamanca again recognized Peter de Luna (Benedict XIII) as pope. At this time Vincent Ferrer laboured to convert the Jews of Saamanca; from 1460 to 1478 St. John of Sahagún enlightened the diocese of his preaching. Salamanca has two cathedrals; the old, celebrated for its massive strength, was foundned in 1100 by the aforesaid Count Raymond near the River Gate (Puerta del Rio). At the end of the thirteenth century it was not yet finished, and its man entrance, called Del Perdón (of the Pardon), was covered over in 1680 with new Doric and Composite pilasters. In 1847 it was freed of its inartistic choir. Its building occupied so long a time that Gothic ogival arches are supported by its Byzantine foundations. Of its three naves the principal one terminates in the main chapel on the reredos of which is to be seen the "Last Judgment" painting of Nicolás Florentino in 1446 for Bisop Sancho of Castile. In early days none but royal personnages wee permitted to be buried in this main chapel; here lie Mafalda, daughter of Alfonso VIII, Fernando Alfonso, natural son of Alfonso IX of León, Bishop Sancho of Castile, Grandson of Pedro, and his successor, Juan de Vivero. The cloisster of the old cathedral was Romanesque, but in 1780 Jerónimo Quiñones rebuilt it in Renaissance style. Most remarkable of ts four chapels, is that of St. Bartholomew, founded by Diego de Anaya, Bishop of Salamanca until 1480, and then Archbishop of Seville, and founder of the famous Colegio de San BartolomÈ. There are also the chapels of Talavera, which was consecrated to the Mozarabic Rite in 1510 and in which Rodrigo Arias Maldonado de Talavera is buried, and that of St. Barbara, founded in 1384 by Bishop Juan Lucero. The new cathedral was founded by the Catholic monarchs, who in 1491 sought to build one in Seville, but the idea was not carried into effect until 1508, when Fernando was at Salamanca. This new edifice was erected side by side with the old, leaving the latter intact. Its architects, Antón Egas and Alfonso Rodríguez, had built churches at Toledo and Seville; Juan Gil de Hontañon was master of works. The buildng was begun in 1560, and it was completed in 10 August, 1733. The tower, set on fire by lightning in 1705, was rebuilt by the celebrated JosÈ Churriguera, who made it a monument of the style (Churrigueresque) to which he gave his name. In the chapel at the centre of the rood screen are remains of Bishop Jerónimo, transferred from the old basilica in 1744, and the venerated "Christ of the Battles". In two large silver vessels within the high altar, the relics of St. John of Sahagún and St. Thomas of Villanova are preserved. Besides the cathedrals, a sumptuous church worthy of especial mention is that of the Dominican convent of San Esteban, occupied by the Dominicans since 1256, where, it is said, Christopoher Columbus was entertained in 1484 and where he found Fray Diego de Deza one of his most ardent protectors. The church was rebuilt in the sixteenth century, the first stone was laid on 30 June, 1524, and the work was completed in 1610. The founder of this convent was the Salamancan Fray Juan de Toledo, of the House of Alva, Bishop of Cordoba, and cardinal; here, too, is buried the famous Duke of Alva with his wife María Enriquez de Toledo. Another beautiful church is that of the Jesuits, founded by King Philip III and his consort Margaret of Austria in 1614. The college was converted into an ecclesiastical seminary by Bishop Beltrán in 1779, was made a pontifical university, and is now under the care of the Jesuits. In former times there were numberous hospitals at Salamanca, but in 1851 it was agreed to combine them all into one, under the care of the Brothers of St. John of God, and dedicated to the Trininty. The library of the university and province, containing more than 100,000 volumes is a remarkable one. Flores, Esp. Sagraada, XIV (2nd ed., Madrid, 1786); Cuadrado, Esp., sus monumentos (Barcelona, 1884); Lafuente, Hist. de Esp. (Madrid,1861). RAMON RUIZ AMADO University of Salamanca University of Salamanca This university had its beginning in the Cathedral School under the direction, from the twelfth century, of a magister scholarum (chancellor). From this episcopal origin, probably in 1230, sprang the royal foundation of Alfonso IX of LÈon, who "with was salutary discretion summoned the most experienced masters of sacred letters and established schools" (Lucas de Tuy); which, however, does no signify, as Rashdall infers, that they taught theology. Alfonso IX granted them the privileges alluded to later by St. Ferdinand, who was in reality the founder, the foundation of his father not having endured. On 6 April, 1243, in letters patent, the saintly king took under his protection the professors, students, and their property, granting them an ecclesiastical tribunal for the settlement of their disputes. In his time began that period of unrivalled prosperity for the university, which for so many centuries made it the "glory of Spain" (Denifle). In Toledo on 8 May, 1254, the king granted the university the privileges that are its Magna Carta, appointing curators, placing it under the authority of the bishop, exempting it from the regular authorities, and assigning salaries for the professors. The professors of law received 500 maravedis a year, canon law 300, grammar, logic, and medicine 200. Some have endeavoured to trace an analogy between these privileges and those granted by Ferdinant I and II to the Universities of Bolgna and Naples. But the fundamental difference that characterized the Spanish university must not be overlooked, that, although a royal foudnation, it was placed under the direction and control of the bishop, the dean, and the chancellor, who conferred the academic titles in the cathedral. The titles were given until 1830 in the name of the pope and king. Doctrinal and ecclesiastical professorships did not, however, contrary to Stein's view, predominate in the university (Denifle). Departments of medicine and juriprudencewere also established, and preference was given to the law, epecially canon law. By petition of theking, 6 Aril, 1255, Alexander IV confirmed the courses at Salamanca, "because in the multitude of the wise is the security of kingdoms, and their govrnments are mantained not less by the advice of the prudent, than by the energy and bravery of the strong". Later he decreed that any accepted teachr in any branch whatsoeveer at Salamanca cold teach his subject in any other university, with the exceptioni of Paris and Bologna, a limitation wich John XXII instituted in 1333. The principles Alfonso the Wise had put into practice in Salamanca, he drew from the "Leyes de Partida", commenced in 1256 and terminated in 1263. Rashdall calls this "a sort of educational code — the first of its kind in modern Europe". In the time of Sancho the Brave the studies declined because the salaries of the professors were not paid. Finally, Ferdinand IV, authorized by Boniface VIII, assigned for this purpjose the "tertia ecclesarum" and from this date, 7 August, 1300, the university entered upon a new era of prosperity. Classes were once more discontinued from 1306 to 1313, when Clement V commanded the "tertia" to be used in restoring the churches. In 1313 a third of the "tertia" was once more devoted to paying the professors of law, civil and canon, medicine, logic, grammar, and music. In 1355 the minorite friar, Dídaco Lupi, taught theology in Salamanca; but this branch, which in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries was to draw the eyes of the entire world to Salamanca, did not flourish there until Benedict XIII introduced it in 1416, and Martin V re-established it in 1422. This pope gave the university its definitive constitution, and numbered it among the four greatest in the world. In 1401 the bishop, Diego de Anaya Maldonado, founded the first college for poor students, which was called the College of San BartolomÈ and later the Old College. This and the colleges of Cuenca, Oviedo, and Fonseca were called "colegios mayores", larger colleges. Aftwerwards a great number of "colegios menores", smaller colleges, secular, regular, and of the four military orders were founded. The Liberals suppressed the "colegios mayores" under the pretext of their decadence but without substituting anyting better, or even equally good, to help the poor students. Following this the "colegios menores" were also closed. The laws of 1845 swept aside the last remaning vestures of these ancient establishments for university training, secularizing them and placing them under the control of the Liberal Government. The number of students at Salamanca in 1584 reached 6778; in 1822 it amounted only to 412, and later it dropped even lower. In the catalogue of its professors figure the names of some celebrated women, such as Doña Beatriz Gallindo and Doña Alvara de Alava. Chacón, Historia de la Universidad de Salamanca 1569 in EL SEMINARIO ERUDITO, XVIII (MADRID,1789); de la Fuente, Hist.de las Univ. (Madrid, 1899) Denifle, Die Entstehung der Ybuv, /berkubm 1885; Rashdall, The Universities of Europe, II Oxford, 1895. RAMON RUIZ AMADO Salamis Salamis A titular see in Cyprus. Salamis was a maritime town on the eastern coast of Cyprus, situated at the end of a fertile plain between two mountains, near the River Pediaeus. It was already an important centre in the sixth century B.C. Its foundation is attributed to Teucer, son of Telamon, King of the Island of Salamis, opposite Attica; others believe it to be of Phoenician origin and derive its name from the Semitic selom, peace. Its fine harbour, its location, and fortifications made it the chief city of the island. In the sixth century B.C. it had kings, allies of the princes of Cyrene; one of them, Gorgus, refused to join in the Ionian revolt, and was expelled by his brother, who took command of the troops of Salamis and the other cities; the battle was fought before Salamis, which fell again into the power of Gorgus. It was besieged by Anexicrates, the successor of Cimon. After the peace of Antacidas, the Persians had to fight for ten years against the valiant king Evagoras, whose panegyric was composed by Isocatres. It was at Salamis in 306 B.C. that the greatest naval battle of antiquity was fought, Demetrius I, Poliorcetes, defeating the Graeco-Egyptian fleet of Ptolemy I. In 295 B.C. Salamis passed under the sway of the kings of Egypt, and in 58 B.C. under that of Rome, at which time it possessed all the eastern portion of the island. When St. Paul landed at Salamis with Barnabas and John, surnamed Mark, returning from Seleucia, there were several synagogues, and it was there he began the conversion of the island (Acts, xiii, 5). Salamis was destroyed by earthquakes, and was rebuilt by Constantius II (337-61), who called it Constantia. It was destroyed by the Arabs in 647 or 648. Its unimportant ruins are near the village of Hagios Sergios, a little north of Famagusta. After its destruction the inhabitants and clergy betook themselves to Famagusta, which became and for a long time remained the residence of the archbishops. At present they reside at Nicosia. In the article on Cyprus (q. v.) are mentioned the principal bishops of Salamis or Constantia; the list of these prelates is given in Le Quien, "Oriens christianus", II, 1043 seq., and more fully in Hackett, "A History of the Orthodox Church of Cyprus" (London, 1901), 651. SMITH, Dict. Of Greek and Roman Geog.; ENGEL, Kypros, eine Monographie, I (Berlin, 1841), 89; DI CENNOLA, Cypern (London, 1877); IDEM, Salaminia (2nd ed., London, 1884); VON LOHER, Cypern (Stuttgart, 1878); FILLION in VIGOUROUX, Dict. De la Bible, s. v. Salamine. S. PÉTRIDÈS Epiphanius of Salamis Epiphanius of Salamis Born at Besanduk, near Eleutheropolis, in Judea, after 310; died in 403. While very young he followed the monastic life in Egypt . On his return to Judea he founded a monastery at Besanduk and was ordained to the priesthood. In 367 his reputation for asceticism and learning brought about his nomination as Bishop of Constantia (Salamis) the metropolis of the Island of Cyprus. For nearly forty years he fulfilled the duties of the episcopate, but his activity extended far beyond his island. His zeal for the monastic life, ecclesiastical learning, and orthodoxy gave him extraordinary authority; hence the numerous occasions on which his advice was sought, and his intervention in important ecclesiastical affairs. He went to Antioch, probably in 376, to investigate Apollinarianism and to intervene in the schism that divided that church. He decided in favour of Bishop Paulinus, who was supported by Rome, against Meletius, who was supported by the episcopate of the East. In 382 he assisted at the Council of Rome to uphold the cause of Paulinus of Antioch. About 394, carried away by an apparently excessive zeal, he went to Jerusalem to oppose the supposed Origenism of the bishop, John. In 402 he was at Constantinople to combat the same pretended heresy of St. John Chrysostom. He died on his return journey to Cyprus. It was at the instance of his correspondents that Epiphanius compiled his works. The earliest (374) is the "Ancoratus", or "The Well-Anchored", i.e. the Christian firmly fixed against the agitations of error. The Trinity and the dogma of the Resurrection are particularly treated by the author, who argues especially against the Arians and the Origenists. There are two symbols at the end of the work: the first, which is the shorter, is very important in the history of symbols, or professions of faith, being the baptismal creed of the Church of Constantia. The second is the personal work of Epiphanius, and is intended to fortify the faithful against current heresies. In the "Ancoratus" Epiphanius confines himself to a list of heresies. Some readers desired to have a detailed work on this question, and Epiphanius composed (374-7) the "Panarion" or "Medicine chest", i.e. a stock of remedies to offset the poisons of heresy. This work is divided into three books comprising in all seven volumes and treating eighty heresies. The first twenty heresies are prior to Jesus Christ; the other sixty deal with Christian doctrine. In reality the number eighty may be reduced to seventy-seven, for among the twenty heresies prior to Christ only seventeen count. Three are generic names, namely Hellenism, Samaritanism, and Judaism. In the editions of the "Panarion" each heresy is numbered in order; hence it is customary to quote the "Panarion" as follows: Epiphanius, Haer. N (the number of the heresy). Necessarily much of the information in this great compilation varies in value. The "Panarion" reflects the character of Epiphanius and his method of working. Sometimes his ardour prevents him from inquiring carefully into the doctrines he opposes. Thus, on his own avowal (Haer., lxxi), he speaks of Apollinarianism on hearsay. At Constantinople he had to acknowledge the Origenist monks whom he opposed that he was not acquainted with either their school or their books, and that he only spoke from hearsay (Sozomen, "Hist. eccl.", VIII, xl). There is, however, in the "Panarion" much information not found elsewhere. Chapters devoted only to the doctrinal refutation of heresies are rare. As an apologist Epiphanius appeared generally weak to Photius. The "Panarion" furnishes very valuable information concerning the religious history of the fourth century, either because the author confines himself to transcribing documents preserved by him alone or because he writes down his personal observations. With regard to Hieracas (Haer., lxvii), he makes known a curious Egyptian sect by whom asceticism and intellectual work were equally esteemed. In connection with the Meletians of Egypt (Haer., lxviii), he has preserved important fragments of contemporary Egyptian history of this movement. With regard to Arianism (Haer., lxix), if he gives an apocryphal letter of Constantine, he transcribes two letters of Arius. He is the only one to give us any information concerning the Gothic sect of the Audians (Haer., lxx). He has made use of the lost report of the discussion between Photius (Haer., lxxi), and Basil of Ancyra. He has transcribed a very important letter from Bishop Marcellus of Ancyra (Haer., lxxii) to Pope Julius and fragments of the treatise of Acaius of Caesarea against Marcellus. With regard to the Semiarians (Haer., lxxiii), he gives in the Acts of the Council of Ancyra (358) a letter from Basil of Ancyra and one from George of Laodicea, and the stenographic text of a singular sermon of Melitius at the time of his installation at Antioch. In the chapter dealing with the Anomeans (Haer., lxxvi) he has preserved a monograph of Aetius. For the first three centuries Epiphanius was compelled to use the only literary sources. Some of these have been preserved, such as the great anti-heretical work of St. Irenaeus of Antioch, "Contra Haereses". Other ancient sources utilized by him have been lost, which gives exceptional value to his work. Thus he made use of the "Syntagma" of Hippolytus. The precise determination of all his sources is matter of controversy. His information is especially valuable with regard to the Samaritans (Haer., x-xiii), the Jews (Haer., xiii-xx), the Ebionites (Haer., xxx), and their Gospel; with regard to the Gnostics Valentius (Haer., xxxi) and Ptolemaeus (Haer., xxxiii), whose letter to Flora he quotes; and with regard to the Scriptural criticism of Marcion. The work ends with a long exposition of the Catholic faith. A summary of the "Penarion" is perhaps the work of Epiphanius. A work entitled "Of Measures and Weights" (De mensuribus et ponderibus) has a more general interest than might be imagined from the title. For the time it is a real "Introduction" to the Holy Scripture, containing the history of Biblical texts and Sacred archaeology. The treatise "On the Twelve Precious Stones" is an explanation of the ornaments of the high-priest's breastplate (Ex., xxviii, 17). Mention must finally be made of two letters of Epiphanius preserved in a Latin translation. In theological matters Epiphanius teaches the doctrine of the Catholic theologians of his time. In the vocabulary of Trinitarian theology he conforms to the language of the Greek Church. He speaks of three hypostases in the Trinity, whereas the Latins and the Paulicians of Antioch speak of one hypostasis in three persons. At bottom it was a mere matter of words, but for some time it occasioned theological dissensions. Ephiphanius clearly teaches that the Holy Ghost proceeds from the Father and the Son. The doctrine that the Holy Ghost proceeds from the Father only prevailed later in the Greek Church. This teaching cannot be traced to Epiphanius (Ancoratus, 8). With regard to the constitution of the Church, he is one of the most explicit of the Greek theologians concerning the primacy of St. Peter ("Ancoratus", 9; "Haer.", lix, 7). Two passages on the Eucharist are famous because they are among those which most clearly affirm the "Discipline of the Secret". The "Secret" was purely pedagogical and often neglected, consisting in grading the doctrinal initiation of catechumens and in not speaking before them of the Christian mysteries save in deliberately vague expressions. Hence the necessity of explaining the words of Epiphanius on the Eucharist ("Ancoratus", 57; "Haer.", xlii, 61). In these two passages, instead of quoting the words of the institution of the Eucharist, the author gives these: "Hoc meum est, hoc." Epiphanius is one of the chief authorities of the fourth century for the devotion to the Blessed Virgin. He expresses himself on the subject in connection with two heresies, of which one diminished, while the other exaggerated, this devotion (Haer." lxxviii, lxxix). A circumstance of his life is well known in the history of images, namely the destruction of an image in the church of Bethel ("Letter to John of Jerusalem" in P.G., XLIII, 390). His character is most clearly shown by the Origenist controversies, which demonstrated his disinterested zeal but also his quickness to suspect heresy, a good faith which was easily taken advantage of by the intriguing, and an ardour of conviction which caused him to forget the rules of canon law and to commit real abuses of power. He saw in Origen the chief cause of the heresies of his time, and especially of Arianism. He was particularly opposed to his allegorical method, his doctrines concerning the Son, in which he saw the subordination of the Son to the Father, his doctrines concerning the pre-existence of souls and the resurrection ("Ancoratus", 54, 62; "Haer.", lxiv). He did not confine himself to this condemnation of Origen. He reproached the monks and bishops of his time with accepting the Origenist errors. Thence resulted at the end of his life the conflict with John of Jerusalem and with St. John Chrysostom. Apart from the injustice of the controversy, he encroached on the jurisdiction of these bishops. He was made use of by Theophilus of Alexandria, the irreconcilable enemy of Chrysostom. The chief sources relative to this controversy are: St. Jerome, "Contra Joannem Hierosolymitanum" in P.L., XXIII, 355; Idem, "Ad Theophilum" in Pl L., XXII, 736; Epiphanius, "Ad Joannem Hierosolymitanum" in P.G., XLIII, 379; Socrates, "Hist. eccl.", VI, x-xiv; Sozomen, "Hist. eccl.", VIII, xiv-xv. The chief editions of Epiphanius's works are those of Petavius (Paris, 1622); Greek text, Latin tr., and notes reproduced with additions in P.G., XLI-XLIII; and of Dindorf (Leipzig, 1859-62), 5 vols., giving only the Greek text, improved in some parts. BARDENHEWER, Patrology, tr. SHAHAN (St. Louis, 1903); ZARUCKE, Literarischer Zentralblatt, LXI, no. 16. LOUIS SALTET Louis-Siffren-Joseph Salamon Louis-Siffren-Joseph Salamon Bishop of Saint-Flour; b. at Carpentras, 22 Oct., 1759; d. at Saint-Flour, 11 June, 1829. After studying law and theology at Avignon, at that time belonging to the Papal States, he was made auditor of the Rota by the favour of Pius VI. This office he resigned for a post in the Parliament of Paris, where he took part in the famous case of the "Diamond Necklace" (1754), which Cardinal de Rohan had purchased for Marie Antoinette. He continued to be a member until the Parliament was abolished (1790). Meanwhile he had kept up a correspondence with the cardinal secretary of State, informing him of all that passed in Paris and could be of interest to Pius VI. When the nuncio, Mgr Dugnani, left Paris towards the end of 1790, the pope appointed Salamon to be his internuncio at the Court of Louis XVI. His devotion to the Church marked him out for persecution, and accordingly he was thrown into prison at the time of the September massacres, 1792. Twice he narrowly escaped death. On his release he wandered about in disguise, acting as vicar Apostolic. In 1801 Mgr Caprara arrived in France as papal legate and appointed him administrator general of the dioceses of Normandy. The new pontiff, Pius VII, did not select him for one of the sees under the Concordat, but made him Bishop of Orthozia in partibus. It was not until after the Restoration that he received a French see at the suggestion of Louis XVIII (1820). His episcopate lasted only nine years, but these were full of work for the restoration of religion. The training of the clergy especially engaged his attention, as he lamented the contrast between the cultured priests of the old rÈgime and those who were brought up during the confusion of the Revolution. His "Memoires" were discovered at Rome and published by AbbÈ Bridier ("MÈmoires inÈdits de l'internonce à Paris pendant la RÈvolution", Paris, 1890). They have been translated by Frances Jackson ("A Papal Envoy during the Terror", London, 1911). His statements are sometimes at variance with established facts. D ELAPORTE, L'Internonce à Paris, pendant la rÈvolution in Etudes, LII [LIII] (Paris, 1891), 318-22; S CANNELL, The internuncio at Paris during the revolution in Dublin Review, CIX (London, 1891), 107-23. T.B. SCANNELL Domingo de Salazar Domingo de Salazar Born in La Rioja, in the village of La Bastida on the banks of the Ebro, 1512; died in Madrid, 4 December, 1594. He entered the Dominican monastery of San Esteban, Salamanca. Sent to Mexico, where he received the degree of Master in Theology, he was appointed to the professor's chair. His ambition to evangelize the heathen was granted and he devoted himself to the conversion of the natives in the Province of Guajaca. He was characterized here by the same zeal for defending the rights of the Indians that he manifested later in an heroic degree in the Philippines. Salazar was next transferred to Florida, where he passed many years in toil and privation. From Florida he was recalled to Mexico to be prior of his convent and vice-provincial of his order. After forty years of missionary life, he was sent to Madrid on important business connected with the Mexican mission. Political enemies tried to thwart his work and succeeded in having him thrown into prison when he sought audience of the king. It was then that his presence in Madrid was brought to the attention of Philip, who proposed his name to the pope as Bishop of the Philippines. Salazar was loath to accept the dignity; but his missionary spirit prevailed. As he wrote later: "One of the reasons which made me accept this bishopric was the fact that these Islands are near China . . . For a long time I have had the conversion of that kingdom at heart, and with that thought I came to these Islands". He set out for his see via Acapulco, taking with him twenty Dominicans, twelve of whom died before reaching Mexico; of the remainder only one was able to continue the journey to the Philippines. Salazar arrived in Manila in 1581. He espoused the cause of the Filipino with a fearlessness that won for him the titles of the "intrepid Salazar", "the Las Casas of the Philippines". He held a synod of the clergy, which was later confirmed by the pope, erected a cathedral, regulated the internal affairs of the diocese, opened a college, and established a hospital. In his charity to the poor he even pledged his pectoral cross to relieve their necessities. Old age did not lessen his zeal. He was almost eighty when he set out for Spain to plead in person the cause of the natives with the king. His mission was successful; various abuses were corrected, three new dioceses were created, and Manila was elevated to a metropolitan see with Salazar as its first archbishop. He died before receiving the Bull of his appointment and was buried in the Church of Santo Tomás, Madrid. His tomb bears this inscription: "Hic jacet D. Fr. Dominicus de Salazar Ordinis Prædicatorum, Philippinarum Episcopus, doctrina clarus verus religiosæ vitæ sectator, suarum ovium piissimus Pastor, pauperum Pater, et ipse vere pauper. Obiit 4 die Decembris anno 1594." B LAIR AND R OBERTSON, The Philippine Islands (Cleveland, 1903); F ERRANDO, Historia de los PP. Domínicos en las Islas Filipinas (Madrid, 1870); M ORENO, Historia de la Santa Iglesia Metropolitana de Filipinas (Manila, 1877). PHILIP M. FINEGAN Sale Sale (SALIENSIS) Diocese in Victoria, Australia, comprises all the territory known as Gippsland. In 1840 Count Strzelecki, an expatriated Polish scientist, accompanied by a young Irishman named James Riley and some attendants, first penetrated this region, which they found to be singularly fertile and teeming with resources, though hitherto regarded as a trackless waste. Its scenery is remarkably beautiful, and it is often called the "Garden of Australia". Still it was colonized but slowly, as the native inhabitants were regarded as fierce and warlike, while many natural obstacles to settlement were offered by the dense forests, lofty mountain ranges, and swift torrents. At the present time, however, it is one of the regions of Australia best known to tourists. It is rich in pasture and timber lands, while its vast mineral wealth is still only partly developed. The capital is Sale, now the seat of the episcopal see erected in 1887 at the request of the plenary synod. Its first bishop was the present titular Rt. Rev. James Francis Corbett. He was born at Limerick in 1840; his theological studies were made in France, and on his return he worked for some years as a priest in his native diocese. He went to Australia at the invitation of Archbishop Goold of Melbourne, to whom he acted as diocesan secretary while fulfilling the duties of pastor of St. Kilda's. He was assistant secretary of the synod of 1885, and on his appointment to the new see was consecrated by Archbishop Carr of Melbourne 25 August, 1887, in the Church of St. Kilda which he himself had built. On his arrival in his diocese there were within its limits three parochial districts and four priests, three of whom afterwards returned to their former Diocese of Melbourne. There are now (1911) 9 parishes, 18 priests, 47 churches or chapels, and 10 schools with 830 pupils. The Catholic population is 13,521, and there are 61 sisters of Notre Dame de Sion. M ORAN, Hist. of Cath. Church in Australia (Sydney, s. d.); B ATTANDIER, Annuaire, Pont. (1911). BLANCHE M. KELLY Salem Salem (SALMANSWEILER) Also called Salomonis Villa on account of the resemblance of its primitive buildings to Solomon's Temple. Salem is an abbey situated near the Castle of Heiligenberg, about ten miles from Constance, Baden (Germany). The abbey was founded by Gunthram of Adelsreute (d. 1138) in 1136 during the reign of Pope Innocent II and Emperor Lothair II. Gunthram also gave the Abbot of Lucelle the necessary lands for the first Cistercian monastery in Alsace, the latter being a foundation of Bellevaux, first daughter of Morimond. Blessed Frowin, formerly the travelling companion and interpreter of St. Bernard, became its first abbot. He had been professed at Bellevaux, and was of the colony sent to found Lucelle; hence have arisen misunderstandings, some maintaining, erroneously, that Salem was founded from Bellevaux. Under the wise and prudent administration of Blessed Frowin and his successors, the abbey soon became very prosperous. Extensive and magnificent buildings, erected in three squares, and a splendid church were constructed between 1182 and 1311. Salem was noted as the richest and most beautiful monastery in Germany, being particularly renowned for its hospitality. Amongst its greatest benefactors and patrons were Conrad of Swabia and Frederick Barbarossa. The former placed the abbey under the special protection of himself and his successors — hence the title of "Royal Abbey" which was renewed several times under Barbarossa and his successors; Innocent II also took the abbey under his particular patronage. Its growth was continuous, and even after having made three important foundations — Raitenhauslach (1143), Maristella or Wettingen (1227), and Konigsbrunn (1288) — it numbered 285 monks at the beginning of the fourteenth century. Its abbot, from 1454 on, was privileged to confer subdeaconship on his monks. The abbey gradually declined, though it numbered forty-nine priests and thirteen other choir religious in 1698, when Abbot D. Stephen (d. 1725) became Vicar-General of the Cistercian Congregation of Upper Germany. Caspar Oexle, who, as librarian, had increased the library to 30,000 volumes and a great number of MSS., was elected abbot in March 1802; in September of the same year the abbey was suppressed and given to the Princes of Baden, while the library was added to that of Petershausen, and finally sold to the University of Heidelberg. The church became a parish church; the grand tower with its fifteen bells, the largest weighing 10,000 lbs., was destroyed (1805), and the other buildings were used as the grand duke's castle. Eberhard, its fifth abbot, is honoured as a Blessed of the order. He was made Archbishop of Salzburg, and entrusted with various important missions by the Holy See. Blessed Henry, a lay brother, is also mentioned in the Cistercian menology. VON WEECH, codex diplomaticus salemitanus (3 vols., Carlsruhe, 1883-95); PETRI, Suevia eccles. (Augsburg, 1698); BUCELINUS, Aquila imperii benedictina (Venice, 1651); Gallia christ., V; Idea chrono-topo-graphica Cong. Cist. S. Bernardi per Superiorem Germaniam (1720); HAUTINGER, Suddeutsche Kloster vor 100 Jahren (Cologne, 1889); SARTORIUS, Cistercium bistertium (Prague, 1700); BRUNNER, Ein Cisterziensbuch (Wurzburg, 1881); BOTTCHER, Germania sacra (Leipzig, 1874); JANAUSCHEK, Orig. Cisterc., I (Vienna, 1877). EDMOND M. OBRECHT Salerno Salerno Diocese in Campania, Southern Italy. The city is situated on the gulf of the same name, backed by a high rock crowned with an ancient castle. The surrounding country is well cultivated, and a natural harbour promotes the commerce of agricultural products; breeding of horses is carried on to a considerable extent. There are two mineral springs. The entrance to the cathedral, built by Robert Guiscard, is through a great court surrounded by porticos, with columns of granite and porphyry, where several ancient sarcophagi are preserved. The middle doors are of bronze, beautifully decorated. In 1722 the interior was transformed by Peorio. The beautiful columns were shut up between pilasters of walling, and the pointed arches were ruined. Of the ancient basilica there remains a high marble candelabrum adorned with mosaics; between the choir and the side of the high altar is the chapel of Giovanni da Procida, also adorned with mosaics and containing the tomb of Gregory VII. In the chapel to the right there is a beautiful Pieta, the finest work of Andrea Salerno. Among other treasures of the sacristy is an ivory altar frontal with scenes from the Old and from the New Testament. There is a tradition that the body of St. Matthew, the apostle, is preserved in the crypt under the high altar; the columns of the vault are beautifully incrusted with multi-coloured marbles. Among other churches are: the Annunziata; San Giorgio, which may rightly be called a picture gallery (Life of St. Benedict); and S. Domenico, where an arm of St. Thomas Aquinas is preserved. Charitable institutions were, and still are, numerous. Salerno was the city of the Salentini. After war with Hannibal (194 B.C.), a Roman colony was established there. In the Social War it was taken by the Samnites. In the eighth century the city was in the power of the Lombard dukes of Benevento; Arichis fortified it and took refuge there, when Charles the Great invaded his duchy. In 840 Siconulfus, brother of the Duke Sicardus who was killed by the partisans of Radelgisus, was proclaimed prince at Salerno, which from that time constituted an independent principality. With the assistance of the Saracens and with the spoils of the churches Siconulfus defended his independence, which was confirmed in 851 by the Emperor Louis II, to whom the prince had sworn allegiance. The chief cities of the principality were Taranto, Cassano, Cosenza, Paestum, Conza, Salerno, Sarno, Cimitile (Nola), Capua, Teano, and Sora. The son of Siconulfus, Sico, was dethroned by his tutor, Petrus, who was succeeded by his son Ademar; the latter, however, was deposed by a conspiracy, tortured, and blinded, while Guaiferius was put in his place (861). In 874 the port of Salerno was so well defended that the Saracens had to abandon the blockade of the city. Guaimarus, son of Guaiferius, struggled (880) against the Saracens and the Byzantines, but on account of his cruelty he was deposed, blinded, and thrown into prison. His son, Guaimarus II, ruled wisely. Gisulfus became famous through the splendour of his court. He was despoiled by the exiled Prince of Beneventum, Landolfo, but Pandolfo Capo-di-Ferro, Prince of Beneventum, restored Gisulfus (974), who, through gratitude, associated with himself in the principality Pandolfo, son of the liberator, by whom he was succeeded in 978. The latter also was deposed by Mansus III, Duke of Amalfi (981), who was confirmed in the principality by Otho II. The people of Salerno, however, rebelled against him, and gave the throne to Giovanni Lamperto, a descendant of the Dukes of Spoleto. Under his son and successor, Guaimaro III (994-1018), the people of Salerno were helped by about forty Norman warriors to repel the Saracens. Guaimaro IV dreamed of uniting the whole of lower Italy into a single principality; he took Amalfi and Sorrento and warred with Argiro, master of Bari, but was assassinated by the Amalfians in 1031. It was only with the assistance of the Normans that his son Gisulfus III was able to recover his throne. The cruelty of Gisulfus against the Amalfians gave to Robert Giuscard, brother-in-law of Gisulfus, a pretext to wage war and to take possession of Salerno, which was bravely defended (1075). Gisulfus ended his days in the pontifical states. Thus the last Lombard principality of Italy came to an end. At the death of Guiscard his states were divided; Salerno was inherited by Roger, who was succeeded (1111) by his son William; at the latter's death Salerno gave itself to Roger II of Sicily (1127), from whom it was taken by the Emperor Lothair (1137), although the latter was unable to hold it. In 1196 Salerno was again besieged, by land and sea, for having held Constance, wife of Henry IV, a prisoner. For this offense dreadful revenge was taken and Salerno never recovered from the damage done to it in the pillage. The heirs of the first princes of the House of Anjou bore the title of Prince of Salerno; John II invested with it Girolamo Colanna, nephew of Martin V. Charles V suppressed the principality, but the province continued to be called Principality of Salerno. The medical school of Salerno was famous in medieval history; it was founded neither by Charles the Great nor by the Arabs, the city never having been under the domination of either. Its origin is to be found in the Benedictine monastery of Salerno, established in 794, in which the botanical and the medical works of the ancients were studied. Its fame grew, when about the year 1070 the celebrated Costantino Africano took refuge there. He had studied in the schools of the Arabs in Babylon, at Bagdad, and in Egypt, and was presented by the brother of the caliph of Babylon to Guiscard, who took him as secretary. He gave a new impulse to philosophical and to medical studies by making known in the West the works of the Arabs. Robert I gave laws to the schools of Salerno, which was the first Western school to introduce academic degrees. New regulations were established for it by Frederick II, who ordered that no one should practise medicine without being "licensed" by that school, the fame of which waned after the fifteenth century through the competition of Naples. The school was suppressed in 1811, together with the University of Salerno. Among the famous physicians that it produced were: Garisponto, author of the "Passionarium Salerni"; Cofone (Ars medendi); and Matthaeus Platearius, author of a commentary on the "Antidotarium" of Nicolo Pietro Musandino (thirteenth century). The "Herbarium" of the school of Salerno was disseminated throughout Europe in the twelfth century. In the same century the rules of hygiene of this school were collected and edited in leonine verse; these rules, which even now are not antiquated, were the schools greatest title to praise. The "Anonymus Salernitanus" who continued the history of the princes of Benevento from Erchempertus to 980, Andrea Sabatini a pupil of Raphael, and Andrea da Salerno were natives of this city. In view of its position, it was natural that Salerno should receive the light of the Gospel at an early date; in fact, various saints, as Antes, Caius, and Fortunatus (28 August), suffered martyrdom there. The age of Bonifacius and four other saints who preceded Gaudentius on the episcopal throne is uncertain; Gaudentius, however, was bishop in 499, which would show that the see was created towards the end of the fourth century. Other bishops were Asterius, who went to Constantinople with Pope Agapitus in 534; St Gaudiosus (eighth century); Petrus (834), formerly Bishop of Canusio, who took refuge at Salerno when the Saracens destroyed his capital, and built the Church of San Giovanni Battista; Bernardus (850), a man of great virtue, who restored several buildings. In 984 Salerno became an archiepiscopal see, the first archbishop being Amato. Other archbishops were: San Alfano (1058-85), who received the exiled Gregory VII; Romualdo Guarna (1153), who took an important part in the ecclesiastical and political affairs of the Kingdom of Naples; Nicolo Agello (1181), taken prisoner by Henry IV to Germany, where he remained for many years notwithstanding the prayers of the popes, especially of Innocent III; Guglielmo de' Godoni (1298), chancellor of the Duke of Calabria, whose successors, to Orso Minutolo (1330), resided at Avignon; Barnaba Orsini (1441), who restored the cathedral; Giovanni Vera (1500), later a cardinal, who was sent on several pontifical legations to France and to England; Girolamo Seripandi (1554), a famous theologian and former general of the Augustinians, whose doctrines on justification, too much akin to those of Luther, were rejected at the Council of Trent, and who afterwards became a cardinal, and died at Trent; Gaspare Cervante (1564), who founded the seminary; Marc Antonio Colonna (1568), who established another college for clerics; his nephew, Marc Antonio Colonna (1574), the author of valuable works; Mario Bolognini (1591), who distinguished himself in France in the controversies with the Huguenots; Giovanni de Torres (1658), who reformed the lives of the clergy; Gregorio Caraffa (1664), a Theatine and a reformer; Antonio Salomone, who, after the annexation of the kingdom of Naples, was imprisoned without reason (1886), and at the beginning of the war with Austria was sent into exile. Since 1818 Salerno has for suffragans the Sees of Capaccio e Vallo, Policastro, Marsico Nuovo, and Nusco. The See of Acerno, which appears a diocese since 1136, is united with it in perpetual administration; among its bishops mention should be made of the Franciscan Antonio Bonito (1493). The archdiocese has: 155 parishes; 60,000 inhabitants; 600 secular priests; 2 institutes for boys and 4 for girls; 11 religious houses for men and 14 for women; and 1 Catholic daily paper. CAPPELLETTI, Le Chiese d' Italia, XX (Venice, 1857); SCHIPA, Storia del principato longobarda de Salerno (Naples, 1887); DE RENZI, La Scuola Salernitana (Naples, 1857); DAREMBERG, L'Ecole de Salerne (Paris, 1880), text and translation of the rules of hygiene. U. BENIGNI The Salesian Society The Salesian Society The Salesian Society, founded by Saint John Bosco, takes its distinctive name from its patron, Saint Francis de Sales. The object for which it was founded may be best seen from the opening words of its constitution: "the Christian perfection of its associates obtained by the exercise of spiritual and corporal works of charity towards the young, especially the poor, and the education of boys to the priesthood." The cradle of the institute may truthfully be said to have been the fields of Valdocco, at that time a suburb but now an integral part of the city of Turin. In the first half of the nineteenth century Italy had not recovered from the disastrous consequences of the false and atheistical philosophical teachings brought into the country at the time of the French Revolution. For this reason education, morality, and religion were then at their lowest ebb. To save the rising generation the Salesian Society was founded. In 1844 Don Bosco began to gather together poor and neglected boys. He found places for them to play in, taught them Catechism and heard their confessions in the open air, afterwards taking them to one of the churches in the city, where he used to say Mass for them and give them holy Communion. These gatherings, called "Festive Oratories", became one of the most important and useful works of the institute in attracting boys. In 1845 the first night-school was opened at Valdocco, and became a permanent institution in the course of a year. It proved such a success that a second one was opened (1847) at Porto Nuovo, and a third at Vanchiglia (1849). In the beginning Don Bosco, for lack of personnel, was forced to make use of the older and more advanced pupils, setting them as teachers and monitors over the others, but necessity soon forced him to form a regular and permanent trained staff. Many of his boys, too, began to develop vocations for the priesthood, and became clerics, while still continuing to assist in the work of education. Much opposition was made to the growing institute, but Mgr. Franzoni, then Archbishop of Turin, took it under his protection, and even the king, Charles Albert, who had heard of Don Bosco's work, became its patron, and it steadily grew. It was, however, found impossible, in many cases, to make a permanent impression on the character of the boys during the short time that they were under the influence of the teachers at the festive oratories and the night-schools. A very large number of the boys had not only to earn their living, but had to learn a trade beforehand to enable them to do so. Thus a new class of boys arose -- the boy-artisans -- which constituted the second division of good works in the rising institute. In 1852 the Church of Saint Francis de Sales was completed and consecrated, and surrounding it large schools for the students and workshops for boy-artisans began to rise. During all this time the work was developing, and a and of devoted and efficient teachers slowly emerged from the chaos of evolution. About this time Don Bosco was urged to consolidate and perpetuate his work by forming a religious congregation, and in 1857 he drew up its first set of rules. In the following year he went to Rome to seek the advice and support of his benefactor, Pius IX, and in 1859 he summoned the first chapter of the congregation, and began the Society of Saint Francis de Sales. In 1863 and 1864 colleges were opened at Mirabello, Monferrato, and Lanzo. This was a new step, as hitherto the scope of the congregation had been almost entirely restricted to the poor. In 1874 the Rule and Constitutions of the Society were definitively approved by Pius IX, and the Salesian Society took its place among the orders of the Church. The development of the order was very rapid; the first Salesian house outside of Italy was opened at Nice in 1875. In the same year, the first band of Salesian missionaries was sent to South America, and houses were founded in Argentina and Buenos Ayres. In 1876 the Salesian co-operators were organized for the purpose of assisting in the good works of the congregation. They were enriched with many indulgences by Pius IX. The Figli di Maria Ausiliatrice, or the Sons of Mary, Help of Christians, were founded to assist tardy vocations to the priesthood. In 1877 the "Salesian Bulletin", the official organ of the congregation, made its first appearance, its object being to inform the Catholic world of the good works undertaken by the institute and to beg help to support them. The "Bulletin" is now printed in eight different languages. In 1877 houses were opened in Spezia, Almagro, and Montevideo. In 1879 missionaries were sent to Patagonia, and houses were opened at Navarre, Marseilles, and Saint-Cyr (France). In 1880 the first house in Spain was opened at Utera, and in South America the mission at Viedma, capital of the Rio Negro, was established. In 1883 the first house in Brazil was opened at Nichteroy, and missions were established at Terra del Fuego and the Falkland Islands. In 1887 the first house was opened in Austria at Trent, and in the same year the Salesians established themselves at Battersea in London, England, and a large band of missionaries was sent to Ecuador. On 31 January, 1886, to the great grief of the congregation, Don Bosco died at the age of seventy-two. His successor, Don Rua, continued and developed the work of the congregation, and many more houses were opened in France, Spain, Italy, Belgium, Portugal, and South America. In 1889 houses were established in the Holy Land and in Africa. Between 1894 and 1911 houses have been founded in Mexico, Tunis, Venezuela, Patagonia, Lisbon, Bolivia, Colombia, Paraguay, Montpelier, Cape Town, England, Chili, San Salvador, Peru, India, and China. The first mission opened in the United States was at San Francisco in 1898. there are now two in that city, and another at Oakland on the other side of the bay. In New York there were two missions opened respectively in 1898 and 1902. A college was opened at Troy in 1903, but transferred (1908) to Hawthorne, Westchester County, in the State of New York. Although the real object of the Salesian Society is the Christian education of the young, especially of the poorer and middle classes, it does not refuse any work of charity for which it has suitable members. In carrying out its principal work, instead of the old punitive or repressive system, it adopts the preventive one, thus promoting confidence and love among the children, instead of fear and hatred. The success of this method is seen from the number of vocations drawn from its ranks. The young aspirants are imbued with the Salesian spirit even before joining the congregation. One year is spent in the novitiate, after which triennial vows are taken before the tyro is admitted to his final profession. The growth of the congregation may be seen from the fact that it contains about 320 houses, distributed into 34 provinicalates, of which 18 are in Europe, and the remaining 16 in America. The houses in Asia and Africa belong to European provinces. There has been no diminution except in France, where most of the houses were suppressed during the regime of persecution under Combes. The houses in Portugal were left untouched during the late change in government. In 1910 the second father general of the congregation died, and was succeeded by Don Albera. The main work of the institute is the education and training of boys divided into two classes, students and artisans. The second branch is the missionary one, and it finds its scope principally in South America and Asia. The third branch is engaged in the education of adults for the priesthood and the fourth is occupied in the diffusion of good Catholic literature. The order obtains its support largely from the generosity of the Salesian co-operators, who, as a third order, contribute largely for this purpose, and to whom the "Salesian Bulletin" is sent monthly, to keep them informed on the progress of the work in distant lands, and to urge them to greater generosity. HEIMBUCHER, Die Orden u. Kongregationen, III (Paderborn, 1908), 491 sqq.; Lives of Don Bosco by LEMOYNE, FRANCESIA, D'ESPINEY; BONETTI, I Cinque Lustri; The Salesian Bulletin. ERNEST MARSH Salford Salford (SALFORDIENSIS) The Diocese of Salford comprises the Hundreds of Salford and Blackburn, in Lancashire, England, and was erected 29 Sept., 1850. It covers the east and south-eastern portions of Lancashire and embraces the manufacturing towns of Manchester, Salford, Blackburn, Oldham, Bury, Burnley, Rochdale, etc. Its area is practically coextensive with that of the ancient Catholic deanery of Manchester, which was under the jurisdiction of the rector or dean, but its title was taken from Salford instead of Manchester to avoid offending Protestant susceptibilities, as an Anglican See of Manchester had been erected in 1847. The Apostolic Letter of Pius IX, which divided the Lancashire District into the two Sees of Liverpool and Salford, allotted to Salford the Hundred of Leyland in addition to those of Blackburn and Salford, but a papal Brief dated 27 June, 1851, transferred to Liverpool the Hundred of Leyland which included the important Catholic town of Preston. The Hundred of Blackburn, covering the north-western portion of the diocese, extends twenty-four miles east to west, and fourteen miles north to south. In the chequered history of the Church following on the religious changes of the sixteenth century it had, with Salford, a long roll of recusants and martyrs for the Faith. The ruins of Whalley Abbey, a thirteenth-century Cistercian foundation, still bear their silent witness. Its abbot, John Paslew, was hanged outside its walls in 1537 for taking part in the Pilgrimage of Grace in 1536; and the property was seized for the use of Henry VIII. The first post-Reformation chapel in Blackburn was opened in 1773, and in Manchester in 1774. In 1843 the Rev. James Sharples, rector of St. Alban's, Blackburn, was consecrated Bishop of Samaria and appointed coadjutor to Bishop Brown, the first vicar Apostolic for the Lancashire District. He built at Salford St. John's Church, which was opened in 1848 and which subsequently became the cathedral for the diocese. Dr. Sharples died 16 Aug., 1850, and the first Bishop of Salford in the restored hierarchy was Rt. Rev. William Turner (1790-1872). He was succeeded in 1872 by the Rt. Rev. Herbert Vaughan (1832-1903), whose episcopate was remarkable for its energy, organizing ability and initiation of works to meet the rapid grown and development of the diocese. On his transference to Westminster in 1892, the Rt. Rev. John Bilsborrow (1836-1903) was consecrated third bishop. The Rt. Rev. Louis Charles Casartelli, D.D., M.A., Litt.Or.D., the fourth bishop, was born in 1852, and ordained priest in 1876. He was closely associated with Cardinal Vaughan in the foundation of St. Bede's College, Manchester, in 1876, and was rector of it when he was nominated bishop in 1903. Bishop Casartelli is widely known as a writer on Oriental subjects, was a professor at Louvain, and has always been very active in the theologico-literary field. The Rt. Rev. John S. Vaughan, D.D., Bishop of Sebastopolis, was elected auxiliary bishop in 1909. Population The Catholic population is estimated at about 300,000, and this is largely a growth of the latter half of the nineteenth century. Although Catholic memories and traditions lingered in Lancashire long after the Reformation, in 1690 only two Catholics were enrolled on the Manchester Poll Book. Ten years later, thirteen Catholic families, according to the returns of the Bishop of Chester, existed in the parish of Manchester with its area of sixty square miles. In 1775 the number of Catholic baptisms in Manchester was thirty-two, whilst the congregation of St. Chad's Catholic Chapel, which had been opened in 1774, was estimated at 500. A survey made for the statistical society of the various Sunday schools in Manchester and Salford in 1836 returned the number of Catholic schools as ten, with an attendance of 4295 scholars. Similar small beginnings were witnessed it the Blackburn Hundred. In 1793 there is record of twenty-six Catholic baptisms for Blackburn. The number of Catholics in the town in 1804 was estimated at 745, and in 1819 the number had increased to 1200 for the town and district. Missions and Priests At the present time there are in the diocese 138 public churches and chapels, 48 convents and private chapels, and 10 chapels of institutions in which Mass is said. The secular clergy number 235, and in addition there are 86 regulars belonging to the Benedictines, Friars Minor, Dominicans, Premonstratensians, Jesuits, Missionary Fathers of St. Joseph, and the Congregation of the Divine Pastor. Education A chain of efficient Catholic elementary schools links up the compulsory secular instruction with the Catholic religious teaching given in them. 55,000 children are on the rolls of the 140 Catholic schools, with their 263 departments and a teaching staff of 1591 Catholic teachers. A training college for residential female teachers, conducted by the Order of the Faithful Companions of Jesus, adds to the completeness of the organization for elementary education. For secondary or higher education there are 18 schools and colleges. Stonyhurst, the great Jesuit college, is the successor of the College of St. Omer, which was founded by Father Robert Parsons, S.J., in 1592 and transferred to Lancashire on 29 Aug., 1794. Works of Charity One of the great works of Cardinal Vaughan during his Salford episcopate was the founding of the Catholic Protection and Rescue Society in July, 1886. The object was to protect and save the destitute Catholic child whose Faith was in danger. 6569 boys and girls have passed through its homes during the years 1886-1911, and its annual expenditure exceeds x4000. The "Harvest", a monthly publication, is its official organ. Orphanages for girls, institutions for the aged and poor under the Little Sisters of the Poor, night shelters for homeless girls under the Sisters of St. Vincent de Paul, the Sisters of St. Joseph in connection with the Rescue Society, sisters who nurse the poor in their own homes, the Sisters of the Good Shepherd who seek to reclaim the fallen, Nazareth House, industrial schools for boys under the Brothers of the Christian Schools, and Brothers of Mercy, and for girls under the Sisters of St. Vincent de Paul; all these manifest an untiring activity in ameliorating the lot of the poor, the forlorn, and the sick. The Catholic Federation and Other Organizations Drastic educational legislation proposed by the government in 1906 and the imperative need for the organization of Catholic forces led to the formation of the Catholic Federation by Bishop Casartelli in 1906. Its primary object is the defence of purely Catholic interests, in which equality of treatment for Catholic schools largely predominates. The official organ is the "Catholic Federationist", which was first issued in Jan., 1910, and is used by the bishop as a vehicle to convey his "message" on current questions. Other societies are: a local branch of the Catholic Truth Society, the parent society of which was reorganized by Cardinal Vaughan when Bishop of Salford in 1884; the School of Social Science; the Society of St. Vincent de Paul; the Ladies of Charity; the Catholic Needlework Guild; the Catholic Boys' Brigade; the Catholic Philharmonic Society; and the Catholic Women's League, with its notable offshoot "The Mothers' and Babes' Welcome". Almanac for the Diocese of Salford (Salford, annually since 1877); SNEAD-COX, Life of Cardinal Vaughan, vol. I (London, 1910); O'DEA, The Story of the Old Faith in Manchester (Manchester, 1910); GERARD, Stonyhurst College, Centenary Record (Belfast, 1894); GRUGGEN AND KEATINGE, History of Stonyhurst College (London, 1901); SMITH, Chronicles of Blackburnshire (Nelson, 1910); CURLEY, The Catholic Hist. Of Oldham (Oldham, 1911). W. O'DEA Salimbene Degli Adami Salimbene degli Adami (OGNIBENE). Chronicler, b. at Parma, 9 Oct., 1221; d. probably at Montefalcone about 1288. He was a member of a distinguished family and about 1238 entered the Franciscan Order. For a time he led a very troubled and wandering life, as his father sought to withdraw him from the order by violence. At a later date he was for a long while in the monasteries at Florence, Parma, Ravenna, Reggio, and Montefalcone. He came into close connection with many scholars of his age, and was also acquainted with Pope Innocent IV and the Emperor Frederick II. Besides various treatises that have been lost he wrote, towards the end of his life, a chronicle covering the years 1167-1287. This chronicle was first edited in the "Monumenta historica ad provincias Parmensem et Placentinensem pertinentia", III (Parma, 1857), but the part issued only covered the years 1212-87. The first part of the chronicle, covering the years 1167-1212, was edited by L. Clédat in his work "De fratre Salimbene et de eius chronicae auotoritate" (Paris, 1878). A fine and complete edition was edited by Holder-Egger in "Mon. Germ. Hist.: Scriptores", XXXII (Hanover, 1906). Besides a poor Italian translation by Cantarelli there is an incomplete one in English by Coulton with the title "From Francis to Dante" (London, 1906). The chronicle is one of the most useful sources of the thirteenth century for the political history of that time and is also an animated picture of the era; it is of especial importance for the history of the internal disputes in the Franciscan Order. The writer it is true is a very impulsive and easily influenced man, is swayed by the prophecies of Joachim of Fiore, is inclined to be a partisan, especially against the secular clergy, yet at the same time he shows sound historical sense, is an intelligent critic, and regards it as the chief object of his historical writing to present the exact truth. MICHAEL, Salimbene und seine Chronik (Innsbruck, 1889); POTTHAST, Bibliotheca historica medii aevi (Berlin, 1896), 994. PATRICIUS SCHLAGER Diocese of Salisbury Ancient Diocese of Salisbury (SARUM, SARISBURIENSIS). The diocese was originally founded by Birinus, who in 634 established his see at Dorchester in Oxfordshire, whence he evangelized the Kingdom of Wessex. From this beginning sprang the later Dioceses of Winchester, Sherborne, Ramsbury, and Salisbury. In the time of Bishop St. Headda (676-705) the see was moved to Winchester, and on Headda's death (705) a formal division took place, when the greater part of Wiltshire with portions of Dorset and Somerset were formed into the Diocese of Sherborne of which St. Aldhelm became the first bishop. Ten bishops in turn succeeded St. Aldhelm before the next subdivision of the see in 909, when Wiltshire and Berkshire became the separate see of Ramsbury, restricting the Diocese of Sherborne to Dorsetshire only. The arrangement continued until the two dioceses were again united in 1058 under Herman, who had been made Bishop of Ramsbury in 1045. He lived to transfer his episcopal chair to Old Sarum in 1075. His successor, St. Osmund, built a cathedral there and drew up for it the ordinal of offices, which became the basis of the Sarum Rite (q. v.) It was the seventh Bishop of Sarum, Richard Poore, who determined to remove the cathedral from the precincts of the royal castle of Old Sarum to a more convenient spot. On 28 April, 1220, he laid the foundation stones of the present cathedral, beginning with the Lady chapel which was consecrated on 28 Sept., 1225. Among those present was St. Edmund, afterwards Archbishop of Canterbury, and at this time treasurer of Salisbury. The cathedral was completed in 1266, having taken nearly half a century to accomplish. It stands alone among English cathedrals in having been built all of a piece, and thus possesses an architectural unity which is exceptional; it is also remarkable as being the first important building in the early English style. The cloisters and chapter house were shortly added; the spire regarded as the most beautiful in Europe is one of the loftiest in the world, and was a later addition, the exact date of which is unknown; prpbably built by 1300. The diocese was divided into four archdeaconries: Salisbury, Berkshire, Wiltshire, and Dorsetshire. In the "Valor Ecclesiasticus" of 1535, over 800 parish churches are recorded. From the translation of the see to Salisbury the bishops were: Old Sarum: + Herman, consecrated 1058, removed the cathedral to Sarum, 1075; + St. Osmund, 1078; + vacancy, 1099; + Roger, 1103; + Jocelin, 1142; + vacancy, 1184; + Hubert Walter, 1189; + Herbert Poore, 1194. New Sarum: + Richard Poore, 1217; + Robert Bingham, 1229; + William of York, 1247; + Giles de Bridport, 1257; + Walter de la Wyle, 1263; + Robert de Wykehampton, 1274; + Walter Scammel, 1284; + Henry de Braundeston, 1287; + William de la Corner, 1289; + Nicholas Longespee, 1292; + Simon of Ghent, 1297; + Roger de Mortival, 1315; + Robert Wyville, 1330; + Ralph Erghum, 1375; + John Waltham, 1388; + Richard Mitford, 1395; + Nicholas Bubwith, 1407; + Robert Hallam, 1408; + John Chandler, 1417; + Robert Neville, 1427; + William Ayscough, 1438; + Richard Beauchamp, 1450; + Lionel Woodville, 1482; + Thomas Langton, 1485; + John Blythe, 1494; + Henry Deane, 1499; + Edmund Audley, 1502; + Lorenzo Campegio, 1524. In 1534 Cardinal Campegio was deprived of the temporalities and Nicholas Shaxton was schismatically intruded into the see. On Campegio's death, Peter Peto (afterwards cardinal) was nominated but never consecrated. Under Mary, the schismatical bishop, John Capon (or Salcot) was reconciled and held the see till his death in 1557. Peto was again nominated, but did not take possession, and Francis Mallet was named, but ejected by Elizabeth before consecration. The cathedral was dedicated to Our Lady. BRITTON, Hist. and Antiquities of Salisbury (London, 1814); DODSWORTH, Historical Account of the See and Cathedral Church of Sarum (LONDON, 1814); CASS, Lives of the Bishops of Sherborne and Salisbury (Salisbury, 1824); PHILLIPPS, Institutiones clericorum in comitatu Wiltoniae (n. P., 1825); ROCK, Church of Our Fathers (London, 1849-53); SCOTT, Salisbury Cathedral: position of high altar (London, 1876), JONES, Fasti Ecclesiae Sarisburiensis (Salisbury, 1879-81); IDEM, Salisbury in Diocesan Histories (London, 1880); IDEM, Charters and documents illustrating the hiatory of the Cathedral, etc., of Salisbury in R. S. (London, l891); WHITE, Saliabury: the Cathedral and See (London, 1896); WORDSWORTH, Ceremonies and processions of Cathedral Church of Salisbury (London, 1901). EDWIN BURTON Saliva Indians Saliva Indians The principal of a small group of tribes constituting a distinct linguistic stock (the Salivan), centring in the eighteenth century, about and below the junction of the Meta and Orinoco, in Venezuela, but believed to have come from farther up the Orinoco, about the confluence of the Guaviare in Columbian territory. They were of kindly and sociable disposition, and especially given to music, but followed the common barbarous practice of killing the aged and feeble. They disinterred the bones of the dead after a year, burned them, and mixed the ashes with their drinking water. In their ceremonies they blew upon the batuto, or great clay trumpet common to the tribes of the region. A grammar of their language was composed by the Jesuit Father Anisson. In 1669 the Jesuit Fathers Monteverde and Castan established the first mission in the tribe, under the name of Nuestra Señora de los Salibas, but both dying within a year the Indians again dispersed to the forest. In 1671 other Jesuit missions were established in the same general region, at Carichana, Sinameo and San Lorenzo, together with a small garrison of twelve soldiers at the first-named station, but were all destroyed by two successive invasions of the savage Carib from below in 1684 and 1693. In these two attacks four priests lost their lives, together with the captain of the garrison, his two sons, and others. Forty years later the missions were restored, the principal one, of the Saliva, being established in 1734 at Carichana on the Orinoco, just below the junction of the Meta. Its founder was Father Manuel Roman, superior of the Jesuit missions of the Orinoco, and discoverer of the Casiquiare connexion with the Amazon. The tribe numbered at that time about 4000 souls, only a small part resided at the mission. It was visited and described by Humboldt in 1800. Another Saliva mission, San Miguel de Macuco, on the Meta, had at one time 900 souls. On the expulsion of the Jesuits in 1767-68 the Orinoco missions were placed in charge of Franciscan fathers, but fell into decline. The revolutionary war and the withdrawal of help from the Spanish Government completed their ruin. The mission property was seized, the Indians scattered, and the tribe is now virtually extinct. JAMES MOONEY Salmanticenses and Complutenses Salmanticenses and Complutenses These names designate the authors of the courses of Scholastic philosophy and theology, and of moral theology published by the lecturers of the philosophical college of the Discalced Carmelites at Alcalá de Henares, and of the theological college at Salamanca. Although primarily intended for the instruction of the younger members of the order, these colleges, being incorporated in the Universities of Alcalá (Complutum) and Salamanca, opened their lecture rooms also to outsiders. During the Middle Ages the Carmelites, with some notable exceptions, had gone hand in hand with the Dominicans in the matter of Scholastic teaching as against the Franciscan and Augustinian schools; it was therefore natural that in the sixteenth century they should maintain their old allegiance as against the Jesuits. Consequently they made strict adherence to Thomism their fundamental principle, and carried it out with greater consistency than probably any other commentators of the neo-Scholastic period. Although the names of the several contributors to the three courses are on record, their works must not be taken as the views or utterances of individual scholars, but as the expression of the official teaching of the order, for no question was finally disposed of without being submitted to the discussion of the whole college, and in case of difference of opinions the matter was decided by vote. By this means such uniformity and consistency were obtained that it could be claimed that there was not a single contradiction in any of these immense works, although nearly a century elapsed between the publication of the first and the appearance of the final instalment. At the beginning the lecturers contented themselves with writing their quaterniones, many of which are still extant. But at the beginning of the seventeenth century the publication of a complete course was decided upon. The "Logic", written by Diego de Jesus (b. at Granada, 1570; d. at Toledo, 1621) appeared at Madrid, 1608, and was re-written by Miguel de la SS. Trinidad (b. at Granada, 1588; d. at Alcalá 1661), in which form it was frequently printed in Spain, France, and Germany. Nearly all the remaining philosophical treatises were the work of Antonio de la Madre de Dios (b. at Léon, 1588; d. 1640). The whole work was then re-cast by Juan de la Anunciacion (b. at Oviedo, 1633; general from 1694 to 1700; d. 1701), who also added a supplement. It appeared at Lyons in 1670 in five quarto volumes, under the title, "Collegii Complutensis Fr. Discalc. B. M. V. de Monte Carmeli Artium cursus ad breviorem formam collectus et novo ordine atque faciliori stylo dispositus". It superseded all previous editions and various supplements, such as the "Metaphysica in tres lib. distincta" (Paris, 1640) by the French Carmelite, Blasius à Conceptione. Antonio de la Madre de Dios laid the foundation of the dogmatic part of the Salmanticenses by publishing, in 1630, two volumes containing the treatises "De Deo uno", "De Trinitate", and "De angelis". He was succeeded by Domingo de Sta Teresa (b. at Alberca, 1600; d. at Madrid, 1654), who wrote in 1647 "De ultimo fine", "De beatitudine, etc.", and "De peccatis". Juan de la Anunciación, already mentioned, contributed "De gratia", "De justificatione et merito", "De virtutibus theologicis", "De Incarnatione", "De sacramentis in communi", and "De Eucharistia". He left the first volume of "De poenitentia" in manuscript. It was revised and continued by Antonio de S. Juan-Bautista, who, dying at Salamanca in 1699, was unable to carry it through the press. The work was therefore completed by Alonso de los Angeles (d. 1724) and Francisco de Sta Ana (d. at Salamanca, 1707). This last volume, the twelfth, appeared in 1704. The Salmanticenses have ever been held in the highest esteem, particularly at Rome where they are considered a standard work on Thomistic scholasticism. A new edition, in twenty volumes appeared in Paris as late as 1870-83. An abridgment (two large volumes, in folio) for the use of students was published by Pablo de la Concepcion (general from 1724 to 1730; d. at Granada, 1734). The moral theology of the Salmanticenses was begun in 1665 by Francisco de Jesus-Maria (d. 1677), with treatises on the sacraments in general, and on baptism, confirmation, the Eucharist, and extreme unction. The fourth edition (Madrid, 1709) underwent considerable revision on account of the new Decrees of Innocent XI and Alexander VII. It was augmented by a disquisition on the "Bull Cruciata" of José de Jesús-Maria, published by Antonio del SS. Sagramento. Andrés de la Madre de Dios (d. 1674) wrote "De sacramento ordinis et matrimonii" (Salamanca, 1668), "De censuris", "De justitia" and "De statu religioso", with all cognate matters. Sebastian de San Joaquin (d. 1714), the author of two volumes on the Commandments, did not live to see his work through the press. Hence it was completed and published by Alonso de los Angeles, who had also put the last hand to the course of dogmatic theology. St. Alphonsus Liguori esteemed the moral theology of the Salmanticenses; he nearly always quotes them approvingly and follows their lead, though on rare occasions he finds them somewhat too easy going. Lehmkuhl complains that they are not always accurate in their quotations. HENRICUS A SS. SACRAMENTO, Collectio scrip. ord. Carmel. excalc. (Savona, 1884), passim; HURTER, Nomenclator. B. ZIMMERMAN Salmas Salmas A Chaldean see, included in the ancient Archdiocese of Adhorbigan, or Adherbaidjan; we know several Nestorian bishops of the latter, from the fifth to the seventh centuries (Chabot, "Synodicon orientale", 665), and in the Middle Ages (Le Quien, "Oriens christianus", II, 1283), also some Jacobite bishops (Le Quien, op. cit., II, 1565). At a date which is not quite certain, but which goes back at least to the end of the eighteenth century (Guriel, "Elementa linguae chaldaicae", Rome 1860, p. 206), the Chaldean Catholic Archdiocese of Adherbaidjan formed one with that of Salmas, and since then it has continued to exist. The diocese contains 8000 faithful, 10 priests, 13 parishes or stations, and 12 churches or chapels. The seminary is at Ourmiah; the Sisters of Charity direct the primary schools. The town and Province of Salmas in the Persian Adherbaidjan are rich in marble, orchards, and vineyards. Revue de l'Orient Chrétien, I, 450; Miss. Cathol. (Rome, 1907), 814. S. VAILHÉ Salmeron Alphonsus Salmeron Jesuit Biblical scholar, born at Toledo, 8 Sept., 1515; died at Naples, 13 Feb., 1585. He studied literature and philosophy at Alcala, and thereafter went to Paris for philosophy and theology. Here, through James Lainez, he met St. Ignatius of Loyola; together with Lainez, Faber, and St. Francis Xavier he enlisted as one of the first companions of Loyola (1536). The small company left Paris, 15 Nov., 1536, and reached Venice, 8 Jan., 1537, and during Lent of that year went to Rome. He delivered a discourse before the Holy Father and was, in return, granted leave to receive Holy orders so soon as he should have reached the canonical age. About 8 Sept., all the first companions met at Vincenza, and all, save St. Ignatius, said their first Mass. The plan of a pilgrimage to the Holy Land was abandoned. Salmeron devoted his ministry in Sienna to the poor and to children. On 22 April, 1541, he pronounced his solemn vows in St. Paul's-Outside-the-Walls, as a professed member of the newly-established Society of Jesus. The autumn of that year, Paul III sent Salmeron and Broët as Apostolic nuncios to Ireland. They landed, by way of Scotland, 23 Feb., 1542. Thirty-four days later they set sail for Dieppe and went on to Paris. For two years Salmeron preached in Rome; his exposition of the Epistle to the Ephesians thrice a week in the church of the Society effected much good (1545). After preaching the Lent at Bologna, he went with Lainez to the Council of Trent (18 May, 1546) as theologian to Paul III. The Dogma of Justification was under discussion. The two Jesuits at once won the hearts and respect of all; their discourses had to be printed and distributed to the bishops. Both set out for Bologna (14 March, 1547) with the Council. After serious sickness at Padua, Salmeron once again took up his council work. The next two years were in great part spent in preaching at Bologna, Venice, Padua, and Verona. On 4 Oct., 1549, Salmeron and his companions, Le Jay and Canisius, took their doctorate in the University of Bologna, so that they might, at the urgent invitation of William IV of Bavaria, accept chairs in Ingolstadt. Salmeron undertook to interpret the Epistle to the Romans. He held the attention of all by his learning and grace of exposition. Upon the death of Duke William, and at the instigation of the Bishop of Verona, much to the chagrin of the faculty of the Academy of Ingolstadt, Salmeron was returned to Verona (24 Sept., 1550). That year he explained the Gospel of St. Matthew. Next year (1551) he was summoned to Rome to help St. Ignatius in working up the Constitutions of the Society. Other work was in store. He was soon (Feb., 1551) sent down to Naples to inaugurate the Society's first college there, but after a few months was summoned by Ignatius to go back to the Council of Trent as theologian to Julius III. It was during the discussions preliminary to these sessions that Lainez and Salmeron, as papal theologians, gave their vota first. When the Council once again suspended its sessions, Salmeron returned to Naples (Oct., 1552). Paul IV sent him to the Augsburg Diet (May, 1555) with the nuncio, Lippomanus, and thence into Poland; and later (April, 1556) to Belgium. Another journey to Belgium was undertaken in the capacity of adviser to Cardinal Caraffa (2 Dec., 1557). Lainez appointed Salmeron first Provincial of Naples (1558), and vicar-general (1561) during the former's apostolic legation to France. The Council of Trent was again resumed (May, 1562) and a third pontiff, Pius IV, chose Salmeron and Lainez for papal theologians. The rôle was very delicate; the Divine origin of the rights and duties of bishops was the be discussed. During the years 1564-82, Salmeron was engaged chiefly in preaching and writing; he preached every day during eighteen Lenten seasons; his preaching was fervent, learned, and fruitful. His writings during this long period were voluminous; Bellarmine spent five months in Naples reviewing them. Each day he pointed out to Salmeron the portions that were not up to the mark, and the next day the latter brought back those parts corrected. The chief writings of Salmeron are his sixteen volumes of Scriptural commentaries--eleven on the Gospels, one on the Acts, and four on the Pauline Epistles. Southwell says that these sixteen volumes were printed by Sanchez, Madrid, from 1597 till 1602; in Brescia, 1601; in Cologne, from 1602-04, Sommervogel (Bibliothèque de la C. de J., VII, 479) has traced only twelve tomes of the Madrid edition--the eleven of the Gospels and one of the Pauline commentaries. The Gospel volumes are entitled, "Alfonsi Salmeronis Toletani, e Societate Jusu Theologi, Commentarii in Evangelicam Historiam et in Acta Apostolorum, in duodecim tomos distributi" (Madrid, 1598-1601). The first Cologne edition, together with the second (1612-15), are found complete. These voluminous commentaries are the popular and university expositions which Salmeron had delivered during his preaching and teaching days. In old age, he gathered his notes together, revised them, and left his volumes ready for posthumous publication by Bartholomew Pérez de Nueros. Grisar (Jacobi Lainez Disputationes Tridentinae, I, 53) thinks that the commentary on Acts is the work of Perez; Braunsberger (Canisii epist., III, 448) and the editors of "Monumenta Historica S.J." (Epistolae Salmeron, I, xxx) disagree with Grisar. The critical acumen of Salmeron, his judicious study of the Fathers and his knowledge of Holy Writ make his Scriptural exegesis still worth the attention of students. He was noted for his devotion to the Church, fortitude, prudence, and magnanimity. The Acts of the Council of Trent show that he wielded tremendous influence there by his vota on justification, Holy Eucharist, penance, purgatory, indulgences, the Sacrifice of the Mass, matrimony and the origin of episcopal jurisdiction--all most important questions because of the gradual infiltration of some heretical ideas into a small minority of the hierarchy of that time. WALTER DRUM Salome Salome (1) The daughter of Herod Philip and Herodias (Matthew 14:6-8: Mark 6:22; cf. Josephus, "Antiq. Jud.", XVIII, v, 4), at whose request John the Baptist was beheaded. (2) One of the holy women present at the Crucifixion, and who visited the tomb on the morning of the Resurrection (Mark 15:40; 16:1). In Mark 15:40, we read: "And there were also women looking on afar off: among whom was Mary Magdalen, and Mary the Mother of James the Less and of Joseph, and Salome." The parallel passage of Matthew reads thus: "Among whom was Mary Magdalen, and Mary the mother of James and Joseph, and the mother of the sons of Zebedee" (Matthew 27:56). Comparison of the two gives a well-grounded probability that the Salome of the former is identical with the mother of the sons of Zebedee in the latter, who is mentioned also in Matthew 20:20 sq., in connection with the petition in favour of her sons. Beyond these references in the Gospel narrative and what may be inferred from them nothing is known of Salome, though some writers conjecture more or less plausibly that she is the sister of the Blessed Virgin mentioned in John 19:25. JAMES F. DRISCOLL Salt Salt Always used for the seasoning of food and for the preservation of things from corruption, had from very early days a sacred and religious character. The Prophet Eliseus employed it to make palatable the waters of a well (IV Kings, ii, 19 sqq.). The Orientals used it to cleanse and harden the skin of a newborn child (Ezech., xvi, 4); by strewing salt on a piece of land they dedicated it to the gods; in the Jewish Law it was prescribed for the sacrifices and the loaves of proposition (Lev., ii, 13). In Matthew 5:13, salt symbolizes wisdom, though perhaps originally it had an exorcistic signification. Its use in the Church belongs exclusively to the Roman Rite. The Ritual knows two kinds of salt for liturgical purposes, the baptismal salt and the blessed salt. The former, cleansed and sanctified by special exorcisms and prayers, is given to the catechumen before entering church for baptism. According to the fifth canon of the Third Council of Carthage it would seem that salt was administered to the catechumens several times a year. This use of salt is attested by St. Augustine (Conf., I. 1, c. xi) and by John the Deacon. St. Isidore of Seville speaks of it (De off., II, xxi), but in the Spanish Church it was not universal. The other salt is exorcized and blessed in the preparation of holy water for the Asperges before high Mass on Sunday and for the use of the faithful in their homes. The present formula of blessing is taken from the Gregorian Sacramentary (P.L., LXXVIII, 231). Both baptismal salt and blessed salt may be used again without a new benediction. The appendix of the Roman Ritual has a blessing of salt for the use of animals and another in honour of St. Hubert. The Roman Pontifical orders salt to be blessed and mixed in the water (mixed in turn with ashes and wine) for the consecration of a church. This is also from the Gregorian Sacramentary. Again salt (not specially blessed) may be used for purifying the fingers after sacred unctions. FRANCIS MERSHMAN Diocese of Salta Diocese of Salta (SALTENSIS). Comprises the civil Provinces of Salta and Jujuy in the northern part of the Republic of Argentina. It was created on 17 February, 1807, the territory being taken from the ancient Diocese of Córdoba del Tucumán. Until 1898 it comprised also the civil Provinces of Tucumán, Santiago del Estero, and Catamarca, which have recently been detached to form new dioceses. The first Bishop of Salta was Nicolás Videla del Pino, who was succeeded by Fray Buenaventura Rizo Patrón, Monsignor Pablo Padilla y Bárcena, and the present bishop, Mgr. Matias Linares y Sanzetenea. The diocese possesses a handsome cathedral and seminary, and conducts a private printing plant which issues a Catholic daily paper, "Tribuna popular". Religious orders of men are represented by the Redemptorists, who devote themselves to giving missions, the Fathers of the Divine Word, the Canons Regular of the Lateran, the Salesians, who are in charge of the schools, and one convent of Franciscans subject to the Congregation of Propaganda. The Sisters of the Good Shepherd, of the Garden of Olives, of the Sacred Heart of Jesus, and Franciscan Tertiaries devote their time to teaching, hospital work, and visiting the sick in their own homes. JULIAN TOSCANO Diocese of Saltillo Diocese of Saltillo (SALTILLENSIS). Diocese in the Republic of Mexico, suffragan of Linares, or Monterey. Its area is the same as that of the State of Coahuila (63,728 sq. miles), and its population (1910), 357,652. The city of Saltillo (5190 feet above the sea-level) is the principal residence of the bishop and of the Governor of the State of Coahuila, and, according to above census, has a population of 35,063. This city was founded in 1575 by Francisco Urdinola, and inhabited by the Huachichiles and Borrados Indians of the country, and by Tlaxcaltecas brought by the Spanish. The Franciscan Father Andres de Leon was one of the first missionaries in this territory in the sixteenth century. In 1827 the name of Saltillo was changed to Ciudad Leona Vicario, in honor of the celebrated Mexican heroine of that name, but the original name always prevailed. The Franciscan Fathers of the Province of Jalisco had eight missions in Coahuila, which, in 1777, formed part of the See of Linares, or Monterey, and belonged to it until 1891, when Leo XIII erected the See of Saltillo with jurisdiction over the entire State of Coahuila. This see has a seminary, with 20 students; 26 parochial schools; 10 Catholic colleges, among these that of St. John Nepomucene; they have altogether 3000 pupils, both boys and girls. The Protestants have 10 colleges with 781 pupils, and 33 churches. In the capital, Saltillo, the present cathedral, which was the former parish church, is worthy of mention. The city of Parras de la Fuente, with a population of 7000, is also notable. It owes its name to the wild grape vines found there by the Conquistadores. D. Antonio Martín of Sapata, and Fray Agustin de Espinosa, who founded the city there, 18 Feb., 1592. During the Spanish domination it was the residence of the Jesuit Fathers, who gave many missions and cared for the towns of the famous Laguna. The modern city of Torreón is the most populous of the state; nevertheless it counts but few religious elements. NORIEGA, Geografia de la Republica Mexicana (Mexico, 1898). CAMILLUS CRIVELLI Diocese of Salt Lake Diocese of Salt Lake (LACUS SALSIS). Includes the State of Utah, and slightly more than half of the State of Nevada. The State of Utah (with the exception of a rectangular piece in the extreme northeast corner, included within the boundary lines of Wyoming), forms a parallelogram, which has a length of 350 miles north and south, and an extreme width of nearly 300 miles. Embraced within the boundaries of the state is a total area of 84,970 square miles, of which 2,780 square miles is water surface leaving a land area of 82,190 square miles. Nevada has a total area of 110,700 square miles and of this area 71,578 square miles belongs to the Diocese of Salt Lake, viz., the Counties of Elko, Lander, Eureka, White Pine, Lincoln, and Nye, a group of counties in the eastern part of the state. This westerly boundary of the diocese, beginning at the extreme north-west corner of Elko County on the state line between Nevada and Oregon and two miles west of 117° W. long., follows south along a line parallel to this meridian for a distance of one hundred miles to the Battle Mountains, when it turns abruptly to the west, along the northerly slope of these mountains for a short distance, and then follows a south-westerly line to a point a little south of 40° N. lat. From here it continues south along an irregular line, skirting the western slope of the Shoshone Range, and thence, by an abrupt turn to the left, along a line parallel to the boundary between Nevada and California, it goes back to 117° W. long., which it again closely follows across the Ralston and Amargosa deserts to the southern boundary of the state. This part of the diocese lies within the Great Basin, except an area of about 12,000 square miles located in the extreme southerly end, the drainage from which flows into the Colorado River. Bounded on the north by the States of Wyoming, Idaho, and Oregon, on the west by the western part of Nevada, on the south by California and Arizona, and on the east by Colorado, the Diocese of Salt Lake extends from 109° to 117° W. long., and from 35 to 42° N. lat. This is an immense territory, sparsely settled, made up of mountains, deserts, sheep ranges, arable valleys, and alluvial lands. The Catholic population is found largely in mining camps, along railroad sections, in Salt Lake City, Ogden, and Park City. The region embraced by the diocese is overwhelmingly Mormon. In 1886 all the territory now included within the boundaries of the diocese constituted a vicariate Apostolic, and the Rev. Lawrence Scanlan, the missionary then in charge, was raised to the episcopate and the vicariate committed to his care. In 1891 the vicariate Apostolic was erected into a diocese, and the Right Rev. Lawrence Scanlon, D.D., fixed his see permanently at Salt Lake City. The history of Catholicism in Utah and Nevada practically began when, early in 1873, Father Scanlan settled in Salt Lake City as pastor of a little parish in the city, and missionary priest over all Utah and more than half of Nevada. Before his appointment the pioneer priests, Fathers Raverdy, E. Kelly, James Foley, and Patrick Walsh, visited or resided for a brief period in Salt Lake City. When Father Scanlan took charge, there was only one small church in the great territory. To-day the statistics of the Church in this region are: estimated Catholic population, Utah and six Nevada counties, 20,000; parishes, 9; missions and stations, 33; parochial and missionary priests, 21; Marist Fathers, 10; Sisters of the Holy Cross, 108; Sisters of Mercy, 12. All diocesan and parochial property is vested in the bishop, who holds it in trust for the people. The Cathedral of St. Mary Magdalen, Salt Lake City, dedicated in August, 1909 by Cardinal Gibbons, is one of the greatest ecclesiastical structures west of the Missouri River. The bishop, as pastor of his large parish, is assisted by five curates, who visit the Catholic institutions of the city, preside at the catechism classes and direct the sodalities of the Holy Angels, the Sacred Heart, the Children of Mary, and the Altar Society. Institutions All Hallows College, Salt Lake City; founded by Bishop Scanlan in 1886; conducted by the Marist Fathers (Very Rev. Dr. Guinan, president), has an annual attendance of 200 pupils, taught by 15 professors; St. Mary's Academy, Salt Lake City; conducted by 33 sisters of the Society of the Holy Cross (Sister Alexis, superior), annual attendance, 250; Convent of the Sacred Heart, Ogden, sisters, 23; pupils, 230; Kearns St. Ann's Orphanage, Salt Lake City, orphans 160, cared for by 10 sisters of the Holy Cross; Judge Mercy Hospital, Salt Lake City, conducted by Sisters of Mercy, Holy Cross Hospital, Salt Lake City, under the care of Sisters of the Holy Cross; the Sisters of the Holy Cross have charge of the parish schools at Salt Lake City, Ogden, Park City, and Eureka. In nearly all the parishes and in all the houses of education, the League of the Sacred Heart, and Sodalities of the Children of Mary and of the Holy Angels are flourishing. SALPOINTE, Soldiers of the Cross, HOWLETT, Life of Rt. Rev. Joseph P. Machebeuf; DE SMET, Letter published in Precis Historiques (Brussels, 19 Jan., 1858); CHITTENDEN, Father De Smet's Life and Trarels among the North American Indians; HARRIS, The Catholic Church in Utah. W.R. HARRIS Salto Salto (SALTENSIS). Diocese in Uruguay, suffragan to Montevideo. This diocese with that of Melo was erected by Pope Leo XIII by his Brief of 19 April, 1897, on the petition of the Bishop of Montevideo and with the consent of the Uruguayan Government. Montevideo was raised to the archiepiscopal rank and two titular bishops were named to assist the new archbishop. However, owing to unfavorable political conditions, no appointments to the new sees have yet been made (December, 1911). The Diocese of Salto comprises the north-western portion of the Republic of Uruguay (see the Ecclesiastical Map of South America in CATHOLIC ENCYCLOPEDIA, III), including the departments of Río Negro, Paysandú, Salto, Artigas, and Tacuarembo, with an area of 25,700 square miles and a population of about 197,000 inhabitants. The town of Salto (population 12,000) is situated on the Río de la Plata opposite Concordia in Argentina. It has a large export trade, and is in communication with both Montevideo and Buenos Aires, by boat and rail. Paysandú (population 16,000) is also a busy commercial centre, the neighboring region being extensively devoted to stock-raising. It contains a hospital and two churches. KEANE, Central and South America, I (London, 1909); MULHALL, Handbook of the River Plate Republics (London, 1895); DIAZ, Hist. de las Repub. de la Plata (Montevideo, 1878); Publications of the Direccion de estadistica general (Montevideo, current); BRYSSEL, La republique orientale de l'Uruguay (1889); Handbook of Uruguay: International Bureau of the American Republics (Washington, 1892 and 1909); BAUZA, Historia de la dominacion espanola en el Uruguay (Montevideo, 1880). Coluccio di Pierio di Salutati Coluccio di Pierio di Salutati Italian Humanist b. in Tuscany, 1331; d. 4 May, 1406. He studied at Bologna and went to Rome to begin his career as pontifical secretary to Urban IV. He had a passion for ancient letters and from 1368 was in correspondence with Petrarch. In 1375 he was summoned to Florence to be chancellor or Latin secretary for the republic, which office he held until his death. He immediately became a frequent attendant of the learned meetings which were held at the Convent of San Spirito and gathered about Luigi de' Marsiglii, theologian and Humanist (d. 1394), and at the Villa Paradiso of the Alberti. Salutati's life was filled chiefly by political and administrative matters; thus he was led to write several works against the Duke of Milan. Among his works are short treatises, "De fato et fortuna", "De religione et fuga saeculi"; the only one printed is "De nobilitate legum et medicinae" (Venice, 1542); but the most interesting portion of his works is his correspondence, a learned edition of which was published by Novati; "Epistolario" (Rome, 1891). Salutati's manuscripts are rather rare in libraries because taste changed suddenly with regard to Latin style. Æneas Sylvius (Pius II) said that he may have had merit in his time, but that modern writers had obscured him. As early as 1401 Leonardo Bruni of Arezzo exactly depicted the Florentine circle in his dialogue and represented Salutati as an old man of another generation. Salutati's activity was exercised under two especially fruitful forms: he received and guided young men very well; Poggio was treated by him as his son; he protected Bruni, and welcomed with enthusiasm Manuel Chrysoloras, whose arrival at Florence in 1396 was the great event of the Renaissance at the end of the fourteenth century. He used his influence to secure Chrysoloras a pension of 100 florins a year, and, old as he was, he took up a course in Greek. On the other hand he devoted himself to seeking for Latin MSS; in 1375 he secured from Verona a copy of Catullus which is still one of the standard texts of the poet (now in Paris, Bib. Nat., Latin 14137). He was also in possession of Petrarch's Propertius, and the best and most ancient MS. of Tibullus (Ambrosianus) was also probably in his library. Petrarch was only acquainted with a collection of Cicero's letters, comprising the letters to Atticus and Quintus and the correspondence between Brutus and Cicero. While endeavoring to recover Petrarch's copy Salutati stumbled upon another collection in 1389, that known as the "Familiar Letters"; in 1392 he was able to have Petrarch's MS. copied at Milan, and this copy is now the chief authority for the text. He was the first to possess Cato's treatise on agriculture, the elegies of Maximianus, the "Aratea" of Germanicus, and the commentary of the grammarian, Pompeius, on Donatus. Provided with these means of study he was able to take up questions of literary history. He proved that the treatise "De differentiis" was not Cicero's. He dealt with the problem of the Octavia, but here he shot wide of the mark. To him we owe the distinction, now long admitted to be incorrect, between Seneca the tragedian and Seneca the philosopher. SABBADINI, Le scoperte dei codici latini e greci ne secoli XIVe XVe (Florence, 1905), 34; VOIGT, Die Wiederbelebung des classischen Altertums, I (Berlin, 1893), 190; SANDYS, A History of Classical Scholarship,II (Cambridge, 1908), 17. PAUL LEJAY Saluzzo Saluzzo (SALUCLIAE, SALUTIENSIS) Diocese in the Province of Cuneo, Piedmont, Upper Italy. The city of Saluzzo is built on a hill overlooking a vast, well-cultivated plain. Iron, lead, silver, marble, slate, etc. are found in the surrounding mountains. The cathedral (1480- 1511), half-Gothic, contains a magnificent high altar, and is rich in sculptures. The church of St. Bernard, formerly belonging to the Conventuals, has interesting tombs of the counts della Torre; the church of St. Dominic contains several artistic tombs, especially that of the Marquess Lodovico II and his spouse (1504), and the chapel of the Holy Sepulchre. St. Augustine's and St. Bernardino's are also worthy of note. The present town hall is the former Jesuit College, while the older one (1462), with a bold tower, is utilized by the Court of Assizes. It was the birthplace of Silvio Pellico, typographer Bodoni, Abate Denina, and Malcarne the anatomist. Saluzzo was a town of the Vagienni, or mountain Liguri, and later of the Salluvii. This district was brought under Roman control by the Consul M. Fulvius. In the Carlovingian era it became the residence of a count; later, having passed to the marquesses of Susa, Manfredo, son of Marquess Bonifacio del Vasto, on the division of that principality became Marquess of Saluzzo; this family held the marquisate from 1142 till 1548. The marquisate embraced the territory lying between the Alps, the Po, and the Stura, and was extended on several occasions. In the Middle Ages it had a chequered existence, often being in conflict with powerful neighbours, chiefly the Counts of Savoy. Tommaso III, a vassal of France, wrote the romance "Le chevalier errant". Ludovico (1416-75) was a wise and virtuous prince. Ludovico II constructed a tunnel, no longer in use, through the Monviso, a remarkable work for the time. With the help of the French he resisted a vigorous siege by the Duke of Savoy in 1486, but in 1487 yielded and retired to France where he wrote "L'art de la chevalerie sous Vegèce" (1488), a treatise on good government, and other works on military affairs. He was a patron of clerics and authors. In 1490 he regained power. After long struggles for independence, this small state was occupied (1548) by the French, as a fief of the Crown. In 1588 Carlo Emmanuele I of Savoy took possession of it. Thenceforward the city shared the destinies of Piedmont with which it formed "one of the keys of the house" of Italy. Saluzzo was formerly part of the Diocese of Turin. Julius II in 1511 made it a diocese immediately dependent on the Holy See. The first bishop was Gianantonio della Rovere, who after eight months resigned in favour of his brother Sisto, later a cardinal. Other bishops were: Filippo Archinti (1546), a celebrated jurisconsult; the Benedictine Antonio Picoth (1583) a learned and pious man, founder of the seminary; he was succeeded by St. Giovenale Ancina (1597-1604) of the Oratory of St. Philip, the apostle of Corsica; Francesceo Agostino della Chiesa (1642); Carlo Gius. Morozzo (1698), who had built the high altar of the cathedral. The diocese, since 1805, has been suffragan of Turin; it contains 91 parishes with 170,000 inhabitants; 300 secular and 30 regular priests; 31 religious houses; 4 institutes for boys and 3 for girls; and has a Catholic newspaper. CAPPELLETTI, Le Chiese d'Italia, XIV; CARUTTI, Il Marchesata di Saluzzo; GABOTTO, I, marchesi di Saluzzo (Saluzzo, 1901). U. BENIGNI Juan Maria Salvatierra Juan Maria Salvatierra Born at Milan, 15 November, 1648; died at Guadalajara, 17 July, 1717. His family was of Spanish origin, the name being written originally Salva-Tierra. While pursuing his studies at the Jesuit college of Parma, he accidentally came across a book upon the Indian missions. It so impressed him that he at once determined to give his life to the same work, although his parents had destined him for marriage with a lady of high rank. Receiving the habit of the Jesuit Order in Genoa, he sailed for Mexico in 1675, and on arriving in that country continued his theological studies for a time, after which he was assigned to a professorship in the college of Puebla. Declining a position in the cathedral, he received permission to devote himself to the conversion of the Indians and, in June, 1680, set out for the still unconquered and defiant Tarumari (q. v.) in the wild mountain defiles of south-western Chihuahua. Among these, and their neighbours, the Tubar, Guazaar, and others, he laboured for ten years, establishing or having charge of several missions, baptizing whole bands, winning the affection of the wild tribes, and, alone, holding them quiet when all around were in murderous revolt. In 1690 he was appointed visitador or inspector of the Jesuit missions of the north-western district. Soon afterwards, through conversations with the missionary explorer, Father Eusebio Kino, he conceived an intense desire for the evangelization of Lower California, for which undertaking official authority was finally granted in 1697, all expense to be at the cost of the missionaries. In the organization and later conduct of the work his chief collaborator was Father Juan Ugarte. The contributions for this purpose, by generous donors, formed the basis of the historic fondo piadoso, or Pious Fund, of California (q. v.), for so many years a subject of controversy with the republican government of Mexico. With one small boat's crew and six soldiers Salvatierra landed 15 October, 1697, at Concepcion Bay, on the coast of the peninsula, and a few days later founded the first of the California missions, which he dedicated to Our Lady of Loreto, his special patroness through life. For a time he acted as priest, captain, sentry, and cook, besides studying the language from a vocabulary prepared by an earlier Jesuit visitor. Father Juan Copart, and from natives who could be induced by presents to come near. In the course of the next few years he founded six missions, successfully overcoming all difficulties. He also made some important explorations. In 1704, being summoned to Mexico, he was appointed provincial, but when accepting the office requested that he might soon again be permitted to take up his mission work. This was granted; in 1707 a successor was appointed, and Father Salvatierra returned to his mission charge, where he remained until summoned in 1717 to Mexico to confer with the new viceroy. Despite a painful infirmity he set out, but the fatigue so aggravated his disorder that he was obliged to stop at Guadalajara, to which place he insisted on being carried in a litter rather than turn back. Says the Protestant historian Bancroft: "It was thus that the apostle of California made his last earthly journey. For two long months he tossed upon his deathbed, suffering extreme agony. Then, feeling that his end was near, he summoned the faithful Bravo to his side, confided to him the particulars of mission affairs, and empowered him to represent California at the capital. On the 17th July, 1717, he died, as he had lived, full of hope and courage. The whole city assembled at his funeral, and the remains were deposited amidst ceremonies rarely seen at the burial of a Jesuit missionary, in the chapel which in former years he had erected to the Lady of Loreto. Salvatierra's memory needs no panegyric. His deeds speak for themselves; and in the light of these, the bitterest enemies of his religion or of his order cannot deny the beauty of his character and the disinterestedness of his devotion to California." His most important writings are: "Cartas sobre la Conquista espiritual de California" (Mexico, 1698); "Nuevas Cartas sobre lo mismo" (Mexico, 1699); and his "Relaciones" (1697-1709) in "Documentos para la Historia de Mexico" (4th series, Mexico, 1853-7). ALEGRE, Hist. De la Compania de Jesus (3 Vols., Mexico, 1841); BANCROFT, Hist. North Mexican States and Texas, I (San Francisco, 1886); BERISTAIN Y SOUZA, Biblioteca Hispano Americana Setentrional, III (Amecameca, 1883); GLEESON, Hist. Catholic Church in California (2 Vols., San Francisco, 1872); VENEGAS, Noticia de la California, y de su conquista temporal y espiritual (3 Vols., Madrid, 1757); imperfect translations in English (London, 1759), French (Paris, 1767), German and Dutch. JAMES MOONEY Salvation Salvation (Greek soteria; Hebrew yeshu'ah). Salvation has in Scriptural language the general meaning of liberation from straitened circumstances or from other evils, and of a translation into a state of freedom and security (I Kings, xi, 13; xiv, 45; II Kings, xxiii, 10; IV Kings, xiii, 17). At times it expresses God's help against Israel's enemies, at other times, the Divine blessing bestowed on the produce of the soil (Is., xlv, 8). As sin is the greatest evil, being the root and source of all evil, Sacred Scripture uses the word "salvation" mainly in the sense of liberation of the human race or of individual man from sin and its consequences. We shall first consider the salvation of the human race, and then salvation as it is verified in the individual man. I. SALVATION OF THE HUMAN RACE We need not dwell upon the possibility of the salvation of mankind or upon its appropriateness. Nor need we remind the reader that after God had freely determined to save the human race, He might have done so by pardoning man's sins without having recourse to the Incarnation of the Second Person of the Most Holy Trinity. Still, the Incarnation of the Word was the most fitting means for the salvation of man, and was even necessary, in case God claimed full satisfaction for the injury done to him by sin (see INCARNATION). Though the office of Saviour is really one, it is virtually multiple: there must be an atonement for sin and damnation, an establishment of the truth so as to overcome human ignorance and error, a perennial source of spiritual strength aiding man in his struggle against darkness and concupiscence. There can be no doubt that Jesus Christ really fulfilled these three functions, that He therefore really saved mankind from sin and its consequences. As teacher He established the reign of truth; as king He supplied strength to His subjects; as priest He stood between heaven and earth, reconciling sinful man with his angry God. A. Christ as Teacher Prophets had foretold Christ as a teacher of Divine truth: "Behold, I have given him for a witness to the people, for a leader and a master to the Gentiles" (Is., lv, 4). Christ himself claims the title of teacher repeatedly during the course of His public life: "You can call me Master, and Lord; and you say well, for so I am" (John, xiii, 13; cf. Matt., xxiii, 10; John, iii, 31). The Gospels inform us that nearly the whole of Christ's public life was devoted to teaching (see JESUS CHRIST). There can be no doubt as to the supereminence of Christ's teaching; even as man, He is an eyewitness to all He reveals; His truthfulness is God's own veracity; His authority is Divine; His words are the utterance of a Divine person; He can internally illumine and move the minds of His hearers; He is the eternal and infinite wisdom of God Incarnate Who cannot deceive and cannot be deceived. B. Christ as King The royal character of Christ was foretold by the Prophets, announced by the angels, claimed by Christ Himself (Ps., ii, 6; Is., ix, 6-7; Ezech., xxxiv, 23; Jer., xxiii, 3-5; Luke, i, 32-33; John, xviii, 37). His royal functions are the foundation, the expansion and the final consummation of the kingdom of God among men. The first and last of these acts are personal and visible acts of the king, but the intermediate function is carried out either invisibly, or by Christ's visible agents. The practical working of the kingly office of Christ is described in the treatises on the sources of revelation; on grace, on the Church, on the sacraments, and on the last things. C. Christ as Priest The ordinary priest, is made God's own by an accidental unction, Christ is constituted God's own Son by the substantial unction with the Divine nature; the ordinary priest is made holy, though not impeccable, by his consecration, while Christ is separated from all sin and sinners by the hypostatic union; the ordinary priest draws nigh unto God in a very imperfect manner, but Christ is seated at the right hand of the power of God. The Levitical priesthood was temporal, earthly, and carnal in its origin, in its relations to God, in its working, in its power; Christ's priesthood is eternal, heavenly, and spiritual. The victims offered by the ancient priests were either lifeless things or, at best, irrational animals distinct from the person of the offerer; Christ offers a victim included in the person of the offerer. His living human flesh, animated by His rational soul, a real and worthy substitute for mankind, on whose behalf Christ offers the sacrifice. The Aaronic priest inflicted an irreparable death on the victim which his sacrificial intention changed into a religious rite or symbol; in Christ's sacrifice the immutation of the victim is brought about by an internal act of His will (John, x, 17), and the victim's death is the source of a new life to himself and to mankind. Besides, Christ's sacrifice, being that of a Divine person, carries its own acceptance with it; it is as much of a gift of God to man, as a sacrifice of man to God. Hence follows the perfection of the salvation wrought by Christ for mankind. On His part Christ offered to God a satisfaction for man's sin not only sufficient but superabundant (Rom., v, 15-20); on God's part supposing, what is contained in the very idea of man's redemption through Christ, that God agreed to accept the work of the Redeemer for the sins of man, He was bound by His promise and His justice to grant the remission of sin to the extent and in the manner intended by Christ. In this way our salvation has won back for us the essential prerogative of the state of original justice, i.e., sanctifying grace while it will restore the minor prerogatives of the Resurrection. At the same time, it does not at once blot out individual sin, but only procures the means thereto, and these means are not restricted only to the predestined or to the faithful, but extend to all men (I John, ii, 2; I Tim., ii, 1-4). Moreover salvation makes us coheirs of Christ (Rom., viii, 14-17), a royal priesthood (I Pet., ii, 9; cf. Ex., xix, 6), sons of God, temples of the Holy Ghost (I Cor., iii, 16), and other Christs-- Christianus alter Christus; it perfects the angelical orders, raises the dignity of the material world, and restores all things in Christ (Eph., i, 9-10). By our salvation all things are ours, we are Christ's, and Christ is God's (I Cor., iii, 22-23). II. INDIVIDUAL SALVATION The Council of Trent describes the process of salvation from sin in the case of an adult with great minuteness (Sess. VI, v-vi). It begins with the grace of God which touches a sinner's heart, and calls him to repentance. This grace cannot be merited; it proceeds solely from the love and mercy of God. Man may receive or reject this inspiration of God, he may turn to God or remain in sin. Grace does not constrain man's free will. Thus assisted the sinner is disposed for salvation from sin; he believes in the revelation and promises of God, he fears God's justice, hopes in his mercy, trusts that God will be merciful to him for Christ's sake, begins to love God as the source of all justice, hates and detests his sins. This disposition is followed by justification itself, which consists not in the mere remission of sins, but in the sanctification and renewal of the inner man by the voluntary reception of God's grace and gifts, whence a man becomes just instead of unjust, a friend instead of a foe and so an heir according to hope of eternal life. This change happens either by reason of a perfect act of charity elicited by a well disposed sinner or by virtue of the Sacrament either of Baptism or of Penance according to the condition of the respective subject laden with sin. The Council further indicates the causes of this change. By the merit of the Most Holy Passion through the Holy Spirit, the charity of God is shed abroad in the hearts of those who are justified. Against the heretical tenets of various times and sects we must hold + that the initial grace is truly gratuitous and supernatural; + that the human will remains free under the influence of this grace; + that man really cooperates in his personal salvation from sin; + that by justification man is really made just, and not merely declared or reputed so; + that justification and sanctification are only two aspects of the same thing, and not ontologically and chronologically distinct realities; + that justification excludes all mortal sin from the soul, so that the just man is no way liable to the sentence of death at God's judgment-seat. Other points involved in the foregoing process of personal salvation from sin are matters of discussion among Catholic theologians; such are, for instance, + the precise nature of initial grace, + the manner in which grace and free will work together, + the precise nature of the fear and the love disposing the sinner for justification, + the manner in which sacraments cause sanctifying grace. But these questions are treated in other articles dealing ex professo with the respective subjects. The same is true of final perseverance without which personal salvation from sin is not permanently secured. What has been said applies to the salvation of adults; children and those permanently deprived of their use of reason are saved by the Sacrament of Baptism. A.J. MAAS Salve Mundi Salutare Salve Mundi Salutare A poem in honour of the various members of Christ on the Cross. A fifteenth-century MS. ascribes it to St. Bonaventure, and Daniel thinks that this "inspired singer of the Cross" could well have composed it. The commonest ascription is to St. Bernard; and Trench thinks that this and other poems "were judged away from him on very slight and insufficient grounds by Mabillon", who places the hymn among the spurious (aliena et supposititia) works of the saint (P.L., CLXXXIV, 1319-24). Although the saint died in 1153, and no MS of the hymn antedates the fourteenth century, Daniel favours the ascription of two of the cantos to the saint. Mone judged the hymn of French origin, and declared that all hope of restoring the text correctly lay in the future discovery of French MSS. This task was attempted by M. Haureau ("Poèmes latins attribués à Saint Bernard", 1890, pp. 70-73), who, finding it in only three MSS. (two in Paris, one at Grenoble), all of the fifteenth century, thinks it incredible that the hymn should have been composed by St. Bernard. It is divided into seven cantos, headed respectively: "Ad Pedes", "Ad Genua", "Ad Manus", "Ad Latus", "Ad Pectus", "Ad Cor", "Ad Faciem" (To the Feet, Knees, Hands, Side, Breast, Heart, Face). Each canto contains five stanzas of ten lines each, except the canto "Ad Cor", which has seven. The MSS. give many variant texts and many additional titles (as "To the Mouth", "Shoulders", "Ears", "the Scourging", "the Crowning"). Mone accepts only four cantos (To the Feet, Knees, Hand, Side) as original. Daniel accepts but two original cantos (those addressing the Feet and the Knees), but not their titles, which he believes of later coinage. He thinks the oldest text is found in a Lichtenthal MS. (fifteenth century) containing only the cantos beginning "Salve mundi salutare" and "Salve, salve rex sanctorum", under the "probably true" title of "Planctus super passionem Domini". "Whoever," he says, "reads the first hymn carefully, must see that it concerns the whole form of Christ suffering, and that the feet are mentioned for the sole reason that the poet places himself at the foot of the cross, prostrate and embracing the feet of the Saviour. The second poem, also, deals with the Passion generally, and only once, and passingly, alludes to the knees." He attributes both the titles and the elaborations to the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries, when the devotion to the Five Wounds was growing. "Then the verses of Bernard offered convenient warps or threads in which might be interwoven the woof of devotion to the wounds singly." The first lines of the cantos are: 1. Salve mundi salutare (Ad Pedes); 2. Salve Jesu, Rex sanctorum (Ad Genua); 3. Salve Jesu, paster bone (Ad Manus); 4. Salve Jesu, summe bonus (Ad Latus); 5. Salve, salus mea, Deus (Ad Pectus); 6. Summi regis cor aveto (Ad Cor); 7. Salve caput cruentatum (Ad Faciem). In St. Bernard's "Opuscula" (Venice, 1495), the seventh canto is addressed "To the Whole Body", and commences: "Salve Jesu reverende". Julian gives the first lines of some translations (by non-Catholics) of all the cantos except three and five, and remarks that "some of the parts have suffered from neglect", and that "this should be remedied by an able translator". In the second edition of the "Dict. of Hymnology", he refers to the translation of Mrs. E. M. Shapcote (a convert to Catholicism) and gives the date as 1873. This was published first in the "Rosary Magazine" (1877 and 1878) and republished by Burns and Oates, London, 1879; its title is: "A Rhythmical Prayer to the Sacred Members of Jesus Hanging upon the Cross". The stanzaic form is that used by Mrs. Shapcote in one of her latest works ("Mary, the Perfect Woman", Manresa Press, 1903), and may be illustrated by the first stanza of canto 5 (To the Breast): O God of my Salvation, hail to Thee; O Jesus, Sweetest Love, all hail to Thee; O Venerable Breast, I worship Thee; O Dwelling-place of Love, I fly to Thee, With trembling touch adore and worship Thee. A different arrangement of the poem, found in Horst's "Paradisus animae christianae" (1644), has been translated by Canon Oakeley (1850), and (probably) by W. J. Copeland. The first lines of both are given by Julian. The paucity of Catholic translations is doubtless due to the fact that the hymn appears never to have been in liturgical use. However, the Roman Breviary hymn "Jesu dulcis amor meus" (Lauds of the feast of the Most Holy Winding Sheet of Our Lord, assigned to Friday after the second Sunday in Lent) is made up of lines taken, with some alterations, from widely separated cantos. This short poem contains five stanzas of the type: "Jesu, dulcis amor meus" (l. 36); "Ac si praesens sis, accedo" (l. 6); "Te complector cum affectu' (l. 13); "Tuorum memor vulnerum" (l. 15). The following stanzas comprise lines 8, 97, (?), 65; 321 (Salve caput cruentatum), 326, 328, 330; 156 (Salve latus Salvatoris), 166, 169, 170; 106, 116, (?), 40. This curiously constructed hymn (the lines are here numbered as they are found in P. L., loc. cit.) has neither rhyme nor classical quantity, while the fourth line of each stanza is in iambic rhythm and the other three lines are in trochaic rhythm. Three translations are indicated below. JULIAN, Dictionary of Hymnology (London, 1907), pp. 989 and 1697, give first lines of trs. from the Latin and German; DANIEL, Thesaurus hymnologicus, I, 232 and note, p. 233, declares his views that all the cantos "breathe forth the heats and fires of divine love, so that nothing could be imagined softer or sweeter", II, 359, gives a canto which is, as Mone says, an incoherent mixture, IV, 224-8, gives the complete poem, with excellent notes pp. 228-31; MONE, Lateinische Hymnen, I, 162-74, gives much critical apparatus; TRENCH, Sacred Latin Poetry (London, 1874), gives cantos Ad Pedes and Ad Faciem, and (p.138) says of the hymns attributed to St. Bernard: "If he did not write, it is not easy to guess who could have written them; and indeed they bear profoundly the stamp of his mind, being only inferior in beauty to his prose." KONIGSFELD, Lateinische Hymnen und Gesange (Bonn, 1865), 190-201, gives twelve stanzas with German tr.; MARCH, Latin Hymns (NewYork, 1875), 144-119, gives fifteen stanzas (with notes, p. 277). The hymn Jesu dulcis amor meus, tr. CASWALL, in Lyra Catholica (1849); latest ed. 1884); tr. WALLACE, 1874; tr. BAGSHAWE in Breviary Hymns and Missal Sequences (London, 1900), 75. H.T. HENRY Salve Regina Salve Regina The opening words (used as a title) of the most celebrated of the four Breviary anthems of the Blessed Virgin Mary. It is said from the First Vespers of Trinity Sunday until None of the Saturday before Advent. An exception is noted in Migne's "Dict. de liturgie" (s. v.), namely that the rite of Châlons-sur-Marne assigns it from the Purification B. M. V. until Holy Thursday. An other variation, peculiar to the cathedral of Speyer (where it is chanted solemnly every day "in honour of St. Bernard"), may have been based on either of two legends connecting the anthem with the saint of Clairvaux. One legend relates that, while the saint was acting as legate Apostolic in Germany, he entered (Christmas Eve, 1146) the cathedral to the processional chanting of the anthem, and, as the words "O clemens, O pia, O dulcis Virgo Maria" were being sung, genuflected thrice. According to the more common narrative, however, the saint added the triple invocation for the first time, moved thereto by a sudden inspiration. "Plates of brass were laid down in the pavement of the church, to mark the footsteps of the man of God to posterity, and the places where he so touchingly implored the clemency, the mercy, and the sweetness of the Blessed Virgin Mary" (Ratisbonne, "Life and Times of St. Bernard", American ed., 1855, p. 381, where fuller details are given). It may be said in passing that the legend is rendered very doubtful for several reasons: + the narrative apparently originated in the sixteenth century, and relates a fact of the twelfth; + the silence of contemporaries and of the saint's companions is of some significance; + the musical argument suggests a single author of both the anthem and its concluding words. The authorship is now generally ascribed to Hermann Contractus (q. v.). Durandus, in his "Rationale", ascribed it to Petrus of Monsoro (d. about 1000), Bishop of Compostella. It has also been attributed to Adhémar, Bishop of Podium (Puy-en-Velay), whence it has been styled "Antiphona de Podio" (Anthem of Le Puy). Adhémar was the first to ask permission to go on the crusade, and the first to receive the cross from Pope Urban II. "Before his departure, towards the end of October, 1096, he composed the war-song of the crusade, in which he asked the intercession of the Queen of Heaven, the Salve Regina" (Migne, "Dict. des Croisades", s. v. Adhémar). He is said to have asked the monks of Cluny to admit it into their office, but no trace of its use in Cluny is known before the time of Peter the Venerable, who decreed (about 1135) that the anthem should be sung processionally on certain feasts. Perhaps stimulated by the example of Cluny, or because of St. Bernard's devotion to the Mother of God (the saint was diligent in spreading a love for the anthem, and many pilgrim-shrines claim him as founder of the devotion to it in their locality), it was introduced into Citeaux in the middle of the twelfth century, and down to the seventeenth century was used as a solemn anthem for the Magnificat on the feasts of the Purification, Annunciation, and Nativity B. V. M., and for the Benedictus at Lauds of the Assumption. In 1218 the general chapter prescribed its daily processional chanting before the high altar after the Capitulum; in 1220 it enjoined its daily recitation on each of the monks; in 1228 it ordered its singing "mediocri voce", together with seven psalms, etc. on every Friday "pro Domino Papa" (Gregory IX had taken refuge in Perugia from Emperor Frederick II), "pro pace Romanae Ecclesiae", etc. etc. -- the long list of "intentions" indicating how salutary was deemed this invocation of Our Lady. The use of the anthem at Compline was begun by the Dominicans about 1221, and was rapidly propagated by them. Before the middle of that century, it was incorporated with the other anthems of the Blessed Virgin in the "modernized" Franciscan Breviary, whence it entered into the Roman Breviary. Some scholars say that the anthem had been in use in that order (and probably from its foundation) before Gregory IX prescribed its universal use. The Carthusians sing it daily at Vespers (except the First Sunday of Advent to the Octave of Epiphany, and from Passion Sunday to Low Sunday) as well as after every hour of the Little Office B. V. M. The Cistercians sang it after Compline from 1251 until the close of the fourteenth century, and have sung it from 1483 until the present day -- a daily devotion, except on Holy Thursday and Good Friday. the Carmelites say it after every hour of the Office. Pope Leo XIII prescribed its recitation (6 January, 1884) after every low Mass, together with other prayers -- a law still in force. While the anthem is in sonorous prose, the chant melody divides it into members which, although of unequal syllabic length, were doubtless intended to close with the faint rhythmic effect noticeable when they are set down in divided form: Salve Regina (Mater) misericordiae, Vita, dulcedo, et spes nostra, salve. Ad te clamamus, exsules filii Hevae; Ad te suspiramus gementes et flentes in hac lacrymarum valle. Eia ergo advocata nostra, illos tuos misericordes oculos ad nos converte. Et Jesum, benedictum fructum ventris tui, nobis post hoc exsilium ostende. O Clemens, O pia, O dulcis (Virgo) Maria. Similarly, Notker Balbulus ended with the (Latin) sound of "E" all the verses of his sequence, "Laus tibi, Christe" (Holy Innocents). The word "Mater" in the first verse is found in no source, but is a late insertion of the sixteenth century. Similarly, the word "Virgo" in the last verse seems to date back only to the thirteenth century. Mone (Lateinische Hymnen des Mittelalters, II, 203-14) gives nine medieval hymns based on the anthem. Daniel (Thesaurus hymnologicus, II, 323) gives a tenth. The "Analecta hymnica" gives various transfusions and tropes (e. g. XXXII, 176, 191-92; XLVI, 139-43). The composers adopt curious forms for the introduction of the text, for example (fourteenth century): Salve splendor praecipue supernae claritatis, Regina vincens strenue scelus imietatis, Misericordiae tuae munus impende gratis, etc. The poem has fourteen such stanzas. Another poem, of the fifteenth century, has forty-three four-line stanzas. Another, of the fifteenth century, is more condensed: Salve nobilis regina fons misericordiae, etc. A feature of these is their apparent preference for the briefer formula, "O clemens, O pia, O dulcis Maria." The anthem figured largely in the evening devotions of the confraternities and guilds which were formed in great numbers about the beginning of the thirteenth century. "In France, this service was commonly known as Salut, in the Low Countries as the Lof, in England and Germany simply as the Salve. Now it seems certain that our present Benediction service has resulted from the general adoption of this evening singing of canticles before the statue of Our Lady, enhanced as it often came to be in the course of the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries by the exposition of the Blessed Sacrament, which was employed at first only as an adjunct to lend it additional solemnity." (Father Thurston; see BENEDICTION OF THE BLESSED SACRAMENT for some elaboration). Luther complained that the anthem was sung everywhere throughout the world, that the great bells of the churches were rung in its honour, etc. He objected especially to the words "Queen of mercy, our life, our sweetness, our hope"; but the language of devotion is not that of dogma, and some Protestants, unwilling that it should disappear from Lutheran churches, reconstructed it "evangelically" (e.g., a version in use at Erfurt in 1525: "Salve Rex aeternae misericordiae".) The Jansenists found a like difficulty, and sought to change the expression into "the sweetness and hope of our life" (Beissel, I, 126). While the anthem thus figured largely in liturgical and in general popular Catholic devotion, it was especially dear to sailors. Scholars give instances of the singing of Salve Regina by the sailors of Columbus and the Indians. The exquisite plainsong has been attributed to Hermann Contractus. The Vatican Antiphonary (pp. 127-8) gives the revised official or "typical" form of the melody (first tone). The now unofficial "Ratisbon" edition gave the melody in an ornate and in a simple form, together with a setting which it described as being in the eleventh tone, and which is also very beautiful. An insistent echo of this last setting is found in the plainsong of Santeul's "Stupete gentes." There are many settings by polyphonic and modern composers. Pergolesi's (for one voice, with two violins, viola, and organ) was written shortly before his death; it is placed among his "happiest inspirations", is deemed his "greatest triumph in the direction of Church music" and "unsurpassed in purity of style, and pathetic, touching expression." H. T. HENRY Salvete Christi Vulnera Salvete Christi Vulnera The Roman Breviary hymn at Lauds of the feast of the Most Precious Blood, is found in the Appendix to Pars Verna of the Roman Breviary (Venice, 1798). The office, added since 1735, was in some dioceses a commemorative Lenten feast, and is still thus found assigned to Friday after the fourth Sunday of Lent, with rite of major double. Pius IX (Aug 10, 1849) added it to the regular feasts of the Breviary and assigned it to the first Sunday of July (double of the second class). In the fact that the feast was thus established generally after the pope's return from Gæta, Faber sees "an historical monument of a vicissitude of the Holy See, a perpetual Te Deum for a deliverance of the Vicar of Christ" (The Precious Blood, p. 334, Amer. ed.). The hymn comprises eight Ambrosian stanzas in classical iambic dimeter verse together with a proper doxology: Summa ad Parentis dexteram Sedenti habenda est gratia Qui nos redemit sanguine, Sanctoque firmat Spiritu. Amen. A cento, comprising stanzas i, ii, iv, viii, forms the hymn at Lauds in the office of the Pillar of the Scourging (Columna Flagellationis D.N.J.C.), a feast celebrated in some places on the Tuesday after Quinquagesima Sunday; but the hymn in this case has its proper doxology: Cæso flagellis gloria, Jesu, tibi sit jugiter, Cum patre et almo Spiritu Nunc et per sæculum. Amen. To the translations of Caswall, Oxenham, and Wallace, listed in Julian's "Dictionary of Hymnology", should be added those of Archbishop Bagshawe (Breviary Hymns and Missal Sequences, p. 101: "All hail! ye Holy Wounds of Christ"), Donahoe (Early Christian Hymns, p. 252: "All hail, ye wounds of Jesus"), "S.", in Shipley's "Annus Sanctus", Part II (p. 59: "All hail, ye wounds of Christ"). The Vesper hymn of the feast, "Festivis resonent compita vocibus", comprising seven Asclepiadic stanzas, and the Matins hymn, "Ira justa conditoris imbre aquarum vindice", comprising six stanzas, have been translated by Caswall (Lyra Catholica, pp. 83, 85), Bagshawe (loc. cit., Nos. 95-6), Donahoe (loc. cit., pp. 249-52). The Vesper hymn was also translated by Potter (Annus Sanctus, Part I, p. 85), and the Matins hymn by O'Connor (Arundel Hymns, etc., 1902, No. 80), and by Henry (Sursum Corda, 1907, p. 5). H.T. Henry Salvianus Salvianus A Latin writer of Gaul, who lived in the fifth century. Born of Christian parents, he married a pagan woman named Palladia, who was converted together with her parents; husband and wife resolved to live thenceforth in continence. About 430 Salvianus become one of the ascetics directed by Honoratus of Lerinum. Gennadius speaks of him as a priest of the Church of Marseilles. He lived and wrote in the South of Gaul. He was probably a native of the Roman Germania -- of Trier, according to a conjecture of Halm (De gub, VI, xiii, 72). He traveled in Gaul and in Africa. In his extant writings he does not yet know of the invasion of Attila and the battle of Châlons (451). Of the numerous works mentioned by Gennadius (De viris, lxvii) there remain only nine letters and two treatises: "Ad ecclesiam adversum avaritiam" and "De gubernatione Dei" or "De præsenti judicio". The fourth is one of his most interesting letters; in it he explains to his recently-converted parents-in-law the decision reached by him and his wife to observe continence. In the ninth he justifies to Solonius his use of a pseudonym in his first writing. He issued the treatise "De ecclesia" under the name of Timotheus; this work exhorts all Christians to make the Church their heir. The "De gubernatione Dei", in eight books was written after 439 (VII, x, 40). He endeavoured to prove a Divine explanation of the barbarian invasions. With the orthodox but depraved Romans he contrasts the barbarians, infidels or Arians, but virtuous. This thesis places Salvianus in the ranks of the Latin moralists, who from the "Germania" of Tacitus down, show to their corrupt compatriots an ideal of justice and virtue among the Germans. The work, dedicated to Bishop Salonius, a disciple of Lerinum, is unfinished and seems to have appeared in fragments; Gennadius knew only five books. Salvianus is a careful writer, much resembling Lactantius, but his style is strongly influenced by the rhetoricians, and its prolixity renders it wearisome. The same influence doubtless explains the exaggeration of his ideas on the necessity of giving all his goods to the Church and the antithesis of Roman corruption and German virtue. The "De gubernatione" contains interesting pictures of manners, but all must not be taken literally. Salvianus speaks as an advocate and in doing so forces the tone, palliating what goes against his case and bringing out in the strongest relief all that favours it. To judge the society of the time by his pictures is to risk making mistakes. Apart from his style, Salvianus is not highly cultured. He has some slight knowledge of law; he is ignorant enough to attribute Plato's "Republic" to Socrates (De gub., VII, xxiii, 101). There are two critical editions of his works: Halm in "Monumenta Germaniæ" (Berlin, 1877) and Pauly in "Corpus script. ecclesiasticorum latinorum" (Vienna, 1883). PAUL LEJAY Salzburg Salzburg (SALISBURGENSIS) The Archdiocese of Salzburg is conterminous with the Austrian crown-land of the same name. The Romans appeared in the lands south of the Danube under Emperor Augustus, laid out roads, founded towns, and turned the territory into a province. Salzburg belonged to Noricum. Christianity was introduced by individual colonists, artisans, and soldiers; St. Maximilian, Bishop of Laureacum (Lorch), is mentioned as the first martyr of Noricum during the era of the persecutions. Although Constantine brought peace to the Church, the Romanized territory was subsequently exposed on all sides to the attacks of barbarian peoples, and the last representative of Roman civilization in Noricum was St. Severus (d. 482). He visited Cucullae (Kuchel near Hallein) and Juvavum (Salzburg), where he found a church already established and witnessed the martyrdom of the priest-abbot Maximus. His apostolate was "the last ray before utter darkness"; the whole territory was soon devastated by barbarian tribes, and it was only about 700 that Christian civilization again made its appearance. St. Rupert, Bishop of Worms, baptized Duke Theodo of Bavaria, erected at Waldersee a church in honour of St. Peter, and made Juvavum, where he found the Roman buildings over-grown with brambles, his episcopal seat. The cathedral monastery was also named after St. Peter, and Rupert's niece, Avendrid, founded the convent of Nonnberg. St. Boniface completed the work of St. Rupert, placed the Diocese of Salzburg under the Primatial See of Mainz, and substituted the Benedictines for the Irish monks in St. Peter's. He had a dispute with their abbot-bishop Virgil concerning the existence of the antipodes. Virgil dispatched the regionary bishop Modestus to Carinthia, of which the latter became the apostle. Under Virgil the valuable "Liber confraternitatum", or confraternity book of St. Peter's, was begun. Arno, the successor of Virgil, enjoyed the respect of Charlemagne, who, after overthrowing the Avars, assigned to him as his missionary territory all the land between the Danube, the Raab, and the Drave. While Arno was at Rome attending to some business for Charlemagne, Leo III appointed him archbishop over the bishops of Bavaria. When the dispute concerning the delimitation of their ecclesiastical provinces broke out between Aquileia and Salzburg, Charlemagne declared the Drave the boundary. The dignity of the archbishops as territorial sovereigns must be also traced to Charlemagne. Arno took advantage of the intellectual life at the court of the great emperor to have manuscripts copied in 150 volumes, thus forming the oldest library in Austria. The efforts of Duke Wratislaus of Moravia to withdraw his territory from the ecclesiastical influence of the Germans prepared great trouble for Archbishop Adalwin. Adrian II appointed Methodius Archbishop of Pannonia and Moravia; it was only when Wratislaus had fallen into the hands of Louis the German that Adalwin could protest effectually against the invasion of his rights. Methodius appeared at the Synod of Salzburg, was struck in the face, and was kept in close confinement for two and a half years. To the endeavour of the archbishop to demonstrate to the pope the justice of his claims we are indebted for the important work, "De conversione Bulgarorum et Carantanorum libellus". However, Adalwin was complelled to release Archbishop Methodius at the command of the pope. Darkness once more settled on the land, when the Magyars ravaged the great Moravian empire; not a church remained standing in Pannonia, as the bishops informed the pope, and Archbishop Thiadmar fell in battle. Michaelbeuern was set aflame. With the crushing defeat of the Magyars at Lechfeld (955) begins a henceforth unarrested Christian civilization in Salzburg. When, shortly after this, Liudolf of Swabia and Conrad of Lothringen rose against Otto the Great and induced Archbishop Herold to become their associate, the latter was seized, blinded, deposed, and finally banished. The tenth century is for Italy the saeculum obscurum, the era of feuds of the opposing factions of the nobility. In Germany, on the contrary, the episcopate flourished, and in this prosperity Salzburg also participated. The emperor's brother, Bishop Bruno of Cologne, the "bishop-maker", consecrated Friedrich for Salzburg, who in turn consecrated St. Wolfgang Bishop of Ratisbon. Friedrich declared the monastery of St. Peter independent. In 996 Archbishop Hartwik received the right to coin money; in the presence of Saint Henry II and his spouse Kunigunde, the archbishop consecrated the church on the Nonnberg. When St. Hemma, Countess of Friesach, founded the convent of Gurk in 1042, the first abbess, Ita, was chosen from Nonnberg. In Salzburg the noble tendencies and great principles of the age of Gregory VII and his immediate successors, aiming at the sanctification of the Church, the success of the Crusades, the fostering of religious life among the people, and the development of monastic life, were always encouraged. The first archbishop of this period was Gebhard. Three students had set out for Paris to study philosophy and theology; during a night spent in a forest-glade near a spring, they confided to one another their ideals for the future -- each wished to become a bishop, and each vowed in this contingency the foundation of a monastery. Their hopes were gratified: Adalbert became Bishop of Wurzburg and founded Lambach in Upper Austria; St. Altmann of Passau founded Gottweig for twelve canons, who were replaced twelve years later by Benedictines from St. Blasien in the Black forest; Gebhard founded Admont (1074) and the Diocese of Gurk (1072). These bishops were the mainstays of the "cause of St. Peter" in Germany. They held aloof from the Synod of Worms to which Henry IV summoned the bishops and abbots to declare their opposition to the pope. Henry therefore named an anti-bishop for Salzburg, Bertold of Moosburg, and Gebhard had to endure an exile of nine years; shortly before his death he was able to return, and was buried at Admont (1088). His successor Theimo consecrated the church and monastery of St. Paul in Carinthia. Defeated by the royal bishop, Bertold, he was kept in strict confinement for five years at Freisach; scarcely had he recovered his liberty when he joined in the crusade of Guelph of Bavaria, was again thrown into prison, and suffered a horrible martyrdom (1102). On the abdication of Henry IV, Count Conrad I of Abensberg was elected archbishop; Conrad accompanied Henry V to Rome, when he went thither to receive imperial coronation. Paschal II and Henry came to an agreement according to which the Church should renounce all claim to imperial fiefs and the emperor all claim to investiture. When this condition, on which the coronation was to take place 12 February, 1111, became known, the German bishops and even the secular nobility protested against it, fearing lest by an onslaught on all the imperial fiefs the king should make his power absolute. The pope was held in confinement, the priests robbed of their rich vestments, the church plate, and even the buckles of their shoes. When the archbishop complained of this treatment, a German knight threatened to cleave his head in twain. His dignified bearing rendering it impossible to maintain his position in Salzburg, he lived an exile until the investiture strife was definitely settled by the Calistine Concordat of 1122. Conrad henceforth devoted all his energy to his diocese; he replaced the secular clergy at the cathedral by Augustinian Canons, whose rule he himself adopted in 1122, and established a convent of canonesses. At Seckau also he established the canons, and appointed the celebrated Gerhoh provost of Reichersberg. He meanwhile granted establishments to the Benedictines (Georgenberg, Fiecht), Cistercians (Victring in Carinthia), Praemonstratensians (Wilten near Innsbruck). The Church of St. Peter was also rebuilt in Romanesque style; while previously the monks of St. Peter's had elected the archbishop, they abdicated this right in favour of the canons by the agreement of 1139 between the abbot and the archbishop. In the first contest between the papacy and empire during the Hohenstaufen period, the archbishops of Salzburg had taken the side of the Guelphs. When, in 1159, Frederick I declared in favour of Victor IV, the creature of two Ghibelline cardinals, against Alexander III, Archbishop Eberhard I, Count of Hippoldstein, steadily supported Alexander. Barbarossa left him in peaceful possession of his see until his death. However, his successor, Conrad II, son of Leopold III the Pious, aroused Frederick's anger, and died a fugitive at Admont in 1168. Barbarossa now stood at the acme of his fortune. He opposed to Archbishop Adalbert, son of King Wladislaus II of Bohemia, as anti-bishop Provost Henry of Berchtesgaden; however, at the Diet of Venice (1177) -- "the last great diet of the Middle Ages", pope and emperor exchanged embraces -- it was agreed that both bishops should abdicate, and that Conrad III of Wittelsbach should receive the archiepiscopal see, and appoint the imperial archbishop to the See of Mainz. Through Conrad the archbishops of Salzburg received the rank of legate Apostolic throughout the whole ecclesiastical province of Noricum, and therewith the dignity of cardinal. On Conrad's death Adalbert again succeeded to the archdiocese. On account of his excessive strictness he was confined in the castle of Werfen for fourteen days by his own officials. When Frederick II adopted the policy of his father in a still more exaggerated form, and was consequently excommunicated by Gregory IX, Archbishop Eberhard II of Regensberg (Switzerland) and his friend Duke Leopold VI brought about the Peace of San Germano (1230). The Christian leaders met at Anagni, whither the archbishop also came, but the duke died on the way to the meeting. The archbishop consecrated the monastery of Lilienfeld, founded by the duke, and interred him there. Meanwhile the zealous archbishop had created within his territory three new dioceses to give increased efficiency to the care of souls: Chiemsee (1216), Seckau (1218), St. Andrew's in the Lavantal (1225). For these dioceses also the archbishop was not only to nominate, but also to confirm and consecrate. On account of his friendly relations with the emperor it is evident that he exercised the prerogatives of sovereignty, and is to be honoured as "the founder of the land of Salzburg". For refusing to publish the Decree of the First General Council of Lyons, which excommunicated Frederick and relieved him of his empire, Eberhard also incurred excommunication. When he died suddenly the following year, still under the ban, his body was buried in the annex of the parish-church of Radstadt, but forty years later it was transferred to consecrated ground in Salzburg cathedral. During the Austrian, and the almost simultaneous German, interregna Salzburg shared in the general confusion, and had its anti-bishop. Archbishop Philip, Count of Ortenburg, was more warrior than cleric and steadfastly refused to accept priestly ordination. In foreign politics he favoured William of Holland, the candidate for the throne set up by the papal party; in Austria he espoused the cause of Premysl Ottaar favored by the pope. The decree of Alexander IV that each bishop-elect must be consecrated within half a year affected Philip immediately; as he paid no attention, Bishop Ulrich of Seckau was appointed in his place, and finally he himself was excommunicated and Salzburg placed under an interdict. The people thereupon drove Philip out and invited Ulrich to enter into possession; as, however, the latter was unable to repay the money which he had been compelled to borrow in Rome, he also was expelled. He was finally able to return to Salzburg, but merely celebrated the feast of Corpus Christi in 1265 (which Urban IV had extended to the whole Church the year before) and then resigned. Rudolph of Habsburg brought to a close the interregnum. Throughout the whole series of years and on all important occasions including the investiture of his sons, Albert and Rudolph, with Austria, Styria, Krain, and the Wendish March (27 December, 1280), Archbishop Frederick II of Walchen (Pinzgau) was a faithful supporter of Rudolph, and must thus be numbered among the founders of Habsburg rule in Austria. Human inclinations and alliances are subject to rapid change. Rudolph's son, Duke Albert I of Austria, engaged in an almost uninterrupted feud for ten years with Archbishops Rudolph of Hoheneck and Conrad IV of Praitenfrut. Repeatedly the armies stood so close to each other that "each could see the white in his opponents' eyes"; several towns were demolished (Friesach). The mischief-maker was Abbot Henry of Admont, who enjoyed Albert's confidence; no sooner had this warlike cleric met death from an arrow-would received in the chase, than duke and archbishop found themselves on terms of peace and friendship (1297). During the succeeding period German history is dominated by the conflicts of the houses of Wittelsbach and Habsburg. The people of Salzburg remained true to the Habsburgs. During the struggle for the throne between Louis the Bavarian and Frederick III, Archbishop Frederick III of Leibnitz was declared an outlaw. During the seventy years' residence of the popes in Avignon subsequent to 1309, the archbishops had to proceed thither to receive the pallium. When, in 1347, the frightful plague known as the Black Death swept through Salzburg, the Jews were accused of poisoning the wells and subjected to cruel persecution. In imitation of the confederated towns in Germany, five towns in the territory of Salzburg formed the Igelbund (1403). They presented to the new archbishop, Eberhard III of Neuhaus, an election capitulation demanding, in an instrument which was surrounded with their seals as a boar (Igel) with bristles, the redress of their grievances (taxes). Already the Jews had been widely accused of stabbing consecrated Hosts, which, it was said, were subsequently discovered emitting blood (Lower Austria and Carinthia). As similar desecrations were declared to have taken place in Salzburg, the Jews were banished in 1404 and a synodal ordinance declared a little later that they should be distinguishable by a pointed hat. During the Western Schism the attitude of the archbishops toward the popes varied. Archbishop Pilgrim II of Puchheim at first supported the Roman pope, Urban VI, but subsequently espoused the cause of the Avignon pontiff, Clement VII. His successor, Gregory of Osterwitz, also obtained the pallium from Boniface IX at Rome. When Gregory XII was pope at Rome and Benedict XIII at Avigno, the cardinals of both parties, wishing to end the Schism, summoned the Council of Pisa (1409). This assembly deposed both popes and elected Alexander V supreme pontiff, but, as the earlier popes refused to abdicate, there were now three popes. Archbishop Eberhard III supported the Pisan pope, John XXIII. In his affectionate care for the Church, King Sigismund associated himself with John in convening the General Council of Constance. Hus was already condemned when Eberhard arrived with a large retinue; however, the archbishop participated in the condemnation of Jerome of Prague. In 1428 Eberhard convened a great provincial synod of his bishops, the superiors of religious orders, and deputies of the University of Vienna; at this assembly earlier ecclesiastical regulations were renewed, and new measures adopted for the revival of ecclesiastical life. In the next year a provincial synod was again held. As the heresy of Wyclif and Hus threatened to infect the province, it was decreed that no one should permit a heretic to preach or harbour him; on the contrary, he should be denounced to the people. Dukes, counts etc. were to imprison all persons suspected of heresy; Jews should wear a cornered hat and their wives should carry attached to their clothing a small bell. The Renaissance epoch was for Salzburg an era of cultural decay, caused by the incompetence of the territorial princes and the bad conditions of Austria under Emperor Frederick IV. The first Renaissance pope, Nicholas V, sent out legates to announce the jubilee indulgence, to promote a crusade against the Turks, and to inaugurate the reform of the clergy. Nicholas of Cusa on the Mosel (Cusanus), appointed legate for Germany, held a provincial synod at Salzburg (1451) in which monasteries were directed to return to the observance of the rule within the interval of a year. Three visitors (Abbot Martin von den Schotten, Abbot Laurence of Mariazell, and Prior Stephen of Melk) visited the Benedictine monasteries of Austria and Bavaria, and in about fifty established uniform obedience to the rule. Under Archbishop Bernhard the political and economic depression of the archdiocese was the deepest. Seeing the Turks ravaging the archiepiscopal lands in Carinthia, and the estates of his territory making ever increasing demands and imposing taxes of various kinds, Bernhard summoned a diet in 1473 -- the first held in the little archiepiscopal state. He resigned his office but recalled his resignation repeatedly, until finally, five years before his death, he really abdicated. At the close of this period Leonhard of Keutschach (d. 1519) revived religious life: with astounding energy he had the burgomasters and town councillors, who were imposing unjust burdens, arrested simultaneously and confined in the castle; all Jews were banished from the land. His closing years were embittered by his suffragan Matthaeus Lang, who, although not a priest, was Bishop of Gurk and cardinal, and aimed at the archiepiscopal see. Lang promised the cathedral chapter (monks) to effect its transformation into a chapter of secular priests, if the canons would recognize him as coadjutor with right of succession. The Bulls of Leo X, decreeing these changes, soon arrived. In ecclesiastical art, late Gothic ruled at Salzburg, as is gloriously demonstrated in the church on the Nonnberg and its crypts, the Margarethenkapelle in the cemetery of St. Peter, and the Franciscan church with its magnificent vault of netted work The primatial see, for which Matthaeus Lang had so passionately striven, was for him a martyr's chair. Not yet a priest, the new ruler entered his episcopal city. Although unnoticed in official circles, the innovations emanating from Wittenberg were insinuating themselves into the archdiocese. Mining was rapidly developed, and miners arrived from Saxony bringing with them the new doctrines and sectarian books. Lang strove to retain his subjects in the Faith: Luther proclaimed him a "monster", the people of Salzburg besieged him in his fortress Hohen-Salzburg (the Latin War), and two successive risings of the peasants were the occasion of manifold horrors and of unspeakable suffering for the ruler and his land. Lang was present at the Second Diet of Speyer (1529); and in the following year held lengthy negotiations with Melanchthon at Augsburg. The fact that Lang invited lay persons to the provincial synod of 1537, at which it was resolved to send delegates to a general council, created an unpleasant commotion in Rome, since it was feared that this step presaged the formation of a national Church. In accordance with Ferdinand's demand for the use of the chalice by the laity in 1564, Pius IV granted this privilege for Germany and the Archdioceses of Gran and Prague; however, as the emperor's hopes were soon to be unfounded, the giving of Communion under both species ceased at Salzburg in 1571. The beneficent effects of the Council of Trent extended also to Salzburg, where, for the execution of its decrees, Archbishop Jacob of Kuen-Belasy summoned in 1569 a provincial council, according to Hauthaler the most important of all the synods of Salzburg, since through it "was secured for ever a solid foundation for church reform in this province in accordance with the spirit of the decrees of Trent". Four years later he again convened a provincial council, especially notable as almost three centuries were to elapse before another provincial council was held in Germany. The succeeding archbishops by wise moderation perserved their territory from the sufferings of the wars of religion, conducted elsewhere with bloodshed and cruelty. Lang's successor, Archbishop Ernst, administered the archdiocese for fourteen years as "elected bishop", although the pope had confirmed his election only on the condition that he should receive episcopal consecration within ten years, and although his brother, Duke William of Bavaria, was a strict Catholic. During this period flourished Theophrastus Paracelsus (Philip of Hohenheim), the celebrated physician and alchemist, also Berthold, Bishop of Chiemsee, a strict censor of his age (see BERTHOLD OF CHIEMSEE). After the religious Peace of Augsburg Archbishop Wolf Dietrich (Wolfgang Theodorich) of Raitenau and his successors acted on the policy adopted there (cujus regio, ejus religio) and followed the precedent set by Protestant princes, when they gave their subjects the option of professing the religion of their fathers or emigrating. The task of influencing the people by sermon and exhortation was confided mainly to the Franciscans and Capuchins. The former were given the convent in St. Peter's, where previously the daughters of the nobility and the townsfolk had been educated. Archbishop Wolf Dietrich also encountered opposition at Salzburg when he began to tear down the ancient Romanesque cathedral; years were consumed in the destruction of the venerable stone edifice. He commissioned Vincenzo Scamozzi to draw up the plan of a new cathedral, which was to surpass in magnificence everything in Germany. The cathedral was cross-shaped, had three naves, a central cupola, cross-arms ending in a semicircle, and two huge towers on the facade. However, when the plan was completed and building was to be begun, the indefatigable archbishop found himself badly involved. The closing five years of his life were sad. To protect the salt-makers of Salzburg from the unjust customs regulations of Duke Maximilian of Bavaria, he resorted to military demonstrations, which constituted a breach of national peace. The soldiers of the duke took him prisoner, and brought him to the castle of Hohen-Salzburg. Here he was subjected to unworthy treatment, and, although a promise to abdicate if liberated was extorted from him, he was retained a prisoner until his death five years later (1612). His successor, Marcus Sitticus of Hohenems, who had so ill-used him, was a relative; it may be that Sitticus feared that the great recklessness of Wolf Dietrich would imperil the peace of the archdiocese. In 1614 Sitticus began the rebuilding of the cathedral, in which the architect, Santino Solair, "has bequeathed one of the most magnificent creations of the barocco style of architecture outside Italy" (Ilg). It was also this archbishop who finished the residence and castle of Mirabell, and restored Hellbrunn with its fountains. While Austria and Germany were ravaged in the Thirty Years' War and civilization declined, Archbishop Paris, Count of Lodron, accomplished such fruitful works of peace that he is remembered as "the father of his country". The Alma Benedictina (1623), for almost two hundred years the pride and joy of Salzburg, was his work; Ferdinand II granted it the power of conferring academic degrees in all four faculties. In 1628 Archbishop Lodron consecrated the cathedral. Archbishop Max Gandolf, Count of Kuenberg, built in 1674 the celebrated pilgrimage church of Maria Plain; his successor, John Ernest, Count of Thun, built the college church, Fischer of Erlach being the architect. The wonderful chimes also date from this period. Under Leopold Anton, Freiherr von Firmian, Protestant tendencies revealed themselves more vigorously than before, supported and promoted by the Protestant members of the imperial estates. In imitation of the Corpus evangelicorum, the Lutherans of the Salzburg territory formed a league, binding themselves by oath and an outward rite of mutual sprinkling of salt. The infection grew dangerous. The archbishop did all he could; he invited the Jesuits as missionaries, and engaged the help of the emperor. Later he enforced the Decree of the religious Peace of Augsburg: recantation or emigration. In ten years about 30,000 persons left the territory and settled in East Prussia, or in Wurtemberg or Hanoverian territory; a few emigrated to Georgia in North America. A child of the era of "Enlightenment", Archbishop Jerome Count Colloredo laboured in its spirit and with the same persistent rashness as Joseph II. However, his precipitate innovations in both the school system and ecclesiastical matters alienated from him the minds of the people, as had happened in the case of his imperial prototype. The fact that the four ecclesiastics of the highest rank in Germany declared as the first point in the Punctuation of Ems that the rights of the pope should be reduced to those which he enjoyed during the first three centuries, betrays a rare historical sense, since the sawed off the branch on which they sat. While Jerome in this case followed too blindly the lead of Joseph II, he displayed his courage when the emperor wished to erect new ecclesiastical provinces in Vienna and Graz. The Graz province was to be governed by an archbishop, Gorz was to be a simple diocese, and all the dioceses of Inner Austria -- including the projected Diocese of Leoben -- were to be placed under Graz. Colloredo refused his consent, whereupon the emperor retaliated by seizing the ecclesiastical possessions of Salzburg in Inner Austria, without, however, changing the archbishop's attitude. Finally, after two years' negotiations, a settlement was arrived at on 19 April, 1786; Salzburg abdicated its episcopal rights in Styrea and Carinthia in favour of the Bishops of Sekkau, Leoben, Gurk, and Lavant, but retained its metropolitan rights over them, enjoyed the right of nomination for Sekkau and Lavant at every vacancy, and for Gurk at every third vacancy. For Leoben -- of which, however, Engel was the first and last bishop -- the founder was to have the right of nomination, and the metropolitan the right of confirmation. The classical writers of church music throw a radiance about Salzburg at this period. The house in which Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart was born (1756) now contains the Mozart museum, with compositions of the master, and his skull (a legacy of Hyrtl). Mozart died in 1791 at Vienna, whither he had come at the age of twenty years. Michael Haydn occupied throughout his life the position of orchestral conductor of the Archbishop of Salzburg (d. 1806) Archbishop Jerome was a special patron of Haydn, and was delighted by the master's new composition for almost every ecclesiastical function. Among Haydn's works are thirty masses, over one hundred graduals, and the glorious "Hier liegt vor deiner Majestat" (Here lies before Thy Majesty). These and the incomparably beautiful responsories of Holy Week express a deep religious sentiment. Salzburg suffered much through the French wars, which led to the destruction of the ecclesiastical principality. The signers of the Peace of Westphalia agreed on one point, that ecclesiastical territory should furnish the means of mutual compensation, the so-called "secularization". Similarly the men of the French Revolution soon confiscated all church property, and the Germans, their apt pupils, completed the secularization in Germany by the decree of the Imperial Delegate at Ratisbon. The Catholic Church lost three and a half million adherents and a yearly income of twenty million gulden (about $8,000,000). The archbishops of Salzburg were deprived in the same year of their temporal sovereignty; Jerome, the last ecclesiastical sovereign of Salzburg, died at Vienna. During the first two decades of the nineteenth century, Salzburg had a chequered fate: from 1803 to 1805 it was an electorate under Grand-Duke Ferdinand of Tuscany; from 1805 to 1809 it passed into the possession of Austria, from 1809 to the Peace of Vienna it was Bavarian. Short as was the Bavarian dominion, Montegelas found time to overturn all the old institutions. In 1810 the university was dissolved, although the theological faculty remained; the monasteries were forbidden to receive novices, and they owed their continued existence to Crown-Prince Ludwig. The Peace of Vienna restored this beautiful land to the mild rule of the Habsburgs. Francis I gave it an eminent archbishop in Augustin Gruber. Gruber was born at Vienna and developed, as catechist at St. Anna's and as teacher of catechetics for the alumni, into the classical writer on catechetical instruction. His "Theorie der Katechetik" and "Praktisches Handbuch der Katechetik fur Katholiken" (2 vols.) have appeared in numerous editions. As aulic councillor for ecclesiastical affairs, Gruber drafted the statute of organization for the Archdiocese of Salzburg, on his succession to which he laboured in the true spirit of St. Augustine. Always mild and affectionate, he won back even the obstinate Manharter Sect to the Church; he lectured personally to the ecclesiastical students, especially on St. Augustine and the "Regula pastoralis" of Gregory the Great. On his tours of visitation, he would question the parish-priest concerning the theme suitable to the local conditions, and would immediately preach thereon. One cannot read without emotion his correspondence and hear of his personal relations with Prince Friedrich Schwarzenberg, who became in more than one respect his successor. John Cardinal Katschthaler is the eighty-third bishop, and the seventy-fourth Archbishop of Salzburg. The archdiocese contains 270,000 Catholics, 483 secular priests, 216 male religious in 11 convents, and 998 nuns in 102 convents. GREINZ, Das soziale Wirken der kathol. Kirche in der Erzd. Salzburg (Vienna, 1898); RIEDER, Kurze Gesch. Des Landes Salzburg (Salzburg, 1905); WIDMANN, Gesch. Salzburg's (2 vols., Gotha, 1907-9), extending to 1519. C. WOLFSGRUBER Joseph Salzmann Joseph Salzmann Founder of St. Francis Provincial Seminary (St. Francis, Wisconsin) known as the "Salesianum", one of the best known pioneer priests of the North-west, b. at Münzbach, Diocese of Linz, Upper Austria, 17 Aug., 1819; d. at St. Francis, Wisconsin, 17 Jan., 1874. He was ordained in 1842, and laboured very successfully in his home diocese until 1847, when the visit of the first Bishop of Milwaukee, John Martin Henni, and his urgent appeal ripened his long-felt desire to devote his life to the foreign missions. Having come to Milwaukee in October, 1847, he was appointed to a small country mission, but soon his extraordinary success induced the bishop to make him pastor of St. Mary's congregation at Milwaukee. There the German free-thinkers resorted to every kind of insult and calumny to thwart the success of this intrepid champion of the Church, and he encountered a long and bitter combat with them. Feeling the lamentable scarcity of priests Salzmann conceived the idea of founding a seminary. To collect the necessary funds he went from state to state, and after many difficulties, on 29 January, 1856, the institution was opened with twenty-five students. Rev. Michael Heiss, afterwards Archbishop of Milwaukee, was its first rector. The seminary is now one of the most prominent in the country. Several hundreds of priests and twenty-three bishops call it their Alma Mater. Salzmann is also the founder of the first Catholic normal school in the United States and of the Pio Nono College. After years of hard struggles the Catholic Normal School of the Holy Family now stands on a solid basis and yearly sends out efficient teachers to parochial schools. The American branch of the St. Cecilia Society for the promotion of genuine church music owes its existence and growth to him. Salzmann was of a noble character full of holy enthusiasm for the cause of God and his Church, fearless in the defence of truth, an eloquent preacher, a warm friend and father of his students, and a wise counsellor to priests and bishops. R AINIER, Dr. Joseph Salzmann, Leben u. Wirken (St. Louis, 1876; 2nd ed., Milwaukee, 1903); tr. B ERG, A Noble Priest (Milwaukee, 1903). JOSEPH RAINIER Samar and Leyte Sámar and Leyte The names of two civil provinces in the Visayan group of the Philippines, which include the islands of Balicuatro, Batac, Biliran, Capul, Daram, Homonhon, Leyte (2722 sq. miles), Manicani, Panaon, Sámar (5031 sq. miles), and several smaller islands, and which make up the D IOCESE OF C ALBAYOG (C ALBAYOGANA), suffragan of Manila. The diocesan seat is at Calbayog, a city of 22,000 inhabitants on the western side of Sámar; the cathedral is dedicated to Sts. Peter and Paul. The first Jesuit missionaries reached Leyte and Sámar in 1595, the islands subsequently forming part of the Diocese of Cebu until erected into a separate diocese, 10 April, 1910. The first bishop is the Rt. Rev. Pablo Singzon de la Anunciacion, D.D., formerly Vicar-General of Cebu, consecrated in St. Francis's Church, Manila, 24 June, 1910. The Lazarist Fathers have charge of the diocesan seminary and college of St. Vincent de Paul at Calbayog. Besides training youths for the priesthood they give courses of primary instruction in seven grades, three commercial courses, a four years' high school course, and classical courses for the B. A. degree (Greek, Latin, English, Spanish, natural science, higher mathematics, and philosophy). There are 180 students. The Sisters of Charity have charge of the girls' academy, the College of the Miraculous Medal, at Calbayog, in which there are primary, secondary, and higher courses, together with lessons in drawing, painting, music, sewing, and embroidery. Statistics Priests, secular, 45; regular, 22; Lazarist Fathers, 5; parishes on Sámar, 33, missions, 138; parishes on Leyte, 39, missions, 71; total parishes (including 25 small islands), 79; estimated population, 800,000, practically the whole of whom are devout and loyal Catholics. R EDONDO, Historia de la Diócesis de Cebú in Guia oficial de Filipinas (1907). C.F. WEMYSS BROWN Samaria Samaria A titular see, suffragan of Cæsarea in Palestine Prima. In the sixth year of his reign (about 900 b.c.) Amri, King of Israel, laid the foundations of the city to which he gave the name of Samaria, "after the name of Semer the owner of the hill" (II Kings, xvi, 24). This detached hill was 1454 feet above sea-level, and more than 328 feet above the surrounding hills. His son, Achab, married to Jezabel, a Sidonian princess, introduced the worship of Baal (III Kings, xvi, 32). Shortly after, the Prophet Elias announced the famine which for three years and more devastated the city and surrounding country (III Kings, xvii, xviii). Samaria suffered her first siege from Benadad, King of Damascus (III Kings, xx, 1- 21); after the disaster which this same king suffered at Aphec, he concluded a treaty with Achab (III Kings, xx, 34-43). The body of Achab was carried there from Ramoth Galaad, and the dogs licked his blood in the gutters, according to the prediction of the Prophet (III Kings, xxii, 1-39). Elias prophesied that King Ochonias, who fell from the window of his palace, would die of this fall, which prophecy was very shortly fulfilled (IV Kings, i). His brother and successor, Joram, threw down the statue of Baal, erected by Achab (IV Kings, iii, 2). The history of Samaria is connected with various episodes in the life of the Prophet Elias, notably on account of the siege of the city by Benadad (IV Kings, ii, 25; vi, 8 sq.). Jehu, founder of a new dynasty, exterminated the last descendants of Achab, and destroyed the temple of Baal in Samaria; then he was interred in the city as his predecessors had been (IV Kings, x). Nevertheless the worship of Astarte still continued in the city (IV Kings, xiii, 6). Joas, who had transported the treasures of the temple of Jerusalem, pillaged by him, to Samaria, was buried in the tomb of the kings of Israel (IV Kings, xiv, 14-16; II Par., xxv, 24) as also was his son Jeroboam II (IV Kings, xiv, 16, 24, 29). Then followed a series of regicides and changing of ruling families. Zachary, after reigning six months, was assassinated (IV Kings, xv, 10) by Sellum, who reigned one month, and was in turn killed by Manahem, who ruled ten years (IV Kings, xv, 14-17). His son, Phaceia, after a reign of two years, was put to death by the chief of his army, Phacee (IV Kings, xv, 25), who met a like fate at the end of twenty years (IV Kings, xv, 30). Osee, son of Ella, seems to have been crowned or placed upon the throne by Teglathphalasar III, King of Assyria. Finally Salmanasar IV and his general, Sargon, took possession of Samaria (721 b.c.) after a siege lasting not less than three years (IV Kings, xvii, 4-6; xviii, 9 sq.). The inhabitants who survived the siege were transported into Assyria to the number of 27,290, according to an inscription. Thus were realized the threats of the Prophets against haughty Samaria (Is., ix, 9-11; xxviii, 1-8; Ezech., xxiii, 4-9; Osee, vii, viii, x, xiv; Amos, iii, 9-15; iv, 1 sq.; vi, 1; vii, 2-17; viii, 14; Mich., i, 5-7; ii; iii; vi; Ps. viii, 4 etc.). The first historical period, and not the least glorious, since it was for nearly two hundred years the capital of the kingdom of Israel, was thus ended. There remained only the temple of Baal, which had preceded the temple of Augustus, erected by King Herod, repaired by the American mission of Harvard University, also the palace of Amri, discovered by this same mission. Instead of the Israelites transported into Assyria, colonies were sent over, formed of various nations, Chaldeans, Cutheans, Syrians, Arabs, and others (IV Kings, xvii, 24); these mingled with the native population, forming an amalgamation of religion and superstition; thus the Israelites with their own national worship gave birth to the people and the religion of the Samaritans. The latter became furious enemies of the Jews, but Sichem or Neapolia, and not Samaria, became their principal religious and political centre. From 721-355 b.c., Samaria was a Babylonian and Persian city; finally it fell into the power of Alexander who to avenge the murder of his governor, partly exterminated the inhabitants, replacing them by a Græco-Syrian colony (Quintus Curtius, IV, 321). Having thus become Græco- Samaritan, the city continued its hostilities against the Jews, and following an attack upon Marissa, it was taken after a memorable siege and utterly destroyed by John Hyrcanus about 110 b.c.. It was rebuilt by the proconsul of Syria, Gabinus, between 57 and 55 b.c. (Josephus, "Bell. Jud.", I, vii, 7; I, viii, 4; "Ant.", XIII, x, 2, 3; XIV, v, 3). The city was then returned to the Samaritans. Herod the Great eventually received it from Octavius (31 b.c.) after the death of Cleopatra, the previous ruler. He enlarged and embellished it, in the centre built a magnificent temple to Augustus (of which the monumental staircase may still be seen), and called it Sebaste (about 25 b.c.) in honour of the sovereign (Josephus, "Bell. Jud.", I, xx, 3; I, xxi, 2; "Ant.", XV, vii, 3; XV, viii, 5). Herod made it one of his favourite residences, although it was maritime Cæsarea which obtained his political preponderance. After Herod came his son Archelaus, who ruled the city ("Ant.", XVII, xi, 4; "Bell. Jud.", II, vi, 3); at the death of the latter the province was annexed to Syria as a gift to Herod Agrippa I, a.d. 41 ("Ant.", XIX, v, 1; XIX, ix, 1-2). Always hostile to the Jews, the inhabitants of Samaria saw their city burned by the latter, a.d. 65 ("Bell. Jud.", II, xviii, 1); according to Ulpianus, "Digest", L, tit. 15, and the coinage of the city, Septimus Severus established there a colony about a.d. 200 (Eckhel, "Doctrina numm.", III, 44). Very likely a Roman garrison was then placed there. It is possible that there may have been some question of Samaria in Acts, viii, 5, on the subject of the sermon of the deacon Philip; in this case Christianity is traced to its very origins. According to Le Quien (Oriens christ., III, 649-54), Marinus, Bishop of Sebaste, represented the diocese at the Council of Nicæa (325); Eusebius at Seleucia (359); Priscianus at Constantinople (381); Eleutherius at Lydda (Lydia), (415); Constantine at the Robber Synod of Ephesus (449); Marcianus, at the end of the fifth century; Pelagius (535). During the French occupation Samaria was a Latin bishopric, and several titulary bishops are mentioned (Eubel, "Hierarchia Catholica medii ævi", I, 445; II, 309). The Greeks also made it a titular see. It must be remembered that Sebaste and not Samaria was always the correct name of this diocese. From the fourth century we meet with the cultus of St. Paul and St. Jerome at Samaria; it possessed also the tombs of Eliseus and Abdias, and that of St. John the Baptist, whose magnificent church, rebuilt by the Crusaders, is to-day a mosque (see text in Thomson, "Sacred Places", I, 102). From 985, El- Muqadassi does not mention Samaria, now nothing more than a humble district of Nablusi; in 1283, we find nothing but one inhabited house with the exception of a little Greek monastery (Burchard, "Descriptio Terræ Sanctæ", Leipzig, 1873, 53). To-day the village of Sebastyeh, amid orchards and kitchen gardens, comprises three hundred inhabitants, all Mussulmans. Smith, Dict. of Greek and Roman Geog., s. v.; Robinson, Biblical Researches in Palestine, III (Boston, 1841), 138-49; The Survey of Western Palestine, Memoirs, II (London, 1882), 160-1, 211-4; Lynn and Reisner, The Harvard Expedition to Samaria in The Harvard Theological Review, II (January, 1909), III (April, 1910); GuÉrin, Description de la Palestine, Samarie (II (Paqris, 1874-5), 188-209; Heidet in Vig. Dict. de la Bible, s. v. Samarie; Revue biblique (1909), 435-45 (1911), 125-31. S. VailhÉ Samaritan Language and Literature Samaritan Language and Literature I. LANGUAGE The original language of the Samaritans was the vernacular of Palestine, that is Hebrew. This language was superseded later by Aramaic. One result of the domination of Islam there was the substitution of Arabic. Hebrew, as the idiom of the Pentateuch, both was and is for the Samaritans the sacred language; and even to-day some of them have a knowledge, although indeed a somewhat imperfect one, of it. The pronunciation differs considerably from that settled by the Masoretic text. As the Samaritans use neither vowels nor diacritical signs, the pronunciation has only been preserve by tradition; yet, notwithstanding isolated variations, it seems to have remained, on the whole, very much the same. Information on this point is given by H. Petermann in his "Versuch einer hebräischen Formenlehre nach der Aussprache der heutigen Samaritaner" (Leipzig, 1868). The colloquial language of the Samaritans from the last centuries before Christ up to the first centuries of the Arab domination was a dialect of western Aramaic largely peculiar to Palestine. What was formerly called the Samaritan language rested almost exclusively upon the polyglot edition of the Samaritan Targum (see below), and most of the lexical and grammatical peculiarities which were ascribed to this idiom have been deduced solely from the incredibly corrupt manuscripts of the Targum. They rest on corruptions, arbitrary spellings, mutilated Arabic idioms, and other errors of copyists who were unacquainted with the true idiom of the language. Consequently, the existing Samaritan grammars and lexicons are in the highest degree misleading to those who are not specialists. Among these works are, for example, Uhlemann, "Institutiones linguæ Samaritanæ" (Leipzig, 1837); Nicholls, "A Grammar of the Samaritan Language" (London, 1858); Petermann, "Brevis linguæ Sam. grammatica" (Berlin, 1873); Castelli, "Lexicon heptaglotton" (London, 1669). [Cf. Kohn, "Zur Sprache, Literatur und Dogmatik der Samaritaner" (Leipzig, 1876).] Apart from a decided intermixture of Hebrew idioms, as well as of words borrowed from the Greek and Latin, the real Samaritan language differed but little from the Aramaic spoken in the other parts of Palestine, especially from that of Northern Palestine, as, for example, it is found in the Palestinian Talmud. Owing to the secluded position of this people, its literature in the course of time must have become more and more isolated. No linguistic value can be attached to the writings in what is called the Samaritan language, produced after the extinction of Aramaic. The authors, accustomed to speak Arabic, strove to write in a language of which they had no mastery. Leaving out later flourishes added to individual letters, Samaritan written characters represent a more ancient type than the square characters and resemble those found on Hebrew coins and the inscriptions of seals, but with a greater inclination to the cursive. The script appears to belong to a later development of the writing used in the old Hebrew codices, and, taken altogether, a type of writing common in a part of Palestine in the fourth century before Christ may be preserved in it. It would be well to replace the unsatisfactory Samaritan type used in printing with more suitable characters in closer agreement with the old manuscripts. Among the inscriptions written in Samaritan characters the two most important are those at Nablus, the one in the minaret wall of the mosque of El-Hadrâ, the other belonging to a private individual. [Cf. Rosen in "Zeitschrift der deutschen morgenländischen Gesellschaft" (hereafter to be cited as ZDMG), XIV (1866), 622. The first inscription is also discussed by Blau in ZDMG, XIII (1859), 275, the second is treated in Lidzbarski, "Handbuch der nordsem. Epigraphik" (Weimar, 1898), 440.] Both inscriptions belong apparently to the period before the destruction of the Samaritan Synagogue by Justinian I (529 b.c.). The inscription on the building of the present synagogue (published by Rosen in ZDMG, XIV, 624) belongs to the year 1711. In regard to some other inscriptions, cf. B. Wright in "Proceedings of the Society of Biblical Archæology", VI (1883), November, 25; Clermont-Ganneau in "Revue biblique" (1906), 84; Lagrange in "Revue illustrée de la Terre Sainte" (1890), 339 (1891), 83; also in "Revue biblique" (1893), 114; Sobernheim, "Samar. Inschriften aus Damaskus" in "Mitteilungen und Nachrichten des Deutschen Palästina-Vereins", VIII (1902), 70; Idem, "Sieben samarit. Inschriften aus Damaskus" (Vienna, 1903). II. LITERATURE Samaritan literature consists of writings in Hebrew, Aramaic, Arabic, and for the Hellenistic period, Greek. The number of writings at present in the possession of the Samaritan community at Nablus is small. Barton has given in "Biblioth. Sacra", LX (1903), 612 sqq., a list of these books and manuscripts drawn up by Jaqûb, the priest at Nablus. From the seventeenth century on, manuscripts have been acquired by various European libraries. The number of these was considerably increased through the sale of manuscripts made in 1870 to the Imperial Library of St. Petersburg by the Karaite Abraham Firkovitch; these writings had been collected by him in the genisoth of the Samaritans at Cairo and Nablus. In the remainder of this article a condensed sketch will be given of the most important writings contained in the Samaritan literature. A. The Samaritan Pentateuch and the Translations of It The most important of the works belonging to Samaritan literature is the Samaritan Pentateuch, that is the Pentateuch written in the Samaritan character in Hebrew, which is not to be confounded with the Samaritan Targum (see below). In the early Christian centuries this Pentateuch was frequently mentioned in the writings of the Fathers and in marginal notes to old manuscripts, but in the course of time it was forgotten. In 1616 Pietro della Valle obtained a copy by purchase at Damascus; this copy came into the possession of the library of the Oratory at Paris and was printed in 1645 in the Paris Polyglot. At the present time the manuscript, which is imperfect and dates from 1514, is in the Vatican Library. From the time of this publication the number of codices, some much older, has been greatly increased, and Kennicott was able to compare in whole or part sixteen manuscripts ["Vet. Test. Hebr." (Oxford, 1776)]. The views of scholars vary as to the antiquity of this Samaritan recension. Some maintain the opinion that the Samaritans became acquainted with the Pentateuch through the Jews who were left in the country, or through the priest mentioned in IV Kings, xvii, 28. Others, however, hold the view that the Samaritans did not come into possession of the Pentateuch until they were definitely formed into an independent community. This much, however, is certain: that it must have been already adopted by the time of the founding of the temple on Garizim, consequently in the time of Nehemias. It is, therefore, a recension which was in existence before the Septuagint, which fact makes evident its importance for the verification of the text of the Hebrew Bible. A comparison of the Samaritan Pentateuch with the Masoretic text shows that the former varies from the latter in very many places and, on the other hand, very often agrees with the Septuagint. For the variant readings of the Samaritan Pentateuch see Kennicott, loc. cit., and for the most complete list see Petermann, loc. cit., 219-26. A systematic grouping of these variants is given by Gesenius, "De Pentateuchi Samaritani origine indole et auctoritate" (Halle, 1815), p. 46. Very many of these variations refer to orthographic and grammatic details which are of no importance for the sense of the text; others rest on evident blunders, while still others are plainly deliberate changes, as the removal of anthropomorphisms and expressions which seemed objectionable, the bringing into conformity of parallel passages, insertion of additions, large and small, different members in the genealogies, corruptions in favour of the religious opinions of the Samaritans, among them, in Deut., xxvii, 4, the substitution of Garizim for Ebal’, and other like changes. Although, in comparison with the Masoretic text, the Samaritan Pentateuch shows many errors, yet it also contains readings which can be neither oversights nor deliberate changes, and of these a considerable number coincide with the Septuagint in opposition to the Masoretic text. Some scholars have sought to draw from this the conclusion that a copy of the Old Testament used by Samaritans settled in Egypt served as a model for the Septuagint. According to Kohn, "De Pentat. Samar." (Breslau, 1865), the translators of the Septuagint used a Græco-Samaritan version, while the same scholar later claims to trace back the agreements to subsequent interpolations from the Samareiticon [Kohn, "Samareiticon und Septuaginta" in "Magazin für Gesch. und Wissenschaft des Judentums" (1894), 1 sqq., 49 sqq.]. The simplest way of explaining the uniformity is the hypothesis that both the Samaritan Pentateuch and the Septuagint go back to a form of text common to the Palestinian Jews which varies somewhat from the Masoretic text which was settled later. However, taking everything together, the decision must be reached that the Masoretic tradition has more faithfully preserved the original form of the text. The most celebrated of the manuscripts of the Samaritan Pentateuch is that in the synagogue at Nablus. It is a roll made of the skins of rams, and written, according to the belief of the Samaritans, in the thirteenth year after the conquest of Canaan at the entrance to the Tabernacle on Mount Garizim by Abisha, a great-grandson of Aaron. Abisha claims for himself the authorship of the manuscript in a speech in the first person which is inserted between the columns of Deut., v, 6 sqq., in the form of what is called a tarikh. This is of course a fable. The age of the roll cannot be exactly settled, as up to now it has not been possible to examine it thoroughly. B. The Samaritan Targum In addition to the Hebrew Pentateuch, the Samaritans had also a translation of this in the Samaritan-Aramaic idiom, the Samaritan Targum. According to their own account this was written by Nathanael, a priest, who died b.c. 20. In reality, it probably belongs to the beginning of the third century after Christ; in any case it cannot be put earlier than the second century of our era. In all the manuscripts the text is hopelessly garbled, and what has been published up to the present time as the Samaritan Targum proves in reality to be a text frequently corrected, altered, and corrupted, both in language and contents, at various times, in various localities, and by various hands, a text that is constantly farther removed from the original which in the end is almost lost sight of. An approximate idea of what the original may have been is presented in the St. Petersburg fragments published by Kohn, Zur Sprache, Literatur und Dogmatik der Samaritaner" (Leipzig, 1876), p. 214. According to Kahle, "Textkritische und lexikalische Bemerkungen zum samaritan. Pent.-Targum" (Leipzig, 1898), there had never been a universally acknowledged original Targum, but only partial translations made by various priests for practical purposes. On the point cf. E. Littmann in "Theol. Literatur-Zeitung" (1899), No. VI. So far as it is possible to judge, the original Targum was a fairly literal translation from the Samaritan Pentateuch, but a translation made without any real comprehension of the sense and with a defective knowledge of the Hebrew language. Greek readings designated as tò Samareitikón are frequently quoted in old hexaplaric scholia and by some Fathers. These readings nearly all agree with the Samaritan Targum. This Samareitikón was probably nothing more than a Greek translation of the Samaritan Targum made in Egypt for the use of the Samaritan communities there [Kohn in ZDMG, XLVII (1893), 650 sqq.; Idem, "Samareiticon und Septuaginta" (see above)]. C. Translation of the Pentateuch into Arabic The translation of the Pentateuch into Arabic that passes under the name of Abu Sa‘id appeared in the eleventh or twelfth century, probably to drive out the translation by Saadja (d. 924). Abu Sa‘id, who lived in the thirteenth century, was the reviser of the Arabic Pentateuch; formerly he was incorrectly regarded as its translator. Bloch and Kahle have lately demonstrated that this translation has absolultely no uniform character, that two, if not more, recensions are to be accepted. The translation is, in general, an exact one, although now and then an effort is evidently made to bring the Biblical text into conformity with the religious opinions of the Samaritans. The work used in preparing it is of course the Samaritan Pentateuch, but it can be proved that Saadja's translation was also used. Thus the succession in order of time of the translations of the Samaritan Pentateuch coincides with the historical facts: Samaritan Targum or translation into the Aramaic vernacular; Greek translation (Samareitikón) for the diaspora; Arabic translation from the time of the sovereignty of the Arabs. D. Exegetical and Theological Literature To this belongs above all the haggadic commentary on the Pentateuch written by Marqa in pure Aramaic and generally ascribed to the fourth century. It contains chiefly edifying meditations on selected portions of the Pentateuch in six books. The copy of it which Petermann had made from a manuscript at Nablus in 1868 is at Berlin. Portions of this have been published: Heidenheim, Books I, II, IV, and extracts from the other books in "Biblioth. Samar.", III, Pts. 5 and 6 (Weimar, 1896); Baneth, "Des Samar. Marqah an die 22 Buchstaben anknüpfende Abhandlung" (Berlin, 1888); Munk, "Des Sam. M. Erzählung über den Tod Moses" (Berlin, 1890); Emmerich, "Das Siegeslied, eine Schrifterklärung des Sam. M." (Berlin, 1897); Hildesheimer, "Marqahs Buch der Wunder" (Berlin, 1898). The most prosperous period of Samaritan theological learning was that of the Judæo-Arabic literature, the pioneer in which was Saadja, while the path he opened was zealously followed by Rabbinists and Karaites. A number of Samaritan-Arabic commentaries on the Pentateuch belong to the three centuries succeeding that in which Saadja lived. Among these belongs, for example, a commentary on Genesis dated 1053, of which Neubauer publishes a fragment (Gen., i-xxviii, 10) in the "Journ. Asiat." (1873), 341. Ibrahim of the tribe of Jaqûb, who probably did not live before the sixteenth century, wrote a commentary on the Pentateuch, planned on a large scale. A manuscript copy of the first four books made at Nablus through the efforts of Petermann is at Berlin. Publications from it are: Klumel, "Mischpatim, Ein samarit.-arab. Commentar zu Ex. xxi-xxii, 15, von Ibrahim ibn Jakub" (Berlin, 1902); Hanover, "Das Festgesetz der Samaritaner nach Ibrahim ibn Jakub" (Berlin, 1904). Various extracts are given by Geiger in ZDMG, XVII (1863), 723; XX (1866), 147; XXII (1868), 532. Other commentaries are to be found in manuscript in libraries; the titles of a number of them are known. Works on smaller portions of the Pentateuch were also not unusual. Among the codifications of the Law the most important is the "Kitâb al-Kâfi" written about 1050 by Yûsuf ibn Salâmah; the work is a kind of Samaritan Schulchan aruch, made up of the explanations of the most distinguished Samaritan teachers of the law. Of this work Kohn has edited the tenth chapter, "Die Zaraath-Gesetze der Bibel nach dem Kitab al-Kafi des Jusuf ibn Salamah" (Frankfort on the Main, 1899). Munajja ibn Zadaka, an important and prolific writer, taught in the eleventh or twelfth century. Various writings of his are quoted; the most widely known was his Kitâb al Khilaf", a more exact title of which would be, "Investigations and Controversial Questions between the two Sects of Jews and Samaritans". The work is divided into two parts; a manuscript copy of the second part, obtained by Petermann in 1868 at Nablus, is to be found at Berlin. Further information concerning this second part is given by L. Wreschner, "Samaritanische Traditionen" (Halle, 1888). Six small fragments of this work are at Breslau and have been published by Drabkin, "Fragmenta commentarii ad Pentateuchum Samaritano-Arabici sex" (Breslau, 1875). In addition to these many theological works are cited or are to be found in manuscript in libraries. Cf. Nutt, loc. cit., 131 sqq.; Steinschneider, "Die arabische Literatur der Juden" (Frankfort-on-Main, 1902), 319 sqq. E. Liturgy and Religious Poetry A large number of the manuscripts are liturgical texts. They contain prayers and hymns for various feasts and occasions in Aramaic and Hebrew. The majority belong to a fairly late period, as the numerous Arabic idioms show. In some of them, each Hebrew or Aramaic strophe is followed by an Arabic translation. The earliest and most celebrated liturgical poet is Marqa; next to him comes his contemporary Amram. Later poets are, for example, Abu’l Hasan (eleventh century) and his son Ab-Galuga; the high-priest Pinehas ben Joseph (fourteenth century), his son Abisha, the latter's contemporary Abdallah ben Salâmah; further, Abraham al-Qabasi (sixteenth century) and others. The British Museum has a complete manuscript of the Samaritan Liturgy in twelve quarto volumes. F. Chronicles and other Forms of Secular Literature A distinct branch of the literature is formed by the Samaritan chronicles. Among these are: (a) the Book of Joshua, in Arabic, the main part of which probably belongs to the thirteenth century, even though here and there it may be based on earlier records. In thirty-eight chapters it treats, somewhat in the manner of a Midrash, the history from the death of Moses to the death of Josue, with many apocryphal additions. An appendix to the ninth chapter carries on the recital to Alexander Severus. The sole manuscript in Samaritan characters came from Cairo and is to be found now at Leyden. It was published in Arabic with a Latin translation by Juynboll, "Chronicon Samaritanum" (Leyden, 1848). A Hebrew translation was issued by Kirchheim, 13417axx.gif (Frankfort on the Main, 1855); an English one by O. T. Crane, "The Samaritan Chronicle or the Book of Joshua" (New York, 1890). Gaster believed he had discovered the Hebraico-Samaritan "Book of Josue", and published it in square characters, with a German translation, in the ZDMG, LXII (1908), 209 sqq., 494 sqq. He was, however, the victim of a mystification. Cf. Kahle, loc. cit., 250 sq.; Dalmann in "Theol. Literaturzeitung" (1908), 533, 665; Fraenkel, loc cit., 481 sqq.; Yahuda in "Sitzungsber. d. Akad. d. Wissensch. in Berlin", XXIX (1908), 887 sqq. (b) The Arabic Chronicle of Abu’l Fath.–According to the statement of the author this chronicle was written at Nablus in the year 756 of the Hegira or a.d. 1355, at the request of the high-priest Pinehas. It relates the course of events from the time of Adam to that of Mohammed, using older chronicles as a basis. Some manuscripts give a continuation up to Harun-al-Rashid. The work contains numerous anachronisms and fables; it is intended to magnify the Samaritans in an unfair manner, and passes over whole periods of time. It was edited by Vilmar, "Abulfathi annales Samaritani" (Gotha, 1856). The Latin translation that was announced has not yet appeared. (c) El Tolide, known as "the Neubauer Chronicle".–A copy of this chronicle, made in 1859 by the high-priest Jaqub ben Aaron, was published by A. Neubauer in the "Journal Asiatique" (1869), 385 sqq. The chronicle is written in Hebrew and is acompanied by a literal Arabic translation. The main part, written in 1149, is the work of the high-priest Eleazar ben Amram, the continuation, written in 1340, is that of Jaqub ben Ismael. Other writers have brought the chronicle down to 1856. It contains hardly more than bare chronologies from Adam on, together with brief historical notices, and is in reality little more than a catalogue of the high-priests and of the most important Samaritan families. (d) A chronicle edited by E. N. Adler and M. Seligsohn, "Une nouvelle chronique samaritaine" in the "Revue des études juives", vols. XLIV, XLV, XLVI; also printed separately (Paris, 1903). It comes down to the year 1899. With exception of a few Samaritan words and two liturgical portions in the Samaritan dialect, the language is a corrupt Hebrew full of Arabic expressions. Besides the chronicles which have become known up to now, there must have been, at least in former times, many other works of historical and legendary character. Cf. for example, "Buch Josua", c. lxvii at close, and Abu’l Fath, in his introduction. As regards other branches of secular learning, fragments or titles are known of works on astronomy, medicine etc. A few writings on grammar have been preserved, especially on that of the Hebrew language; among these authors are Ibrahim ben Faray of the twelfth century, Eleazar ben Pinehas about 1400, Abu Sa’id, apparently the same as the one who wrote the translation of the Pentateuch. These works are to be found in manuscript at Leyden. Noeldeke investigated them carefully and published the results in the "Göttinger Gelehrte Nachrichten", nos. 17 and 20 (1862). These writings give sufficient information as to the position of the Samaritan in regard to grammar and show that they did not advance beyond an uncertain groping. Of particular interest is the little treatise of Abu Sa’id on reading Hebrew, which Noeldeke gives in the original and in a translation (loc. cit., 387 sqq.). There are also manuscripts of lexical character, which are, however, of little value. A manuscript written by a priest named Pinehas in the Bibliothéque Nationale at Paris contains the verb and noun forms in parallel columns of Hebrew, Samaritan, and Arabic; a copy of this manuscript is at Christ's College, Cambridge. Cf. Nutt, loc. cit., 150, and Harkavy, loc. cit., in appendix, p. 161. G. Epistles The correspondence between Samaritans and European scholars which began at the end of the sixteenth century and was continued, with occasional interruptions, up to a recent date, offers an essential contribution to the knowledge of Samaritan conditions. These letters of the Samaritans are either in Arabic or in a more or less correct Hebrew written in Samaritan characters; the latter are generally accompanied by an Arabic translation. The first European scholar to enter into correspondence with the Samaritans was Joseph Scaliger. In 1589 he addressed letters to the Samaritan communities at Nablus and Cairo; but no answer was sent until after his death (1609). This was followed by the correspondence (1672-88) carried on with Thomas Marshall, Rector of Lincoln College at Oxford, through Huntington, the Anglican preacher at Aleppo, and the correspondence (1684-1691), with the German Hiob Ludolf. After a long suspension the correspondence was resumed (1808-26) by Silvestre de Sacy. As regards a further scatterred correspondence see the bibliography below. H. Secular Literature of the Hellenistic Era in Greek In closing, something should be said of the secular literature written during the hellenistic era in Greek. The chronicler Thalus (about 40 b.c. was probably a Samaritan. His work appears to have been a chronicle of the world. The majority of fragments of and references to it relate to the mythological period; a few to the history of Cyrus. The mixture of Oriental and Greek mythological stories is in entire agreement with the manner of the hellenizing Jews of his era. For the fragments see C. Müller, "Fragm. hist. Græc.", III, 517-519. Among the citations made by Alexander Polyhistor one from an unknown person is preserved in Eusebius, "Præp. Evang.", IX, xviii. This agrees in matter with a longer quotation (ibid., IX, xvii) erroneously ascribed to the Jew Eupolemos. Both citations are plainly to be traced to one original which must have been the work of a Samaritan of whom no further particulars are known; for example Garizim is explained as ’óros ùphístou. The fragments are to be found in C. Müller, loc. cit., III, 214. The Samaritan Theodotus, who lived about 200 b.c., wrote an epic on Sichem of which forty-seven hexameters are preserved in Eusebius, "Præp. Evang.", IX, xxii; see C. Müller, loc. cit., 217. He also seems to have embellished sacred history with scraps of Greek mythology. Freudenthal also thinks that Cleodemus, or Malchus (200 b.c.), was a Samaritan, on account of the syncretic fusion of Greek mythology with narratives of Biblical origin. However, this is not a necessary conclusion. GENERAL. MARGOLIOUTH, Descriptive List of the Hebrew and Samaritan MSS. of the Brit. Museum (London, 1893); Catalogue of the Hebrew and Samar. MSS. in the Brit. Museum (only I vol. publ., London, 1899); NEUBAUER, Catalogue of the Hebrew MSS. in the Bodleian Library (Oxford, 1886); HARKAVY, The Collection of Samaritan MSS. at St. Petersburg (London, 1874); Castalogues des MSS. hébreux et samaritains de la Bibliothèque Impériale (Paris, 1866); Supplement by STEINSCHNEIDER in Zeitschrift für hebr. Bibliographie, VI (1902, reprinted at Frankfort-on-the-Main, 1903); GEIGER, Neue Mitteilungen über die Samaritaner in Zeitschrift der deutschen Morgenländischen Gesellschaft, XVI-XXII, a review of publications from the Samaritan literature up to 1868. Cf. also NUTT, A Sketch of Samaritan History, Dogma and Literature (London, 1874); COWLEY, Sam. Literatur und Religion in Jew. Quart. Rev. (1896), 562 sqq.; MONTGOMERY, The Samaritans (Philadelphia, 1907), 270 sqq. A. The Samaritan Pentateuch was printed in vol. VI of the Paris Polyglot (1645), and in vol. I of the London Polyglot (1657); BLATNAY edited a copy in square characters (Oxford, 1790). In modern times many newly-discovered fragments have been published. GESENIUS, De Pentateuchi Samaritani origine indole et auctoritate (Halle, 1815); FELL, Einleitung in das Alte Testament (Paderborn, 1906), 111 sqq.; GALL in Zeitschrift für die alttestamentl. Wissenschaft (1906), 293. B. It was first, and most incorrectly, printed in vol. VI of the Paris Polyglot (1645), somewhat more correctly in vol. VI of the London Polyglot (1657); later it was ed. by BRÜLL in square characters (Frankfort-on-Main, 1873-76). The edition by PETERMANN, Pentateuchus Samaritanus: I. Genesis; II. Exodus (Berlin, 1872-73), is also unfortunately not critically satisfactory; its continuation by VOLLERS, Leviticus (1883); Numbers (1885); Deuteronomy (1897), rests on better authorities. In addition fragments found at Oxford, London, and St. Petersburg, have been published: KOHN, Samaritanische Studien (Breslau, 1868); IDEM in ZDMG, LXVII (1893), 626 sqq. C. Abu Sa‘id, Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, ed. KUENEN (Leyden, 1851-54); BLOCH, Die samarit.- arab. Pentateuch-Uebersetzung (Deut. i-xi) (Berlin, 1901), with introduction and notes. Cf., as regards this, KAHL in Zeitschrift für hebr. Bibliographie (1902), no. 1; IDEM, Die arab. Bibelübersetzungen (Leipzig, 1904), 25 (Exod., ix, 20-26); the celebrated Barberini Triglott in the Barberini Library at Rome dates from 1227 and contains in three columns the Samaritan Pentateuch, the Samaritan Targum, and the Arabic translation in Samaritan characters. E. COWLEY, The Samaritan Liturgy, edited with Introduction etc. (2 vols., Oxford, 1910). Of earlier publications of rvarious hymns should be mentioned: GESENIUS, Carmina Samaritana (Leipzig, 1824); Geiger in ZDMG, XVIII (1864), 814 sqq.; The Prayer of Al-Galuga; XXI (1867), 273 sqq.; The Litany of Marqa; KOHN, Zur Sprache, Literatur und Dogmatik d. Samar. (an old Pesach-Hagada). What HEIDENHEIM offers in his Quarterly and in the Biblioth. Samar. must be characterized as decidedly imperfect. In general, cf. COWLEY, The Sam. Liturgy and Reading of the Law in Jewish Quarterly Review, VII (1904), 121 sqq.; RAPPOPORT, La liturgie samaritaine (Angers, 1900). G. The best collection of the Samaritan correspondence since the time of Huntington is DE SACY, Correspondance des Samaritains de Naplouse in Notices et Extraits des MSS. de la Bibliothéque du Roi, XII (Paris, 1831), I sqq., contains the originals with French translations; cf. also HEIDENHEIM in Viertaljahrsschrift für english-theolog. Forschung und Kritik, I (Gotha, 1861), 768 sqq.; also ZDMKG, 17 (1863), 375 sqq.; HAMAKER in Archief voor Kerkeljke Geschiedenis, V (Amsterdam, 1834), 4 sqq.; a letter addressed in 1842 to the French Government is published in Les Annales de philosophie chrétienne (1853). Of later date are a letter to Kautzsch, see Zeitschrift des Deutschen Palästina-Vereins (1885), 149 sqq.; a letter addressed to King Oscar of Sweden published by ALMKVIST (Upsala, 1897); one to ROSENBERG, see his Lehrbuch der samaritan. Sprache (Vienna, 1901); one to BARTON, see Bibl. sacra., LX (1903), 610. H. FREUDENTHAL, Hellenistische Studien, Pt. I (Breslau, 1875); SCHÜRER, Gesch. des jüd. Volkes im Zeitalter Jesu Christi, III (3d ed., Leipzig, 1898), 357 sq., 372 sq. FR. SCHÜHLEIN Joseph Anton Sambuga Joseph Anton Sambuga Theologian, b. at Walldorf near Heidelberg, 9 June; 1752; d. at Nymphenburg near Munich 5 June, according to Sailer, but 5 January according to other statements, 1815. His parents were Italians who had come from the neighbourhood of Como. He went to school at Mannheim and to the monastic school of the Augustinians at Wiesloch and then entered the University of Heidelberg. In 1770 family affairs took him to Italy where he finished his theological studies and was ordained priest at Como, 2 April, 1774. After he had laboured at Como for a while as chaplain at the hospital he returned to Germany and in 1775 was made chaplain at Helmsheim, in 1778 chaplain and in 1783 court preacher at Mannheim, in 1785 parish priest at Herrnsheim. In 1797 he was again called to the Court at Mannheim as teacher of religion to Prince Louis (later King Louis I of Bavaria), the oldest son of Duke Maximilian Joseph. When Maximilian Joseph went to live at Munich as Elector of Bavaria (from 1806 King Maximilian I), Sambuga followed the Court to that city and was later the teacher of religion to the younger children of the Elector also. He was a pious, deeply-religious priest, and belonged to the school of Sailer whose friend he was. Among his writings should be mentioned: "Schutzrede für den ehelosen Stand der Geistlichen" (Frankenthal, 1782; 2nd ed., Munich, 1827); "Ueber den Philosophismus, welcher unser Zeitalter bedroht" (Munich, 1805); "Ueber die Nothwendigkeit der Besserung, als Rücksprache mit seinem Zeitalter" (2 vols., Munich, 1807); "Untersuchung über das Wesen der Kirche" (Linz and Munich, 1809); "Der Priester am Altare" (Munich, 1815; 3d ed., 1819). There were published after his death: "Sammlung verschiedener Gedanken über verschiedene Gegenstände", ed. by Franz Stapf (Munich, 1818); "Auserlesene Briefe", ed. by Karl Klein (Munich, 1818); "Zweite Sammlung", ed. by Franz Stapf (1819); "Predigten auf Sonn-und Festtage", ed. by K. Klein (Mannheim, 1822); "Reden und Aufsätze", collected and ed. by J. B. SchmitterHug (Lindau, 1834). Sailer, Joseph Anton Sambuga, wie er war (Munich, 1816); the same account in Sailer, Biographische Schriften, I, in Sailer's collected works, vol. XXXVIII (2nd ed. Sulzbach, 1841), 157-416. FRIEDRICH LAUCHERT Samoa Samoa (Or NAVIGATORS' ISLANDS). A group of islands situated in latitude 13§30' and 14§30' south and longitude 168§ and 173§ west, and composed principally of fertile mountainous islands, such as Savai'i, Upolu, Tutuila, Manu'a, of volcanic and coral formations. The natives are tall, muscular, hardy, and fearless seafarers, but ferociously cruel (formerly cannibalistic) in war; hospitable, but indolent in peace; of dignified and courteous bearing, and skilled in debate. The aboriginal government was an aristocratic federation of chiefs, chosen from certain families, controlling the royal succession. The first mission work in these islands was done by John Williams of the London (Protestant) Missionary Society, 1830. In 1836 Gregory XVI divided Oceanica (which includes Samoa) between the Society of the Sacred Hearts of Jesus and Mary and the Marists. The First Catholic missionaries, Marists, landed in Samoa in 1845. In 1851 the Vicar Apostolic of Central Oceanica appointed by Pius IX was also Administrator of Samoa. This double title was borne by the succeeding bishops, Elloy and Lamaze, until 1896, when Mgr. Broyer was appointed Vicar Apostolic of Samoa and Tokelau, with residence at Apia. The total population is estimated at 37,000, of whom 7500 are Catholics, with l bishop and 21 priests, several of them natives. There are 17 churches with resident pastors, 100 chapel stations under married catechists, schools under Sisters of the Third Order of Mary. Divorce and immorality ae the principal obstacles to Catholic progress. The London Missionary Society has 12 missionaries and 8658 church members. There are also Mormon and Wesleyan missions. The European name of these islands was given them by Bougainville in 1768. In 1872 Commander Meade, U.S.N., negotiated the concession of a coaling station in Tutuila; this was ratified by a treaty in 1878. Treaties with Germany and Great Britain followed in 1879. Native dynastic disorders and consular aggressions necessitated the Berlin Conference of 1889, between the interested powers, resulting in a tripartite government of the islands by the United States, Germany, and Great Britain. Popular disapproval in the United States of "foreign alliances" led to the dissolution of this agreement and a partition in 1899, Tutuila and the islands east of 171§W longitude passing under American control, the rest to Germany, under an imperial governor. Tutuila still remains (1911) under native chiefs and laws (when not conflicting with American law), with supervision by the commandant of the United States Naval Station. MONFAT, Les Samoas, etude historique et religieuse (Lyons, 1890); VIOLETTE, Dictionnaire Samoa-francais-anglais, et Grammaire (Paris, 1879); TURNER, Nineteen Years in Polynesia (London, 186l); KRAMER, Die Samoa-Inseln. (Stuttgart, 1902); GRIFFIN, List of Books in Library of Congress on Philippine Islands, Samoa and Guam with Maps by PHILLIPS (Washington, 1901); London Missionary Society; Report for 1907; HERVIER, Les Missions Maristes en Oceanie (1902); Annals of the Propagation of the Faith (1905); BUCHBERGER, Kirchliches Handlexikon (Munich, 1910); BATTANDIER, Annuaire Pontifical Catholique; Missionsbote (Steyler, 1905-06); Compilation of Messages and Papers of Presidents of the U. S. from 1787-1897, VII, VIII, IX, X (Washington), s. vv. Grant, Hayes, Cleveland, Harrison, McKinley; Foreign Relations of the U. S. Correspondence, etc., relating to Samoa; 51st and 53rd Congress; FOSTER, A Century of American Diplomacy (New York and Boston, 1900); IDEM, American Diplomacy in the Orient (New York and Boston, 1903); Tutuila; Memoranda furnished by Navy Department to 57th Congress, U. S. Senate (1902). W.F. SANDS Samogitia Samogitia (SAMOGITIENSIS) A Russian diocese, also called Telshi (Telshe), including the part of Lithuania lying on the Baltic; this Lithuanian district, also named Schmudien (Polish, Zmudz) or Schamaiten (Lithuanian, Zemaitis), was conquered about 1380 by the Teutonic Knights, and ceded to Poland in 1411 by the first Treaty of Thorn after the defeat of Tannenberg. During the supremacy of the Teutonic Knights a part of the inhabitants had been baptized, but Christianity had not become firmly established. King Jagello of Poland (1386-1434) travelled through the country, gave instruction in the Christian religion himself, and called upon the people to be baptized. He founded the Diocese of Samogitia with its see at Miedniki, his act being confirmed by the Council of Constance in 1416, and the cathedral, which was dedicated to Saints Alexander, Evantius, and Theodul, was erected in 1417. The first bishop was a German named Matthias; he was succeeded in 1421 by Nicholas, a Pole. Until the sixteenth century a large part of the people were strongly inclined to heathenism. Among the later bishops should be mentioned Melchior I (1574-1609), who re-established Catholicism after the Reformation. His predecessor George III founded a seminary for priests. There was an uninterrupted succession of bishops until 1778. The see then remained vacant, and in 1798 the diocese was suppressed, after it had fallen to Russia in the third Partition of Poland in 1795. Up to that time it had been a suffragan of Gnesen. In 1849 it was re-established as a suffragan of Mohilev. The first bishop of this second period was Matthias Wolonzewski. The see is Kovno on the Njemen. By the convention made in 1847 between Pius IX and Russia the diocese includes the governments of Courland and Kovno, which have together an area of about 26,219 square miles. The Catholic population of the two governments is 1,258,092; there are 426 parishes and dependent stations, and 600 priests. Rzepnicki, Vitæ præsulum Poloniæ, III (Posen, 1763), 26-42; Gams, Series episcoporum (Ratisbon, 1873), 357; Die katholische Kirche unserer Zeit, ed. by the Leo Association, III (Berlin, 1902), 159-60; Directorium pro diæcesi Telsensi (Kowno, 1910). KLEMENS LÖFFLER Samos Samos Titular see, suffragan of Rhodes in the Cyclades. The island, called in Turkish Soussan-Adassi, is 181 sq. miles in area and numbers 55,000 inhabitants, nearly all of whom are Greek schismatics. There are nevertheless some Catholics dependent on the Latin Bishop of Chios and two convents of Fathers of the African Missions of Lyons and of Sisters of St. Joseph. Since 1832 the island has constituted an autonomous principality, governed by an Ottoman Greek appointed by the Porte and recognized by England, France, and Russia. Samos was first inhabited by the Leleges, Carians, and Ionians, the latter being very active and given to navigation. Its greatest prosperity was attained under the tyrant Polycrates (536-522 b.c.) at whose court the poet Anacreon lived. The philosopher Pythagoras (b. at Samos) seems to have lived at the same time; Æsop also stayed there for a long time. At the assassination of Polycrates Samos passed under Persian domination, and, about 439 b.c., participated in the Greek confederation especially with Athens. This city, under Pericles, took it by force. Henceforth it had various fortunes, until the Romans, after pillaging it, annexed it in a.d. 70. It was included in the Province of the Isles. Under the Byzantines Samos was at the head of a maritime theme or district. It was captured and occupied in turn by Arabian and Turkish adventurers, the Venetians, Pisans, Genoese, and Greeks, and the Turks in 1453. These various masters so depopulated it that in 1550 Sultan Soliman had transported thither Greek families, whence sprang the present population. From 1821 to 1824 Samos had a large share in the war of independence and won several victories over the Turks. Among its bishops Le Quien (Oriens Christ., I, 929-32) mentions: Isidore I, at the beginning of the seventh century; Isidore II, in 692; Heraclius, in 787. Stamatriadès (Samiaca, IV, 169-255) gives a fuller list including two aged bishops, Anastasius and George. St. Sabinianus, b. at Samos and martyred under Aurelian, is venerated on 29 January, at Troyes in Champagne; there is also a St. Leo, d. at Samos, venerated on 29 April, but he seems very legendary. At first a suffragan of Rhodes, Samos was an autocephalous archdiocese in 1730; in 1855 it was a metropolitan see as at present, dependent on the Greek Patriarch of Constantinople. In I Mach., xv, 23, the Roman senate makes known to Samos (Samus) the decree favourable to the Jews. St. Paul stayed there for a short time (Acts, xx, 15). Smith, Dict. of Greek and Roman Geog., s. v.; Rosen, Reison auf den griech. Inseln (Stuttgart, 1843), 139-150; Lacroix, Iles de la Grèce (Paris, 1853), 214-58; GuÉrin, Description de l'île de Patmos et de l'île de Samos (Paris, 1856), 123-324; Guinet, La Turque d'Asie, I, 498-523; StamatiadÈs, Samiaca (5 vols., in Greek, Samos, 1886); Burchner, Das ionische Samos (Amberg, 1892; Munich, 1896). S. VAILHÉ Samosata Samosata a titular see in Augusta Euphratensis, suffragan of Hierapolis, capital of Commagenum, whose kings were relatives of the Seleucides. The first was Mithridates I Callinicus (d. 96 b.c.); his son and successor, Antiochus I, died before 31 b.c., when the country was governed by Mithridates, an ally of Anthony at Actium; then followed his other son, Antiochus II, whom Octavius summoned to Rome and condemned in 29 b.c. In 20 b.c. Mithridates III became king, then Antiochus III, who died in 17 b.c., in which year Tiberius united Commagenum to the province of Syria. In 38 Caligula gave the province to King Antiochus IV Epiphanes Magnus, afterwards deposed, later restored by Claudius in 41, and deposed again in 72 by Cæsennius Pætus, Governor of Syria. The sons of Antiochus withdrew to Rome and Commagenum passed under Roman administration. A civil metropolis from the days of Emperor Hadrian, Samosata was the home of the sixteenth Legio Flavia Firma and the terminus of several military roads. The native city of Lucian, the philosopher and satirist, and of Paul, Bishop of Antioch in the third century, it had seven martyrs: Hipparchus, Philotheus, etc., who suffered under Maximinus Thrax, and whose "Passion" was edited by Assemani ("Acta SS. martyrum orient. et occident.", II, 124-47; see also Schultess in "Zeitschr. der deutschen morgenländischen Gesellschaft", LI (1897), 379. St. Daniel the Stylite was born in a village near Samosata; St. Rabulas, venerated on 19 February, who lived in the sixth century at Constantinople, was also a native of Samosata. A "Notitia episcopatuum" of Antioch in the sixth century mentions Samosata as an autocephalous metropolis ("Echos d'Orient", X, 144); at the Photian Council of 879, the See of Samosata had already been united to that of Amida or Diarbekir (Mansi, "Conciliorum collectio", XVII-XVIII, 445). As in 586 the titular of Amida bears only this title (Le Quien, "Oriens christianus", II, 994), it must be concluded that the union took place between the seventh and the ninth centuries. Among the earlier bishops may be mentioned Peperius at Nicæa (325); St. Eusebius, a great opponent of the Arians, killed by an Arian woman, honoured on 22 June; Andrew, a vigorous opponent of St. Cyril of Alexandria and of the Council of Ephesus (Le Quien, "Oriens christianus", II, 933-6). Chabot gives a list of twenty-eight Jacobite bishops ("Revue de l'Orient chrÈtien", VI, 203). In February, 1098, the emir Baldoukh, attacked by Baudouin of Antioch, cut his army to pieces there. In 1114 it was one of the chief quarters of the Mussulmans hostile to the Count of Edessa, to whom it succumbed, but was recaptured by the Mussulmans about 1149. At present the ruins of Samosata may be seen at Samsat on the right bank of the Euphrates, in the caza of Husni Mansour and the vilayet of Mamouret-el-Aziz; there are remains of a wall towards the south, traces of the ancient wall dating probably from the first century, and finally the artificial hill on which the fortress was erected. Smith, Dict. of Greek and Roman Geog., s. v.; Humann and Puchstein, Reisen in Kleintsien u. Nord Syrien (1890), 191; Marquardt, Manuel des antiquitÈs romaines, II (Paris, 1892), 340-3; Chapot in Bulletin de correspondance hellÈnique, XXVI, 203-5; Idem, La frontière de l'Euphrate (Paris, 1907), 269-71. S. VAILHÉ Richard Sampson Richard Sampson Bishop of Chichester and subsequently of Coventry and Lichfield; d. at Eccleshall, Staffordshire, 25 Sept., 1554. He was educated at Trinity Hall, Cambridge, Paris, and Sens. Having become Doctor of Canon Law, he was appointed by Wolsey chancellor and vicar-general in his Diocese of Tournay, where he lived till 1517. Meanwhile he gained English preferment, becoming Dean of St. Stephen's, Westminster, and of the Chapel Royal (1516), Archdeacon of Cornwall (1517), and prebendary of Newbold (1519). From 1522 to 1525 he was ambassador to Charles V. He was now Dean of Windsor (1523), Vicar of Stepney (1526), and held prebends at St. Paul's and at Lichfield; he was also Archdeacon of Suffolk (1529). Being a man of no principle, and solely bent on a distinguished ecclesiastical career, he became one of Henry VIII's chief agents in the divorce proceedings, being rewarded therefor by the deanery of Lichfield in 1533, the rectory of Hackney (1534), and treasureship of Salisbury (1535). On 11 June, 1536, he was elected schismatical Bishop of Chichester, and as such furthered Henry's political and ecclesiastical policy, though not sufficiently thoroughly to satisfy Cranmer. On 19 Feb., 1543, he was translated to Coventry and Lichfield on the royal authority alone, without papal confirmation. He held his bishopric through the reign of Edward VI, though Dodd says he was deprived for recanting his disloyalty to the pope. Godwin the Anglican writer and the Catholic Pitts both agree that he did so retract, but are silent as to his deprivation. He wrote in defence of the royal prerogative "Oratio" (1533) and an explanation of the Psalms (1539-48) and of Romans (1546). BREWER, Reign of Henry VIII (London, 1884); Letters and Papers of Henry VIII (London, 1831-52); FRIEDMANN, Anne Boleyn (London, 1884); COOPER, Athenae Cantabrigienses (Cambridge, 1858-61); PITTS, De illustribus Angliae Scriptoribus (Paris, 1619); DODD, Church History, I (Brussels vere Wolverhampton, 1739-42); ARCHBOLD in Dict. Nat. Biog. EDWIN BURTON St. Samson St. Samson Bishop and confessor, born in South Wales; died 28 July, 565 (?). The date of his birth is unknown. His parents whose names are given as Amon of Dyfed and Anna of Gwynedd, were of noble, but not royal, birth. While still an infant he was dedicated to God and entrusted to the care of St. Illtyd, by whom he was brought up in the monastery of Llantwit Major. He showed exceptional talents in his studies, and was eventually ordained deacon and priest by St. Dubric. After this he retired to another monastery, possibly after that on Caldy Island, to practise greater austerities, and some years later became it abbot. About this time some Irish monks who were returning from Rome happened to visit Samson's monastery. So struck was the abbot by their learning and sanctity that he accompanied them to Ireland, and there remained some time. During h is visit he received the submission of an Irish monastery, and, on his return to Wales, sent one of his uncles to act as its superior. His fame as a worker of miracles now attracted so much attention that he resolved to found a new monastery or cell "far from the haunts of men", and accordingly retired with a few companions to a lonely spot on the banks of the Severn. He was soon discovered, however, and forced by his fellow-countrymen to become abbot of the monastery formerly ruled by St. Germanus; here St. Dubric consecrated him bishop but without appointment to any particular see. Now, being warned by an angel, he determined to leave England and, after some delay, set sail for Brittany. He landed near Dol, and there built a monastery which became the centre of his episcopal work in the district. Business taking him to Paris, he visited King Childebert there, and was nominated by him as Bishop of Dol; Dol, however, did not become a regular episcopal see till about the middle of the ninth century. Samson attained the age of 85 years, and was buried at Dol. Several early lives of Samson exist. The oldest, printed by Mabillon in h is "Acta Sanctorum" from a MS. at Citeaux, and again by the Bollandists, claims to be compiled from information derived from Samson's contemporaries, which would refer it to about 600. Dom Plaine in the "Analecta Bollandiana" has edited another and fuller life (from MS. Andeg., 719), which he regards as earlier than Mabillion's. Later lives are numerous. G. ROGER HUDLESTON Samson Samson (Derived from the Hebrew word for "sun"). The last and most famous of the Judges of Israel. The narrative of the life of Samson and his exploits is contained in chapters xiii-xvi of the book of Judges. After the deliverance effected by Jephte, the Israelites again fell into their evil ways and were delivered over to the Philistines for forty years. An angel of the Lord in the form of a man appears to the barren wife of Manue of the tribe of Dan and promises her that she shall bear a son who shall deliver Israel from the oppression of the Philistines. He prescribes abstinence on the part of both mother and son from all things intoxicating or unclean, and that no razor shall touch the child's head, "for he shall be a Nazarite of God". The angel bearing a similar message again appears to Manue as well as to his wife, and it is only after his disappearance in the flame of a burnt offering that they recognize with great fear his celestial nature. The child is born according to the prediction and receives the name Samson, and the narrative informs us that the "spirit of the Lord" was with him from his youth. Strangely enough this spirit impels him in spite of his parents' opposition to choose a wife from among the ungodly Philistines (Judges, xiv, 1-4). On a visit to Thamnatha, the town of his intended bride, Samson gives the first evidence of his superhuman strength by slaying a lion without other weapon than his bare hands. Returning later he finds that a swarm of bees have taken up their abode in the carcass of the lion. He eats of the honey and the incident becomes the occasion of the famous riddle proposed by him to the thirty Philistine guests at the wedding festivities: "Out of the eater came forth meat, and out of the strong came forth sweetness." In their inability to find the answer the guests, toward the end of seven days' feast, induce Samson's wife to coax him to reveal it to her, and not sooner has she succeeded than she declares it to her countrymen. Samson, however, in order to provide the thirty garments pledged in the wager, goes down to Ascalon in "the spirit of the Lord" and slays thirty Philistines whose garments he gives to the guests who had declared the answer to the riddle. In anger he returns to his father's house, and his bride chooses one of his wedding companions for her husband. He returns later to claim her and is informed by her father that she has been given to one of his friends, but that he may have instead her younger and fairer sister. Samson declines the offer and catching three hundred foxes he couples them tail to tail, and having fastened torches between their tails turns them loose to set fire to the corn harvests of the Philistines which are thus destroyed together with their vineyards and olive-yards. The Philistines retaliate by burning the faithless wife and her father, whereupon Samson makes a "great slaughter of them" and then retires to dwell in a cavern of Etam in the tribe of Juda. Three thousand Philistines follow him and take up their quarters at Lechi. The men of Juda, alarmed, blame Samson for this invasion and deliver him up bound to the enemy. But when he is brought to them the spirit of the Lord come upon him; he bursts his bonds and slays a thousand Philistines with the jawbone of an ass. Being thirsty after this exploit, he is revived by a spring of water which the Lord causes to flow from the jawbone. Later while Samson is visiting a harlot in Gaza the Philistines gather about the city gate in order to seize him in the morning, but he, rising at midnight, takes the gate, posts and all, and carries it to the top of a hill in the direction of Hebron. Subsequently he falls in love with a woman named Dalila of the valley of Sorec, who is bribed by the Philistines to betray him into their hands. After deceiving her three times as to the source of his strength, he finally yields to her entreaties and confesses that his power is due to the fact that his head has never been shaved. The paramour treacherously causes his locks to be shorn and he falls helpless into the hands of the Philistines who put out his eyes and cast him into prison. Later, after his hair has grown again he is brought forth on the occasion of the feast of the god Dagon to be exhibited for the amusement of the populace. The spectators, among whom are the princes of the Philistines, number more than three thousand, and they are congregated in, and upon, a great edifice which is mainly supported by two pillars. These are seized by the hero whose strength has returned; he pulls them down, causing the house to collapse, and perishes himself in the ruins together with all the Philistines. Because of certain resemblances some scholars have claimed that the biblical account of the career and exploits of Samson is but a Hebrew version of the pagan myth of Hercules. This view, however, is nothing more than a superficial conjecture lacking serious proof. Still less acceptable is the opinion which sees in the biblical narrative merely the development of a solar myth, and which rests on little more than the admitted but inconclusive derivation of the name Samson from shemesh, "sun". Both views are rejected by such eminent and independent scholars as Moore and Budde. The story of Samson, like other portions of the Book of Judges, is doubtless derived from the sources of ancient national legend. It has an ethical as well as a religious import, and historically it throws not a little light on the customs and manners of the crude age to which it belongs. LAGRANGE, Le Livre des Juges (Paris, 1903); MOORE, The Book of Judges in The International Critical Commentary (1895); VIGOUROUX, Dict. de la Bible, s.v. JAMES F. DRISCOLL Samson Samson Abbot of St. Edmunds, b. at Tottington, near Thetford, in 1135; d. 1211. After taking his M.A. in Paris, Samson returned to Norfolk and taught in the school at Bury. In 1160 the monks of St. Edmunds sent him to Rome on their behalf to appeal against an agreement of the abbot and King Henry II, and for this on his return Abbot Hugh promptly clapped him into gaol. In 1166 Samson was a fully-professed monk, and on his election as abbot on Hugh's death in 1182 he had filled a number of offices — those of sub-sacrist, guestmaster, pittancer, third prior, master of novices, and master of the workmen. For the rest of his life, as Abbot of St. Edmunds, Samson worked with prodigious activity for the abbey, for the town, and for the State. He regained the right of joint election of two bailiffs for the abbey and town, made a thorough investigation of the properties of the abbey, looked into the finances, cleared off arrears of debt, rebuilt the choir, constructed an aqueduct, and added the great bell tower at the west end of the abbey, and two flanking towers. He did his best for the liberties of the town; helped the townsfolk to obtain a charter and gave every encouragement to new settlers. The monks resisted Samson's concessions of market rights to the townsmen, but were no match for their abbot. A hospital at Babwell, and a free school for poor scholars, were also the gifts of Abbot Samson to the townspeople. Pope Lucius III made Samson a judge delegate in ecclesiastical causes; he served on the commission for settling the quarrel between Archbishop Hubert and the monks of Canterbury; and on the Royal Council in London, where he sat as a baron, frustrated the efforts of William of Longchamp to curtail the rights of the Benedictine Order. Samson died in 1211, having ruled his abbey successfully for thirty years. Carlyle in "Past and Present" has made Abbot Samson familiar to all the world; but Carlyle's fascinating picture must not be mistaken for history. Memorials of St. Edmunds Abbey, ed. Arnold, in Rolls Series; Norgate in Dict. Nat. Biog., s. v.; there are many editions and translations of Jocelin de Brakelond's De rebus gestis Samsonis Abbatis. JOSEPH CLAYTON Samuco Indians Samuco Indians (Zamuco). The collective name of a group of tribes in southwestern Bolivia, speaking dialects of a common language which constitutes a distinct linguistic stock (Samucan) and includes, besides the Samuco proper, the Guaranoca, Morotoco, Poturero, and several others. Their original country was along the northern border of the Chaco, from about 18° to 21° south latitude and from about 58° to 62° west longitude, bordering south upon the Toba and other wandering tribes of the Chaco, and west and north-west upon the celebrated mission tribes of the Chiquito and Chiriguano. In their original condition the Samuco were semi-sedentary, and combined agriculture and hunting, the men returning to the woods at the close of the planting season to hunt, drying the meat for future use. They planted corn, manioc, and a species of plum. The women wove mats and hammocks (the latter from thread spun from native cotton) and made pottery. The men were noted for their warlike and adventurous spirit. They went entirely naked, while the women wore only a small covering about the middle of the body. Lips, ears, and nostrils were bored for the insertion of wooden plugs. The men carried bows, lances, and wooden clubs, and the warrior's weapons were buried with him. Mothers strangled all their children after the second, and in one tribe, the Morotoco, the women seem to have ruled while the men did the household work. They were passionately given to dancing and visiting, and to the drinking of chicha, an intoxicating liquor made from fermented corn. The majority of them were Christianized through the efforts of the Jesuits in the middle of the eighteenth century, and were establidhed in the Chiquito missions of Bolivia, particularly in the missions of San Juan, Santiago, and Santo Corazon, where many of them, through the efforts of the missionaries, adopted the prevailing Chiquito language. Their conversion was largely the work of Father Narciso Patzi. A large part of them retained their savage independence in the forests. Those of the three mission towns numbered together 5854 souls shortly before the expulsion of the Jesuits in 1767. In 1839, according to d'Orbigny, they numbered about 1250 souls, besides about 10,000 more still wild in the remote eastern forests. The same traveller describes them as robust and well built, frank, honest, sociable, and notably fond of adventure, pleasure, and gaiety, and with a sweet and euphonious language. BALLIVIAN, Documentos para la hist. de Bolivia (La Paz, 1906); BRINTON, American Race (New York, 1891); DOBRIZHOFFER, Account of the Abipones (London, 1822); HERVÁS Catálogo de las Lenguas, I (Madrid, 1800); D'ORBIGNY, L'Homme Américain (Paris, 1839); SOUTHEY, Hist. of Brazil, III (London, 1823). JAMES MOONEY Diocese of San Antonio Diocese of San Antonio (Sancti Antonii). Comprises all that portion of the State of Texas between the Colorado and Rio Grande Rivers, except the land south of the Arroyo de los Hermanos, on the Rio Grande, and the Counties of Live Oak, Bee, Goliad, and Refugio. It embraces an area of about 90,909 square miles. The first religious ministrations in this territory of which we have definite historical information where those of the French secular and regular priests who accompanied the expedition of La Salle. They entered Matagorda Bay in January, 1685. La Salle built a fort called Fort St. Louis on the spot subsequently occupied by the Bahia Mission; a chapel was constructed in the fort, and for two years five priests laboured here: Fathers Zenobius Membré, Maxime Le Clercq, and Anastasius Douay, Franciscans, and Fathers Chefdeville and Cavelier, Sulpicians. They finally abandoned Texas and returned to Canada. Shortly after their departure, Franciscans from the apostolic school of Querétaro and Zacatecas founded missions on the Rio Grande. The pioneer Spanish priest was the Franciscan Father Damian Mazanet, who accompanied the expedition of Alonzo de León in 1689. He found the field so promising that he invoked the help of the civil and ecclesiastical authorities to establish a permanent mission beyond the Rio Grande. In 1690 Father Mazanet crossed the Rio Grande, accompanied by Fathers Michael Fontcubierto, Francis Casanas, Anthony Borday, and Anthony Pereira. The friendly Indians (Asinais) received them with joy, and the Mission of San Francisco de las Tejas was established. In 1691, and again in 1700, additional missionaries arrived from Mexico; four more missions were established, and these were maintained till 1718, when the chief mission was transferred to San Antonio. In 1703 the Mission of San Francisco Solano was established on the banks of the Rio Grande. It was transferred in 1712 to San Ildefonso; thence, in 1713, it was moved to San José on the Rio Grande, and, finally, in 1718 to the San Antonio River, where it was established under the title of San Antonio de Valero. This last move was made by order of the Marquess de Valero, Viceroy of New Spain. The mission was then under the direction of Fray Antonio de San Buenaventura y Olivares. In the year 1716 nine friars from Querétaro and Zacatecas, with Father Antonio Margil de Jesús as superior, established six Missions in the most northerly part of the Province of Texas, and a few years afterwards another was built near the Presidio of Nuestra Senora del Pilar de los Adayes, seven leagues from the fort of Natchitoches, in Louisiana. The mission of La Purísima Concépcion was founded in 1716, among the Sanipaos, Tocanes and other tribes. A massive stone church was erected in 1731, and is still in a fair state of preservation and is used for Divine Worship. It is situated one mile south of the present city of San Antonio. In 1729 the King of Spain ordered four hundred families to be transferred from the Canary Islands to Texas. Fourteen families arrived the next year, and the city of San Fernando was founded near the fort and mission of San Antonio de Valero. A chapel was at once raised, to serve till a proper parish church could be built. The two settlements in course of time became consolidated and the modern city of San Antonio is the result. In 1744 the cornerstone of the Church of San Fernando was laid, and on 6 November, 1749, the building was dedicated to Divine worship. A portion of this edifice still stands and serves as the sanctuary of the present Cathedral of San Fernando. The Province of Texas was subject to the jurisdiction of Guadalajara till December, 1777, when it became part of the newly-erected Diocese of Nuevo León, or Linares. The Indian missions continued under the care of the Franciscans, many of whom won the crown of martyrdom. In 1777 Fray Pedro Ramírez, missionary at San José, was president of all the Texas missions, and by an Indult of Clement XIV was empowered to administer confirmation in all parts of Texas. On 10 April, 1794, Don Pedro de Nava, commandant-general of the north-eastern interior provinces, of which Texas formed a part, published a decree by which all the missions within his jurisdiction were secularized. Nevertheless the Franciscans in many instances remained as pastors, though they received their jurisdiction from the bishop, like other parish priests. Their missions subsisted in a flourishing state till about 1813, when they were suppressed by the Spanish Government, and the Indians dispersed. In 1839, Gregory XVI established a prefecture Apostolic in Texas and appointed the Very Rev. J. Timon prefect Apostolic. In 1840 the Rev. John M. Odin visited Texas as vice-prefect Apostolic. Through his efforts, warmly supported by the minister of France, de Saligny, the congress confirmed to "the Chief Pastor of the Roman Catholic Church in the Republic of Texas" the churches of San Fernando, the Alamo (San Antonio de Valero), La Purísima Concépcion, San José, San Juan Capistrano, San Francisco de la Espada, Goliad, Victoria and Rufugio, with their grounds, the latter not to exceed fifteen acres each. A Bull erecting the Republic of Texas into a vicariate Apostolic was published by Gregory XVI on 10 July, 1841, and the Right Rev. John M. Odin was appointed Bishop of Claudiopolis and assigned to the vicariate. Religion, which had languished since the secularization of the missions and the departure of the Franciscan monks, now began to revive. New churches were built, and some of the old mission buildings restored; religious orders of men and women were introduced from Europe; schools, hospitals, and charitable institutions were established. Colonists from Europe and various parts of the United States began to pour in and settle upon the wide and fertile plains of eastern and southern Texas. A large proportion of the European immigrants were Catholics. Germans founded prosperous settlements at New Braunfels in 1844, at Castroville in 1845, and later at D'Hanis, Fredericksburg, High Hill, and other places. A colony of Poles, led by the Rev. Leopold Moczygemba, O.F.M., founded the thriving settlement of Panna Maria in 1854; another Polish colony was established at St. Hedwig, near San Antonio. Bohemians planted flourishing settlements at Fayetteville, Praha, Moulton, Shiner, and other points. In all these places there are now fine churches and schools, and an influential and constantly increasing Catholic population. In 1847 the Diocese of Galveston was established, its territory embracing the whole State of Texas. On 3 September, 1874, this immense territory was divided, ecclesiastically, and the Diocese of San Antonio was created by the Holy See. Anthony Dominic Pellicer, the first bishop, was a native of St. Augustine, Florida; b. 7 Dec., 1824, consecrated at Mobile, Alabama, 8 Dec., 1874; d. 14 April, 1880. John Claudius Neraz, second bishop, was b. 12 Jan., 1828, at Anse, Department of the Rhone, France; he laboured for thirty years on the missions in eastern and southern Texas, was consecrated in the Cathedral of San Fernando, San Antonio, 8 May, 1881, and d. 15 Nov., 1894. John Anthony Forest, third bishop, was b. 25 December, 1838, at St. Martin, Canton St. Germain, France. Like his predecessor, he spent the whole of his priestly life in arduous missionary work in southern Texas, often helping to build churches with his own hands. He was consecrated 28 October, 1895, and d. 11 March, 1911, deeply loved and regretted by all classes. John William Shaw, the present bishop, was b. At Mobile, Alabama, in 1863, made his principal studies in Ireland and at Rome, and was ordained a priest on 26 May, 1888. On 14 April, 1910, in the cathedral at Mobile, Alabama, he was consecrated titular Bishop of Castabala and coadjutor with the right of succession to the Bishop of San Antonio. On 18 May, 1910, he was appointed administrator of the diocese, owing to the ill-health of Bishop Forest, at whose death his succeeded to the see. San Antonio is the largest city in Texas; it was the capital of the Spanish province and from and days of the Franciscan missions has been a centre of Catholic activity in religious, educational, and charitable work. With a population of 100,000, it has thirteen Catholic parishes. Four of these, including the Cathedral of San Fernando, are for the Mexican, or Spanish-speaking population; two are for the English-speaking; two English and German, one German, one Polish, one Flemish, and two for the coloured population. There are also several hundred Italian families, scattered among the various parishes. The city is the headquarters of several religious congregations whose works extend to neighbouring dioceses and states, and to the Republic of Mexico. The Oblates of Mary Immaculate, who since their introduction by Bishop Odin in 1849 have laboured with glorious results among the poor Mexicans of Texas, have their provincial house here, and conduct a theological seminary and an apostolic college for the training of youth for the priesthood. The South-western Province of the Oblates was established in October, 1904, with the Very Rev. H. A. Constantineau, O.M.I., D.D., as first provincial. The province includes all the states of the south and west, and the Republic of Mexico. The Congregation of the Sisters of Divine Providence, devoted exclusively to Christian education, have their mother-house in San Antonio, from which they direct twenty-nine academies and schools in this diocese and forty-three in neighbouring dioceses in Texas, Louisiana, and Oklahoma. The Congregation of the Sisters of Charity of the Incarnate Word also have their mother-house in the city. They conduct in the diocese twenty schools and academies, three hospitals, two orphan asylums, and a home for the aged. They have also a number of hospitals and schools in neighbouring dioceses and in Mexico. Other religious orders represented are: Missionary Sons of the Immaculate Heart of Mary (Vich, Spain), who have charge of the cathedral and the other Spanish-speaking congregations at San Antonio and a number of rural Mexican missions; the Society of Mary (Dayton, Ohio), who conduct two college and a parish school at San Antonio and a college at Victoria; the Josephite Fathers, in charge of two parishes four coloured Catholics in the city; the Ursuline Nuns, two large academies; the Sisters of the Holy Ghost, devoted to the Mexican and coloured races; the Sisters of Our Lady of Charity of Refuge; the Sisters of St. Theresa of Jesus—all at San Antonio. The Sisters of the Incarnate Word and Blessed Sacrament have a fine academy at Victoria, and conduct schools at Halletsville and Shiner; the Sisters of Mercy, an academy and parochial school at Stanton. The congregation of Holy Cross (Notre Dame, Indiana) conduct a large college at Austin. Statistics (1911) Priests, 130 (secular, 69; religious, 61); brothers, 65; sisters, 607; parochial schools, 28; pupils, boys 1,290, girls 1,626; colleges and academies (many of which serve also as parish schools), 37; students, boys 2,173, girls 2,225; theological seminary, 1; students, 12; Apostolic college, 1; students, 49; orphan asylums, 2; inmates, boys, 108, girls, 105; house of refuge, adult inmates, 68; child inmates, 17; total number of youths receiving Catholic training; 7,629; hospitals, 3; number of patients yearly, 2,386; home for aged, 1; inmates, 74; churches with resident priests, 63; missions with churches, 71; total number of churches, 134; stations, 78; chapels, 14; Catholic population, about 96,500. History of the Catholic Church in the Diocese of San Antonio (San Antonio, 1897); Diocesan Archives (unpublished); Southern Messenger (San Antonio), files, November, 1894; Oct. 1895; March, April, 1910; March, 1911. WILLIAM CAMPBELL San Carlos de Ancud San Carlos de Ancud (Sancti Caroli Ancudiæ). The most southern of the Chilian dioceses. It extends from the River Cautín on the north to Cape Horn on the south; comprises the civil Provinces of Valdivia, Llanquihue, and Chiloé, part of the Province of Cautín and the Territory of Magallanes; has an area of more than 77,220 square miles, and a population of 371,856 inhabitants, 356,267 of whom are Catholics. San Carlos de Ancud (3,500 inhabitants) is the episcopal city, and the other important cities of the diocese are: Valdivia (15,000 inhabitants); Puerto Montt (5,500 inhabitants); Osorno (7,600 inhabitants); and Punta Arenas (12,300 inhabitants). The diocese is divided into 48 parishes. The cathedral chapter is composed of the dean, archdeacon, doctoral (councillor), and one canon. The seminary is directed by the Jesuits and has 106 students. There are 69 secular priests and 86 regular. The male religious orders have 30 houses and are represented by 141 members, the orders being the Jesuits, Franciscans, Capuchins, Discalced Carmelites, Salesians, and Brothers of the Christian Schools. The female religious orders have 18 houses and 95 members. In Puerto Montt there is a college directed by the Jesuits, and an industrial school in charge of the Christian Brothers; in Valdivia there is a commercial school under the care of the Salesians. There are 5 colleges for girls under the care of the Sisters of the Immaculate Conception of Paderborn, and the Salesian Sisters conduct another; there are also 12 primary schools, five of which are for the Indians; all these schools are in charge of religious teachers. There are 2 orphan asylums, and 6 hospitals in charge of nuns. More than 3,300 children are taught in these schools. The churches and chapels number 255. The Prefecture Apostolic of Araucanía is situated within the confines of the diocese, and has 19 missions in charge of German Capuchins from the Province of Bavaria; in these missions there are 18 churches and 13 chapels. The native population of this prefecture is about 60,000. The Territory of Magallanes belongs to the Prefecture Apostolic of Southern Patagonia, under the care of the Salesians. The Prefect Apostolic, Mgr. José Fagnano, lives in Punta Arenas. The missionaries have evangelized the Indians of Patagonia and Tierra del Fuego; the latter are composed of three races, Onas, Yaaganes, and Alacalufes, and are greatly reduced in numbers. The diocese was separated from the Diocese of Concepción by Gregory XVI, erected 1 July, 1840 by the Bull "Ubi primum", and made a suffragan of the Archdiocese of Santiago. Five bishops have goverend the diocese: D. Justo Donoso (1845-53); Fray Francisco de Paula Solar (1857-82); Fray Juan Agustin Lucero (1887-97); D. Ramón Angel Jara (1898-1910); Fray Pedro Armengol Valanzuela. Three diocesan synods, 1851, 1894, and 1907, have been held in the diocese. The clergy annually hold conferences from April to October to discuss moral and ethical questions, and make an annual spiritual retreat of eight days. In almost all the parishes, a nine day's mission is given to the faithful each year to prepare them for the paschal communion. The people are law-abiding and industrious, and they observe the principles and practices of their religion. Each parish has pious associations and confraternities, such as that of the Blessed Sacrament, and also various associations for the improvement of morals and for mutual support. Catalogo de los Eclesiasticos, etc., de Chile (Santiago, 1911); Anuario Estadistico de Chile (Santiago, 1910); Censo de la Republica de Chile de 1907 (Santiago, 1908). CARLOS S. COTAPOS Alonzo Sanchez Alonzo Sánchez Born in Mondejar, Guadalajara, Spain, in 1547; died at Alcalá, 27 May, 1593. He entered the Society of Jesus at Alcalá on 27 May, 1565. He was rector of the college of Navalcarnero, taught grammar for five years, and in 1579 went to the mission of Mexico, where he was rector of the seminary. Early in 1581 he set out for the Philippines with Bishop Salazar. Sánchez and his companion, Antonio Sedeno, and a lay brother were the first Jesuits in these islands. The bishop made Sánchez his consellor, appointed him to write the acts of the synod of Manila, and, when Sánchez was sent on an embassy to China, interrupted the synod until Sánchez had returned. Twice Sánchez was despatched on official business to China, where he met celebrated Jesuit missionaries of that country and from Japan. He was thus able to publish later an interesting and curious acocunt of the state of Christianity in China at the end of the sixteenth century. By the unanimous vote of all the Spanish officials, civil and religious, of the merchants and other leading citizens, Sánchez was chosen to go to Madrid as representative of the colony in 1586. Sánchez's mission to Philip II was very successful, his arguments moving the king to retain the islands, which many of his advisors had been urging him to abandon. From Madrid he went to Rome, and was there welcomed by Pope Sixtus V, from whom he received many privileges for the Church in the Philippines. In a Brief of 28 June, 1591, Gregory XIV praises the apostolic labours and writings of Sánchez, calling him a true defender of the authority and rights of the Holy See. Innocent IX addressed to him the Bull "Inter felices", in which he lauds his work. Clement VIII at his request granted various favours to the bishop and clergy in the islands. Sánchez gave an account of the Jesuit missions in the Philippines to Aquaviva, the General of the Society. It had been proposed to withdraw the fathers from the Archipelago, but Aquaviva, following the plan proposed by Sánchez, determined that the Society should remain, and made the Manila residence a college with Sedeno as its first rector. Sánchez now asked to be allowed to return to the Philippines, but was sent instead as visitor to some of the Spanish provinces of the Society of Jesus, where serious domestic and external troubles menaced the well-being of the entire Society. The singular tact of Sánchez gained the day; he expelled some influential but turbulent members from the Society, and won over the king, the Inquisition, and prominent personages, so that they became better disposed towards the Society than ever before. Sánchez was elected one of the representatives of the Province of Toledo to the Fifth General Congregation of the Society, but he remarked that he had a more important journey to make than the one to Rome. He died twelve days later on the feast of the Ascension. Distinguished for unusual mental gifts, Sánchez was no less remarkable for his sanctity of life; his penances were those of an anchorite, his prayer as prolonged as that of any comtemplative. His writings include chiefly short treatises, memorials, and the like. A catalogue and summary of forty-one of these, drawn up by the author, is given by Colín. Colin, Labor Evangelica, new ed. by Pastells (Barcelona, 1900); Sommervogel, Bibl. de la C. De J.: Biblogr., III (Brussels, 1896); Astrain, Hist. de la Compania de Jesus en la Asistencia de Espana, III (Madrid, 1909); De Guilhermy, Menologe de la Companie de Jesus, assistance d'Espagne (Paris, 1902). P.M. FINEGAN Alonzo Coello Sanchez Alonzo Coello Sánchez Born at Benyfayro, Valenciz, Spain, in 1513 or 1515; died at Madrid, 1590. His name Coello is certainly Portuguese, and was probably that of his mother. From his intimate conexion with Portugal, Philip II constantly referred to him as his "Portuguese Titian". We have no definite information that Sánchez was ever in Italy, but he certainly carefully copied the paintings of Titian under the influence of Sir Antonio Mor, who was his great master. In 1552 he accompanied him to Lisbon when Mor was sent by Charles V to paint the portraits of the royal family, and Sánchez then entered into the service of Don Juan of Portugal, who had married Joanna, the daughter of Charles and the sister of Philip II. On the death of the Infante Don Juan, his widow recommended her painter to her brother Philip, and as Mor had just left the Court and retired to Brussels, Philip II appointed Coello pintor de cámara. He was one of the earliest of the Spanish court portrait-painters, and as his work was in great demand he became a rich man. He painted Gregory XIII and Sixtus V, many of the grandees of Spain, Cardinal Farnese, and the Dukes of Florence and Savoy. He also executed considerable work at the Escorial and painted the triumphal arch erected at Madrid for the entry of Anne of Austria, wife of Philip II. Perhaps his most notable portrait, however, was that of St. Ignatius Loyola, executed from casts taken twenty-nine years before, and from instructions and sketches made by one of the fathers. His greatest portrait was that of his friend, Father Siguenza, which was engraved by Selma. He was buried at Valladolid, where he had founded a home for foundling children. His epitaph was written by López de Vega. Sánchez's colouring resembles that of Titian, and his portraits are powerful and lifelike. There is one in the National Portrait Gallery in London, another at Vienna, three at Brussels, and several at Madrid. One of the churches of that city also possesses a screen decorated by him and intended to be used during Holy Week. His pictures have always been highly esteemed in Spain, where they have sold for very large sums of money on the few occasions when they came into the market. Coello painted Philip II in almost every kind of costume, on foot and on horseback, and in many attitudes, but he is not generally considered to have been as successful with his royal patron as he was with some of the ecclesiastics, whose portraits he drew in noble proportions. Pacheco, Arte de la pintura (Seville, 1649); Palomino de Castro y Velasco, El museo pictorico y escala optica (Madrid, 1715); Machado, Colleccao de memorias dos pintores (Lisbon, 1823); Stirling-Maxwell, Annals of the Artists of Spain (London, 1891); Hartley, Spanish Painting (London, 1904). GEORGE CHARLES WILLIAMSON Jose Bernardo Sanchez José Bernardo Sánchez Born at Robledillo, Old Castile, Spain, 7 September, 1778; d. at San Gabriel, California, 15 January, 1833. He became a Franciscan on 9 October, 1794, and joined the missionary college of San Fernando, Mexico, in 1803, going to California the following year. He was stationed at Mission San Diego (1804-20); Mission Purisima 1820-1); and at San Gabriel. In 1806, as chaplain, Fr. Sánchez accompanied a military expedition against the savages. In 1821 with Fr. Prefect Mariano Payeras he went with an exploring expedition into the interior to search for new mission sites. From 1827 to 1831 he reluctantly held the position of presidente of the missions and of vicar forane to the bishop. He was a very pious and energetic missionary, but dreaded the office of superior. His incessant appeals for relief were at last granted, but he survived only two years. During his term he vigorously opposed Governor Echeandia's secularization scheme. In a long series of critical notes he showed that the plan would result in the destruction of the missions and the ruin of the neophytes. "As far as it concerns me personally", he wrote, "would that it might be to-morrow, so that I might retire between the four walls of a cell to weep over the time I wasted in behalf of these unfortunates." There is no doubt that the sight of the inevitable ruin hastened his death. His remains were buried at the foot of the altar of San Gabriel Mission. Santa Barbara Archives; Records of Mission San Diego, San Carlos, and San Gabriel; Engelhardt, The Franciscans in California (Harbor Springs, Mich., 1897); Bancroft, California (San Francisco, 1886). ZEPHYRIN ENGELHARDT Thomas Sanchez Thomas Sanchez Born at Cordova, 1550; died in the college of Granada, 19 May, 1610. In 1567 he entered the Society of Jesus. He was at first refused admittance on account of an impediment in his speech; however, after imploring delivery from this impediment before a highly venerated picture of Our Lady at Cordova, his application was granted. He held for a time the office of master of novices at Granada. The remainder of his life was devoted to the composition of his works. His death was due to inflammation of the lungs. His contemporaries bear testimony to the energy and perseverance with which he laboured towards self-perfection from his novitiate until his death. His penitential zeal rivalled that of the early anchorites, and, according to his spiritual director, he carried his baptismal innocence to the grave. Luis de la Puente, then rector of the college of Granada and later declared "venerable", attests the holiness of Sanchez in his letter to Francis Suarez, a translation of which may be found in the Bibliotheque de Bourgogne at Brussels. Sanchez belongs to those who are much abused on account of their works. The chief work of Sanchez and the only one which he himself edited, is the "Disputationes de sancti matrimonii sacramento". The first edition is said to have appeared at Genoa in 1602; but this can have been only the first folio volume, for which permission to print was secured in 1599, as the two succeeding volumes contain both in their preface and the author's dedication the date 1603. The first complete edition was, according to Sommervogel, that of Madrid, 1605; later followed a series of editions printed at different places both before and after the author's death. The last edition seems to have been issued at Venice in 1754. The work had an extraordinary fate, inasmuch as some editions of the third volume have been placed on the Index of Prohibited Books, the grounds being not the doctrine of the author, but the perversion of the work and the suppression of what the author taught. Even in the earlier editions of the Index as revised by Leo XIII, till his Constitution "Officorum ac munerum", we may still read: "Sanchez, Thom. Disputationum de Sacramento Matrimonii tom. III. Ed. Venetiae, sive alarium, a quibus 1.8 disp. 7 detractus est integer num. 4. Decr. 4 Febr. 1627". This number is omitted from the edition of Venice, 1614; it treats of the power of the pope to grant a valid legitimation of the offspring of marriages invalid only through canon law through the so-called sanatio in radice. The author's mode of expression shows a not always pleasing verbosity. As it deals with every possible point in the subject, it has often, quite unjustifiably, drawn upon Sanchez the charge of immorality. Soon after the death of Sanchez a second work appeared. "Opus morale in præcepta Decalogi"; the first folio volume was prepared by the author himself, but the second volume, as well as the whole of his third work, "Consilia moralia", had to be compiled from manuscript notes. These works also went through a series of different editions, and likewise drew upon themselves the accusation of laxity, especially with reference to the question of what is called "mental reservation" (restrictio mentalis). It is true that we find in Sanchez (op. mor. in præc. Decalogi, III, vi, n. 15) the twenty-sixth thesis condemned by Innocent XI; "If anyone, by himself, or before others, whether under examination or of his own accord, whether for amusement or for any other purpose, should swear that he has not done something which he has really done, having in mind something else which he has not done, or some way of doing it other than the way he employed, or anything else that is true: he does not lie nor perjure himself." The thesis rests on a peculiar definition of a "lie", which indeed in none too easy to define, and has engaged the ingenuity of scholars from the time of St. Augustine to to-day. Sanchez did not regard every mental reservation as always permissible, but was simply discussing the sinfulness of the lie (or oath) in itself; that some other sin—even grievous, according to the circumstances—may have been involved in the action, he does not deny. According to Wernz (Jus decretalium, IV, n. 20), Sanchez's work "De matrimonio" is even to-day reckoned by the Roman Curia among the classical works on marriage. Nieremberg, Varones ilustres, VII (new ed., Bilbao, 1891); Guilhermy, Menologe de la C. de J. (Paris, 1902); Sommervogel, Bibl de la C. de J. (Brussels, 1896); Hurter, Nomenclator, III (3rd ed., Innsbruck, 1907). AUG. LEHMKUHL Sanction Sanction (Lat. sancire, same root as sanctus). Sanction signifies primarily the authoritative act whereby the legislator sanctions a law, i.e. gives it value and binding force for its subjects. Hence, objectively, the law itself is called sanction inasmuch as it is imposed on the consciences and obedience of subjects; thus ecclesiastical laws are often called sanctiones canonicoe. In more modern language every measure is called a sanction which is intended to further the observation of the law by subjects, whether the reward to whomsoever fulfills it, or the penalty or chastisement inflicted or at least threatened for nonfulfilment, whether it relates to presciptive laws which require something to be done, or to prohibitive laws which require that something be omitted. These sanctions in turn may result from the very nature of the law, which are internal sanctions like those of the natural law, or they may be added by a positive act of the lagislator, and these are external sanctions. Hence sanction is called moral, psychological, legal, or penal, according to the origin or the nature of it. (see ETHICS; LAW; PUNISHMENT.) A. BOUDINHON Sanctity (Mark of the Church) Sanctity (Mark of the Church) The Term "sanctity" is employed in somewhat different senses in relation to God, to individual men, and to a corporate body. As applied to God it denotes that absolute moral perfection which is His by nature. In regard to men it signifies a close union with God, together with the moral perfection resulting from this union. Hence holiness is said to belong to God by essence, and to creatures only by participation. Whatever sanctity they possess comes to them as a Divine gift. As used of a society, the term means + that this society aims at producing holiness in its members, and is possessed of means capable of securing that result, and + that the lives of its members correspond, at least in some measure, with the purpose of the society, and display a real, not a merely nominal holiness. The Church has ever claimed that she, as a society, is holy in a transcendent degree. She teaches that this is one of the four "notes", viz., unity, catholicity, apostolicity, and sanctity, by which the society founded by Christ can be readily distinguished from all human institutions. It is in virtue of her relation to the Person and work of Christ that this attribute belongs to the Church. She is (1) the fruit of the Passion -- the kingdom of the redeemed. Those who remain outside her are the "world" which knows not God (I John, iii, 1). The object of the Passion was the redemption and sanctification of the Church: "Christ also loved the church, and delivered Himself up for it: that he might sanctify it, cleansing it by the laver of water in the word of life" (Eph., v, 25, 26). Again (2) the Church is the body of Christ. He is the head of the mystical body: and supernatural life -- the life of Christ Himself -- is communicated through the sacraments to all His members. Just as the Holy Ghost dwelt in the human body of Christ, so He now dwells in the Church: and His presence is so intimate and so efficacious that the Apostle can even speak of Him as the soul of the mystical body: "One body and one Spirit" (Eph., iv, 4). Thus it follows as a necessary consequence from the nature of the Church and her relation to Christ, that as a society she must possess means capable of producing holiness: that her members must be characterized by holiness: and that this endowment of sanctity will afford a ready means of distinguishing her from the world. It is further manifest that the Church's holiness must be of an entirely supernatural character -- something altogether beyond the power of unassisted human nature. And such is in fact the type of sanctity which Christ and His Apostles require on the part of members of the Church. (1) The virtues which in the Christian ideal are the most fundamental of all, lie altogether outside the scope of the highest pagan ethics. Christian charity, humility, and chastity are instances in point. The charity which Christ sets forth in the Sermon on the Mount and in the parable of the Good Samaritan -- a charity which knows no limits and which embraces enemies as well as friends -- exceeds all that moralists had deemed possible for men. And this charity Christ requires not of a chosen few, but of all His followers. Humility, which in the Christian scheme is the necessary groundwork of all sanctity (Matt., xviii, 3), was previously to His teaching an unknown virtue. The sense of personal unworthiness in which it consists, is repugnant to all the impulses of unregenerate nature. Moreover, the humility which Christ demands, supposes as its foundation a clear knowledge of the guilt of sin, and of the mercy of God. Without these it cannot exist. And these doctrines are sought in vain in other religions than the Christian. In regard to chastity Christ not merely warned His followers that to violate this virtue even by a thought, was a grievous sin. He went yet further. He exhorted those of His followers to whom the grace should be given, to live the life of virginity that thereby they might draw nearer to God (Matt, xix, 12). (2) Another characteristic of holiness according to the Christian ideal is love of suffering; not as though pleasure were evil in itself, but because suffering is the great means by which our love of God is intensified and purified. All those who have attained a high degree of holiness have learnt to rejoice in suffering, because by it their love to God was freed from every element of self-seeking, and their lives conformed to that of their Master. Those who have not grasped this principle may call themselves by the name of Christian, but they have not understood the meaning of the Cross. (3) It has ever been held that holiness when it reaches a sublime degree is accompanied by miraculous powers. And Christ promised that this sign should not be lacking to His Church. The miracles, which His followers should work, would, He declared, be no whit less stupendous than those wrought by Himself during His mortal life (Mark, xvi, 17, 18; John, xiv, 12). Such in brief outline is the sanctity with which Christ endowed His Church, and which is to be the distinguishing mark of her children. It is, however, to be noted that He said nothing to suggest that all His followers would make use of the opportunities thus afforded them. On the contrary, He expressly taught that His flock would contain many unworthy members (Matt., xiii, 30, 48). And we may be sure that as within the Church the lights are brightest, so there too the shadows will be darkest -- corruptio optimi pessima. An unworthy Catholic will fall lower than an unworthy pagan. To show that the Church possesses the note of holiness it suffices to establish that her teaching is holy: that she is endowed with the means of producing supernatural holiness in her children: that, notwithstanding the unfaithfulness of many members, a vast number do in fact cultivate a sanctity beyond anything that can be found elsewhere: and that in certain cases this sanctity attains so high a degree that God honours it with miraculous powers. It is not difficult to show that the Catholic and Roman Church, and she alone, fulfils these conditions. In regard to her doctrines, it is manifest that the moral law which she proposes as of Divine obligation, is more lofty and more exacting than that which any of the sects has ventured to require. Her vindication of the indissolubility of marriage in the face of a licentious world affords the most conspicuous instance of this. She alone maintains in its integrity her Master's teaching on marriage. Every other religious body without exception has given place to the demands of human passion. In regard to the means of holiness, she, through her seven sacraments, applies to her members the fruits of the Atonement. She pardons the guilt of sin, and nourishes the faithful on the Body and Blood of Christ. Nor is the justice of her claims less manifest when we consider the result of her work. In the Catholic Church is found a marvellous succession of saints whose lives are as beacon-lights in the history of mankind. In sanctity the supremacy of Bernard, of Dominic, of Francis, of Ignatius, of Theresa, is as unquestioned as is that of Alexander and of Cæsar in the art of war. Outside the Catholic Church the world has nothing to show which can in any degree compare with them. Within the Church the succession never fails. Nor do the saints stand alone. In proportion to the practical influence of Catholic teaching, the supernatural virtues of which we have spoken above, are found also among the rest of the faithful. These virtues mark a special type of character which the Church seeks to realize in her children, and which finds little favour among other claimants to the Christian name. Outside the Catholic Church the life of virginity is contemned; love of suffering is viewed as a medieval superstition; and humility is regarded as a passive virtue ill-suited to an active and pushing age. Of course it is not meant that we do not find many individual instances of holiness outside the Church. God's grace is universal in its range. But it seems beyond question that the supernatural sanctity whose main features we have indicated, is recognized by all as belonging specifically to the Church, while in her alone does it reach that sublime degree which we see in the saints. In the Church too we see fulfilled Christ's promise that the gift of miracles shall not be wanting to His followers. Miracles, it is true, are not sanctity. But they are the aura in which the highest sanctity moves. And from the time of the Apostles to the nineteenth century the lives of the saints show us that the laws of nature have been suspended at their prayers. In numberless cases the evidence for these events is so ample that nothing but the exigencies of controversy can explain the refusal of anti-Catholic writers to admit their occurrence. The proof appears to be complete. There can be as little doubt which Church displays the note of sanctity, as there is in regard to the notes of unity, catholicity and apostolicity. The Church in communion with the See of Rome and it alone possesses that holiness which the words of Christ and His Apostles demand. MURRAY, De ecclesia Christi, II (Dublin, 1862); BELLARMINE, De conc. et ecclesia, IV, xi-xv; TANQUEREY, Synopsis theol. dogmaticæ, I (Paris, 1900); BENSON in Ecclesia edited by MATTHEW (London, 1906). For modern anti-Catholic polemics on this subject, see MARTINEAU, Seat of Authority in Religion (London, 1890); PALMER, Treatise of the Church (London, 1842), I, vi, x, xi. G.H. JOYCE Sanctorum Meritis Sanctorum Meritis The hymn at First and Second Vespers in the Common of the Martyrs in the Roman Breviary. Its authorship is often attributed to Rabanus Maurus (d. 856), Archbishop of Mainz — e.g. by Blume (cf. Hymnody, V, 2), who thinks his hymns show originality and "no small poetic power". Dreves also (Analecta hymnica, XL, 204) favours the ascription. The stanza, in classical prosody, comprises three Asclepiadic lines and one Glyconic. In Horace such a stanza indicates a grave and thoughtful frame of mind; but the breviary hymns using the stanza are usually suggestive of triumphant joy — e.g. the "Festivis resonent compita vocibus" (Most Precious Blood), the "Te Joseph celebrent agmina coelitum", and the "Sacris solemniis" in rhythmic imitation. Dom Johner ("A New School of Gregorian Chant", New York, 1906, p. 89) places hymns in this measure among those "in which the verbal accent preponderates and the metrical accent only makes itself noticeable in certain places (particularly in the fourth line and when a line closes with a word accentuated on the penultimate)". He illustrates the rhythmical stress by italics. Applying his scheme to the Asclepiadic lines we should have: Sa-ncto-rum me-ri-tis in-cly-ta gau-di-a. His illustration of the fourth line (Glyconic) is: Vi-cto-rum ge-nus o-pti-mum. The "Grammar of Plainsong" by the Benedictines of Stanbrook (London, 1905, p. 61) remarks that the long verses have the accents on the third, seventh, and tenth syllables; and the short verse, on the third and sixth syllables; and illustrates this scheme by the last two lines of the stanza (the acute accent marking the rhythmical stress): Gliscens fÈrt animus prómere cántibus Victorúm genus óptimum. In the following illustration (Holly, "Elementary Grammar of Gregorian Chant", New York, 1904, p. 44) the acute accent indicates the tonic accent of the word; the grave accent, the place where the rhythmical or metrical accent falls; the circumflex, the concurrence on a syllable of both metrical and tonic accents: Sanctôrum mêritìs ínclyta gâudià Pangâmus sôciì, gestàque fôrtià; Glíscèns fert ânimus prómere cântibus Victôrum gênus ôptimùm. Obviously, the metre is refractory for singing or public recitation. Dreves (loc. cit., pp. 180-1) notes that several references are made to the hymn by Hincmar of Reims, one of the most interesting being his objection to the theology of the last stanza ("Te trina Deitas", subsequently changed into the present form: "Te summa O Deitas"). Hincmar admits that he knew not the author of the hymn which "some people end with the chant or rather blasphemy [a quibusdam cantatur vel potius blasphematur] 'Te trina deitas'." The phrase objected to was nevertheless sung in the doxology of the hymn down to the revision of Urban VIII, and the Church still sings it in the doxology of the "Sacris solemniis" of the Angelic Doctor. The Paris Breviary kept the metre but entirely recast the hymn, writing the first stanza thus: Christi martyribus debita nos decet, Virtutis memores, promere cantica; Quos nec blanditiis, nec potuit minis Fallax vincere sæculum. To the list of translators given by Julian ("Dict. of Hymnol.", 2nd ed., London, 1907, pp. 993, 1698) should be added Bagshawe ("Breviary Hymns and Missal Sequences", London, 1900, p.164: "Let us sing, dear companions, the joys of the saints"). The (Baltimore) "Manual of Prayers" gives the translation of the Anglican hymnologist, Dr. Neale. There are twelve translations in English. The text is found in many MSS. of the tenth century (cf. Dreves, "Analecta hymnica", L, 204-5); Hincmar, "De una et non trina Deitate" in P.L., CXXV, 478, 498, 500). For Latin text (omitting second and third stanzas) and English translation, plainsong, and modern musical setting, see "Hymns Ancient and Modern, Historical Edition" (London, 1909, pp. 289-90), which notes that Dreves assigns the hymn to Rabanus Maurus in his "Hymnologische Studien zu Venantius Fortunatus und Rabanus Maurus" (Munich, 1908, p. 135), "in spite of the fact that Raban wrote to Hincmar disapproving of the phrase 'Te trina Deitas'." The approved plainsong will appear in the forthcoming Vatican Antiphonary. Pothier ("MÈlodies GrÈgoriennes" Tournai, 1880) illustrates the Asclepiadic metre by the "Sanctorum meritis", places the accents on the third, seventh, and tenth syllables of the Asclepiads and on the third and sixth of the Glyconic, and remarks that "in singing the Asclepiad and the Glyconic, the first three syllables should be gone over slowly, and the accents should be well marked, especially the last" (p.199). Egerton ("A Handbook of Church Music", New York, 1909, p.180) places the principal accent on the tenth syllable, and secondary accents on the third and seventh, with a "mora vocis" after the sixth. Delaporte ("Les Hymnes du brÈviaire romain" in the "Rassegna Gregoriana", Nov.-Dec., 1907, col. 501) remarks that, when the edition of 1602 of the Roman Breviary was in preparation, Cardinal Gesualdo in 1588 wrote to various nuncios to get suggestions for emendations. The nuncio at Paris consulted "alcuni principali della Sorbona", with some curious results, one of which was the criticism demanding a change in the doxology of the "Sacris solemniis" from "Te trina Deitas" to "Te summa Deitas", for the reason that "it is impious to call the Deity, or the essence of God, threefold". As noted above, the Church still sings "Te Deitas" in the "Sacris solemniis" of the "Angel of the Schools", although it has changed the phrase in the doxology of the "Sanctorum meritis". H.T. HENRY Sanctuary Sanctuary A consecrated place giving protection to those fleeing from justice or persecution; or, the privilege of taking refuge in such consecrated place. The right of sanctuary was based on the inviolability attached to things sacred, and not, as some have held, on the example set by the Hebrew cities of refuge. It was recognized under the Code of Theodosius (399) and later by that of Justinian. Papal sanction was first given to it by Leo I, about 460, though the first Council of Orange had dealt with the matter in 441. The earliest mention of sanctuary in England was in a code of laws promulgated by King Ethelbert in 600. The right of asylum was originally confined to the church itself, but in course of time its limits were extended to the precincts, and sometimes even to a larger area. Thus, at Beverley and Hexham, the boundaries of sanctuary extended throughout a radius of a mile from the church, the limits being marked by "sanctuary crosses", some of which still remain. In Norman times there were two kinds of sanctuary in England, one belonging to every church by prescription and the other by special royal character. The latter was considered to afford a much safer asylum and was enjoyed by at least twenty-two churches, including Battle, Beverley, Colchester, Durham, Hexham, Norwich, Ripon, Wells, Winchester, Westminster, and York. A fugitive convicted of felony and taking the benefit of sanctuary was afforded protection from thirty to forty days, after which, subject to certain severe conditions, he had to "abjure the realm", that is leave the kingdom within a specified time and take an oath not to return without the king's leave. Violation of the protection of sanctuary was punishable by excommunication. In some cases there was a stone seat within the church, called the "frith-stool", on which it is said the seeker of sanctuary had to sit in order to establish his claim to protection. In others, and more commonly, there was a large ring or knocker on the church door, the holding of which gave the right of asylum. Examples of these may been seen at Durham cathedral, St. Gregory's, Norwich, and elsewhere. The ecclesiastical right of sanctuary ceased in England at the Reformation, but was after that date allowed to certain non-ecclesiastical precincts, which afforded shelter chiefly to debtors. The houses of ambassadors were also sometimes quasi-sanctuaries. Whitefriars, London (also called Alsatia), was the last place of sanctuary used in England, but it was abolished by Act of Parliament in 1697. In other European countries the right of sanctuary ceased towards the end of the eighteenth century. G. CYPRIAN ALSTON Sanctuary Sanctuary The space in the church for the high altar and the clergy. It is variously designated apsis or concha (from the shell-like, hemispherical dome), and since the Middle Ages especially it has been called "choir", from the choir of singers who are here stationed. Other names are presbyterium, concessus chori, tribuna or tribunal, hagion, hasyton, sanctum, sanctuarium. From the architectural standpoint the sanctuary has undergone manifold alterations. In Christian antiquity it was confined to the apse, into the wall of which the stone benches for the clergy were let after the fashion of an amphitheatre, while in the middle rose up the bishop's chair (cathedra). It would however be wrong to believe that this ancient Christian sanctuary had always a semicircular formation, since recent investigations (especially in the East) have revealed very various shapes. Over a dozen different shapes have already been discovered. In Syria the semicircular development advances very little or not at all from the outer wall, while beside it are situated two rooms which serve respectively for the offering (prothesis) and for the clergy (diaconicum). The sanctuary was often formed by three interconnected apses (Dreiconchensystem); the quite straight termination also occurs. An important difference between the Roman and Oriental churches consisted in the fact that in the case of the latter the wall of the sanctuary was interrupted by a window through which the sunlight freely entered, while the windowless Roman apse was shrouded. in a mysterious darkness. As the semicircular niche could no longer in all cases hold the numbers of the higher and Lower clergy, a portion of the middle nave was often enclosed with rails and added to the sanctuary, as may be seen today in the San Clemente at Rome. Outside Rome this necessity of enlarging the sanctuary was met in another way, by introducing between the longitudinal (or cross) aisle and the apse a compartment or square, the basilica thus receiving (instead of the Roman T-shape) the form of a cross. This innovation was of far-reaching importance, since the sanctuary could not develop freely. This development proceeded from the beginning to the close of the Middle Ages in what may be declared as an almost wanton fashion. The time at which this innovation was introduced has been for a long time the subject of a violent literary feud, since it is most intimately connected with the development of the cruciform arrangement of churches. Some investigators hold that this form is first found in the Monastery of Fulda under Abbot Bangulf about the year 800; according to others it occurred before the time of Charlemagne in the French monasteries of Jumièges and Rebais. In recent times Strzygowski has maintained that both views are incorrect, and that the extended sanctuary, or in other words the cruciform church, was already common in the early Christian period in Asia Minor, and was thence transplanted to the West by Basilian monks as early as the fourth or fifth century. A second very important alteration, which occurred during the Carlovingian Renaissance, consisted in the introduction or rather transplantation from the East to the West of the "double sanctuary". By this is meant the construction of a second sanctuary or west choir opposite the east; this arrangement was found even in ancient times in isolated instances, but its introduction in the case of larger churches gradually became universal in the West. Concerning the reasons for this innovation various theories have been put forward. It must, however, be recognized that the reasons were not everywhere the same. They were three in particular: the duplication of the titular saints, the construction of a place for the remains of a saint, and the need of a nuns' or winter choir. In addition, Strzygowski has also maintained the influence exercised by the change of "orientation", that is the erection of the altar, which in the East originally stood in the west of the church, at the eastern end. The second reason seems to have given incentive most frequently to the construction of the second choir. Thus in 819 Abbot Ansger built a west choir with a crypt to receive the remains of St. Boniface; in Mittelzell (Richenau) this choir was constructed for the relics of St. Mark, in Eichstatt (1060) for the remains of St. Willibald. Especially suitable for nuns' convents was the west choir with a gallery, since from it the nuns could follow Divine Service unobserved; for this reason the church built at Essen (Prussia) in 874 received a west choir in 947. The increase of the clergy, in conjunction with the striving (in the Romanesque period) after as large crypts as possible, led to the repeated increase of the sanctuary, which, however, exercised a very prejudicial influence on the architectural arrangement of space. The sanctuary was extended especially westwards — thus into the longitudinal aisle, but at times also into the cross aisle. Examples of this excessively great extension are supplied by the cathedrals of Paderborn and Speyer. The walls of this sanctuary, which had thus become a formal enclosure, were often decorated with Biblical reliefs; here, in fact, are preserved some very important Romanesque reliefs, as on the Georgentor at Bamberg and in the Church of St. Michael at Hildesheim. But even in the Romanesque period began the war against this elevated sanctuary, waged mainly by the monks of Hirsan (Germany), then highly influential, and the Cistercians. The former as opponents of the crypts, restored the sanctuary to the same level as the nave or made it only a few steps higher; they also ended the sanctuary in a straight line, and gave it only a small round apse. More important was the change made by the Cistercians, who, to enable so many priests to read Mass simultaneously, resolved the eastern portion into a number of chapels standing in a straight line at either side of the sanctuary. This alteration began in the mother-house of Cisteaux, and extended with the monks everywhere even to the East. These alterations paved the way for the third great transformation of the sanctuary: this was accomplished by Gothic architecture, which, in consequence of the improved vaulting, found it easier to conduct the side aisles around the choir, as the Romanesque architects had already done in individual cases. The sanctuary indeed was not thereby essentially altered, but it was now accessible on all sides, and the faithful could attain to the immediate vicinity of the high altar, When it was not separated by a wall, an entirely free view of the sanctuary was offered. For the most part, however, the termination of the sanctuary with walls was retained, while in front was still erected the screen, which enjoyed in the Gothic period its special vogue. This arrangement of the sanctuary is usually found in the great cathedrals after the French models, and may thus be designated the "cathedral type", although it also occurs in the larger parish and monastery churches. Frequently the sanctuary has an exceptional length; this is especially the case in England, and influenced the architectonic arrangement of space if the sanctuary was enclosed with walls. Its effect was most unfavourable in the canon's choir (called the Trascoro) in the cathedrals of Spain, which was transferred to the middle nave as a separate construction and was cut off by high walls with grated entrances. This enclosure was most magnificently decorated with architectural and other ornamentations, but it entirely destroyed the view of the glorious architecture. Side by side with this "cathedral type" was retained the old simple type, in which the sanctuary was not accessible on all sides; this was found especially in parish churches and in the churches of the mendicant orders. When the church had three naves, the choirs of the side naves lay beside the chief choir. This kind of a sanctuary remained the most popular, especially in Germany and Italy. The Renaissance to a great extent restored to the sanctuary its original form. In the effort to increase the middle nave as much as possible, Renaissance architecture in many cases neglected the side naves or limited them to the narrowest aisles. The free approach to the sanctuary from all sides thus lost its justification. The sanctuary necessarily received a great breadth, but lost its earlier depth. In its preference for bright and airy spaces, the Renaissance also abandoned the method of separating the sanctuary from the rest of the church by means of a screen; at a subsequent period, the latter was replaced by the low Communion bench. Thus a person entering the church through the main door commanded a free view of the sanctuary, which, especially in Italy, was gloriously decorated with marble incrustations. As the sunlight, entering unchecked through the cupola covering the intersection, brightly illuminated the edifice, the effect was entirely different from that awakened by the Romanesque and Gothic sanctuaries. In the medieval church the sanctuary was shut off from the congregation and was as inaccessible as the Holy of Holies in the Temple of the Old Testament; the sanctuary of the Renaissance church stands out before us in a brilliance of light like Mount Tabor, but without blinding our gaze. We believe that we are nearer the Deity, our hearts are filled with joyous sentiments, so that we might cry out with the Apostle Peter "It is good for us to be here". In the medieval church, on the other hand, we are penetrated with a mysterious awe and like Moses feel urged to take off our shoes, for this is a holy place. STRZYGOWSKI, Kleinasien. Ein Neuland der Kunstgeschichte (Leipzig, 1903); HASAK, Die romanische u. gotische Baukunst der Kirchenbau (Stuttgart 1902). BEDA KLEINSCHMIDT. Sanctus Sanctus I. HISTORY The Sanctus is the last part of the Preface in the Mass, sung in practically every rite by the people (or choir). It is one of the elements of the liturgy of which we have the earliest evidence. St. Clement of Rome (d. about 104) mentions it. He quotes the text in Isaias, vi, 3, and goes on to say that it is also sung in church; this at least seems the plain meaning of the passage: "for the Scripture says . . . Holy, holy, holy Lord of hosts; full is every creature of his glory. And we, led by conscience, gathered together in one place in concord, cry to him continuously as from one mouth, that we may become sharers in his great and glorious promises" (I Cor., xxxiv, 6-7). It seems clear that what the people cry is the text just quoted. Clement does not say at what moment of the service the people cry those words; but again we may safely suppose that it was at the end of what we call the Preface, the place at which the Sanctus appears in every liturgy, from that of "Apost. Const.", VIII, on. The next oldest witness is Origen (d. 254). He quotes the text of Isaias and continues: "The coming of my Jesus is announced, wherefore the whole earth is full of his glory" (In Isa., hom., I, n. 2). There is nothing to correspond to this in the Prophet. It seems plainly an allusion to liturgical use and so agrees very well with the place of the Sanctus. The Anaphora of Sarapion of Thmuis (Egypt, fourteenth century) gives the Sanctus almost exactly in the form of the Alexandrine Liturgy (Funk, "Didascalia", Paderborn, 1905, II, 174), but says nothing about its being sung by the people. From the fourteenth century we have abundance of testimony for the Sanctus in every liturgical centre. In Egypt St. Athanasius (d. 373) mentions it (Expos in Ps, cii, P.G. XXVII, 434); at Jerusalem St. Cyril (d. 373) (Catech. myst., V, 6), and at Antioch St. John Chrysostom (d. 407) alludes to it (in Ps. cxxxiv, n. 6, P.G., LV, 393). Tertullian (d. about 220) ("de Oratione", 3) and Victor of Vite (d. 486) ("Hist. persec. Vandal", III, P.L., LVIII quote it in Africa; Germanus of Paris (d. 576) in Gaul (in Duchesne, "Origines du Culte", 2d ed., Paris, 1898, p. 204), Isidore of Seville (d. 636) in Spain (ibid.). The Sanctus is sung by the people in "Apostolic Constitutions", VIII, XII, 27 (Brightman, "Eastern Liturgies", 18-19) and so in almost all rites. The scanty state of our knowledge about the early Roman Mass accounts for the fact that we have no allusion to the Sanctus till it appears in the first Sacramentaries. The Leonine and Gelasian books give only the celebrant's part; but their prefaces lead up to it plainly. The Gregorian Sacramentary gives the text exactly as we still have it (P.L. LXXVIII, 26). But the passage quoted from St. Clement and then the use of Africa (always similar to Rome) leave no doubt that at Rome too the Sanctus is part of the oldest liturgical tradition. In view of Clement's allusion it is difficult to understand Abbot Cabrol's theory that the Sanctus is a later addition to the Mass ("Les Origines liturgiques", Paris, 1906, p. 329). The connection in which it occurs in the liturgy is this: in all rites the Eucharistic prayer (Canon Anaphora) begins with a formal thanksgiving to God for his benefits, generally enumerated at length (see PREFACE). This first part of the prayer (our Preface) takes the form of an outline of creation, of the many graces given to Patriarchs and Prophets in the Old Law and so to the crowning benefit of our redemption by Christ, to His life and Passion, to the institution of the Holy Eucharist and the words of institution, all in the scheme of a thanksgiving for these things (cf. ib.). Before the prayer comes to the mention of our Lord it always refers to the angels. In "Apost. Const.", VIII, XII (Brightman, op. cit., 15-18), they occur twice, at the beginning as being the first creatures and again at the end of the Old Testament history -- possibly in connection with the place of Isaias who mentions them. In St. James's liturgy this part of the Anaphora is much shorter and the angels are named once only (ibid., p.50); so also in St. Mark they come only once (pp. 131-32). They are always named at length and with much solemnity as those who join with us in praising God. So the description in Isaias, VI, 1-4, must have attracted attention very early as expressing this angelic praise of God and as summing up (in v. 3) just the note of the first part of the Anaphora. The Sanctus simply continues the Preface. It is a quotation of what the angels say. We thank God with the angels, who say unceasingly: "Holy, holy, holy", etc. Logically the celebrant could very well himself say or sing the Sanctus. But, apparently from the beginning of its Christian use (so already Clem. Rom.), one of the dramatic touches that continually adorn the liturgy was added here. We too desire to say with the angels: "Holy, holy, holy"; so when the celebrant comes to the quotation, the people (or choir) interrupt and themselves sing these words, continuing his sentence. The interruption is important since it is the chief cause of the separation of the original first part of the eucharistic prayer (the Preface) at Rome from the rest and the reason why this first part is still sung aloud although the continuation is said in a low voice. The only rite that has no Sanctus is that of the Ethiopic Church Order (Brightman, op. cit., 190). II. THE SANCTUS IN THE EASTERN RITES In the liturgies of St. James and St. Mark and the Byzantine Rite (Brightman, loc. cit.) the introductory sentence calls it the "hymn of victory" (ton epinikion hymnon). This has become its usual name in Greek. It should never be called the Trisagion, which is a different liturgical formula ("Holy God, Holy Strong One, Holy Immortal One have mercy on us") occurring in another part of the service. In "Apost. Const.", VIII, XII, 27, the form of the Epinikion is: "Holy, holy, holy the Lord of Hosts (sabaoth). Full (are) the heaven and the earth of his glory. Blessed for ever. Amen." St. James has: "Holy, holy, holy, Lord (voc.) of hosts. Full (are) the heaven and the earth of thy Glory. Hosanna (he) in the highest. Blessed (is) he that comes in the name of the Lord. Hosanna, (he) in the highest." In this the cry of the people on Palm Sunday (Matt., xxi, 9, modified) is added (cf. the Jacobite form, Brightman, p. 86). Alexandria has only the text of Isaias (ib. 132; and Coptic, in Greek, 176; Abyssinian, p. 231). In the Greek Alexandrine form (St. Mark) the text occurs twice. First the celebrant quotes it himself as said by the cherubim and seraphim; then he continues aloud: "for all things always call thee holy (hagiazei) and with all who call thee holy receive, Master and Lord, our hallowing (hagiasmon) who with them sing, saying . . ." and the people repeat the Epinikion (Brightman, p.132). The Nestorians have a considerably extended form of Is., vi, 3, and Matt., xxi, 9, in the third person (ib. 284). The Byzantine Rite has the form of St. James (ib. 323-324), so also the Armenians (p. 436). In all Eastern rites only the sentence that immediately introduces the Epinikion is said aloud, as an Ekphonesis. III. THE SANCTUS IN THE WEST In Latin it is the "Tersanctus" or simply the "Sanctus". "Hymnus angelicus" is ambiguous and should be avoided, since this is the usual name for the Gloria in Excelsis. Germanus of Paris bears witness to it in the Gallican Rite (Ep. I; P.L., LXXII, 89 seq.; see above). Its form was as at Rome. The Mozarabic Sanctus is almost the Roman one; but it has for the first Hosanna: "Osanna filio David" (more literally Matt., xxi, 9) and the additional exclamations "Agyos, agyos, agyos Kyrie o theos" (P.L., LXXXV, 548 cfr. 116). Milan has exactly our form. It may be noted that the Gallican and Mozarabic liturgies, following the tradition of Antioch and Jerusalem (Brightman, op. cit., pp. 19, 51), continue the Anaphora by taking up the idea of the Sanctus: "Vere sanctus, vere benedictus Dominus noster Iesus Christus" (P.L.,LXXXV, 548) and so coming almost at once to the words of Institution: This prayer, which varies in each Mass, is called "Post Sanctus", or "Vere Sanctus". Milan has one remnant of this on Holy Saturday (Duchesne, ib. 205). At Rome the Sanctus is described in "Ordo Rom.", I, as "hymnus angelicus, id est Sanctus" (P. L., LXXVIII, 945). It is sung by the regionary subdeacons (ib.). So also "Ordo Rom.", II, which notes that Hosanna is sung twice (ib. 974). C. Atchley thinks that this marks the beginning of the addition of the Benedictus verses to the Sanctus, that originally these were an acclamation to the celebrating bishop and that they were only later directed towards the Holy Eucharist. In "Apost. Connst.", VIII, XIII, 13 (Brightman, 24), these verses are sung at the Elevation just before Communion, then they were pushed back to become an appendix to the Sanctus, where they coincide more or less with the moment of consecration. Mr. Atchley further thinks that the Benedictus in the Roman Rite is a Gallican addition of the eleventh century ("Ordo Romanus Primus", London, 1905, pp. 90-5). That the verses of Matthew, xxi, 9, were first used as a salutation to the bishop is quite probable (cf. Peregrinatio Silviæ, ed. Gamurrini, 59-60). It is less likely that they are a late Gallican addition at Rome. Their occurrence in the liturgy of Jerusalem-Antioch may well be one more example of the relation between that centre and Rome from the earliest ages (see CANON OF THE MASS). We do not know at what moment the chant of the Sanctus was taken from the subdeacons and given to the schola cantorum. This is merely part of a general tendency to entrust music that was getting more ornate and difficult to trained singers. So the Gradual was once sung by a deacon. The "Ordo Rom. V" implies that the subdeacons no longer sing the Sanctus (P. L. LXXVIII, 988). In "Ordo XI", 20 (ib. 1033), it is sung by the "Basilicarii". St. Gregory of Tours (d. 593) says it is sung by the people (de mirac. S. Martini, II, 14; P.L. LXXI). The notice of the "Liber Pontificalis" that Pope Sixtus I (119-128) ordered the people to sing the Sanctus cannot be correct. It seems that it was not sung always at every Mass. The Second Council of Vaison finds it necessary to command that it should not be omitted in Lent nor at requiems (Can. 3; Hefele-Leclercq, "Histoire des Conciles" II, 1114). There were also laws in the Middle Ages forbidding the celebrant to continue the Canon before the choir had finished singing it (Martène, "De antiq. eccl, ritibus", I, 4, §7). The ringing of a bell at the Sanctus is a development from the Elevation bell; this began in the Middle Ages. Ivo of Chartres (d. 1116) mentions it (Ep. 142) and Durandus (Rationale, IV, 41, §53). It was rung to call people to church that they might see the Elevation. The Sanctus bell is an earlier warning that the Canon is about to begin. The rubrics of the Missal still say nothing about the bell at the Sanctus. It was (and in places still is) usual to ring the great church bell, at least at high Mass. The hand-bell was only a warning to the ringers in the tower (Gavanti-Merati, "Thesaurus S. Rituum", II, 7, Venice, 1762, p. 156). The text of the Roman Sanctus is first, Isa., vi, 3, with 'pleni sunt coeli et terra gloria tua" instead of "plena est omnis terra gloria eius". In this way (as at Antioch and Alexandria) it is made into a prayer by the use of the second person. In all liturgies the Hebrew word for "hosts" sabaoth) is kept, as in the Septuagint (Vulgate, "exercituum"). The "Lord of hosts" is a very old Semitic title, in the polytheistic religions apparently for the moon-god, the hosts being the stars (as in Gen., II, 1; Ps. xxxii, 6). To the Jews these hosts were the angels (cf. Lc., II, 13). Then follows the acclamation of Palm Sunday in Matthew, xxi, 9. It is based on Ps. cxvii, 25-26; but the source of the liturgical text is, of course, the text in the Gospel. Hosanna is in the Greek text and Vulgate, left as a practically untranslatable exclamation of triumph. It means literally "Oh help", but in Matthew, xxi, 9, it is already a triumphant interjection (like Alleluia). In "Didache", X, 6, it occurs as a liturgical formula ("Hosanna to the God of David"). In the medieval local rites the Sanctus was often "farced" (interpolated with tropes), like the Kyrie and other texts, to fill up the long musical neums. Specimens of such farcings, including one attributed to St. Thomas Aquinas, may be seen in Bona, "Rerum liturgicarum", II, 10, §4 (ed. Paris, 1672), p. 418. The skeleton of a Mass at the blessing of palms retains not only a Preface but also a Sanctus, sung to the original "simple" tone. The many other prayers (blessing of the font, ordinations, etc.) that are modelled on the Preface diverge from its scheme as they proceed and do not end with a Sanctus. IV. PRESENT RITE At high Mass as soon as the celebrant has sung the last word of the Preface (dicentes) the choir begins the Sanctus, continuing his phrase. They should sing it straight through, including the Benedictus. The custom of waiting till after the Elevation and then adding the Benedictus, once common, is now abolished by the rubric ("De ritibus servandis in cantu missæ, VII) of the Vatican Gradual. It was a dramatic effect that never had any warrant. Sanctus and Benedictus are one text. Meanwhile the deacon and subdeacon go up to the right and left of the celebrant and say the Sanctus in a low voice with him. Every one in the choir and church kneels (Cærim. Episcop., II, VIII, 69). The hand-bell is usually rung at the Sanctus; but at Rome there is no bell at all at high Mass. While the choir sings the celebrant goes on with the Canon. They must finish or he must wait before the Consecration. At low Mass the celebrant after the Preface, bowing and laying the folded hands on the altar, continues the Sanctus in a lower voice (vox media). The bell is rung three times. Although the rubrics of the Missal do not mention this it is done everywhere by approved custom. It may be noticed that of the many chants of the Sanctus in the Gradual the simple one only (for ferias of Advent and Lent, requiems and the blessing of palms) continues the melody of the Preface and so presumably represents the same musical tradition as our Preface tone. As in the case of the Preface its mode is doubtful. DURANDUS, Rationale divinorum officiorum, IV, 34; BONA, Rerum liturgiarum libri duo, II, X, 4; BENEDICT XIV, De SS. Sacrificio missæ, II, XI, 18-19; GAVANTI-MERATI, Thesaurus S. Rituum, II, VII, 80-86; GIHR, Das h. Messopfer (Freiburg 1897), 524-530. ADRIAN FORTESCUE Episcopal Sandals Episcopal Sandals FORM AND PRESENT USE Unlike the ancient sandals, which consisted merely of soles fastened to the foot by straps, the episcopal sandals are in the form of low shoes, and resemble slippers. The sole is of leather; the upper part, generally ornamented with embroidery is made at the present day of silk or velvet. No cross is required upon the sandals; at Rome this is an exclusively papal privilege. With the sandals are worn the liturgical stockings, caligæ. The stockings, which are of silk, are either knitted or are made by sewing together pieces of silk fabric that have been cut a suitable shape; they are worn over the ordinary stockings. The privilege of wearing the sandals and caligæ belongs only to bishops. They may be worn by abbots and other prelates only by special privilege from the pope and only so far as this privilege grants. The pontifical foot-wear is used only at pontifical solemn Mass and at functions performed during the same, as ordination, but not on other occasions, as, for example, Confirmation, solemn Vespers, etc. It is therefore in the most exact sense of the word a vestment worn during the Mass. The liturgical colour for the day decides the colour of the sandals and caligæ; there are, however, no black stockings or sandals, as the bishop does not make use of the pontifical foot-wear either at masses for the dead or on Good Friday. Sandals and stockings are only customary in the Latin Rite and are unknown in the Oriental Rites. HISTORY Sandals and stockings belong to the liturgical vestments supported by the earliest evidence. They are depicted upon the monuments of the fifth century, for instance upon mosaics of San Satiro near San Ambrogio at Milan, and on those of the sixth century, e.g. the mosaics in San Vitale at Ravenna. Originally the sandals were called campagi, the stockings udones. The shoes were given the name sandalia probably during the eighth to the ninth century, and this name was first applied to them in the north; the designation caligæ for udones came into use in the tenth century, also in the north. As regards the original form and material of the campagi, they were slippers that covered only the tip of the foot and the heel, and must have been fastened to the foot by straps. This slipper was made of black leather. The stockings were, very likely, made of linen, and were white in colour. In the earliest period the campagi and udones were by no means exclusively an episcopal ornament, as they were worn by deacons. Indeed this foot-covering was not reserved exclusively for the clergy, as not only the monuments show that the campagi and udones were worn by the laity, but Lydus also testifies to this usage (De mag., I, xvii). Campagi and udones were originally worn in the post-Constantine era as a mark of distinction by certain persons of rank, and were probably copied from the foot-wear of the ancient senators. Their use gradually became customary among the higher clergy, especially when these appeared in their full official capacity for the celebration of the Liturgy. During the eighth and ninth centuries also the Roman subdeacons and acolytes wore a distinctive foot-wear, the subtalares, which, however, were simpler than the campagi, and had no straps. The sandals and stockings became a specifically episcopal vestment about the tenth century. Apparently as early as the twelfth century, or at least in the second half of the thirteenth century, they were no longer worn even by the cardinal deacons of Rome. The privilege of wearing the sandals and caligæ was first granted to an abbot (Fulrad of St. Denis) in 757 by Stephen III. This is, however, an isolated case, as it was only after the last quarter of the tenth century, and especially after the twelfth century that it became customary to grant abbots this privilege. DEVELOPMENT OF SHAPE The caligæ seem to have experienced no particular development. In the later Middle Ages they were, as a rule, made of silk. The earliest enforcement in respect to caligæ of the regulations for liturgical colours seems to have been at Rome, but even here probably not until the fourteenth century. The sandals retained substantially their original form until the tenth century. Then straps were replaced by three or five tongues reaching to the ankle, extensions of the upper leather upon the point of the foot, and these were fastened at ankle by means of a string. In the twelfth century these tongues were gradually shortened; in the thirteenth century, the sandal was a regular shoe with a slit above the foot or on the side to make the putting on easier. In the sixteenth century there was a return to the earlier form of the sandal; instead of a high shoe it now became once more a low foot-covering, like a slipper, a form which it has retained until the present time. The material of which the pontifical sandals are made was, until the thirteenth century, exclusively leather, at times covered with silk. Since the later Middle Ages, the upper part of the sandals has been made, not of leather, but of silk, velvet, etc. It is not until about 1400, with the exception of entirely isolated earlier examples, that a cross is to be found upon the sandals. The fork-shaped decoration, frequently found on pontifical shoes, especially on those of the thirteenth century, was not a cross, but merely an ornament. BRAUN, Die pontif. Gewaender des Abendlandes (Freiburg, 1898); IDEM, Die liturg. Gewandung im Occident u. Orient (Freiburg, 1907); BOCK, Gesch. der liturg. Gewaender, II (Bonn, 1866); DE LINAS, Anciens vetements sacerdotaux (Paris, 1860-63); ROHAULT DE FLEURY, La messe, VIII (Paris, 1889). JOSEPH BRAUN Sandemanians Sandemanians An English form of the Scottish sect of Glassites, followers of John Glas (b. 1695; d. 1773) who was deposed from the Presbyterian ministry in 1728, for teaching that the Church should not be subject to any league or covenant, but should be governed only by Apostolic doctrine. Glas's son-in-law, Robert Sandeman (b. 1718; d. 1771), having been for many years an elder in the Glassite sect, removed to London in 1760, where he gathered a congregation at Glovers' Hall, Barbican. Though for the most part he followed the teaching of Glas, he went beyond that doctrine in maintaining that faith is only a simple assent to Divine testimony which differs in no way from belief in ordinary human evidence. In 1764 Sandeman went to America to propagate his views, and founded some congregations there, for which reason the Glassites in America, like those in England, are known as Sandemanians. In England the sect has never been numerous, possessing less than a dozen meeting-places in the whole country, including two in London. It is chiefly known owing to the great chemist Sir Michael Faraday (b. 1791; d. 1867) having officiated as a Sandemanian elder in London in the middle of the nineteenth century. Membership is granted on confession of sin and public profession of faith in the Death and Resurrection of Christ. The new member receives a blessing and the kiss of peace from all present. Each congregation is presided over by several elders, all unpaid, who are elected for their earnestness of conviction and sincerity, and who hold office for life. On the death of an elder the survivors propose for election the name of a suitable member of the congregation, who is then elected by the whole body. The Sandemanians practice a weekly celebration of the Lord's supper, and the agape or love-feast, which takes the form of dining together between the morning and afternoon services. The elders alone preach, but the ordinary members take turns in offering prayers. The ceremonial washing of feet is also performed on certain occasions. They abstain from things strangled and from blood. As they consider that casting lots is a sacred process, they regard all games of chance as unlawful. They practice community of goods to a modified extent, considering all their property as liable to calls on behalf of the Church and the poor. It is also considered wrong to accumulate wealth. If any member differs obstinately from the rest he is expelled and by this system perfect unanimity is secured. They refuse to join in prayer with members of other denominations and to eat and drink with an excommunicated person is held to be a grievous sin. The Sandemanians as a religious body are very obscure and it is difficult to obtain reliable information with regard to them, but the total membership in Great Britain is believed not to exceed two thousand. BLUNT, Dict. of Sects, Heresies, and Schools of Thought (London, 1874); Dict. Nat. Biog., s. vv. Glas and Sandeman; JONES, Life and Letters of Faraday (London, 1870). EDWIN BURTON Felino Maria Sandeo Felino Maria Sandeo Often quoted under the name of Felinus, Italian canonist of the fifteenth century, b. at Felina, Diocese of Reggio, in 1444; d. at Lucca, October, 1503, according to most writers, according to others at Rome, 6 Sept. of the same year. He taught canon law from 1466 to 1474 at Ferrara, which was his family's native place, and at Pisa until 1484, when he became auditor of the Sacred Palace and lived at Rome. On 4 May, 1495, he became Bishop of Penna and Atri and on 25 Sept. of the same year Coadjutor Bishop of Lucca with right of succession. He became Bishop of Lucca in 1499. Felino was a good compiler but lacked originality. His chief work is "Lectura", or "Commentaria in varios titulos libri I, II, IV, et V Decretalium" (see Hain, "Repert. bibliogr.", II, n, 269-78, N. 14280-14325, published rather often, notably at Milan, 1504; Basle, 1567; Lyons, 1587). He also published a "Sermo de indulgentia", "Repetitiones" "Consilia", and "Epitome de regno Siciliae" (s. 1., 1495). Some unedited works are mentioned in Fabricius, "Bib. latina mediae et infimae aetatis" with additions by Mansi, II (Florence, 1858), 558. SCHULTE, Gesch. der Quellen und Literatur des canonischen Rechts, II (Stuttgart, 1877), 350-2; EUBEL, Hierarchia cath. medii aevi, II (Munster, 1901), 199, 236. A. VAN HOVE Anton Sander Anton Sander Historian, b. at Antwerp, 1586; d. at Afflighem, Belgium, 10 Jan., 1664. Having become master of philosophy at Douai in 1609, he studied theology for some years under Malderus at Louvain, and Estius at Douai, and was ordained priest at Ghent. For some years he was engaged in parochial duties, and combated the Anabaptist movement in Flanders with great zeal and success. In 1625 he became secretary and almoner of Cardinal Alphonsus de la Cueva, later becoming canon, and in 1654 penitentiary at Ypres. After three years, however, he resigned this office to devote himself entirely to scientific, and especially to historical studies. He soon found himself compelled to claim the hospitality of the Benedictine Abbey of Afflighem, since he had reduced himself to absolute poverty by the publication of numerous works. He combined high intellectual gifts with great zeal, and left behind forty-two printed, and almost as many unprinted, works. The most important are the following: "De scriptoribus Flandriae libri III" (Antwerp, 1624); "De Gandavensibus eruditionis fama claris" (Antwerp 1624), "De Brugensibus eruditionis fama claris libri II" (Antwerp, 1624); "Hagiologium Flandriae sive de sanctis eius provinciae liber unus" (Antwerp, 1625; 2nd ed., Lille, 1639). A general edition of these four works appeared under the title: "Flandria illustrata" (2 vols., Cologne, 1641-44; The Hague, 1726). Of his other works may be mentioned: "Elogia cardinalium sanctitate, doctrina et armis illustrium" (Louvain, 1625): "Gandavium sive rerum Gandavensium libri VI" (Brussels, 1627); "Bibliotheca belgica manuscripta" (2 parts, Lille, 1641-3); "Chorographia sacra Brabantiae sive celebrium in ea provincia ecclesiarum et coenobiorum descriptio, imaginibus aeneis illustrata" (Brussels, 1659; The Hague, 1726); this is his chief work. FOPPENS, Bibl. Belgica, I (Brussels, 1739), 87 sqq.; HURTER, Nomenclator. PATRICIUS SCHLAGER Nicholas Sander Nicholas Sander (SANDERS). Born at Charlwood, Surrey, in 1530; died in Ireland, 1581. Educated at Winchester and New College, Oxford, he graduated in 1551, and took a share in Pole's reform of the university. He had to flee under Elizabeth and was ordained at Rome, afterwards receiving the degree of Doctor of Divinity. He also wrote there in 1560 a remarkable "Report on the State of England" for Cardinal Moroni (Catholic Record Soc., I). He attended the Council of Trent as a theologian of Cardinal Hosius and afterwards accompanied him and Cardinal Commendone in legations to Poland, Prussia, and Lithuania. In 1565 he returned to Louvain, then much frequented by Catholic exiles, amongst whom was his mother, his sister Elizabeth being a nun of Syon at Rouen. Nicholas became professor of theology there, and soon joined in the great controversy over Jewel's "Apologie", in which the English exiles first appeared to the world as a learned and united Catholic body. Sander's contributions were, "The Supper of the Lord", "A Treatise of Images", "The Rock of the Church" (Louvain, 1565, 1566, 1567), followed by his great work, "De visibili monarchia ecclesiae" (Louvain 1571). These works, joined with the proofs he had already given of diplomatic ability, and the high esteem of the nobles and gentry who had fled from England after the Northern Rising (1569), caused Sander to be regarded as practically the chief English Catholic leader. Almost the earliest attempt to restore ecclesiastical discipline in England after the fall of the ancient hierarchy was the Rescript of Pius V (14 August, 1567), granting to Sander, Thomas Harding, and Thomas Peacock (the former treasurer of Salisbury and president of Queen's College, Cambridge; see "Dict. Nat. Biog.", xxiv, 339; xliv, 143) "bishoply power in the court of conscience", to receive back those who had lapsed into heresy (Vatican Arch., Var. Pol, lxvi, 258; Arm., 64, xxviii, 60). When Sander was summoned to Rome in 1572, his friends believed that he would be made a cardinal, but Pius V died before he arrived. Gregory XIII kept him as consultor on English matters, and many letters of this period are still preserved in the Vatican. In 1573 he went to Spain to urge Philip II to subsidize the exiles, and when in 1578 James Fitzgerald had persuaded Sega, papal nuncio at Madrid, with the warm approbation of Gregory, and the cold connivance of Philip, to fit out a ship to carry arms to Ireland, Sanders went with him as papal agent, but without any title or office. They landed in Dingley Bay (17 July, 1579) and the Second Desmond war ensued with its terrible consequences. Sander bore up with unshaken courage, as his letters and proclamations show, in spite of all disasters, till his death. He belonged to the first group of English exiles, who, never having lived in England during the persecution, never realized how complete Elizabeth's victory was. He believed, and acted consistently in the belief, that strong measures, like war and excommunication were the true remedies for the great evils of the time; a mistaken policy, which though supported by the popes of that day, was subsequently changed. The most widely known of Sander's books is his short "De schismate Anglicano". It was published after his death, first by E. Rishton at Cologne in 1585, then with many additions by Father Persons at Rome in 1586. Translated into various languages and frequently reprinted, it was fiercely controverted especially by Bishop Burnet, but defended by Joachim Le Grand. It is now acknowledged to be an excellent, popular account of the period from a Catholic point of view. POLLEN in English Historical Review (Jan., 1891); IDEM in The Month (Jan., 1903); GILLOW, Bib. Dict. Eng. Cath., V, 476; BELLESHEIM, Gesch. der Kat. Kirche in Irland, II (Mainz, 1890), 168; LEWIS, Sander's History of the English Schism (London, 1877). He is also frequently mentioned in the English, Irish, and Spanish State Papers, and there are many of his papers in the Vatican Archives. J.H. POLLEN Diocese of Sandhurst Sandhurst (SANDHURSTENSIS). Diocese in Victoria, Australia; suffragan of Melbourne. The cathedral city, officially known as Bendigo, is situated about one hundred miles directly north of Melbourne, in a shallow basin surrounded by an amphitheatre of gently-rising hills rich in gold, discovered in the district in 1852. This fact attracted to Bendigo immigrants from all parts of the world, among them many Irish and others professing the Catholic Faith. The first missionary was the Rev. Dr. Backhaus. On 21 Sept., 1874, Most Reverend Martin Crane, O.S.A., was consecrated first bishop of this diocese and arrived at the scene of his future labors early in 1875 accompanied by the Rev. M. Maher and the Rev. Stephen Reville, O.S.A. The latter was in 1885 appointed coadjutor bishop to Dr. Crane and succeeded him as bishop on 21 Oct., 1901. During the twenty five years of Dr. Crane's active administration, and since his demise, the interests of the Church have advanced rapidly both in a spiritual and material sense. When in 1875 Bishop Crane assumed charge of the diocese it contained but four parishes with one priest in each. There was no convent or Catholic school. At present the principal churches are situated at Wangaratta, Beechworth, Benalla, Chiltern, Shepparton, Echuca, and Rochester. The two last named parishes together with that of Kyabram are in charge of the Irish Augustinian Fathers who, at the invitation of Bishop Crane, came to the diocese towards the close of 1886. Besides the Augustinian Fathers, there are Marist Brothers, Sisters of Mercy, Sisters of St. Brigid, Sisters of St. Joseph, Presentation Sisters, Faithful Companions of Jesus, and Good Shepherd Sisters. In many outlying districts, unable to maintain a community of nuns, there are flourishing primary schools in charge of lay teachers. In the immediate vicinity of Bendigo, there is now in course of construction an orphanage and Magdalen Asylum, which up to date has cost £45,000, the funds for which are derived from the estate of Dr. Backhaus. The statistics for 1911 are: districts, 22; churches 105; secular priests, 36, regular, 6; religious brothers 7; nuns, 200; college, 1; boarding-schools (girls), 6; primary schools, 31; superior day-schools, 13; children in Catholic schools, over 4000; total Catholic population (1901), 45,368. Australasian Cath. Directory (1911); Annuaire Pontif. Cath (1911); MORAN, Hist. of the Catholic Church in Australasia; HOGAN, The Irish in Australia (1888); THERRY, New South Wales and Victoria (1863). STEPHEN REVILLE Sandomir Sandomir (Polish, Sandomierz; Latin, Sandomiriensis). The city is very ancient, with still existing traces of prehistoric construction. Its population is 6891, of which 2364 are Catholics, 46 of the Orthodox Church, and 3433 Jews. When King Mieczyslaw I (962-92), introduced Christianity into Poland he built two churches at Sandomir dedicated to St. Nicholas and St. John. In the Middle Ages the city became an important centre of political and religious life. Here lived several illustrious and holy personages, namely, the Blessed Salome (1210-68), daughter of Leszek the Fair and wife of Koloman I, King of Hungary; Blessed Adelaide, daughter of Casimir the Just (1179-94), King of Poland, who founded the parochial church of St. John where she was buried (1211); Blessed Vincent Kladubek, who died in 1223 after a fruitful apostolic ministry and was canonized by Clement XIII; Blessed Czeslaw, a Dominican (d. 1242 or 1247), the brother of St. Hyacinth, his cult was approved throughout Poland by Clement XII in 1735; St. Hyacinth; the celebrated and apostolic Dominican who was one of the glories of Catholic Poland; St. Cunegunde (1224-92), wife of Boleslaw the Chaste King of Poland. In 1260 Tatar hordes completely destroyed the city and put all the inhabitants to the sword. Forty-nine Dominicans with Sadok, prior of the convent of St. James, were martyred. In 1476 Jan Dlugosz, the celebrated annalist and Polish historian, a canon of Cracow and Sandomir, built here for the cathedral clergy a house which is still existing and is called by his name. The Congress of Sandomir (1570) was assembled for the purpose of union between Protestant sects and the foundation of a national Protestant Church. The results were negative, but certain measures were proposed and approved for the regulation of the relations between the Protestant sects. Up to the second half of the eighteenth century the city of Sandomir and its territory were under the immediate jurisdiction of the Diocese of Cracow. In 1787 through the initiative of Michael Poniatowski, administrator of the Diocese of Cracow, the Holy See created Sandomir a diocese. The first bishop was Mgr. Adalbert Radozewskl (d. 1796). In 1818, after the Concordat with Russia, Pius VII promulgated the Bull "Ex imposita nobis", which suppressed the greater part of the Diocese of Kielce and transferred its episcopal seat to Sandomir. In the next year Mgr. Stephen Holowczyc, dean of the cathedral of Kielce, was consecrated bishop. The new dioeese comprised the ancient Principality of Sandomir, which is now the Province of Radom, and part of the Province of Kielce. Bishop Holowczyc had scarcely taken possession of his diocese before he was made Archbishop of Warsaw, and a Franciscan, Adam Prosper Burzynski, succeeded him in 1820. After the death of Bishop Burzynski (9 Sept., 1830) the cathedral chapter administered the diocese until 1840, when the rector of the seminary, Clement Bankiewicz, was made bishop at the age of eighty, and died 2 January, 1842. His successor was Bishop Joseph Joachim Goldtman, who had been Bishop of Wladislaw since 1838; he was transferred to the See of Sandomir in 1844, and died on 22 March, 1853. Bishop Joseph Michael Yuszynski, who had occupied various ecclesiastical offices in the diocese, succeeded him, and was consecrated 10 July, 1859. Under him the number of deaneries of the diocese was decreased from seventeen to seven. On his death Bishop Anthony Francis Sotkiewicz, administrator of the Archdiocese of Warsaw and professor of canon law in the ecclesiastical seminary of that city, was consecrated 20 May, 1882; d. 4 May, 1901. At the time of his elevation the number of secular clergy was 278, and the Catholic population 730,940. He was succeeded on 4 September, 1902, by Stephen Alexander Zwierowicz, Bishop of Vilna, who was transferred from the latter see to Sandomir, where he died on 3 January, 1908. The present incumbent of the see is Bishop Marianus Joseph Ryn, canon of the cathedral, who was consecrated 7 April, 1910. The diocese at present comprises seven deaneries: Sandomir, Opatow, Ibza, Kozienice, Radom, Opoczno, and Konskie. There are six churches in the city of Sandomir; the cathedral, which dates from 1120 and to which a cathedral chapter has been attached since 1818; the Church of St. James, founded in 1200 by Blessed Adelaide; here dwelt Hyacinth and Martin of Sandomir, whom Gregory IX sent as his ambassador to St. Louis, to induce him to undertake a crusade; and Raymond Bembnowski, author of the Acts of the Martyrs of Sandomir; the Church of the Conversion of St. Paul, which was in existence in the beginning of the thirteenth century; the Church of the Holy Ghost, founded by the Religious of the Holy Ghost of Santa Maria in Sassia in 1222; the Church of St. Michael, founded in 1686 and attached to a Benedictine monastery; and the Church of St. Joseph, founded in 1685 by the Protestants. There are 212 parishes in the diocese, 1 cathedral church, 1 collegiate church, 10 detached churches, and 50 chapels. The secular clergy number 295. The religious houses were all dispersed after the Polish insurrection of 1863. The regulars are represented by one Franciscan lay brother in the parish of Wysmierzyce. The Sisters of Charity, numbering forty-two, have seven hospitals at Sandomir, Radom, Strzyzowice, Opatow, Staszow, Opoczno. Near Bodzentyn is a cloistered Franciscan monastery with thirteen sisters. The canons of the cathedral number twelve, those of the college, six. There are 870,674 Catholics. Amongst the Catholic societies of Sandomir may be mentioned the Society of Charities, founded in 1905, with 155 members; the archconfraternity of St. Stanislaus Kostka, founded in 1906, with 30 young men; the Christian Working Men's Society, founded in 1907, with 98 members, and the Catholic Society, founded in 1908 with 188 members. BALINSKI, Starozytna polska pod wzglendem historycznym, jeograficznym i statystycznym opisana (Description of Ancient Poland, historical, geographical, and statistical), II (Warsaw, 1844), 268-280; CHANDZYNSKI, Wspomnienia sandomierskie i opis miasta Sandomierza (Recollections of Sandomir and a description of the city) (Warsaw, 1850); BULINSKI, Monografia miasta Sandomierza (Warsaw, 1879); ROKOSZNY AND GAJKOWSKI in Encyklopedja koscielna, XXIV (Warsaw, 1900), 338-352; ROKOSZNY, Swiente Pamiantki Sandomierza (Sacred Monuments of Sandomir) (Warsaw, 1902); IDEM, Przewodnik po Sandomierzu (Guide to Sandomir) (Sandomir, 1908); Catalogus ecclesiarum et cleri saecularis ac regularis diaecesis Sandomiriensis pro anno Domini 1911 (Sandomir, 1910). A. PALMIERI Admiral Sands (Benjamin and James) Sands Benjamin F. Sands Rear-admiral United States Navy, b. at Baltimore, Md., 11 Feb., 1812; d. at Washington, D.C., 30 June, 1883. His parents were non-Catholics and he became a convert in 1850, having married a Catholic, Henrietta M. French, sister of Major-General William H. French, U.S.A. He was appointed a midshipman in the navy from his native state, 1 April, 1828, and passed through the successive grades of promotion until he received the rank of rear-admiral, 27 April, 1871, and was placed on the retired list on reaching the age of 62 years, 11 February, 1874. During the Civil War he held several important commands with conspicuous success, and in 1867 was made superintendent of the Naval Observatory at Washington. During his incumbency of this office, which lasted until 1874, he advanced the observatory to a place equal to the most celebrated in Europe. For many years he was a member of the Catholic Indian Bureau in Washington. Notes he left were compiled by his son, F. B. Sands, into the book "From Reefer to Rear Admiral". His son George H. graduated at West Point and served in the U. S. Army. Three others, William F., F. B., and James H., also served in the navy; a daughter, Rosa, became a Visitation nun. James Hoban Sands Rear-admiral U.S.N., son of foregoing; b. at Washington, D. C., 12 July, 1845; d. there 26 October, 1911. Following the footsteps of his father he achieved a high reputation in the naval service for daring and seamanship. Appointed to the Naval Academy from Maryland in 1859, from which he graduated four years later, he served with the North Atlantic Blockading Squadron during the Civil War. While only an ensign he was twice recommended by boards of admirals to be advanced in grade for gallantry. After the war he had commands in the West India Squadron, and later had charge of the Brooklyn, Boston, Philadelphia, and Washington Navy Yards. He was made rear-admiral, 11 April, 1902, and commanded at the Naval Academy, 1906-07, introducing a much needed reform in spite of opposition in many quarters. This was his last active duty as he retired in 1907 after a sea service of eighteen years and four months and a shore duty of twenty-two years. His example as a Catholic was a strong influence in the navy in developing a spirit of tolerance towards Catholics in the service, and in making religious practices of whatever creed more respected. His wife was Mary Elizabeth Meade, of the famous Philadelphia family of that name, who became a convert. His son William Franklin was United States Minister to Guatemala, and two of his daughters, Clara and Hilda, became Religious of the Sacred Heart. Am. Cath. Who's Who (St. Louis, 1911); Furey in U. S. Cath. Hist. Soc. Hist. Records and Studies (New York, 1911-12); Freeman's Journal (New York) files; U. S. Naval Register. THOMAS F. MEEHAN Sandwich Islands (Hawaii) Sandwich Isands ( Hawaii) Vicariate Apostolic comprising all the islands of the Hawaiian group. They lie just within the northern tropic, between 18 ^o 54' and 22 ^o 15' north latitude, and between 154 ^o 50' and 160 ^o 30' of longitude west of Greenwich. These islands form the present Territory of Hawaii, and belong to the United States. Honolulu, the capital, is on the Island of Oahu. Eight of the islands are inhabited, viz., Kauai, Niihau, Oahu, Molokai, Lanai, Maui, Kahoolawe, and Hawaii. Their population (1910) was 191,909. The first Catholic priests arrived at Honolulu on 9 July, 1827. They were the Rev. Alexis Bachelot, prefect Apostolic, the Rev. Abraham Armand, and the Rev. Patrick Short. The first two were natives of France, and the third of Ireland. All three were members of the Congregation of the Sacred Hearts of Jesus and Mary, called also the Society of Picpus, from the name of the street in Paris in which its mother-house is situated. They had been sent by Pope Leo XII. Protestant missionaries had arrived from New England as early as 1820, and had gained the king and chiefs over to their cause. As soon as the priests began to make converts a fierce persecution was raised against the natives who became Catholics. They were ill-treated, imprisoned, tortured, and forced to go to the Protestant churches, and the priests were banished. Fathers Bachelot and Short were taken to a solitary spot in Lower California, far removed from any human habitation. In 1836 the Rev. Robert Walsh, an Irish priest of the same Congregation, arrived at Honolulu, and through the intervention of the British consul, was enabled to remain on the islands in spite of the ill-will of the Protestant party, which wanted to send him back on the vessel in which he had come. In 1837 Fathers Bachelot and Short returned from California, but religious persecution still continued. In the same year there arrived from France the Rev. Louis Maigret, who afterwards became bishop, and first Vicar Apostolic of the Sandwich Islands. He was not permitted to land, but was obliged to leave the country, together with Father Bachelot. who was in very feeble health. The latter, worn out by labour and trials, died at sea shortly after (5 Dec., 1837). In the year 1839 the French Government put an end to this persecution. On 9 July the twelfth anniversary of the arrival of the first Catholic priests, the French frigate "Artémise", Captain Laplace, arrived at Honolulu. A few hours after anchoring dispatched one of his officers to present the king the following summary request: (1) that the Catholic religion be declared free; (2) that all Catholics imprisoned on account of their religion be set at liberty; (3) that the government give a suitable site at Honolulu for a Catholic Church; (4) that the king place in the hands of the captain of the "Artémise" the sum of $20,000, as a guarantee of his good-will and peaceful mind, said sum to be restored when the French Government should feel satisfied that the above conditions had been fulfilled. Hostilities were to commence if the king failed to comply within forty-eight hours with the terms of this manifesto. All the conditions were readily accepted, and peace was concluded. From this time the Catholic priests have enjoyed a tolerable amount of liberty; but the Protestant missionaries and their friends have been identified with the Government and have had the important positions, using their influence as well as the government emoluments for the advancement of their cause. In the year 1840 there arrived at Honolulu the Rt. Rev. Bishop Rouchouze, first vicar Apostolic of Oriental Oceania, appointed to this office in 1833, and having jurisdiction not only in Hawaii, but also in Tahiti, the Marquesas, and other islands. He was accompanied by-three other priests, one of whom, Rev. Louis Maigret, had been refused a landing at Honolulu in 1837. On 9 July 1840, ground was broken for the foundation of the present Cathedral of Our Lady of Peace. On the same day 280 catechumens received baptism and confirmation. In January, 184l, Bishop Rouchouze returned to France, in search of labourers and resources for his mission.' He was successful in obtaining a number of priests and sisters of the Congregation of the Sacred Hearts. They left France in 1841 — with a cargo of supplies on the schooner "Mary-Joseph", owned by the mission; but, unfortunately, the vessel was lost with all on board, not one surviving to tell the tale. This was a severe blow for the young mission, and retarded its progress for man years. On 15 August, 1843, the newly-finished cathedral of Honolulu was solemnly dedicated, and 800 Catholics received Holy Communion. About this time Oriental Oceania was divided into three vicariates Apostolic: Tahiti, Marquesas, and Sandwich Islands. On 11 July, 1847, Pius IX appointed the then prefect of the mission, the Very Rev. Luis Maigret, vicar Apostolic, to succeed Bishop Rouchouze and take charge of the Sandwich Islands Mission as a separate vicariate. From this time on the mission made slow but steady progress, in spite of the odds it had to contend with. The Protestant ministers found the ancient belief of the aborigines in their idols already shaken and partly discarded (owing probably, to the fact that foreigners broke the dreaded taboos without incurring the wrath of the gods). They taught the Hawaiians to wear clothes, and to read and write the Hawaiian language. After having translated the Bible and given it to the natives, they considered the latter civilized and Christianized, and proceeded forthwith to develop the resources of the country. But this Christianity was superficial. The life — philosophy of the weak and inconstant natives was to shun work and enjoy all the pleasures within reach. If the foreigners had offered them but one form of Christianity and had illustrated it by their good example; if, above all, the efforts at educating these grown-up children had been directed more towards correcting the evil tendencies of their hearts than cramming their minds with knowledge, the aborigines would certainly have received the blessings of Christianity, lived by it, and multiplied. But it was quite otherwise. The mild climate; the inheritance from their fathers of an unrestrained, easygoing, indolent character; the bad example of all classes of foreigners, who brought and spread the germs of disease; the contradictory teachings of the man Christian denominations which tried to establish their respective creeds on the ruins of that of their rivals; the wrong principles of an education which instructs the mind but neglects the heart; the absence of the spiritual aids and remedies of which the Church is the dispenser, to regulate irregular desires of the heart, all these causes combined to produce one dire result, namely, the gradual extinction of the Hawaiian race. In matters relating to education the Catholic mission of Hawaii has not been inactive. From the very start it established, wherever feasible, independent schools in charge, or under the supervision, of the priest. In 1859 the Sisters of the Sacred Hearts of Jesus and Mary arrived at Honolulu to take charge of a boarding and day-school for girls, which has developed into an institution with 36 Sisters, 66 boarders, 125 day-scholars who pay, and 420 in the free department. In 1883-84 the Brothers of Mary, from Dayton, Ohio, took charge of three schools for boys: St. Louis's College at Honolulu, St. Mary's School at Hilo, and St. Anthony's School at Wailuku. The day-schools for girls at Wailuku and Hilo are in charge of the Franciscan Sisters from Syracuse, New York. The latest addition to the educational work is the new boarding and day-school for girls at Kaimuki, and the Catholic orphanage at Kalihi. Besides work of education the Catholic mission has had also a great share in the work for the lepers. In order to stop the spread of this loathsome disease, the Hawaiian Government established a settlement for the lepers on the Island of Molokai (see MOLOKAI; DAMIAN). Bishop Maigret was succeeded in 1882 by the Rt. Rev. Hermann Koeckemann, under whose administration the mission received a considerable increase by the immigration of Portuguese imported from the Azores as labourers for the plantations. They are now spread all over the islands, and there is hardly a church where the priests are not obliged to use the Portuguese language besides the English and Hawaiian. There are to be found also a number of Porto Ricans, some Poles, a few Italians, some Spaniards, a number of Filipinos, and a small number of Catholics of other nationalities. Bishop Koekemann died 22 Feb., 1892, and was succeeded in that year by the Rt. Rev. Gulstan Ropert, who died 5 Jan., 1903. The present incumbent, Rt. Rev. Libert Hubert Boeynaems, was consecrated 25 July, 1903. There are (1911) 85 priests of religious orders in the vicariate, 30 churches, and 55 chapels. The Catholic population is 35,000. There are 4 academies, a college, and 9 parochial schools established by the mission, and the total number of pupils is 2200. Piolet, Les Missions Catholiques Franqaises au XlX ^e siècle (Paris, 1802), IV, 1-33; Michels, Die Volker des Südsees, u. die Gesch. von den protestantischen v. katholischen Missionen, etc. (Münster, 1847); Multhane, The Church in the Sandwich Islands in Catholic World, LXIII (New York 1896), 641; Marshall, Christian Missions (London, 1862); Annals of the Propagation of the Faith, Catholic Missions, passim; Clinch, Hawaii and its Missionaries in Amer. Cath. Quarterly Review, XIX (Philadelphia, 1894), 139; Hist. of the Catholic Religion in the Sandwich Island, 1829-40 (Honolulu 1840, reprinted San Francisco, 1907); Blackman, The Making of Hawaii (London, 1906); Alexander, A Brief Hist. of the Hawaiian People (New York, 1891-99). James c. Beissell Ven. John Sandys Ven. John Sandys English martyr, born in the Diocese of Chester; executed at Gloucester, 11 August, 1586. He arrived at Reims 4 June, 1583, was ordained priest in the Holy Cross Chapel of Reims Cathedral by the Cardinal Archbishop, Louis de Guise, and was sent on the mission 2 October, 1584. He was cut down while fully conscious and had a terrible struggle with the executioner, who had blackened his face to avoid recognition and used a rusty and ragged knife; but his last words were a prayer for his persecutors. JOHN B. WAINEWRIGHT Sanetch Indians Sanetch Indians A sub-tribe of the Songish Indians (q.v.). They speak a dialect of the Cowichan language of Salishan linguistic stock, and occupy several small reserves about Saanich Peninsula at the south-west point of Vancouver Island, B.C. They were estimated at 600 in 1858, but are reduced now to bout 250. In primitive customs and beliefs they resemble the Songish. The work of Christianization was begun among them in 1843 by Father John B. Bolduc and completed by the Oblate Fathers. The whole tribe is now entirely civilized and Catholic, engaged in farming, fishing, and various other paid employments, and are described by their agent as "industrious and law-abiding, fairly temperate, and moral". MORICE, Hist. Catholic Church in Western Canada (Toronto, 1910); Dept. of Ind. Affairs (Canada), annual reports (Ottawa); WILSON, Tribes of Forty-ninth Parallel in Trans. Ethnol. Soc. London, new series, IV (London, 1866). JAMES MOONEY San Francisco San Francisco (SANCTI FRANCISCI) Archdiocese established 29 July 1853 to include the Counties of San Francisco, San Mateo, San Joaquin, Stanislaus, Sonoma, Alameda, Contra Costa, Marin, Lake, Mendocino, Napa, Salano, and Merced lying north of 37° 5' N. lat. in the State of California, U.S.A.; an area of 16,856 square miles. Its suffragans are: the Diocese of Monterey and Los Angeles, and the Diocese of Sacramento, in California; and the Diocese of Salt Lake, which comprises the State of Utah and six counties of the State of Nevada; the province including the states of California and Nevada and all the territory east to the Rio Colorado. All California -- Lower, or Old California, and Upper, or the present state -- was originally under Spanish and Mexican jurisdiction, and later formed the Diocese of Both Californias, of which the Right Reverend Francisco Garcia Diego y Moreno was the first bishop. The Franciscans who landed with Cortes at Santa Cruz Bay on 3 May, 1535 began the first mission work, under the leadership of Father Martin de la Coruna. Their labors in this field, and those of the Jesuits who followed them half a century later, are detailed in a special article devoted to that topic (see CALIFORNIA MISSIONS). Portola discovered the present San Francisco Bay 1 Nov., 1769, and as one of the chain of missions projected by Father Junipero Serra, the mission of San Francisco de Asis, called also the Mission Dolores, was founded 9 Oct., 1776 by his two Franciscan brethren Fathers Francisco Palou and Benito Cambon, both natives of Spain. Under the fostering care of the Franciscans the mission prospered without interruption for more than half a century. Then came the secularization and plunder of the California missions by the Mexican Government in 1834, and San Francisco suffered ruin with the others. The village of Yerba Buena was established on its site, and colonization invited by the civil authorities. Some outside trading was done, and a few ships entered the harbour. In the midsummer of 1846, a man-of-war took possession of the place in the name of the United States, and on 30 Jan. of the following year the name of the town Yerba Buena was changed to San Francisco. Gold was discovered in the spring of 1848, and with this came the thousands of fortune-hunters of all nations and the beginning of the city as a great centre of commerce (see CALIFORNIA). Previous to this the Holy See had established the Diocese of Both Californias, suffragan to the Archbishop of Mexico, and appointed as its bishop, on 27 April, 1840, Father Francis Garcia Diego y Moreno, who was consecrated at Zacatecas, 4 Oct., 1840. He was born at Lagos, State of Jalisco, Mexico, 17 Sept., 1785, and joined the Franciscans at the age of seventeen. Ordained priest 13 Nov., 1808 he was successively master of novices and vicar of the monastery of Our Lady of Guadalupe, and laboured zealously giving missions in the towns and cities of Mexico. In 1830 he was appointed Prefect of the Missions for the Conversion of the Indians in California, and set out for this new field with ten missionaries from the college of Our Lady of Guadalupe, reaching Santa Clara, where he took up his residence. The missions of Upper California were then in a very demoralized state, owing to secular and political interference and persecution. Their utter ruin was averted by the zeal of these priests until the passage of the decree of secularization by the Mexican Congress in August, 1834. The destruction that followed this was so widespread that in the summer of 1836 he went back to Mexico, and by a persistent appeal to its congress secured the repeal of the decree of secularization and an order for the restoration of the missions to the Church. Business in connection with his order detained him in Mexico for several years, and then as he was about to return to California he received notice of his appointment as bishop of the newly-created diocese which contained eighteen of the twenty-one historic California missions. Most of them were in ruins when he arrived at San Diego on 11 December, 1841, to commence the disheartening task of saving what he could of the wreck left by the plunderers of the era of secularization. By heroic effort he opened a seminary at Santa Ynez 4 May, 1844, and by word, deed, and example did everything possible to re-establish the missions, but his health failed, and returning to Santa Barbara in January, 1842 he died there 13 April, 1846. Very Rev. José Maria Gonzalez Rubio, O.F.M., the vicar-general, was appointed administrator before the bishop died, and the choice was ratified by the Archbishop of Mexico. The condition of the diocese may be seen from the statement of the administrator made in a circular letter dated 30 May, 1848, and addressed to the people. "Day by day" he said, "we see that our circumstances grow in difficulty; that helps and resources have shrunk to almost nothing; that the hope of supplying the needed clergy is now almost extinguished; and worst of all that through lack of means and priests Divine worship throughout the whole diocese stands upon the brink of total ruin." The date of this letter is the same as that on which the Treaty of Queretar was signed, ceding California to the United States. American Rule When Upper California thus became part of the United States, the Mexican Government refused to permit an American bishop to exercise jurisdiction in Lower California. To meet his difficulty Pope Pius IX detached the Mexican territory from the Diocese of San Diego or Monterey, which had been erected by Pope Gregory XVI 27 April, 1840, and by decree of the Sacred Congregation of Propaganda, 1 July, 1854, divided Upper California into the two dioceses of San Francisco and Monterey. By Brief of 29 July, San Francisco was made an archbishopric, with Monterey its suffragan see. As Bishop of San Diego or Monterey, the Reverend Joseph Sadoc Alemany, O.P. had been consecrated in Rome by Cardinal Fransoni 30 June, 1850. He was appointed Archbishop of San Francisco, and took possession 29 July, 1853. Before all this occurred, Father Gonzalez as administrator began to take measures to provide for the needs of the people, and in a circular appeal for aid, dated Santa Barbara, 13 June, 1849, he tells his flock that he has asked for priests from the Congregation of the Sacred Hearts of Jesus and Mary and from the Jesuits of Oregon. In the autumn of 1849 Father John Brouillet, then Vicar-General of Nesqually, Oregon, landed at San Francisco on a visit, and as he was the only priest in the vicinity who could speak English, the spiritual destitution of the thousands about the town trying to reach the newly-discovered gold fields touched him, and he remained there to minister to them. A few months later Father Antoine Langlois, a Canadian secular priest who had been labouring for six years in the north-west and was then on his way to Canada to enter the Society of Jesus, joined him, and by direction of his superiors also remained at San Francisco. He has left an "Ecclesiastical and Religious Journal for San Francisco" in MS., which is preserved at Santa Clara College, and in this he relates: "The first Mass said in the Mission established in the city of St. Francis Xavier [sic] was on June 17th, 1849, the third Sunday after Pentecost; Father Brouillet . . . was specifically charged to yield to the wishes of the people and labour towards the building of a Church and hold divine service therein. A beginning was made by the purchase of a piece of ground 25 by 50 varas, after he had called the more zealous Catholics together and opened a subscription of $5000 to pay for the lot and the building to be erected on it . . . Religion now began to be practised in spite of the natural obstacles then in its way by the thirst of gold". Father Brouillet then returned to Oregon, and to succeed him in the mission Fathers Michael Accolti and John Nobili, S.J. reached San Francisco from Oregon 8 Dec., 1849 to establish in the diocese, in response to the invitation of the administrator, a house and college of their order either at Los Angeles or San José, the latter being at that time the chief city of Northern California. These two priests played a very prominent part in the subsequent development of the Church and Catholic education in the diocese. Father Accolti tried to obtain assistance from his brethren of the Missouri and other provinces of his order, and finally in May, 1854 succeeded in having the California mission adopted by the Province of Turin, Italy. In May, 1852 Father James Ryder, S.J., of the Maryland Province visited San Francisco and remained four months on business connected with the society. In March, 1850 two fathers of the Congregation of the Sacred Hearts of Jesus and Mary arrived from the Sandwich Islands, and shortly after four others of the same Congregation from Valparaiso. They were immediately invited to establish themselves in the old missions in Southern California and only one of them remained at San Francisco. This was Father Flavian Fontaine, who started a school there, as he spoke English fluently. This school failed after some time, and occasioned much trouble owing to the debts he left on the property, which were assumed by Father Nobili, who undertook to continue the school as an adjunct to Santa Clara College which he had founded near San Jose. The Dominicans, represented by Father Anderson, were also established. He received faculties from the administrator 17 Sept., 1850 and was appointed pastor at Sacramento, where he fell a victim to cholera early the following year. The "Catholic Directory" for 1850 has this report from California: "The number of clergymen in Northern California is about sixteen, two of whom, the Rev. John B. Brouillet and Rev. Antoine Langlois, are in the town of San Francisco, where a chapel was dedicated to Divine worship last June. The reverend clergy there have also made arrangements for the opening of a school for the instruction of children. The Catholic population is variously estimated at from fifteen to twenty thousand". Racial differences had made some trouble which the administrator hoped the advent of the English-speaking Jesuits would help to settle. In a letter to Father Accolti from Santa Barbara on 5 March, 1850, he says: "Strangers have not been wanting, who, despising the priests of the country, have desired to build a church apart, and have it attended by priests of their own tongue. Such pretensions, though based on some specious reasons, have to some of the parish priests savoured of schism". Such were the conditions in the new diocese to which Bishop Alemany was appointed. He was born at Vich, Spain, 13 July, 1814, entered the Dominican Order in 1829, and in the following year, driven from Spain by government persecution, he went with a fellow novice Francis Sadoc Villarasa to Rome, where they continued their studies and were ordained priests on 27 March, 1837, at Viterbo. They applied to be sent to the Philippine mission, but were assigned instead to the United States, where Father Alemany became Provincial of St. Joseph's Province of the order. Ten years were spent in missionary work in Ohio, Kentucky, and Tennessee, during which time they learned to speak and write English fluently. After Bishop Alemany's consecration he remained in R+ome for a short time, and then, on his way back to his diocese, he stopped at Lyons and Paris, where he collected some gifts of much-needed church furnishings, and in Ireland, where he arranged for volunteer teachers for his schools, and priests for his people. He finally reched San Francisco on the night of 6 Dec., 1850, accompanied by Father Villarasa, O.P., and Sister Mary Goemare, a religious of the Dominican sisterhood. Father Villarasa was for forty years subsequently commissary general of the Dominicans in California, and died there in 1888. They found at San Francisco only two churches: St. Francis's, a frame building attended by those who did not speak Spanish, and the old Mission Dolores for those who did. At Monterey the bishop established the first convent of nuns in California and St. Catherine's Academy, where he and Father Villarasa taught until the arrival of Mother Louisa O'Neill and a band of nuns. The first English-speaking student to enter the priory there in 1852 was Thomas O'Neill, b. in 1832 at Dungannon, Co. Tyrone, Ireland. After his ordination he spent more than fifty years in missionary work in the houses of the Dominicans in California. Bishop Alemany devoted much time to meeting the many difficulties which the differences of ideas and forms held by the Catholics of English-speaking countries from those reared under the Spanish system occasioned. In this he was aided by several pioneer priests, notably the Rev. John Shanahan, who, ordained at Mt. St. Mary's, Emmitsburg, Maryland in 1823, after working many years in New York had gone out to California with the gold-seekers; Rev. Eugene O'Connell, and Rev. John McGinnis. Father O'Connell was born 18 June, 1815 in Co. Meath, Ireland, and ordained priest in 1842. When Bishop Alemany visited Ireland on his way home from Rome, he persuaded Father O'Connell, who was then a professor in All Hallows College, to come out to San Francisco and direct the diocesan seminary which he opened at once at Santa Inez. The bishop attended the first Plenary Council at Baltimore in May, 1852, and he was thus able to report substantial progress in his charge, with foundations of the Jesuits, Dominicans, Franciscans, Fathers of the Sacred Hearts, Sisters of Notre Dame, Sisters of St. Dominic, 31 churches, 38 priests and an estimated Catholic population of 40,000. A band of Sisters of Charity from Emmitsburg, Maryland arrived in August, 1852, and began their work in the schools. On 7 July, 1853 the bishop laid the cornerstone of St. Mary's Church, San Francisco, and having been notified of his elevation to the newly-created Archbishopric of San Francisco formally assumed the title 29 July, 1853. In order to obtain more priests and religious he sent Father Hugh P. Gallagher, who had gone to San Francisco from Pittsburg, Penn., to Ireland, where he succeeded in securing two bands of Presentation Nuns and Sisters of Mercy, who arrived at San Francisco 15 Nov., 1854. The Sisters of Mercy came from Kinsale, Co. Cork, and were led by the famous Mother Mary Baptist (Kate Russell) sister of Lord Russell of Killowen. After a life full of great utility, she died in Aug., 1898 at St. Mary's Hospital, San Francisco, which she founded and directed for more than forty years. Father Gallagher, who had edited a Catholic paper at Pittsburg, took up that work also in san Francisco, where he directed its first Catholic weekly, the "Catholic Standard". He was for many years rector of St. Mary's Cathedral. Among other pioneer priests should be mentioned Fathers John Ingoldsby, John Quinn, John McGinnis, Patrick Mackin, William Kenny, Richard Carroll, who was head of the Diocesan Seminary of St. Thomas Acquinas, Jame Croke, for a long period vicar-general, Peter Grey, and John Prendergast, also vicar-general. Progress was manifest in the rural sections, churches also springing up at Sacramento, Weaverville, Marysville, Grass Valley, Stockton, Placerville, San Mateo, Dalton, and Nevada. A Chinese priest, Father Kian, was even present (1854) for the benefit of his fellow-countrymen. The titles to the old mission property were also secured by legal action. In 1858 the archbishop visited Rome and on 15 July, 1862 convened the first diocesan synod, which was attended by forty-four priests. At this the decrees of the Baltimore Council were promulgated, and rules prescribed for the administration of the diocese. The year before the increase of churches in the northern section of the diocese prompted the Holy See to establish there a Vicariate Apostolic of Marysville and the Rev. Eugene O'Connell was appointed to take charge. He was consecrated titular Bishop of Flaviopolis, and Vicar Apostolic of Marysville, 3 Feb., 1861, in All Hallows College, Dublin, Ireland. He reached Marysville 8 June, and was inducted on the following day at St. Joseph's Pro-cathedral by Archbishop Alemany. He had only four priests in his vicariate, which included the territory from 39x to 40x N. lat. and from the Pacific Coast to the eastern boundary of Nevada. In 1868 the vicariate was erected into the Diocese of Grass Valley, and Bishop O'Connell was transferred to this title 3 Feb. of that year. On 28 May, 1884, the Diocese of Sacramento (q. v.) was created out of this Grass Valley district, with the addition of ten counties in California and one in Nevada, and Bishop O'Connell ruled it until 17 March, 1884, when he resigned and was made titular Bishop of Joppa. He died at Lost Angeles 4 Dec., 1891. The succeeding decades gave no respite to the activity and zeal of Archbishop Alemany in furthering the progress of the Church, and the weight of years and the stress of his long but willing toil began to tell on him. He asked for a coadjutor, and the Rev. Patrick William Riordan, pastor of St. James's Church, Chicago, was selected by the pope for the office. He was consecrated titular Bishop of Cabesa and coadjutor of San Francisco with right of succession, 16 Sept., 1883. Archbishop Alemany resigned the title of San Francisco 28 Dec., 1884 and retired to his native Spain, where he d. 14 April, 1888 at Valencia. When he resigned the diocese had 131 churches, 182 priests, 6 colleges, 18 academies, 5 asylums, 4 hospitals, and a Catholic population of about 220,000. Archbishop Patrick William Riordan, who immediately succeeded him, was born 27 Aug., 1841, at Chatham, New Brunswick. His early studies were made at Notre Dame University, Indiana, whence he went to Rome as one of the twelve students who formed the first class that opened the North American College, 7 Dec., 1859. From there he went to the University of Louvain, and received the degree of S.T.D. He was ordained priest at Mechlin, Belgium, 10 June, 1865 and returning to the United States was appointed professor of theology at the Seminary of St. Mary of the Lake, Chicago. Later he served as pastor at Joliet, Illinois, and in Chicago. At the outset of his administration he made the cause of Catholic education his special endeavour. There had been two earlier attempts to carry on a diocesan seminary. One had failed for lack of teachers, the other for want of pupils. In 1884 Archbishop Riordan made an appeal for a new seminary, and Mrs. Kate Johnson gave him 80 acres of fine land at Menlo Park. Here St. Patrick's Seminary, a large and elaborate building was erected and he gave its management to the Sulpicians. In Aug., 1887 he encouraged the Religious of the Sacred Heart who had come into the diocese in 1882, to begin their academy in the city and develop it into the flourishing institute that was transferred to Menlo Park in August, 1898. The Brothers of the Christian Schools in 1889 moved their St. Mary's College from Bernal Heights to Oakland. The college was started by the Reverend James Croke, V.G., in 1863, and for five years was managed by secular priests and laymen. In 1868 seven Brothers from New York under Brother Justin took over the care of the college, which was chartered by the State in 1872. The Brothers also started their Sacred Heart College in 1878. Archbishop Riordan brought in the Salesian Fathers to take care of the Italians in 1888, Father O. Franchi, a Genoese, being the first to arrive. In 1893 they were also given charge of the Portuguese colony in Oakland. The Paulist Congregation of New York were also invited into the diocese and given charge of Old St. Mary's Church. The archbishop took up the claim on Mexico for the arrears of the Pious Fund of the Californias (q. v.) due the diocese, and prosecuted it to a successful issue before the International Arbitration Tribunal at the Hague, where it was the first case tried. He was a delegate to the Hague in 1902. The English Capuchins were given charge of the scattered missions along the coast of Mendocino in August, 1903. In 1905 the archbishop presided over the golden jubilee of St. Ignatius's College and Church, which had been founded at San Francisco in 1855 by Father Anthony Maraschi, S.J. As his health failed Archbishop Riordan requested the appointment of a coadjutor, and the Right Rev. George Montgomery, Bishop of Monterey and Los Angeles, was elevated to the titular Archbishopric of Osino and made his coadjutor in January, 1903. He was born in Davies County, Kentucky, 30 Dec., 1847, and was ordained priest at Baltimore 20 Dec.,1879. He was chancellor of the Archdiocese of San Francisco when he was chosen for the See of Monterey, in which diocese his administration was most successful, especially in defending the rights of the Catholic Indians. He had just settled down as Archbishop Riordan's assistant, and that prelate had started on a tour for recuperation, when San Francisco was visited by the terrible calamity of the earthquake of 18 April, 1906, and its subsequent fire. Twelve churches were burned and their parishes absolutely wiped out of existence. In the burned district, along with the churches all the institutions, schools, asylums, hospitals, the great Jesuit church and College of St. Ignatius, and the Sacred Heart College of the Christian Brothers -- were destroyed. Four churches in the city were wrecked by the earthquake, and others, including the cathedral and St. Patrick's Seminary at Menlo Park, more or less damaged. Happily no lives of priests, religious, or of children in their care were sacrificed. Archbishop Montgomery took a prominent and very active part in the rescue work that began at once, and Archbishop Riordan returned to the city and commenced the gigantic task of restoration which was rapidly accomplished in two or three years, aided by the generosity of the Catholic congregations of the United States, who sent more than $300,000 at once to the stricken diocese; this great exertion, however, had a debilitating effect on Archbishop Montgomery, who d. 10 Jan., 1907. (see MONTEREY AND LOS ANGELES, DIOCESE OF). On 24 Dec., 1908 Bishop Denis J. O'Connell was appointed auxiliary Bishop of San Francisco. Bishop O'Connell was born at Donoughmore, Co. Cork, Ireland, 28 Jan., 1849, and made his studies at the American College, Rome. After his ordination he carried the decrees of the last Plenary Council of Baltimore to Rome, and returned as secretary to Bishop Conroy, ablegate to Canada. He was made a domestic prelate 20 March, 1887, and rector of the American College, Rome, after the death of Mgr. Hostlot in 1884, and held that office until July, 1895, when he resigned, and acted as the vicar of Cardinal Gibbons for his titular church, S. Maria in Trastevere, Rome. He was appointed rector of the Catholic University, Washington, in 1903; on 3 May, 1908 was consecrated titular Bishop of Sebaste; and on 24 Dec., 1908 was appointed auxiliary Bishop of San Francisco. On 19 Jan., 1912 he was transferred from San Francisco to Richmond, Virginia, as successor to Bishop van de Vyver. Statistics The following religious are now established in the archdiocese (1911): Men:-- Capuchin Fathers (Province of England), Mendocino; Ukiah. Dominican Fathers (Western Province), St. Dominic's, San Francisco; Antioch; Benicia; Martinez; Vallejo, Valona. Fathers of the Sacred Hearts (Belgium), Olema. Franciscan Fathers (St. Louis Province), St. Anthony's, St. Boniface's and Franciscan Monastery, San Francisco; St. Elizabeth's, Fruitvale; St. Turibius, Kelseyville, Lake Co. Jesuit Fathers (California Province), St. Ignatius's Church and College, San Franciscop; Los Gatos; San Jose; Santa Clara. Marist Fathers (American Province), Notre Dame, San Francisco. Paulist Fathers (New York), St. Mary's, San Francisco. Salesian Fathers from Turin, Italy, for the Italians, Sts. Peter and Paul, Corpus Christi Church, San Francisco; St. Joseph's Church (for the Portuguese), Oakland. Sulpician Fathers, St. Patrick's Seminary, Menlo Park. Christian Brothers (Province of San Francisco), Sacred Heart College, St. Peter's School, San Francisco; Martinez; St. Mary's College, St. Patrick's School, San Francisco, Oakland; St. Anthony's School, East Oakland; St. Joseph's Academy, Berkeley; St. Vincent's Orphan Asylum, St. Vincent. Brothers of Mary (Eastern Province), St. James's and St. Joseph's Schools, San Francisco; Stockton; St. Joseph's School, San Francisco; Stockton; St. Joseph's Schools, San Jose; Agricultural School, Rutherford. Women:-- Sisters of Charity (St. Louis, Missouri), Orphan Asylum, Infant Asylum, Technical and St. Vincent's Schools, Mary's Help Hospital, San Francisco; O'Connor Sanitarium, San Jose. Sisters of Charity of the Blessed Virgin Mary (Dubuque, Iowa), St. Bridget's School, San Francisco; Petaluma. Sisters of St. Dominic (Mission San José, California), Immaculate Conception Academy; St. Anthony's and St. Boniface's School, San Francisco; Fruitvale; Mission San Jose; Ukiah. Sisters of St. Dominic (San Rafael, California), Academy, San Rafael; St. Rose's Academy, St. Dominic"s and Sacred Heart Schools, San Francisco; San Leandro; Stockton; Vallejo; Academy and School, Benicia, Franciscan Sisters of the Sacred Heart (Joliet, Illinois), St. Joseph's Hospital, San Francisco. Sisters of the Holy Cross (Notre Dame, Indiana), St. Charles's School, San Francisco. Sisters of the Holy Family (San Francisco), San Jose; Oakland. Sisters of the Holy Names of Jesus and Mary (Hochelaga, Montreal, Province of Quebec), St. Joseph's, San Francisco; Convent of the Holy Names, Immaculate Conception School, St. Francis de Sales School, Sacred Heart School, Oakland. Sisters of St. Joseph of Carondelet (Los Angeles, California), St. Patrick's School and St. Joseph's Home, Oakland; Star of the Sea, San Francisco. Sisters of Mercy (San Francisco, California), mother-house and St. Mary's Hospital, St. Catherine's Home, St. Peter's School, San Francisco; school and academy, East Oakland; Home for the Aged, Fruitvale. Sisters of Mercy, Rio Vista; Sausalito. Sisters of Notre Dame (San José, California), mother-house, college, high school, institute, and 3 schools, San Jose; College and Mission Dolores School, San Francisco; Alameda; Redwood; Santa Clara; Saratoga. Presentation Nuns (San Francisco, California), mother-house, cathedral school, and 2 academies, San Francisco; Berkeley; Sonoma. Sisters of Charity of Providence (Montreal), hospital, Oakland. Little Sisters of the Poor (Chicago, Illinois), San Francisco; Oakland. Little Sisters of the Holy Family (Sherbrooke, Canada), St. Patrick's Seminary, Menlo Park. Helpers of the Holy Souls (Paris, France), San Francisco. Carmelite Sisters, San Francisco. Religious of the Sacred Heart (Chicago Province), San Francisco; Menlo Park. Ursuline Sisters (Santa Rosa, California), Santa Rosa; St. Helena. Archbishop, 1; secular priests, 206; priests of religious orders, 146; total, 352; churches with resident priest, 113; missions with churches, 63; total churches, 176; stations, 31; chapels, 57; seminary, 1; ecclesiastical students, 96; seminaries of religious orders, 3; colleges and academies for boys, 7; students, 340; academies for young ladies, 21; normal school, 1; females educated in higher branches, 5,000; parishes with parochial schools, 42; pupils, 17,000; orphan asylums, 4; orphans, 1,800; infant asylums, 1; inmates, 480; industrial and reform schools, 2; inmates,173; protectory for boys, 1; inmates, 90; total of young people under Catholic care, about 23,000; deaf-mute asylum, 1; hospitals, 6; homes for aged poor, 4; other charitable institutions, 2; baptisms, 7,957; deaths, 3,710; Catholic population, about 250,000. Bibliography, supplied by the Rev. Joseph M. Gleason: -- MANUSCRIPTS: -- In the Cathedral Archives, San Francisco: -- Diary of Bishop Diego y Moreno, continued by Archbishop Alemany; A. S. Taylor MSS; Records of the Missions of San Francisco de Asis, San José, Santa Clara, San Francisco Solano, and San Rafael; Chancery Records. In the University of California: -- Spanish and Mexican Archives of California (copies of the originals burnt in the San Francisco fire of 1906); Bancroft Collection of MSS.; Pioneer MSS.; Seville and Mexican Transcripts. Synodus Diocesana Sanct. Francisci Habita 1862 (San Francisco, 1872); Concilii Prov. S.F.; II, Acta et Decreta (San Francisco, 1883); GLEASON, Catholic Church in California (San Francisco, 1872); BANCROFT, History of California (San Francisco, 1885); GREY, Pioneer Times in California (San Francisco, 1881); CLINCH, California and Its Missions (San Francisco, 1904); HITTEL, History of San Francisco (San Francisco, 1878); ROYCE, California (Boston, 1886); DWINELLE, Colonial History of San Francisco (3rd ed., San Francisco, 1866); WILLEY, Transition Period of California (San Francisco, 1901); SHUCK, California Scrap Book (San Francisco, 1868); MOSES, Establishment of Municipal Government in San Francisco (Baltimore, 1889); BLACKMAR, Spanish Institutions of the South-west (Baltimore, 1891); RICHMAN, California under Spain and Mexico (Boston, 1911); MARRYAT, Mountains and Molehills (London, 1855); KELLY, The Diggings of California (London, 1852); DE SMET, Western Missions and Missionaries (New York, 1863); RIORDAN, The First Half-Century (San Francisco, 1905); ENGELHARDT, The Franciscans in California (Harbor Springs, 1897); ROSSI, Six Ans en Amerique (Californie et Oregon) (Paris, 1863); FRIGNET, La Californie (2nded., Paris, 1867); FERRY, La Nouvelle Californie (Paris, 1850); LEVY, Les Francais en Californie (San Francisco, 1884); MAGUIRE, The Irish in America (New York, 1868), xiii; SWASEY, Early Days and Men of California (San Francisco, 1894); QUIGLEY, The Irish Race in California (San Francisco, 1878); YORKE, Wendte Controversy (San Francisco, 1896); SHEA, Catholic Church in the United States (New York, 1892); GLEASON, Golden Jubilee of the Archdiocese of San Francisco (San Francisco, 1903); For. Rel. Of U. S., Append. II, Pious Fund of the Californias (documents) Washington, 1903); O'MEARA, Broderick and Gwin (San Francisco, 1881); the Local and County Histories of HALLEY, HALL, FRAZER, BOWEN, MENEFEE, etc.; Silver and Golden Jubilee Memorials of different religious orders of the Archdiocese; Society of California Pioneers, Annual Reports (San Francisco); California Historical Society, papers (San Francisco); Academy of Pacific Coast History, papers (San Francisco); Metropolitan Directory and Catholic Directory (1850-1911); Monitor (San Francisco), files; Freeman's Journal (New York 1850-60), files; Alta California (San Francisco), early files; Evening Bulletin (San Francisco), files, especially A. S. Taylor Papers; Evening Examiner (San Francisco), files, especially Phil. Roach Papers; Herald (San Francisco), early files; Dominicana (San Francisco), files; Overland Monthly (San Francisco), files; Grizzly Bear (San Francisco), files; all San Francisco newspapers (period following fire of 1906). THOMAS F. MEEHAN San Gallo San Gallo A celebrated family of architects, sculptors, painters, and engravers, which flourished in Italy during the Renaissance period, from the middle of the fifteenth to the end of the sixteenth century. The founder of the family was Francesco Giamberti (1405-80), a Florentine wood-carver; he had two sons, Giuliano and Antonio. (1) Giuliano da San Gallo Architect and sculptor (1445-1516). After receiving his first training with Francione in his native town, he proceeded to Rome, where he conceived his high ideas of architecture and, through the study of Vitruvius, his enthusiasm for the antique. He was engaged at the building of the celebrated Palace of San Marco, which Cardinal Barbo (Paul II) was erecting. On the outbreak of the war between his native town and Naples, he returned to Florence, and displayed such brilliant talent as a military engineer, that Cardinal Giuliano della Rovere entrusted him with the fortification of the harbour of Ostia (1483). In the following years he worked partly in the service and partly under the protection of the Medici family, enjoying the special favour of Lorenzo the Magnificent. Recommended by the latter he built the Church of Madonna delle Carceri at Prato in 1485, and in 1489 the Villa Poggio at Cajano, where Lorenzo loved to associate with the littérateurs. After he had built the hermitage of S. Agostino before the Gate San Gallo, he was given by Lorenzo the surname of San Gallo, which he transmitted to his descendants. He also built the sacristy of Santo Spirito (1488-92), the court of the monastery of Sta Maria Maddalena de' Pazzi, and the Palazzo Gondi (1494). On Lorenzo's death, Giuliano returned to Rome, where he restored the ceiling of the Church of S. Maria Maggiore, and prepared a model for the palace and cloister court of S. Pietro in Vincoli for Cardinal della Rovere. He accompanied della Rovere to France in 1494, and on his return took an active part in the war against the Pisans. He was taken prisoner, but was released six months later after paying a high ransom. In 1503 he was appointed architect to St. Peter's, and thenceforth — except for a short interruption which again called him to the scene of the war against the Pisans — resided constantly at Rome in the service of Julius II until 1511, when he returned in ill-health to Florence. Here he designed no fewer than seven plans for the Church of San Lorenzo, begun by Brunelleschi but left uncompleted. (2) Antonio da San Gallo the Elder Brother of the above, b. 1455; d. 27 Dec., 1534. He shared the fortune of this brother, whom on their father's death, he accompanied to Rome and represented in many important undertakings. Pope Alexander entrusted him with the fortification of the Castle of San Angelo, and the fort Civita Castellana. The death of his brother afforded him his first opportunity to demonstrate his great talent as an architect and military engineer. He executed the portico of the Servi in Florence, the aisles of the Annunziata at Arezzo, and at Montepulciano, under the influence of Bramante, the magnificent Church of the Madonna di San Biagio, which must be regarded as one of the most glorious edifices in Italy. For profane buildings also his services were frequently requisitioned; thus at Montepulciano and Montesansovino he erected many palaces of almost classical perfection. Appointed chief engineer over all works of fortification by the Florentine Government, he took a prominent part with Michelangelo in the defence of the city. In spite of his great success he renounced art towards the close of his life, and settled in the country. His numerous sketches and drawings, which reveal a great correctness, are preserved in the Uffizi Gallery at Florence. (3) Antonio da San Gallo the Younger Born 1485; died at Terni, 1546. He was a son of the sister of the two preceding, and his real name was Coroliano (corrupted into Cordiani). With the art of his uncles, he adopted also their name, and it was he who conferred on this name its greatest splendour. At Rome he attached himself closely to Bramante, working at first in his studio and later succeeding him in the building of St. Peter's. He enjoyed successively the favour of Leo X, Clement VII, and Paul III, in whose service he was engaged for forty-one years. His extraordinary activity was displayed in three directions, as a builder of churches, a builder of palaces, and a military engineer. In Rome he made a plan for the Church of San Giovanni dei Fiorentini, but was not entrusted with its execution; completed the Church of the Madonna di Loreto, begun by Giuliano da San Gallo; built the Church of Santo Spirito at Borgo, an edifice of noble dignity and simplicity. On Raphael's death, he was appointed architect to St. Peter's, and proposed to introduce important changes into the original plans. He had a large wooden model (still extant) prepared by his pupil Labacco, showing a glorious vestibule and in the interior and exterior exuberant architectonic decorativeness. His plan was later rejected by Michelangelo. For the Cappella Paolina he also prepared a plan. Among the palaces which he erected the most celebrated is the Palazzo Farnese, with the execution of which Cardinal Alexander Farnese (later Paul III) entrusted him without suspecting that thereby he was about to make him one of the greatest builders of palaces in the whole world; Antonio did not live to see the completion of this gigantic work. He also built the Palazzo Sacchetti, the famous Villa Madama (according to Raphael's plans), and in Borgo the uncompleted Porta Santo Spirito. These works did not exhaust his tireless activity. Like his uncles, he was also an able military engineer, and in this capacity was engaged on the fortifications at Civita Vecchia, Ancona, Florence, Parma, Piacenza, Ascoli, Nepi, Perugia, and on the Lago di Marmora. We must also mention the celebrated Pozzo di S. Patrizio (St. Patrick's Well) at Orvieto, executed (1527-40) at the commission of Clement VII; this is cut one hundred and ninety-eight feet into a tufa rock, 248 steps leading to the water-level. Antonio was buried in St. Peter's. Of other members of this illustrious family of artists may be mentioned: + GIOVANNI BATTISTA ANTONIO DA SAN GALLO (1496-1552), a brother of Antonio the younger, whom he assisted in his work; + FRANCESCO DA SAN GALLO (1496-1576), son of Giuliano, sculptor and military engineer; + BASTIANO DA SAN GALLO (1481-1531), known as Aristoteles, a nephew of Giuliano, painter; + GIOVANNI FRANCESCO DA SAN GALLO (1482-1530), architect and engineer. (1) FABRICZY, Handzeichnungen (Stuttgart, 1902); HUELSEN, Il libro de Giuliano da San Gallo, Cod. Vat. Barb. (Leipzig, 1910), 4424. (2)(3) LAURIERE, AND MUNTZ, Giuliano da San Gallo et les monuments antiques du Midi de la France (Paris, 1885); VON GEYMULLER, Documents inedits sur les manuscrits et les oeuvres d'architecture de la famille des San Gallo (Paris, 1885) CLAUSSE, Les San Gallo (3 vols., Paris, 1900-02). BEDA KLEINSCHMIDT Sanhedrin Sanhedrin The supreme council and court of justice among the Jews. The name Sanhedrin is derived originally from the Greek word sunédrion, which, variously modified, passed at an unknown period into the Aramaic vocabulary. Among the Greek-speaking Jews, gerousía, "the assembly of the Ancients" was apparently the common name of the Sanhedrin, at least in the beginning; in post-Biblical Hebrew the appellation Beth-Din, "house of judgment", seems to have been quite popular. HISTORY An institution as renowned as the Sanhedrin was naturally given by Jewish tradition a most venerable and hallowed antiquity. Some Doctors, indeed, did not hesitate to recognize the Sanhedrin in the Council of the seventy Elders founded by Moses (Num., xi, 16); others pretended to discover the first traces of the Sanhedrin in the tribunal created by Josaphat (II Par., xix, 8): but neither of these institutions bears, in its composition or in its attributions, any resemblance to the Sanhedrin as we know it. Nor should the origin of the Sanhedrin be sought in the Great Synagogue, of which tradition attributed the foundation to Esdras, and which it considered as the connecting link between the last of the Prophets and the first Scribes: for aside from the obscurity hovering over the functions of this once much-famed body, its very existence is, among modern scholars, the subject of the most serious doubts. Yet it may be that from the council of the nobles and chiefs and ancients, on which the ruling of the restored community devolved at the time of Nehemias and Esdras (Neh., ii, 16; iv, 8, 13; v, 7; vii, 5; I Esd., v, 5, 9; vi, 7, 14; x, 8), gradually developed and organized, sprang up the Sanhedrin. At any rate, the first undisputed mention we possess touching the gerousía of Jerusalem is connected with the reign of Antiochus the Great (223-187 b.c.; Joseph. "Antiq.", XII, iii, 3). From that time on, we are able to follow the history of the Sanhedrin until its disappearance in the overthrow of the Jewish nation. As under the Greek rulers the Jews were allowed a large measure of self-government, many points of civil and religious administration fell to the lot of the high priests and the gerousía to settle. But when, after the Machabean wars, both the royal and priestly powers were invested in the person of the Hasmonean kings, the authority of the Sanhedrin was naturally thrown in the background by that of the autocratic rulers. Still the Sanhedrin, where a majority of Pharisees held sway, continued to be "the house of justice of the Hasmoneans" ("Talm.", Aboda zara, 36 ^b; Sanh., 82 ^a). A coup d'état of John Hyrcanus towards the end of his reign brought about a "Sadducean Sanhedrin" ("Antiq.", XVI, xi, 1; Sanh., 52 ^b; Megillat Taanith, 10), which lasted until Jannæus; but owing to the conflictgs between the new assembly and Alexander, it was soon restored, to be again overthrown by the Pharisaic reaction, under Alexandra. The intervention of Rome, occasioned by the strife between the sons of Alexandra, was momentarily fatal to the Sanhedrin in so far as the Roman proconsul Gabinius, by instituting similar assemblies at Gadara, Jericho, Amathonte, and Sapphora, limited the jurisdiction of the gerousía of Jerusalem to the city and the neighbouring district (57 b.c.). In 47, however, the appointment of Hyrcanus II as Ethnarch of the Jews resulted in the restoring of the Sanhedrin's authority all over the land. One of the first acts of the now all-powerful assembly was to pass judgment upon Herod, the son of Antipater, accused of cruelty in his government ("Antiq.", XI, ix, 4). The revengeful prince was not likely to forget this insult. No sooner, indeed, had he established his power at Jerusalem (37 b.c.), than forty-five of his former judges, more or less connected with the party of Antigonus, were put to death ("Antiq.", XV, i, 2). The Sanhedrin itself, however, Herod allowed to continue; but this new Sanhedrin, filled with his creatures, was henceforth utilized as a mere tool at his beck (as for instance in the case of the aged Hyrcanus). After the death of Herod, the territorial jurisdiction of the assembly was curtailed again and reduced to Judea, Samaria, and Idumea, the "ethnarchy" allotted to Archelaus. But this condition of affairs was not to last; for after the deposition of the Ethnarch and the annexation of Judea to the Roman province of Syria (a.d. 6), the Sanhedrin, under the control of the procurators, became the supreme authority of the Jewish people; only capital sentences pronounced by the assembly perhaps needed confirmation from the Roman officer before they could be carried into execution. Such was the state of things during the public life of the Saviour and the following thirty years (Matt., xxvi, 57; Mark, xiv, 55; xv, 1; Luke, xxii, 66; John, xi, 47; Acts, iv, 15; v, 21; vi, 12; xxii, 30; xxiii, 1 sq.; xxiv, 20; "Antiq.", XX, ix, 1; x; "Bell. Jud.", II, xv, 6; "Vita", 12, 13, 38, 49, 70). Finally when the misgovernment of Albinus and Gessius Florus goaded the nation into rebellion, it was the Sanhedrin that first organized the struggle against Rome; but soon the Zealots, seizing the power in Jerusalem, put the famous assembly out of the way. Despite a nominal resurrection first at Jamnia, immediately after the destruction of the Holy City, and later on at Tiberias, the great Beth-Din of Jerusalem did not really survive the ruin of the nation, and later Jewish authors are right when, speaking of the sad events connected with the fall of Jerusalem, they deplore the cessation of the Sanhedrin (Sota, ix, end; Echa Rabbathi on Lam., v, 15). COMPOSITION According to the testimony of the Mishna (Sanh., i, 6; Shebuoth, ii, 2), confirmed by a remark of Josephus ("Bell. Jud.", II, xx, 5), the Sanhedrin consisted of seventy-one members, president included. Jewish tradition appealed to Num., xi, 16, to justify this number; but whether the text of Num. had actually any influence on the determination of the composition of the Beth-Din, may be left undecided. The New-Testament writers seem to divide the members into three classes: the chief priests, the scribes, and the ancients; but it might be wrong to regard these three classes as forming a regular hierarchy, for in the New Testament itself the word "ancients", or the phrase "the ancients of the people", is quite frequently equivalent to "members of the Sanhedrin", just as is in Josephus the word bouleutaí "members of the council". They were styled "ancients" no doubt in memory of the seventy "ancients" forming the assembly set up by Moses (Num., xi), but also because the popular mind attached to the word a connotation of maturity of age and respectability (See in "Talm.", Bab., Sanh. 17 ^b, 88 ^a, also in Sifra, 92, the moral and intellectual qualifications required for membership. Since the Beth-Din had to deal frequently with legal matters, it was natural that many of its members should be chosen from among men specially given to the study of the Law; this is why we so often hear of the scribes in the Sanhedrin. Most of those scribes, during the last forty years of the institution's existence, were Pharisees, whereas the members belonging to the sacerdotal caste represented in the assembly the Sadducean ideas (Acts, iv, 1; v, 17, 34; xxiii, 6; "Antiq.", XX, ix, 1; "Bell. Jud.", II, xvii, 3; "Vita", 38, 39), but history shows that at other periods the Pharisean influence had been far from preponderating. According to what rules the members were appointed and the vacancies filled up, we are unable to state; it seems that various customs prevailed on this point at different periods; however, from what has been said above, it is clear that politics interfered more than once in the transaction. At any rate we are told (Sanh., iv, 4) that a semikah, or imposition of hands, took place at the formal installation of the new appointees; and there is every reason to believe that the appointment was for life. Who was president of the Sanhedrin? The Bible and Josephus on the one hand, and the Talmud on the other, contain statements which may shed some light on the subject; unfortunately these statements appear to be at variance with each other and need careful handling. In I Mach., xiv, 44, we read that no meeting (sustrophéd) might be called in the land outside of the high priest's bidding; but it would be clearly illogical to infer from this that the high priest was appointed by Demetrius ex officio president of the Sanhedrin. To conclude the same from the passage of Josephus narrating Herod's arraignment before the Sanhedrin (Antiq., XIV, ix, 3-5) would likewise perhaps go beyond what is warranted by the text of the Jewish historian: for it may be doubted whether in this occurrence Hyrcanus acted as the head of the Hasmonean family or in his capacity of high priest. At any rate there can be no hesitation about the last forty years of the Sanhedrin's existence: at the trial of Jesus, Caiphas, the high priest (John, xi, 49), was the head of the Beth-Din (Matt., xxvi, 5;7); so also was Ananias at the trial of St. Paul (Acts, xxiii, 2), and we read in "Antiq.", XX, ix, I, about the high priest Ananus II summoning the Sanhedrin in a.d. 62. What then of the Rabbinical tradition speaking persistently of Hillel, and Simon his son, and Gamaliel I his grandson, and the latter's son Simon, as holding the office of Nasi from 30 b.c. to a.d. 70 (Talm., Bab. Shabbath, 15 ^a)? Of one of these men, Gamaliel, we find mention in Acts, v, 34; but even though he is said to have played a leading part in the circumstances referred to there, he is not spoken of as president of the assembly. The truth may be that during the first century b.c., not to speak of earlier times, the high priest was not ex officio the head of the Sanhedrin, and it appears that Hillel actualy obtained that dignity. But after the death of Herod and the deposition of Archelaus, which occurred about the time of Hillel's demise, there was inaugurated a new order of things, and that is possibly what Josephus means when, speaking of these events, he remarks that "the presidency over the people was then entrusted to the high priests" (Antiq., XX, x, end). It was natural that, in an assembly containing many scribes and called upon the decide many points of legislation, there should be, next to the Sadducean presidents, men perfectly conversant with all the intricacies of the Law. Gauged by the standard of later times, the consideration which must have attached to this position of trust led to the misconception of the actual rôle of Hillel's descendants in the Sanhedrin, and thus very likely arose the tradition recorded in the Talmud. JURISDICTION AND PROCEDURE We have seen above how the jurisdiction of the Sanhedrin varied in extension at different periods. At the time of the public life of the Saviour, only the eleven toparchies of Judea were de jure subject to the Great Sanhedrin of Jerusalem; however, de facto the Jews all the world over acknowledged its authority (as an instance of this, see Acts, ix, 2; xxii, 5; xxvi, 12). As the supreme court of justice of the nation, the Sanhedrin was appealed to when the lower courts were unable to come to a decision (Sanh., vii, 1; xi, 2); moreover, it had the exclusive right of judgment in matters of special importance, as for instance the case of a false prophet, accusations against the high priest, the sending out of an army in certain circumstances, the enlarging of the city of Jerusalem, or of the Temple courts, etc. (Sanh., i, 5; ii, 4; iii, 4); the few instances mentioned in the New Testament exemplify the cases to which the competency of the Sanhedrin extended; in short, all religious matters and all civil matters not claimed by Roman authority were within its attributions; and the decisions issued by its judges were to be held inviolable (Sanh., xi, 2-4). Whether or not the Sanhedrin had been deprived, at the time of Jesus Christ, of the right to carry death-sentences into execution, is a much-disputed question. On the one hand, that such a curtailing of the Sanhedrin's power did actually take place seems implied in the cry of the Jews: "It is not lawful for us to put any man to death" (John, xviii, 31), in the statement of Josephus (Ant., XX, ix, 1) and in those of the Talmud of Jer. (Sanh., 18 ^a, 24 ^b). Still we see in Acts, vii, St. Stephen put to death by the Sanhedrin; we read likewise in Talm. Jer. (Sanh., 24, 25) of an adulteress burnt at the stake and a heretic stoned; and these three facts occurred precisely during the last forty years of the Temple's existence, when the power of life and death is supposed to have been no longer in the Sanhedrin. Assuming the two facts recorded in Talm. Jer. to be historical, we might explain them away, just as the stoning of St. Stephen, and reconcile them with the curtailing of the Sanhedrin's rights by attributing them to outbursts of popular passion. Some scholars, however, deny that the Romans ever deprived the Sanhedrin of any part of its power: the Sanhedrin, they say, owing to the frequency of cases half-religious and half-political in nature, in order not to alienate the feelings of the people and at the same time not to incur the displeasure of the Roman authorities, practically surrendered into the hands of the latter the right to approve capital sentences; the cry of the Jews: "it is not lawful for us to put any man to death", was therefore rather a flattery to the procurator than the expression of truth. It should be noted, however, that of these views the former is more favourably received by scholars. At all events, criminal causes were tried before a commission of twenty-three members (in urgent cases any twenty-three members might do) assembled under the presidency of the Ab Beth-Din; two other boards, also of twenty-three members each, studied the questions to be submitted to plenary meetings. These three sections had their separate places of meeting in the Temple buildings; the criminal section met originally in the famous "Hall of the Hewn Stone" (Mishna, Peah, ii, 6; Eduyoth, vii, 4) which was on the south side of the court (Middoth, v, 4) and served also for the sittings of the "Great Sanhedrin", or plenary meetings; about a.d. 30, that same section was transferred to another building closer to the outer wall; they had also another meeting place in property called khanyioth, "trade-halls", belonging to the family of Hanan (cf. John, xvii, 13). The members of the Sanhedrin sat in a semicircle that they might see one another while deliberating (Mishna, Sanh., iv, 2; Tos., Sanh., vii, 1). Two clerks stood before them, the one to the right and the other to the left, to take down the votes (Mishna, Sanh., iv, 2). The members stood up to speak, and on matters of civil or ceremonial law the voting began with the principal member of the assembly, whereas the younger members were the first to give their opinion in criminal affairs. For judgments of the latter description a quorum of at least twenty-three members was required: a majority of one vote sufficed for the acquittal; for a condemnation a majority of two votes was necessary, except when all the members of the court (seventy-one) were present (Mishna, Sanh., iv; Tos., Sanh., vii). Since in spite of the identity of names there is little in common betweeen the old Great Sanhedrin of Jerusalem and the schools of Jamnia and Tiberias, it is quite useless to dwell on the latter, as well as on the Kalla assemblies of Babylon. But it will not be amiss to mention the fact that before the fall of Jerusalem there were, besides the Great Sanhedrin we have dealt with above, local courts of justice sometimes designated by the same name, in all the Jewish cities. Besides the tracts Sanhedrin in both Talmuds, and the works of Josephus, which are the principal sources of information on the subject, we may cite the following works: Maimonides, De synedriis et pœnis, Heb. and Lat. (Amsterdam, 1695); Reifmann, Sanhedrin, Heb. (Berdichef, 1888); Selden, De synedriis et præfecturis juridicis veterum Ebræorum (London, 1650); Ugolini, Thesaurus antiquitatum, XXV (Paris, 1672); Blum, Le sanhédrin … son origine et son histoire (Strasburg, 18899); Rabbinowicz, Législation criminelle du Talmud (Paris, 1876); Idem, Législation civile du Talmud (Paris, 1877-80); Stapfer, La Palestine au temps de Jésus-Christ (3rd ed., Paris, 1885), iv; BÜchler, Das Synedrion in Jerusalem (Vienna, 1902); Jelski, Die innere Einrichtung des grossen Synedrion zu Jerusalem und ihre Fortsetzung in späteren palästinensichen Lehrhause bis zur Zeit des R. Jehuda ha-Nasi (Breslau, 1804); Langen, Das jüdische Synedrium und die römische Procurator in Judäa in Tübing. theol. Quartalschr. (1862), 441-63; Levy, Die Präsidentur in Synedrium in Frankel's Monatschr. (1885); SchÜrur, Geschichte des jüd. Volkes im Seitalter Jesu Christi, II (3rd ed., Leipzig, 1898), 188 sq. Charles L. Souvay Diocese of San Jose de Costa Rica San José de Costa Rica (SANCTI JOSEPHI DE COSTARICA). The Republic of Costa Rica, Central America, constitutes this diocese as a suffragan see of the Archdiocese of Guatemala. It was established in 1850, and its Catholic population in 1910 amounted to 368,000, which is practically the total number of inhabitants in the country. There are in the republic: 103 priests, of whom 101 are secular and 12 regular; 68 parish churches; 98 chapels; 1 seminary; 1 diocesan college; 1 academy for girls; 2 orphan asylums; and 4 hospitals, all supported by the Church. At San José, the capital of the republic and see of the diocese, are located the seminary with 10 students, the diocesan college with 150 pupils; the Academy of the Sisters of Our Lady of Sion with 35 sisters and 100 girls; 1 school for poor girls, connected with the same academy, with 80 pupils; 1 orphan asylum, directed by the Sisters of Charity and caring for 230 orphans. There is in the city of Cartago another orphan asylum, under the Salesian Fathers, with 233 orphans. In 1847 President José M. Castro entered into negotiations with the Holy See and secured the establishment of a bishopric at Costa Rica, and on 10 April, 1851 the Rt. Rev. Anselmo Llorente y La Fuente was appointed the first bishop, and consecrated in Guatemala, 7 Sept., of the same year. The present incumbent is Rt. Rev. Juan Gaspar Stork, consecrated 24 Aug., 1904. The cathedral of San José is the largest and handsomest religious edifice in the capital, and is noted for the dignity and elegance of its architecture. (See COSTA RICA, REPUBLIC OF.) JULIAN MORENO-LACALLE San Juan (Argentina) San Juan (SANCTI JOANNIS DE CUYO). Diocese in the Argentine Republic at the foot of the Cordillera of the Andes between 28° and 41° S. lat. It is a suffragan of the Archdiocese of Buenos Aires and comprises the civil Provinces of San Juan, Mendoza, and San Luis, and the national district of Neuquén, has an area of 151,096 sq. miles and a population of 540,000. These provinces were a part of the Archdiocese of Santiago de Chile until 1776, when they passed under the jurisdiction of the Diocese of Córdoba. In 1826 they were constituted into a vicariate Apostolic, and on 19 Sept., 1834, Gregory XVI erected the Diocese of San Juan de Cuyo. The first bishop was Fray Justo de Santa María de Oro, a prominent figure in the history of Argentina. He was the representative from San Juan to the Congress of Tucumán, which on 9 July, 1816, proclaimed the independence of Argentina, and in this assemblage distinguished himself by resolutely opposing the monarchical form of government for the infant nation. He died in 1838, and a handsome bronze statue has been erected to him in the principal square of the city of San Juan. He was succeeded by: José Manuel Eufracio de Quiroga Sarmiento, who died on 25 Jan., 1852; Fray Nicolás Aldazor, died in 1866; Fray José Wenceslav Achaval, who founded the seminary and established the cathedral chapter, and died on 25 Feb., 1898; and the present incumbent, Fray Marcolino del Carmelo Benavente, to whom is due the erection of the statue of Christ the Redeemer at the crest of the Andes, on the boundary line between Chile and Argentina, as a symbol of peace and good will between the two nations. Mgr. Benavente was born at Buenos Aires on 17 Aug., 1845; entered the Dominicans, and was appointed bishop on 7 Jan., 1899. There are four Catholic primary schools for boys, seventeen schools for girls, and one Catholic agricultural college in the Diocese. A catholic daily paper, "El Porvenir", is published at San Juan, and ranks highest among the daily papers of the entire province. There are one or more confraternities attached to all parish churches to encourage piety and devotion. Among the notable edifices of the diocese may he mentioned: the episcopal palace and the Church of San Domingo in San Juan; those of San Francisco, Sagrado Corazón, and Godoy Cruz in Mendoza; and the Matriz of San Louis. At the present time a project has been laid before the National Congress to divide this diocese into three, viz., San Juan, San Luis, and Mendoza. ISIDRO FERNÁNDEZ Sankt Poelten Sankt Pölten Diocese in Lower Austria, derives its name and origin from Fanum Sancti Hippolyti, a monastery founded there in the ninth century and dedicated to St. Hippolytus. The origin of this monastery is obscure. Some think that monks from Lake Tegernsee in Bavaria founded a Benedictine abbey on the Traisen in 791, when Charlemagne united a part of the territory of the Avars with his empire, and Passau took this district as a mission field. In the ninth century Sankt Pölten was the eastern limit of Christian civilization, the only monastery east of the Enns. It is said that the monastery was transferred to secular canons in 985, and in 1080 the great reformer Altmann of Passau replaced these by Reformed Augustinian Canons. The first provost was Engelbert. The bishops of Passau attached much importance to the spiritual and material improvement of this important support of their power in the east. Hefele in his "Konziliengeschichte" (VI, pt. II, 230-2) gives the decisions of the synod that Bishop Gottfried of Passau held at Sankt Pölten in 1284. These were of importance: if a priest celebrates solemnly the wedding of his son or his daughter, he is to be suspended; the secular clergy, pastors, vicars, and chaplains must confess their more serious sins to the dean, the latter to the bishop or archdeacon; everyone may confess less serious sins and negligences to whom he will. Annates are mentioned even at this early date; "the first year of the episcopal collation of vacant churches is used for the church at Passau". Another synod was held at Sankt Pölten ten years later. Soon after this (1306) the city came very near destruction. As in other places stories were current of sacrilegious acts of Jews, especially of pierced and bleeding Hosts. These tales led to the founding of churches of the Sacred Blood; and at Sankt Pölten, as elsewhere, the Jews were robbed and murdered. Only the intercession of Bishop Wernhart prevailed upon King Albert I not to destroy the city. When the Reformation began, the monastery of Augustinian Canons was not strong enough to withstand it; in 1565 there were only three canons. Aid, however, was given by Klesl (q.v.) and the Jesuits, through whose efforts many citizens were converted. Part of one of Klesl's sermons is preserved in the city archives: "Behold, for a thousand years the pictures of your forefathers holding rosaries in their hands have stood in this church". In 1706 the first settlement of the Institute of Mary (q.v.) was made at Sankt Pölten, whence they had been called from Munich by the vice-president of the Government of Lower Austria, Jakob Freiherr von Kriechbaum. At the same time Carmelite nuns settled there. They were later suppressed by the Emperor Joseph II, and the same fate befell the monastery of Augustinian canons. The fifty-ninth and last provost was Ildefons Schmidtbauer. The emperor took the monastery for the episcopal residence and the monastery church for the cathedral. As the Diocese of Wiener-Neustadt reached almost to the capital, Vienna, Joseph II united its territory with the Archdiocese of Vienna, and transferred its bishop to Sankt Pölten. A new diocese was established at Linz and both bishops were made suffragans of the Archbishop of Vienna. Since 1785 Sankt Pölten has had thirteen bishops, each episcopate averaging less than ten years. A popular tradition relating that the last provost had predicted that no bishop would reign over ten years was, however, disproved by the tenth bishop, Feigerle, who reigned eleven years. Some of the bishops have been very distinguished: Sigismund, Count Hohenwart, who was tutor of the Emperor Francis and the Archduke Charles and became Prince Archbishop of Vienna; the court preachers Jakob Frint, Michael Wagner, and Ignaz Feigerle; above all Joseph Fessler, the learned professor, skilful diplomatist, and secretary of the Vatican Council (d. 1872). In 1836 Johann Leonhard resigned the bishopric. At present the diocese has two seminaries for boys, which train candidates for the priesthood. Fessler united one of these seminaries with the seminary at the Benedictine Abbey of Seitenstetten; the other was established at Melk by the present Bishop Johann Rössler. In 1908 Rössler held the first diocesan synod of the independent Bishopric of Sankt Pölten; the important constitutions and acts of this synod have been printed. The Diocese of Sankt Pölten contains 620,000 Catholics; 479 secular priests; 505 members of male orders in 16 houses; and 874 members of female orders in 94 branch houses. Felgel and Lampel. Urkundenbuch des Chorherrenstiftes Sankt Pölten (2 vols., Vienna, 1891-1901); Kerschbaumer, Gesch. des Bistums St. Pölten (2 vols., Vienna, 1875-76); Idem, Jubiläumskatalog aller Diözesangeistlichen seit einem Jahrh. (1885); Erdinger, Diözesan-Nekrologium. Geschichtliche Beilagen Zu den Kurrenden der Diözese (Vienna, 1885); Idem, Bibliographie des Klerus der Diözese St. Pölten (Vienna, 1889); Fohringer, Das soziale Wirken der katholischen Kirche in St. Pölten (Vienna, 1900). C. WOLFSGRUBER San Leon Del Amazonas San León del Amazonas Prefecture Apostolic in Peru. Though the section of Peru lying on the eastern side of the Andes was comprised in the Dioceses of Ayacucho, Chachapoyas, Cuzco, and Huanuco, yet there were many pagan Indian tribes, formerly evangelized by the Jesuits, living outside of the sphere of civilization, roaming through the forests subject to no laws. Moved by their pitiable condition the Peruvian bishops, with the approval of the Government, requested the Sacred Congregation of Propaganda, towards the close of the nineteenth century, to interest itself in their evangelization. As a result by a Decree of Propaganda, on 5 February 1900, the uncivilized eastern portion of the state known popularly as "la Montaña", was divided into three prefectures Apostolic depending directly on Propaganda, that of San León del Amazonas being the most northerly. It comprises the regions drained by the Río Marañón and the Amazon with their tributaries, except the Ryo Ucayaly, and extends to the frontiers of Ecuador, Colombia, and Brazil. To prevent controversies as to jurisdiction, which might arise with the existing sees, the mission territory, by the wording of the Decree of erection is to be coextensive with the uncivilized portions of the older dioceses. As the Indians are nomadic the missionaries have first, by teaching them the rudiments of agriculture, to overcome their wandering habits, and then strive to inculcate the fundamental truths of Christianity; but frequently when success seems to be crowning their efforts the savages yield to their roving instincts, and take again to their forest life. The mission, which is supported partly by the Government but chiefly by the Society of the Propagation of the Faith in Eastern Peru, is entrusted to the Augustinians and contains four priests, who depend directly on their father general. The superior, R. P. Paulín Diaz, resides at Iquitos; there are stations also at Peba and Puento Melander. Another was established at Huabica in 1903, but six months later it was destroyed by the Indians and the missionary martyred. (See PEBA INDIANS.) Missiones Catholicae (Rome, 1907); CHANTRE y HERRERA, Hist. de las missiones de la Compania de Jesus en el Maranon espanol, 1637-1767 (Madrid 1901). A.A. MACERLEAN San Luis Potosi San Luis Potosí (SANCTI LUDOVICI POTOSIENSIS) Diocese in Mexico, erected by Pius IX in 1854. It includes the State of San Luis Potosí, and a small portion of the State of Zacatecas. Its cathedral is richly decorated. The Church of Mount Carmel is a fine specimen of the Baroque style of architecture. Before the revolution there adjoined it a splendid Carmelite convent, a spacious orchard, and lands that extended to the sea, a distance of 400 miles. At present, part of the convent has been rebuilt and given to the Ladies of the Sacred Heart, who preside over a well-attended school. The sanctuary of Our Lady of Guadalupe is also a magnificent church. The first bishop was Don Pedro Barajas, who spent most of his episcopal life in exile. The second and third bishops had very brief episcopates The present (and fourth) bishop, Don Ignacio Montes de Oca y Obregón, rules in more peaceful times, and has been able to build a large seminary, where not only Mexican subjects, but also some students from the United States and Canada, receive a solid education, imparted by a choice staff of professors belonging to different orders and to the secular clergy. A school of arts and crafts has been founded under the Augustinian Fathers, also an orphan asylum and a Catholic hospital. The cathedral has its chapter canonically established; and there are 56 parishes with their churches and schools, and about three times as many chapels. The population of the diocese is (1910) 624,748, all Catholic, except perhaps some fifty foreigners. The capital, San Luis Potosí, has 82,946 inhabitants. Diocesan Archives; PEÑA, Historia de San Luis. J. MONTES DE OCA Y OBREGÓN San Marco and Bisignano San Marco and Bisignano (SANCTI MARCI ET BISINIANENSIS) Diocese in the Province of Cosenza in Calabria, Italy. San Marco Argentano (so called because it is near the ancient Argenta) was founded in the eleventh century by the Norman Drogo, who erected a high tower there. Bisignano is the ancient Besidias, or Besidianum, which in the eleventh century became the residence of a Norman count and later a fief of the Orsini. In 1467 Skanderberg's daughter, wife of the Prince of Bisignano, invited thither many Albanian families who established various colonies, spoke their own language, and used the Greek Rite. The first mention of a bishop is in 1179. Bisignano certainly had bishops in the tenth century, when mention is made of Ulutto in the life of St. Uilo di Rossano; Bishop Federico (1331) was killed in 1339. The two sees were united in 1818. The united dioceses are immediately subject to the Holy See, and contain 64 parishes, 256 priests, 110,000 inhabitants, some convents of religious, and a house of nuns. CAPPELLETTI, Le chiese d'Italia, XXI (Venice, 1857). U. BENIGNI San Marino San Marino An independent republic lying between the Italian Provinces of Forli, Pasaro, and Urbino, having an area of 38 sq. miles and a population of 10,000. Its chief resources are agriculture and the growing of vines. The government is carried on by two consuls or captains-regent, elected for six months from the members of the General Council, composed of sixty members elected for life from the nobles, the burgesses, and the rural landowners, in equal numbers. The council has legislative powers; from its members is selected the Council of Twelve, which is the supreme court. The Kingdom of Italy, by the Acts of 22 March, 1862, recognized the independence of the republic, and has retained friendly relations with it, the Sanmarinese currently being accepted in the kingdom. The territory extends over seven hills, on the highest of which, Il Titano, the city of San Marino is built. There are nine communes, including the capital, and as many more parishes, some of which belong to the Diocese of Montefeltro, and the others to Rimini. The Palace of the Supreme Council, containing paintings by Guido Reni, is worthy of notice. According to the legend, St. Marinus, a stonecutter, came to the mountain about A.D. 350 to ply his trade and spread the truths of Christianity. Monte Titano belonged to Felicissima, a Riminese lady, who at her death bequeathed it to the mountaineers, recommending them to remain always united. San Marino, however, in the Lombard age, belonged to the Duchy of Spoleto; in the tenth century the abbots of the monastery were under the civil government, but they soon freed themselves and formed a free commune. The Holy See recognized the independence of San Marino in 1291. In quick succession the lords of Montefeltro, the Malatesta of Rimini, and the lords of Urbino attempted to conquer the little town, but without success. When the inhabitants aided Pius II against Sigismondo Malatesta, the pope granted the republic some castles. In 1503, but only for a few months, it formed part of the possessions of Cesar Borgia. In the same century some feudatory lords attempted its liberty; the last effort being made by Cardinal Giulio Alberoni, legate of Ravenna, who in 1739, aiding certain rebels, contrary to the orders of Clement XII, invaded the republic, imposed a new constitution, and endeavored to force the Sanmarinese to submit to the Government of the Pontifical States. Twice in the nineteenth century (1825 and 1853) similar attempts were made. The celebrated archaeologist Bartolomeo Borghesi was a native of San Marino. U. BENIGNI San Martino Al Cimino San Martino al Cimino A prelature nullius in the territory of the Diocese of Viterbo, Province of Rome. The district is about 1840 feet above sea-level, on the western slope of Monte Fogliano in the Cimini mountains, amidst an extensive forest of chestnut trees. It is much frequented as a health resort. The principal dignitary of the collegiate chapter has the title of abbot, and his jurisdiction extends only over the commune of San Martino, which consists of only one parish. In early times it was a Benedictine abbey, first mentioned under Benedict VIII (eleventh century). In 1150 it was entrusted by Eugenius III to the Cistercians of St-Sulpice near Belley; in 1207 it came into the possession of the monks of Pontigny, who (under Abbot John, 1213-32) raised it to a state of great prosperity. After 1379 the abbots were always commendatory; in 1564 it was included in the mensa of St. Peter's chapter. In 1645 the castle and the abbey buildings were acquired by Olimpia Pamphili, sister of Innocent X, who established a still existing collegiate chapter. The Gothic church possesses architectural interest. EGIDI in Riv. storica benedettina (1906-7). Concerning the church see FROTHINGHAM in American Journal of Archeology (1890), 299 sqq. U. BENIGNI San Miniato San Miniato A city and diocese in the Province of Florence, Central Italy. It is first mentioned in the eighth century as a "vicus Wallari", where there was an oratory of S. Miniato, the celebrated martyr St. Mennas. From the eleventh century the inhabitants of this town were frequently at war with those of S. Genesio, a neighbouring city, where many councils and assemblies of the nobles and cities of Tuscany were held (1074, Council of S. Peter Igneus; 1197, Treaty of S. Genesio between Celestine III and the Tuscan cities). The inhabitants of San Miniato were of the imperial party and the town was frequently occupied by German soldiers; the emperors granted them many privileges. In 1248 S. Genesio was completely destroyed. In 1397 the town was taken by Florence. From 1248 the chapter was transferred from S. Genesio to S. Miniato, and in 1526 the head of the chapter obtained the episcopal dignity. In 1408 the Republic of Florence wished to have it made an episcopal see, being then a suffragan of Lucca. Finally in 1622 it became a diocese. Its first bishop was Franceseo Nori (1624). The diocese is a suffragan of Florence and contains 100 parishes with 240 secular and 42 regular priests; 108,000 souls; 5 convents of men, 13 convents of nuns, with 7 educational establishments for girls. RONDONI, Memorie storiche de S. Miniato al Tedesco (Venice 1877); CAPPELLETTI, Le chiese d'Italia, XVII (Venice, 1844). U. BENIGNI Jacopo Sannazaro Jacopo Sannazaro (Latin, ACTIUS SINCERUS SANNAZARIUS). Italian and Latin poet, b. at Naples, 28 July, 1458; d. at Rome, in Aug., 1530. He belonged to a family of Spanish origin, in the service of Charles III, of Durazzo, holding the fief of Rocca di Mondragone from the end of the fourteenth century. He received the name by which he was known because he was born on the feast of St. Nazarius. Having lost his father at an early age, he lived in Nocera dei Pagani with his mother; returning later to Naples he studied with Pontanus and was a member of the academy which assembled about this scholar. In this group he received the name of Sincerus by which he is often mentioned in the letters of the times. He was closely allied with the princes of Aragon at Naples and followed Fedirico into the exile to which he was driven by Louis XII, King of France (1521). Relying on the generosity of the French king, Federico established himself at Tours, and Sannazaro remained with him until his death (9 Sept., 1504). During this time Sannazaro discovered a MS. containing the hitherto unknown works of Latin poets, the fragment of the "Halieutica" ascribed to Ovid by Pliny the Elder, the "Cynegetica" of Grattius Faliscus, Nemesianus, and Rutilius Namatianis. MS. 227 of Vienna is actually the portion of this MS. which contained the "Halieutica" and Grattius. MS. 3261 of Vienna is only a sixteenth-century copy of Nemesianus and Rutilius. On returmug to his own country Sannazaro left it no more. In his old age he had the sorrow of seeing his villa of Tore di Mergoglino destroyed by the imperial forces. He had just rebuilt it when died. In his youth Sannazaro wrote a work in mingled verse and prose entitled "Arcadia", in which he described the pastoral life according to the traditions of the ancients. This work had great success; it was translated and imitated, and in the sixteenth century had about sixty editions; the first was at Venice, 12 May, 1502. The "Arcadia" gave rise to the pastoral style of writing much cultivated in Italy and elsewhere. A scholarly edition was issued by Scherillo (Turin, 1888). Sannazaro's other Italian poems were sonnets and canzoni. All were collected by Gallipoli (Padua, 1723). A correspondent of Paulus Manutius mentions another work called "Gliomero", now lost. A work entitled "Farsa" affords an idea of it. It consisted of detached scenes of a popular character, written in the Neapolitan dialect, and intended to amuse the king's Court. Sannazaro's poetical reputation was formerly founded on his Latin works: the "Ecologiae piscatoriae", bucolic verses concerning fishers, elegies and epigrams containing interesting details concerning the life of the poet and contemporaries, his mistresses, Carmosina, Bonifacia, and Cassandra, and which are the best evidences of his sentiments; "Salices", account of metamorphosis; and especially the "De partu Virginis", a poem in three cantos which cost him twenty years of labor and won him the name of the Christian Virgil. These works show that he was a diligent imitator of Ovid and Virgil. The Christian poem is a mixture of the antique and the modern, of mythology and Biblical reminiscenses. Digressions often far from happy are inserted as ornaments, for instance in connection with the ass of the manger Sannazaro reviews all the legends in which the ass has played a part. He also abuses allegorical personifications. The poem, praised by Leo X before it was known, is dedicated to Clement VII, who covered it with praise. Sannazaro's Latin works were published by Volpi (Padua, 1719) and Janus Bronkhusius (1728). BELON, De Sannazarii vita et operibus (Paris, 1895); SANDYS, A History of Classical Scholarship, II (Cambridge, 1908), 90; SABBADINI, La scoperte dei codici latini e greci (Florence, 1905), 140; CAMPAUX, De ecloga piscatoria qualem a veteribus adumbratam absolvere sibi proposuerit Sannazarius (Paris, 1859); NUNZIANTE, Un divorzio ai tempi di Leone X (Rome, 1887); TORRACA, Jacopo Sannazaro (Naples, 1879). PAUL LEJAY San Salvador San Salvador The name given by Columbus to his first discovery in the New World. It is one of the Bahama group of islands, and lies to the east of the southern extremity of Florida in 24° north lat. and 75° west long. It is also known under its Indian name of Guanahani. There has been endless discussion as to exactly which one of the Bahamas was first discovered by Columbus, and it is probable that men will never quite agree. All that can be said positively is that the first land discovered by him was one of the Bahamas. Different writers have at different times claimed the distinction for Cat Island, Samana, Mariguana, Grand Turk, and Watling's Island. The name San Salvador was given to Cat Island during the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries, but it does not fit the description given by Columbus in as much as it is not low and level and has no interior lagoon. A noteworthy attempt to prove that Samana was the landfall was made by Captain Gustavus V. Fox, of the United States Navy, in the "Report of the United States Coast Survey" for 1880. Navarrete first advocated Grand Turk Island in 1826, and Varnhagen in 1864 wrote a paper advocating Mariguana. The weight of modern testimony, however, seems to favor Watling's Island. Lieutenant J. B. Murdoch an American naval officer, made a careful study of the subject, and found that in Columbus's description there were more points of resemblance in Watling's Island than in any other of the group. Among others whose opimon carries weight, and who are advocates of Watling's Island, are Major, the map-custodian of the British Museum, and the eminent geographer, Clements R. Markham. See bibliography of COLUMBUS. VENTURA FUENTES San Salvador San Salvador (SANCTI SALVATORIS IN AMERICA CENTRALI) Diocese. The Republic of Salvador, often incorrectly called San Salvador from the name of its capital, is the smallest and most thickly populated state of Central America. It is bounded on the W. by Guatemala, on the N. and E. by Honduras, on the S. by the Pacific Ocean. It lies between 92° 26´ 55´´ and 89° 57´ W. long., and 14° 27´ 20´´ and 13° 2´ 22´´ N. lat., being 50 miles long and 186 miles broad. It is 7225 square miles in area and is divided politically into 14 departments. The population in 1906 was 1,116,253, of whom 772,200 were Ladinos (mixed Spanish and Indian blood), and 224,648 Indians, the latter being principally Pipils, but partly Chontalli. The chief towns are San Salvador (59,540), Santa Anna (48,120), San Miguel (24,768), and Nueva San Salvador (18,770); the chief port is La Union (4000). With the exception of a narrow alluvial seaboard Salvador is a high plateau, intersected by mountains containing many volcanoes, five of which are active. The most remarkable of the latter, Izalco, popularly called the "Lighthouse of Salvador" from its almost continual eruptions (three to each hour), broke out in a small plain on 23 February, 1770, and has now a cone over 6000 feet high. Earthquakes are frequent and San Salvador has often suffered, especially on 16 April, 1854, when the entire city was levelled in ten seconds. Salvador is rich in minerals, gold, silver, copper, mercury, and coal being mined. The chief imports, which in 1909 had a value of $4,176,931 (gold), are machinery, woollens, cottons, drugs, hardware; the chief exports besides minerals are indigo, sugar, coffee, and Peruvian balsam, valued at $16,963,000 (silver). Railroads connect the capital with Santa Tecla and the port of Acajutla. Education is free and compulsory but very backward. There are about 600 primary schools, with 30,000 enrolled pupils, 20 high schools (3 normal, and 3 technical), and a university at San Salvador with faculties of engineering, law, medicine, pharmacy, and dentistry. The National Library (founded 1867) has 20,000 volumes; a National Museum was established in 1903. Salvador was invaded by Pedro Alvarado in 1524, emancipated from Spain in 1821, and made part of the Federation of Central America in 1824. In 1839 it became free. Its Constitution finally adopted in 1886 provides for a president elected for four years, with a right to nominate four secretaries of State, and a National Assembly of 70 members, 42 of whom are landholders, all elected by universal male suffrage. Catholicism is the state religion, but the civil authorities are hostile and have confiscated the sources of church revenue. San Salvador on the Rio Acelhuate in the valley of Las Hamacas was founded in 1528, but rebuilt in 1539, about twenty miles south of its first site; the diocese, erected on 28 September, 1842, is suffragan of Santiago of Guatemala, and contains 589 churches and chapels, 190 secular and 45 regular clergy, 70 nuns, 89 parishes, 3 colleges for boys and 3 for girls, and a Catholic population of over 1,000,000; the present bishop, who succeeded Mgr. Carcamo, is Mgr. Antonio Adolfo PÈrez y Aguilar, born at San Salvador, 20 March, 1839, and appointed on 13 January, 1888. Salvador: Bulletin of the Bureau of American Republics (Washington, 1892); Reyes, Nociones de historia del Salvador (San Salvador, 1886); Pector, Notice sur le Salvador (Paris, 1889); GonsÁlez, Datos sobre la república de El Salvador (San Salvador, 1901); Keane, Central America, II (London, 1901), 183-94. A.A. MACERLEAN Piero Da San Sepolcro Piero da San Sepolcro Painter, b. at Borgo San-Sepolcro, about 1420; d. there, 1492. The most usual form of his name is the traditional one, PIERO DELLA FRANCESCA, which is better authenticated in contemporary documents than what in late research had been supposed to be the more correct form, PIERO DEI FRANCESCHI (Gronau, "Repertorium fur Kunstwissenschaft", xxiii, 392-4). He was the son of a notary, Ser Benedetto, a member of an influential family long identified with the government of the town—the Franceschi. His earliest artistic training is unknown, but he was active at Perugia in 1438, probably as an assistant to Domenico Veneziano, and he was certainly employed in the same capacity in the Church of Sant' Egidio, Florence, in 1439-40. To Domenico and probably also to Paolo Uccello, Florentine Realists who did much for the technical side of painting, we may ascribe the formative influence in his art. Piero first appears as an independent master in 1445, when he painted a still surviving altar-piece of many panels for the Brotherhood of the Misericordia in his native town. He is said to have laboured with Domenico at Loreto, and he was certainly at Rimini in 1451, when he painted a remarkable fresco in the chapel of San Francesco, representing Sigismondo Malatesta, Lord of Rimini, venerating his patron saint, Sigismund. After this he was active at Ferrara and Bologna, and, according to Vasari, he also decorated a room of the Vatican for Pope Nicholas V. In 1454 he was again at Borgo San-Sepolcro, where in 1460 he painted a fresco of St. Louis of Toulouse, now preserved in the town hall. It was probably between this date and 1466 that he painted his masterpiece, the frescoes in the choir of San Francesco at Arezzo, which may, however, have been begun earlier. The subject is the "Story of the True Cross", involving incidents beginning with Adam and including the story of Solomon and the Queen of Sheba, Constantine and St. Helena, Heraclius and Chosroes. These frescoes rank with those by Masaccio in the Brancacci Chapel as epoch-making in the decorative art of the fifteenth century. In the spring of 1469 Piero was at Urbino, lodging in the house of Giovanni Santi, the father of Raphael, in which city a large part of his later activity occurred. From this period probably dates the remarkable diptych of the Uffizi, containing the portraits of the Duke (then Count) of Urbino, the ideal prince of the Renaissance, and the mild and refined image of his wife, Battista Sforza, with allegorical triumphs of these rulers on the reverse sides. About this time he also painted the well-known "Madonna" with saints and angels, venerated by the Duke of Urbino, now in the Brera, Milan; and the "Flagellation of Christ", a beautiful architectural composition in the cathedral of Urbino. According to a well-established tradition recorded by Vasari, Piero became blind in later life. At this time he wrote his celebrated treatises: "De quinque corporibus regularibus", which show him as a great geometrician, and his "Prospettiva Pingendi" (Treatise on Perspective), a manual for painters. This work reveals him as the greatest master of the theory of perspective in his day, and gave him a reputation beyond Italy. His testament is recorded 5 July, 1478, and he was interred in the present cathedral of his native town in 1492. His principal frescoes, besides those mentioned, include: the "Resurrection," in the town hall of Borgo San-Sepolcro, a marvelous piece of foreshortening and perspective; a "Hercules", now in the possession of Mrs. J. L. Gardner of Boston; and an imposing "Magdalen" in the cathedral of Arezzo. Among his panel pieces are the "Triumph of Chivalry" (New York Historical Society); the "Baptism of Christ" and the "Nativity", both in the National Gallery, London, the latter the first moonlight scene in modern painting; an "Annunciation" in the Gallery at Perugia; "St. Michael" in London; and "St. Thomas Aquinas" in the Poldo-Pezzoli Museum at Milan. The charming "Portrait of a Young Girl" attributed to him in this gallery, as well as similar portraits in other European galleries, is now generally ascribed to another artist. Piero's position in the development of Italian art is a unique and important one. He is the greatest of that group of pathfinders, the Realists, whose scientific experiments created the grammar of modern painting. In mural painting he towers above his contemporaries as the worthy successor of Masaccio, and the connecting link between his art and that of Raphael. In the Central Italian painting of the Renaissance his position was a dominant one; he may be called the founder of the school. The chief masters of the following generation—Perugino and the rest—either studied under or were influenced by him. Of his more intimate pupils, Melozzo da Forli carried perspective to the highest perfection, while Luca Signorelli developed figure-painting to the greatest excellence attained before Michelangelo. To Florentine excellence of draughtmanship Piero united the superior colour sense of the Umbrians. Most remarkable was his rendition of light and air, in which he easily surpassed his contemporaries. His types are seldom beautiful, but they are strong and primeval, admirably modelled, and as impassive as the sculptures at the Parthenon. Perhaps the most striking feature of his art is this wonderful objectivity, in which regard he stands rivalled by Holbein and Velazquez alone in modern painting. VASARI, Vite, ed. MILANESI (1878); tr. BLASHFIELD AND HOPKINS (1897). Of the biographies of Piero that by PICHI (Borgo San-Sepolcro, 1893) is rather a panegyric; that of WITTING (Strasburg, 1898) is the most scholarly; another is by WATERS (London, 1901); RICCI, Piero della Francesca (Rome, 1910), is best for illustrations. GEORGE KRIEHN San Severino San Severino (SANCTI SEVERINI) San Severino is a small town and seat of a bishopric in the Province of Macerata in the Marshes, Central Italy. It has two cathedrals, the ancient one near the old castle, which contains precious quattrocento paintings and inlaid stalls in the choir. The new cathedral, dating from 1821, is the old Augustinian church and contains paintings from Pinturicchio (Madonna), Antonio and Gian Gentile da S. Severino, Pomarancio, and others. The Churches of S. Domenico and S. Francesco are also adorned with fine pictures; the Church of S. Maria in Doliolo, formerly a Benedictine monastery, has a crypt believed to be the ancient temple of Feronia converted later into a church. The two sanctuaries of S. M. del Glorioso and S. Maria dei Lumi are worthy of note. The most important civic building is the communal palace, which contains some halls richly decorated and a collection of ancient inscriptions. S. Severino stands on the site of the ancient Septempeda, a city of Picenum, later a Roman colony. In the eighth century it was a fortress of the Duchy of Spoleto. The Church of San Severino gave its name later to a new town that grew up around it. In the twelfth and thirteenth centuries it was at constant war with the neighbouring cities, especially with Camerino, and always supported the cause of the emperors, particularly of Frederick II. Louis the Bavarian named as vicar of San Severino Smeduccio della Scala, who, passing into the service of the Holy See, gave great help to the expedition of Cardinal Albornoz and became feudal lord of San Severino, a post held later by his son Onofrio. His nephew Antonio paid with his life for attempting to resist the arms of Pietro Colonna, the representative of Martin V; his sons tried in vain to recapture the city (1434), which remained immediately subject to the Holy See. Among its illustrious sons were: the lacquer-workers Indovino and Giovanni di Pier Giacomo, the poet Panfilo, the physician Eustacchi, the condottiere Francuccio da S. Severino, and the Franciscan, Saint Pacifico. A local legend attributes the preaching of the Gospel to a holy priest, Maro. Under the high altar of the cathedral are the relics of Sts. Hippolytus and Justinus. The saint from whom the city takes its name is commonly believed to have been Bishop of Septempeda, but his date is unknown. In the Middle Ages S. Severino was suffragan of Camerino; the old cathedral was then a collegiate church. In 1566 it had a seminary. In 1586 Sixtus V made it an episcopal see, the first bishop being Orazio Marzari. Among his successors were: Angelo Maldacchini, O. P. (1646); Alessandro Calai Organi (1702), the restorer of the seminary; Angelo Antonio Anselmi (1792), exiled in 1809. The diocese is a suffragan of Fermo, and has 29 parishes with 18,000 inhabitants, 3 houses of nuns, and 5 of religious men. GENTILI, De ecclesia septempedina (Macerata, 1830), 8. IDEM., Sopra gli Smeducci vicari per Santa Chiesa in S. Severino (Macerata, 1841); CAPPELLETTI, Le chiese d'Italia, III Venice, 1854). U. BENIGNI Gaetano Sanseverino Gaetano Sanseverino Restorer of the Scholastic philosophy in Italy, b. at Naples, 1811; d. there of cholera, 16 Nov., 1865. He made his studies in the seminary at Nola, where his uncle was rector. After his ordination, he continued the study of philosophy, with the special view of comparing the various systems. He became a canon of the cathedral of Naples, professor of logic and metaphysics in the seminary substitute-professor of ethics in the university, and eventually scrittore in the National Library. Sanseverino had been educated in the Cartesian system, which at that time prevailed in the ecclesiastical schools of Italy, but his comparative study of the various systems supplied him with a deeper knowledge of the Scholastics, particularly St. Thomas, and of the intimate connection between their doctrine and that of the Fathers. From that time until the end of his life, his only concern was the restoration of Christian philosophy, in which, not only by his writings, but by his lectures and conversation, he was of supreme assistance to Leo XIII. With this object, he founded, in 1840, "La Scienza e la Fede", a periodical which was continued until 1887 by his disciples and associates, Signoriello and d'Amelio. His principal work is "Philosophia christiana cum antiqua et nova comparata" (5 vols., Naples, 1862). This work is incomplete, covering only logic and psychology, but one hardly knows whether to admire most its lucidity of exposition, its copiousness of argument, or the vast number of authors cited and discussed. His first work on a large scale, and that which assured his reputation as a teacher, was "I principali sistemi della filosofia del criterio, discussi colla dottrina de' Santi Padri e de' Dottori del Medio Evo" (Naples, 1850-53), in which he discusses and confutes the systems of Hume and Gioberti on the criterion of truth. Another important work of his is "La dottrina di S. Tommaso sull' origine del potere e sul preteso diritto di resistenza" (on the origin of authority and the pretended right of resistance) (Naples, 1853). "Elementa philosophiæ christianæ" (Naples, 1864-70) was written for the use of his classes, the last volume (Ethics) being edited by his disciple Signoriello. Besides the two already mentioned, his disciples included Talamo, Prisco (now a cardinal) Cacace, Galvanese, and Giustiniani. Proverita, Del Canonico Gaetano Sanseverino (Naples, 1867). U. BENIGNI San Severo San Severo (SANCTI SEVERINI) Diocese in the Province of Foggia (Capitanata), Southern Italy, situated in a fertile plain, watered by the Radicosa and Triolo. The origin of the city is obscure. Under the Normans it became the residence of a prince, then passed under the Benedictines of Torre Maggiore, later under the Templars, on whose suppression it was disamortized. It suffered frequently from earthquakes, especially in 1627, 1828, and 1851. The Diocese of San Severo was established in 1580. The episcopal see is only the continuation of that of Civitate, which in turn succeeded the ancient city of Teanum. Civitate, where the papal troops were defeated by the Normans in 1052, was an episcopal see in 1062 under Amelgerio. Among the bishops of Civitate were: Fra Lorenzo da Viterbo, O.P. (1330), a distinguished theologian; Luca Gaurico (1545), a distinguished astronomer; Franc. Alciato (1561), later a cardinal. In 1580 the first occupant of the See of San Severo was Martino de Martini, a Jesuit; other bishops are: Fabrizio Verallo (1606), nuncio in Switzerland, later a cardinal; Franc. Venturi (1625), a distinguished canonist and defender of the rights of the Church; Orazio Fortunati (1670), who restored the cathedral; Carlo Felice de Mata (1678), founder of the seminary, which was enlarged by two of his successors, Carlo Franc. Giacoli (1703) and Fra Diodato Sommantico (1720), an Augustinian. To this diocese was added later the territory of the ancient Dragonaria, a city built in 1005 by the Byzantine Governor of Apulia. Cappelletti gives the names of twenty-eight bishops between 1061 and 1657. It seems never to have been formally suppressed. The diocese is suffragan of Benevento, and has 7 parishes, about 46,000 inhabitants, and 6 religious houses. Cappelletti, Le chiese d'Italia, XIX (Venice, 1857). U. BENIGNI Andrea Contucci Del Sansovino Andrea Contucci del Sansovino Born at Monte San Sovino, Arezzo, 1460; died 1529. He was a sculptor of the transition period at the end of the fifteenth and beginning of the sixteenth century, and showed the qualities of the transition in his style. He worked at first in his native town and in Florence, then for about eight years in Portugal. His best sculptures were produced in Florence and Rome after his return. The "Baptism of Christ", a marble group in the baptistery of Florence, contains very effective figures finely contrasted. The monuments of Cardinals Basso and Sforza Visconti in the Church of Santa Maria del Popolo at Rome are also striking. They prove that he was able to combine what he had fully learned from antiquity with the art of the mature early Renaissance. The central and chief niche stands upon a high pedestal between Corinthian pillars; above the round arch of this niche is an attic, that supports the figure of God the Father upon a shell throne with a genius at each side. In the central niche the dead are represented asleep, their heads resting upon their arms, awaiting resurrection; above them in the vault of the niche is a figure of the Blessed Virgin, on a smaller scale. In and above side niches are the cardinal virtues, which rise upwards towards the genii just mentioned. The unity in the conception of the structure and the rich decoration of the details show great skill in art. It has been often asserted that there is a touch of the spirit of Raphael in the combination of dignified repose and subdued movement in the figures. Sansovino had a great task given him in the Casa Santa of Loreto, where he was to produce nine reliefs and twenty-two statues. Bramante had encased the Casa with a marble covering, architecturally very fine, which was designed to have rich plastic ornament. Sansovino was only able to make a few of the reliefs, such as the "Annunciation" and the "Birth of Christ", the other reliefs and statuettes were made by his assistants and successors. Among these pupils was Andrea Tatti (about 1480-1570) of Florence, who took the name of his master Sansovino. During the forty later years of his long life he was, next to Titian, one of the most distinguished artists of Venice. In Venice he represents the second epoch of the grand style in art, and was the head of a clearly defined school. Among his first works were a statue of St. James, at Florence, which, with the exception of a somewhat unnatural pose, has striking qualities, and a Bacchus entirely in the antique style, also at Florence. Among his works at Rome is the celebrated "Madonna del Prato" in the Church of San Agostino. At Venice he adopted a style more akin to painting, which is pleasant in small works, especially if movement and animation are expressed. Among works of this class are the statuettes of Pallas, Apollo, Mercury, Pax, the relief of Phrixos and Helle which adorns the small loggia he built on the campanile, a terra-cotta Madonna, formerly gilded, placed within the campanile, a statue of Hope, and a group containing the Madonna in the palace of the Doges. The colossal statues of Mars and Neptune in front of this palace are less successful. The bronze reliefs around the choir of San Marco, and the bronze doors of the sacristy of the same, however, show pictorial beauty. Sansovino made for the Chapel of St. Anthony at Padua a marble relief in the grand style; it represents the bringing back to life of one who had been drowned, and contains extraordinary contrasts of graceful and repellent figures. As an architect, Jacopo adopted much from the style of Bramante, and in architecture as well as in sculpture brought much of the Roman Cinquecento to Venice. His chief architectural work, the public library, has always been greatly admired on account of its classic form, rich decoration, and wholly pictorial arrangement. It displays a double order of columns, Tuscan and Ionic, over which is a rich frieze and a balustrade with statues. One of his most beautiful decorative works is the small loggia mentioned before. The best of the churches he built is San Georgio de' Greci; it has always been greatly admired for its fine work in marble. Another building of tasteful construction that is ascribed to Sansovino is the Palazzo Corner della Cà Grande. Sansovino gathered about him a large number of assistants, who executed the decorations of the buildings he erected. These buildings were architecturally entirely in accordance with Venetian taste. Thus he was universally regarded in Venice as a master of the first rank, and felt himself completely at home there, although at first he had thought of going to France. CICOGNARA, Storia della Scultura, II (Prato, 1823); SCHONFELD, A. Sansovino und seine Schule (Stuttgart, 1881); PERKINS, Italian Sculptors (London, 1868); Le fabbriche di Venezia, I (Venice, 1815); MOLINIER, Venise, ses arts decoratifs (Paris, 1889). G. GIETMANN Diocese of Santa Agata Dei Goti Diocese of Santa Agata dei Goti (S. AGATHAE GOTHORUM) In the Province of Benevento, Southern Italy; the city, situated on a hill at the base of Monte Taburno, contains an ancient castle. In the vicinity are many antiquities and inscriptions belonging to the ancient Saticula, a town taken from the Samnites by the Romans and made a Latin colony in 313. The present name is derived possibly from a body of Goths who took refuge there after the battle of Vesuvius (552); the church of the Goths in Rome, too, was dedicated to St. Agatha. In 866 Emperor Louis II captured it from the Byzantines who had taken it from the Duchy of Benevento; in 1066 it fell into the hands of the Normans. It was almost completely destroyed by an earthquake in 1456. Besides the Saticulan inscriptions there are two Christian inscriptions of the sixth century. It had already been an episcopal see for a long time when the first bishop, Madelfridus, was appointed (970); a metrical epitaph of his successor, Adelardus, is preserved in the Church of the Misericordia. Of the other bishops we may mention Felice Peretti (1566), later Sixtus V; Feliciano Ninguarda, O.P. (1583), visitor of the monasteries in Germany; Giulio Santucci, a Conventual (1595), and distinguished theologian; Filippo Albini (1699), who reformed the discipline and studies of his clergy; St. Alphonsus Liguori (1762-75). The diocese is suffragan of Benevento; it contains 26 parishes, 63 churches and chapels, 93 secular and 14 regular priests, 30,500 inhabitants, 3 houses of religious men and 6 of nuns, 1 institute for young boys, and 3 for young girls. CAPPELLETTI, Le chiese d'Italia, XIX (Venice, 1870); ANON., Memorie istoriche della citta di S. Agata dei Goti (Naples, 1841). U. BENIGNI Santa Casa di Loreto (Holy House of Loreto) Santa Casa di Loreto (The Holy House of Loreto). Since the fifteenth century, and possibly even earlier, the "Holy House" of Loreto has been numbered among the most famous shrines of Italy. Loreto is a small town a few miles south of Ancona and near the sea. Its most conspicuous building is the basilica. This dome-crowned edifice, which with its various annexes took more than a century to build and adorn under the direction of many famous artists, serves merely as the setting of a tiny cottage standing within the basilica itself. Though the rough walls of the little building have been raised in height and are cased externally in richly sculptured marble, the interior measures only thirty-one feet by thirteen. An altar stands at one end beneath a statue, blackened with age, of the Virgin Mother and her Divine Infant. As the inscription, Hic Verbum caro factum est, reminds us, this building is honoured by Christians as the veritable cottage at Nazareth in which the Holy Family lived, and the Word became incarnate. Another inscription of the sixteenth century which decorates the eastern facade of the basilica sets forth at greater length the tradition which makes this shrine so famous. "Christian pilgrim", it says, "you have before your eyes the Holy House of Loreto, venerable throughout the world on account of the Divine mysteries accomplished in it and the glorious miracles herein wrought. It is here that most holy Mary, Mother of God, was born; here that she was saluted by the Angel, here that the eternal Word of God was made Flesh. Angels conveyed this House from Palestine to the town Tersato in Illyria in the year of salvation 1291 in the pontificate of Nicholas IV. Three years later, in the beginning of the pontificate of Boniface VIII, it was carried again by the ministry of angels and placed in a wood near this hill, in the vicinity of Recanati, in the March of Ancona; where having changed its station thrice in the course of a year, at length, by the will of God, it took up its permanent position on this spot three hundred years ago [now, of course, more than 600]. Ever since that time, both the extraordinary nature of the event having called forth the admiring wonder of the neighbouring people and the fame of the miracles wrought in this sanctuary having spread far and wide, this Holy House, whose walls do not rest on any foundation and yet remain solid and uninjured after so many centuries, has been held in reverence by all nations." That the traditions thus boldly proclaimed to the world have been fully sanctioned by the Holy See cannot for a moment remain in doubt. More than forty- seven popes have in various ways rendered honour to the shrine, and an immense number of Bulls and Briefs proclaim without qualification the identity of the Santa Casa di Loreto with the Holy House of Nazareth. As lately as 1894 Leo XIII, in a Brief conceding various spiritual favours for the sixth centenary of the translation of the Santa Casa to Loreto, summed up its history in these words: "The happy House of Nazareth is justly regarded and honoured as one of the most sacred monuments of the Christian Faith; and this is made clear by the many diplomas and acts, gifts and privileges accorded by Our predecessors. No sooner was it, as the annals of the Church bear witness, miraculously translated to Italy and exposed to the veneration of the faithful on the hills of Loreto than it drew to itself the fervent devotion and pious aspiration of all, and as the ages rolled on, it maintained this devotion ever ardent." If, then, we would sum up the arguments which sustain the popular belief in this miraculous transference of the Holy House from Palestine to Italy by the hands of angels, we may enumerate the following points: (1) The reiterated approval of the tradition by many different popes from Julius II in 1511 down to the present day. This approval was emphasized liturgically by an insertion in the Roman Martyrologium in 1669 and the concession of a proper Office and Mass in 1699, and it has been ratified by the deep veneration paid to the shrine by such holy men as St. Charles Borromeo, St. Francis de Sales, St. Ignatius Loyola, St. Alphonsus Liguori, and many other servants of God. (2) Loreto has been for centuries the scene of numerous miraculous cures. Even the skeptical Montaigne in 1582 professed himself a believer in the reality of these (Waters, "Journal of Montaigne's Travels", II, 197-207). (3) The stone on which the original walls of the Santa Casa are built and the mortar used in their construction are not such as are known in the neighbourhood of Loreto. But both stone and mortar are, it is alleged, chemically identical with the materials most commonly found in Nazareth. (4) The Santa Casa does not rest and has never rested upon foundations sunk into the earth where it now stands. The point was formally investigated in 1751 under Benedict XIV. What was then found is therefore fully in accord with the tradition of a building transferred bodily from some more primitive site. It must be acknowledged, however, that recent historical criticism has shown that in other directions the Lauretan tradition is beset with difficulties of the gravest kind. These have been skilfully presented in the much-discussed work of Canon Chevalier, "Notre Dame de Lorette" (Paris, 1906). It is possible that the author has in some directions pressed his evidence too far and has perhaps overstated his case, but despite the efforts of such writers as Eschbach, Faloci-Pulignani, Thomas, and Kresser, the substance of his argument remains intact and has as yet found no adequate reply. The general contention of the work may be summarized under five heads: (1) From the accounts left by pilgrims and others it appears that before the time of the first translation (1291) there was no little cottage venerated at Nazareth which could correspond in any satisfactory way with the present Santa Casa at Loreto. So far as there was question at all in Nazareth of the abode in which the Blessed Virgin had lived, what was pointed out to pilgrims was a sort of natural cavern in the rock. (2) Oriental chronicles and similar accounts of pilgrims are absolutely silent as to any change which took place in 1291. There is no word of the disappearance at Nazareth of a shrine formerly held in veneration there. It is not until the sixteenth century that we find among Orientals any hint of a consciousness of their loss and then the idea was suggested from the West. (3) There are charters and other contemporary documents which prove that a church dedicated to the Blessed Virgin already existed at Loreto in the twelfth and thirteenth centuries, that is to say, before the epoch of the supposed translation. (4) When we eliminate certain documents commonly appealed to as early testimonies to the tradition, but demonstrably spurious, we find that no writer can be shown to have heard of the miraculous translation of the Holy House before 1472, i.e., 180 years after the event is supposed to have taken place. The shrine and church of Loreto are indeed often mentioned; the church is said by Paul II in 1464 to have been miraculously founded, and it is further implied that the statue or image of the Blessed Virgin was brought there by angels, but all this differs widely from details of the later accounts. (5) If the papal confirmations of the Loreto tradition are more closely scrutinized it will be perceived that not only are they relatively late (the first Bull mentioning the translation is that of Julius II in 1507), but that they are at first very guarded in expression, for Julius introduces the clause "ut pie creditur et fama est", while they are obviously dependent upon the extravagant leaflet compiled about 1472 by Teramano. It is clearly impossible to review here at any length the discussions to which Canon Chevalier's book has given rise. As a glance at the appended bibliography will show, the balance of recent Catholic opinion, as represented by the more learned Catholic periodicals, is strongly in his favour. The weight of such arguments as those drawn from the nature of the stone or brick (for even on this point there is no agreement) and the absence of foundations, is hard to estimate. As regards the date at which the translation tradition makes its appearance, much stress has recently been laid by its defenders upon a fresco at Gubbio representing angels carrying a little house, which is assigned by them to about the year 1350 (see Faloci-Pulignani, "La s. Casa di Loreto secondo un affresco di Gubbio", Rome, 1907). Also there are apparently other representations of the same kind for which an early date is claimed (see Monti in "La Scuola Cattolica", Nov. and Dec., 1910). But it is by no means safe to assume that every picture of angels carrying a house must refer to Loreto, while the assigning of dates to such frescoes from internal evidence is one of extreme difficulty. With regard to the papal pronouncements, it is to be remembered that in such decrees which have nothing to do with faith or morals or even with historical facts which can in any way be called dogmatic, theologians have always recognized that there is no intention on the part of the Holy See of defining a truth, or even of placing it outside the sphere of scientific criticism so long as that criticism is respectful and takes due regard of place and season. On the other hand, even if the Loreto tradition be rejected, there is no reason to doubt that the simple faith of those who in all confidence have sought help at this shrine of the Mother of God may often have been rewarded, even miraculously. Further it is quite unnecessary to suppose that any deliberate fraud has found a place in the evolution of this history. There is much to suggest that a sufficient explanation is afforded by the hypothesis that a miracle-working statue or picture of the Madonna was brought from Tersato in Illyria to Loreto by some pious Christians and was then confounded with the ancient rustic chapel in which it was harboured, the veneration formerly given to the statue afterwards passing to the building. Finally, we shall do well to notice that at Walsingham, the principal English shrine of the Blessed Virgin, the legend of "Our Lady's house" (written down about 1465, and consequently earlier than the Loreto translation tradition) supposes that in the time of St. Edward the Confessor a chapel was built at Walsingham, which exactly reproduced the dimensions of the Holy House of Nazareth. When the carpenters could not complete it upon the site that had been chosen, it was transferred and erected by angels' hands at a spot two hundred feet away (see "The Month", Sep., 1901). Curiously enough this spot, like Loreto, was within a short distance of the sea, and Our Lady of Walsingham was known to Erasmus as Diva Parathalassia. Of the older works on Loreto it will be sufficient to mention ANGELITA, Historia della Translatione etc. (first printed about 1579, but written in 1531). It is founded upon Baptista Mantuanus, Teramano, and a supposed "tabula, vetustate et carie consumpta". The official history of Loreto may be regarded as contained in TURSELLINUS, Lauretanae Historiae Libri V (Rome, 1697); and MARTORELLI, Teatro istorico della S. Casa nazarena (3 vols., fol., Rome, 1732-1735). In more modern times we have VOGEL, De ecclesiis Recanatensi et Lauretana (written in 1806, but printed only in 1859), and LEOPARDI, La Santa Casa di Loreto (Lugano, 1841). Both these writers showed an appreciation of the grave critical difficulties attending the Loreto tradition, but they did not venture openly to express disbelief. A new epoch in this discussion, already heralded by FATHER GRISAR at the Munich Congress; by M. BOUDINHON in Revue du Clerge Francais, XXII (1900), 241; by L. DE FEIS, La S. Casa di Nazareth (Florence, 1905), and by LE HARDI, Hist. de Nazareth (Paris, 1905), was brought to a climax by CHEVALIER, Notre Dame de Lorette (Paris, 1906). Among the learned Catholic reviews which have openly pronounced in Chevalier's favour may be mentioned the Analecta Bollandiana, XXV (1907), 478-94; Stimmen aus Maria-Laach, II (1906), 373; Revue Biblique, IV (1907), 467-70; Revue Benedictine, XXIII (1906), 626-27; Zeitschrift f. Kath. Theologie, XXVI (1906), 109-16; Theologische Quartalschrift, XCIX (1907), 124-27; Revue d'Histoire Ecclesiastique, VII (1906), 639-58; Historisches Jahrbuch, XXVIII (1907), 356; 585; Revue des Questiones Historiques, LXXXI (1907), 308-10; Revue Pratique d'Apologetique, III (1906), 758-61; Revue du Clerge Francais, XLIX (1906), 80-86, and many others. On the same side may further be mentioned BOUDINHON, La Question de Loretto (Paris, 1910); BOUFFARD, La Verite sur le Fait de Loretto (Paris, 1910); and CHEVALIER, La Santa Casa de Loretto (Paris, 1908). See also the articles on Loreto in the Kirchliches Handlexikon (Munich, 1908), and in HERDER'S Konversations-Lexikon (Freiburg, 1907). The articles that have openly taken part against Chevalier's thesis are comparartively few and unimportant, for example in L'Ami du Clerge (1906-1907); a series of articles by A. MONTI in La Scuola Cattolica (Milan, Jan.-Dec., 1910); and other articles of more weight by G. KRESSER in Theol. praktische Quartalschrift (Tubingen, 1909), 212-247. Isolated works in favour of the Loreto tradition are those of ESCHBACH, La Verite sur le Fait de Lorette (Paris, 1908); F. THOMAS, La Santa Casa dans l'Histoire (Paris, 1909); POISAT, La Question de Loreto (Paris, 1907); FALOCI-PULIGNANI, La Santa Casa di Loreto secondo un affresco di Gubbio (Rome, 1907). For an account of Loreto in English reproducing the old traditions from an uncritical standpoint see GARRATT, Loreto the New Nazareth (London, 1895). HERBERT THURSTON Diocese of Santa Catharina Santa Catharina (FLORIANOPOLIS; FLORIANOPOLITANA). Diocese; suffragan see of the Archdiocese of Porto Alegre (São Pedro do Rio Grande), in Brazil, South America, created in 1906. Its jurisdiction comprises the whole territory of the State of Santa Catharina, with a Catholic population of 405,800 out of a total of about 500,000 in 1909. It is conjectured that in 1515 Juan Díaz Solís and Vicente Yañez Pinzón were the first white men who explored this territory, landing in the Bay dos Perdidos; Sebastian Cabot in 1525 and Diego García in 1526 disembarked on the Island of Santa Catharina, then known as the Island of Patos, and thence they proceeded to the River Plate. Santa Catharina was constituted as a state of the Brazilian Union 11 Jun., 1891, having adhered to the republic on 17 Nov., 1890. The diocese comprises the following vicariates: Florianopolis, Santo Antonio, Blumenau, Brusque, Cresciuma, São Francisco, Itajahy, Joinville, Garopaba, Lages, Laguna, Tijucas, Tubarão, Urussanga, and Villa Nova. The residence of the bishop is Florianopolis, the capital of the state, situated on the western shore of Santa Catharina Island, with a magnificent harbor, pleasant climate, and a population of 18,000. Besides the cathedral, there are at Florianopolis 12 churches, 2 monasteries (Franciscans and Jesuits), and 2 nunneries (Sisters of the Divine Providence, and Sisters of the Immaculate Conception). The diocese maintains an excellent high school in the state capital, known as the Gymnasio de Santa Catharina. There is also a college for girls, in charge of the Sisters of the Divine Providence, called Collegio Coração de Jesus. The same sisters have an asylum for orphan girls. Florianopolis has 12 Catholic cemeteries, 1 Protestant, and 1 municipal. The Franciscan Friars publish two periodicals in the diocese, one entitled "L'Amico", in the city of Blumenau, and another, "Sineta de Céo", in the city of Lages. There is another Catholic publication, edited in Florianopolis by the Associação Protectora des Desamparados Irmão Joaquim, under the name of "A Fe". The present bishop. of Santa Catharina, Rt. Rev. João Becker, was b. 24 Feb., 1879, and appointed 3 May, 1908. JULIAN MORENO-LACALLE Diocese of Santa Cruz de la Sierra Santa Cruz de la Sierra (SANCTAE CRUCIS DE SIERRA). Diocese in Bolivia, erected on 6 July, 1605, as suffragan of Lima, but since 2 July, 1609, it has been dependent on La Plata (Charcas). Its first bishop was Mgr. Antonio Calderón. The diocese comprises the departments of Santa Cruz (area 126,000 sq. miles) and Beni (district of Mojos), which lie immediately west of Matto Grosso, Brazil. The rural and wooded portions of these regions are inhabited by the Moxos Indians, among whom flourishing missions were established in the seventeenth century by the Jesuits under Father Cipriano Baraza.. The converted Indians numbered over 50,000 at the time of the suppression of the society, after which the missions declined rapidly; but though many of the Moxos are now pagan, the converted Indians are fervent Catholics (see MOXOS INDIANS). The town of Santa Cruz (population 18,000), formerly called also San Lorenzo de la Frontera, was founded in 1575 on the Rio Piray, on the eastern slope of the Andes. The diocese contains about 250,000 Catholics; 103 priests; 54 parishes; and 74 churches and chapels. The present bishop, Mgr. Belisario Santistevan, was born in the Diocese of Santa Cruz de la Sierra on 2 January, 1843; and on 26 June, 1890, appointed titular Bishop of Dansara and coadjutor to Mgr. Baldivia, whom he succeeded on 1 June 1891. Sinopsis estad. y geograf. de la republ. de Bolivia (La Paz, 1903); BALLIVAN, Docum, para la hist. geograf. de la repub. de Bolivia (La Paz, 1906). Archdiocese of Santa Fe (New Mexico) Santa Fe (SANCTAE FIDEI IN AMERICA). Archdiocese in New Mexico, erected by Pius IX in 1850 and created an archbishopric in 1875. It comprised at first the three territories of New Mexico, Colorado, and Arizona, detached from the Diocese of Durango, Mexico. Since 1868 it has been restricted to the larger portion of New Mexico. Suffragans: the Bishops of Tucson and Denver. The Catholics number about 150,000, of whom 12,000 are Pueblo Indians (Tiguex and Quirix); the majority of the remainder are of Spanish descent. There are (1911) 50 parish churches and 350 mission chapels, most of them built or thoroughly repaired since 1852; these are attended by 70 priests, 50 seculars, and 20 regulars (Jesuits and Franciscans); each priest is a missionary in charge of from six to ten scattered missions, some of them very far apart. Of the priests, there is but one native; the others are French, Belgian, German, and Italian. Their ministerial work is governed by the decrees of the Baltimore Council and of the diocesan synods; they have ecclesiastical conferences and annual retreats; they form also among themselves a Clergy Relief Union, incorporated, and they are aided by 160 religious: Christian Brothers, Sisters of Loretto, of Charity; of the Most Blessed Sacrament, of St. Francis, and of the Sorrowful Mother. Despite the increase in recent years of English-speaking people and the exclusive teaching of English in the schools, the diocese at large still is a Spanish-American community. The assimilation of Mexicans and Indians with the Americans, desired by some and dreaded by many, is an arduous task. All the priests speak both English and Spanish, besides other languages; but Spanish today is and must be used in the confessional and from the pulpit, except in a few cities (Santa Fe, Albuquerque, Las Vegas, Raton, and Roswell) where both languages are used. Likewise some of the old Spanish customs are retained, such as the administration of confirmation to infants. "Roma non objiciente", the privileges of Spain in regard to fast and abstinence are still in vogue, and the clergy live on the offerings of the faithful without regular salaries. Education, when the diocese was erected, was limited to the teaching in Spanish, exclusively, of the primary elements of religion, reading, and writing, by either the priests or lay teachers. Today there are in the archdiocese: a college for boys (Santa Fe); a high school (Albuquerque); eight academies for young ladies; two boarding schools for Indians; parochial schools in Santa Fe, Albuquerque, Las Vegas, Bernalillo, Jemez, Peña Blanca, Folsom, Goswell, and Gallup, with an average, daily increasing, of 4000 children under Catholic care, despite the poverty of the people, and the moneyed competition of the Presbyterian and Methodist missions, which have selected New Mexico as a field of operation. There is also in the diocese an orphan asylum for girls, and four sanatoria with hospital annexed, conducted by sisters, at Santa Fe, Albuquerque, Las Vegas, and Roswell. The flourishing condition of the diocese is due to the zeal of: Archbishop Lamy (1850-85); Archbishop Salpointe (1885-94); Archbishop Chapelle (1894-97); Archbishop Bourgade (1898-1908) who built the cathedral at Tucson; and Archbishop Pitaval (1909); and of the pioneers: Very Rev. P. Eguillon, Revs. G. J. Macheboeuf (afterwards Bishop of Denver), J. B. Salpointe, Gabriel Ussel, J. M. Coudert, A. Truchard, J. B. Rallière, J. B. Fayet, J. Fialon, C. Seux, A. Fourchegu etc. The relations between Church and State authorities are harmonious. Mass is said and catechism taught at the penitentiary and at the Government Indian school; at every Legislature a Catholic priest is chosen for chaplain and in nearly all country schools the teachers are Catholics. SALPOINTE, Soldiers of the Cross (Banning, 1898); DEFOURI, Historical Sketch of the Catholic Church in New Mexico (San Francisco, 1887); ENGELHARDT, The Franciscans in Arizona (Harbor Springs 1899). JULES DERACHES Diocese of Santa Fe (Argentina) Santa Fe (SANCTAE FIDEI). Diocese in the Argentine Republic, suffragan of Buenos Aires, comprising the Province of Santa Fe and the gobernaciones of El Chaco and Formosa, was separated from the Diocese of Paraná (q.v.) on 15 February, 1897. Our Lady of Guadalupe (feast on second Sunday after Easter) is the diocesan patroness. The first and present bishop, Mgr. Juan Agustín Boneo (b. at Buenos Aires, 23 June, 1845, preconized titular Bishop of Arsinoe, 15 June, 1893, as coadjutor to Archbishop León Federico Aneiros of Buenos Aires), was transferred to the newly-established see on 27 January 1898. The diocese has an area of about 145,100 sq. miles and a population of 860,000 inhabitants, mostly Catholics. There are 65 parishes; 48 vice-parishes; 4 Indian mission centres; 143 secular clergy: a conciliar seminary with 45 students, and two students in the Collegio Pio Latino Amerioano, Rome; 52 Catholic colleges and schools, in addition to several Indian schools, orphanages at Santa Fe, Esperanza, and Rosario, and Catholic hospitals at Santa Fe, Rosario, Esperanza, and Las Rosas. The religious orders include the Dominicans, Franciscans, Fathers of the Sacred Heart, Missionaries of the Heart of Mary, Fathers of the Divine Word, Jesuits, and Salesians; Dominicanesses, Capuchin Sisters, Sisters of the Holy Union, Daughters of María Auxiliadora. Among the many Catholic societies are the Apostleship of Prayer, Workingmen's Circles, Conferences of St. Vincent de Paul, and Priests' Eucharistic League. The Province of Santa Fe has an area of about 51,000 sq. miles and a population of 820,000. Its capital, Santa Fe (45,000 inhabitants), situated on the Río Salado founded by Juan de Garay in 1573, is associated with the most important events in the national life of Argentina. In its old cabildo, or city hall, the Constituent Congress of 1882 and the National Convention of 1860 were held. It contains a Jesuit Church (1654) and a large Jesuit College of the Immaculate Conception. There are 14 churches and chapels besides the 3 parish churches; the cathedral is dedicated to St. Joseph. The "El amigo del obrero" is published twice a week in the interests of the Catholic working man. Rosario, 186 miles from Buenos Aires, the most important city in the diocese and the second in the republic, was founded in 1725 by Francisco Godoy, as a settlement for the Calchaqui Indians, and has a population of about 190,000. It is situated on the Río Paraná, and, being the centre of the Argentine grain trade, has very extensive commerce, its exports being valued at £7,301,398 and its imports at £6,397,579 in 1907. The town is beautifully constructed and contains many large public parks. In l907 it had 130 schools attended by 15,563 children. It contains 4 parishes, 2 vice-parishes, and 22 public or semi-public chapels, including an Irish church. The Salesian Fathers publish a weekly newspaper "Cristoforo Colombo". The Territories of El Chaco (area about 52,700 sq. miles, population 25,000) and Formosa (about 41,400 sq. miles, population 15,000) from real missionary regions entrusted to the ministrations of the Franciscans of San Lorenzo in Santa Fe, of La Merced at Corrientes, and of San Francisco in Salta. They form a vicariate forane with headquarters at Resistencia, R. P. Pedro Iturralde, commissary general of the Franciscan missionaries, being the present vicar forane. There is a parish church at Resistencia and chapels at San José and San Antonio. The fathers have a mission (founded in 1900) at Nueva Pompeya on the Río Bermejo, with a school for the Mataco Indians (40 pupils); they minister also in the colonies of La Florencia (Río Teuco), La Buenaventura (Río Pilcomayo), and Frias (Río Berno). There is a native mission at San Francisco Solano (Río Pilcomayo), with an Indian school equipped with forges, saw-mills, carpentry works, and a sugar factory. The mission at San Francisco de Laishí near Colonia Aquino (Formosa) is exclusively of the Tobas Indians and contains a similar school directed by the missionaries. USSHER, Guia eclesiastica Argentina (Buenos Aires, 1910); Anuario estadistica de la ciudad del Rosario de Santa Fe (Rosario, current issue); MARTIN, Through Five Republics of South America (London, 1906); HIRST, Argentina (London, 1960), 264-77. A.A. MACERLEAN Santa Lucia Del Mela Santa Lucia del Mela Prelature nullius within the territory of the Archdiocese of Messina, Sicily, now governed by an administrator Apostolic, who is always a titular bishop. It comprises 7 parishes, with 72 secular priests. For bibliography, see SICILY; MESSINA. U. BENIGNI Diocese of Santa Maria (Brazil) Santa Maria (SANCTAE MARIAE). A Brazilian see, suffragan of Porto Alegre. The latter, formerly known as the See of Sao Pedro do Rio Grande do Sul, was recently made an archdiocese and divided, three new sees, Pelotas, Santa Maria, and Uruguayana, being separated from it by Pius X on 15 August, 1910. Santa Maria, containing twenty-two parishes, comprises the central and northern portions of the State of Rio Grande do Sul. The climate is mild, the country well wooded and fertile, and there are many colonies of German and Italian emigrants among the inhabitants, who are chiefly engaged in agriculture and cattle-raising. The population is almost entirely Catholic. The most important town is Cachoeira or the Rio Jacuhy, 120 miles west of Porto Alegre, with which it communicates by steamboat and rail. The other main centres of population are Rio Pardo, Santa Maria, Passo Fundo, and Cruz Alta. By a Decree of the S. C. of the Consistory, 6 Feb., 1911, Mgr. Lima de Valverde was appointed first Bishop of Santa Maria. GALANTI, Compendio de Historia de Brazil (Sao Paulo, 1896-1905). A.A. MACERLEAN Santa Maria de Monserrato Santa Maria de Monserrato (BEATAE MARIAE VIRGINIS DE MONTSERRATO). An abbey nullius in Brazil. When it was determined to restore the Benedictine Order in Brazil, the work was entrusted to the Congregation of Beuron, 24 April, 1895, under the guidance of Dom Gerard van Caloen. By a Decree of the Sacred Congregation of the Consistory, 15 Aug., 1907, the Abbey of Santa Maria de Monserrato at Rio de Janeiro, founded in 1589, was erected into an abbey nullius, the same Decree separated the District of Rio Branco from the Diocese of Amazones and subjected it to the jurisdiction of the Abbot of Santa Maria de Monserrato. This mission territory is bounded on the north and west by Venezuela, on the north and east by British Guiana, on the south by the two branches of the Rio Branco and the Rio Negro. In the early part of 1898 it was visited by Fathers Libermann and Berthon of the Congregation of the Holy Ghost, who did a little apostolic work among the Catholics scattered along the banks of the Rio Branco. The region contains 6000 Catholic Brazilians, and 50,000 pagan Indians. Mgr. van Caloen born, 12 March, 1853; entered the Benedictine Congregation of Beuron, was appointed Abbot of São Bento at Olinda, 20 May, 1896, and general vicar of the Brazilian congregation in 1899, he was transferred, 28 Feb., 1905, to the monastery of São Bento, at Rio de Janeiro; made titular Bishop of Phocea, 13 Dec., 1907; and elected abbot-general of the Brazilian congregation, 6 Sept., 1908. He resides at Rio de Janeiro. On 8 June, 1907 he obtained a coadjutor, Abbot Dom Chrysostom de Saegher, Abbot of St. Martin of Thebaen, who has the right of succession to the abbatial See of Monserrato. A.A. MACERLEAN Diocese of Santa Marta (Colombia) Santa Marta (SANCTA MARTHAE). Diocese in Colombia, erected in 1535, its first bishop being Alfonso do Tobes; suppressed by Paul IV in 1562; it was re-established by Gregory XIII -- 15 April, 1577, as suffragan of Santa Fe de Bogotá; it became suffragan of Cartagena in 1900, at which time it comprised the State of Magdalena and the territories of Sierra Nevada y Motilones and Goajira. In 1905 the north-eastern portion of the diocese was formed into the Vicariate Apostolic of Goajira. Magdalena was first visited. by Alonso de Ojeda in 1499. Santa Marta, the second town founded by the Spaniards in America, was established by Rodrigo de Bastidas 29 July, 1525; it was sacked in 1543 and again in 1555; while Sir Francis Drake reduced it to ashes in 1596. St. Louis Bertrand labored at Santa Marta for a time, and baptized 15,000 pagans there. The town is situated at the mouth of the Río Manzaneres, on the Gulf of Santa Marta, 46 miles north-east of Barranquilla, and contains about 6000 inhabitants, an episcopal palace, public college, and conciliar seminary. Simón Bolívar d. 17 Dec., 1830, at San Pedro, a few miles distant. A diocesan synod was held at Santa Marta in 1881. The present bishop, Mgr. Francisco Simón y Rodenas, O.F.M., was b. at Orihuela, 2 Oct., 1849; appointed as successor of Mgr. Caledon to the see, 11 June, 1904; and enthroned, 14 Nov. following. The diocese has an area of 20,400 square miles, and contains 8 deaneries, 42 parishes, 40 secular priests, 3 convents of the Presentation Sisters of Tours with 15 nuns, and about 100,000 inhabitants, practically all Catholics. The Sisters of Charity established a hospital and school at Santa Marta in 1883. MOZANS, Up the Orinoco and down the Magdalena (New York, 1910). A.A. MACERLEAN Diocese of Santander Santander (SANCTI ANDERII, SANTANDERIENSIS). This diocese in Spain takes its name not from St. Andrew as some, misled by the sound of the name, believe, but from St. Hemeterius (Santemter, Santenter, Santander), one of the patrons of the city and ancient abbey, the other being St. Celedonius. The diocese is bounded on the north by the Bay of Biscay, on the east by Vizcaya and Burgos, on the south by Burgos and Palencia, on the west by Leon and Oviedo. It is suffragan of Burgos, and comprises most of the civil Province of Santander and parts of those of Alava and Burgos. In Roman times Santander was called Portus Victoriae, in memory of Agrippa's having conquered it from the Cantabrians, and in the period of the reconquest was regarded as one of the Asturias—Asturias de Sant Ander, between the Rivers Saja and Miesa. The territory was repeopled by Alfonso I, the Catholic. Alfonso II, the Chaste, founded there the Abbey of Sts. Hemeterius and Celedonius, where the heads of those holy martyrs were kept. Alfonso VII, the Emperor, made it a collegiate church. As early as 1068, King Sancho II, the Strong, granted a charter to the Abbey and port of St. Hemeterius in reward for services, and Alfonso V did as much. Alfonso VIII gave the abbot the lordship of the town on 11 July, 1187. In the fourteenth century the canons were still living in community in this abbey, and Abbot Nuno Perez, chancellor to Queen Maria, drew up constitutions for them; these constitutions were confirmed by King Fernando IV in 1312, and later by John XXII. The town of Santander aided King St. Ferdinand when he conquered Seville; it broke the iron chains with which the Guadalquiver had been closed, by ramming them with a ship—which is the armorial blazon of the city. Santander did not become an episcopal see until the reign of Fernando VI. By a Bull of 12 December, 1754, Benedict XIV confirmed the creation of the See of Santander, making the collegiate church a cathedral, and giving it territory taken from the Archdiocese of Burgos. In 1755 Fernando VI raised the town to the rank of a city. The last Abbot and first Bishop of Santander was Francisco Javier de Arriaza, a native of Madrid, who took possession in 1755 and ruled until 1761. The Province of Santander was formed in 1801, and in 1816 became an independent intendencia and one of the provinces in the definitive political organization (see SPAIN). The city at present has a population of 54,700 and is one of the most important harbors on the Bay of Biscay. The cathedral is a structure of very diverse periods, and at one time had the character of a fortress. Its lower portion contains a spacious crypt, called the parish church of Christ because it serves parochial uses. The dark and sombre character of the structure marks its original purpose of a pantheon. It consists of three naves with three apses forming as many chapels, and a baptistery has been erected in it. The building dates from the twelfth or early thirteenth century, but presents added features of many later periods. A spiral staircase, constructed in the wall, leads from the crypt to the cathedral properly so called, to which the cloister of the old abbey serves as vestibule, opening on the principal street (Rue Mayor) of the city. The church itself, exclusive of the capilla mayor, is formed of three naves of unequal height, 128.5 feet in length and 59.5 feet in width. In the choir is buried the abbot, Pedro Luis Manso y Luniga (d. 1669), who had it built. In a corner of the nave on the Gospel side is a holy-water font of Arabic workmanship probably brought as a memorial of the conquest from Córdoba where it served as a basin for ablutions; it bears a very poetical Arabic inscription, which has been translated by Don Pascal Gayangos. The capilla mayor, or principal chapel, was built late in the seventeenth century by Abbot Manuel Francisco de Navarrete y Ladrón de Guevara (1695-1705). The relics of the martyrs Sts. Hemeterius and Celedonius are kept in the high altar. On the south is a cloister which long served as a cemetery; and in the south-eastern corner was the Chapel of the Holy Ghost, the last remains of the hospice founded by Abbot Nuño Pérez Monroy, counsellor to Dona Maria de Molina in the distracted reigns of Fernando IV and Alfonso XI. The other parishes of Santander are: San Francisco, an ancient convent of the Friars Minor, facing on the Plaza de Becedo; Consolación; the parish of the Society of Jesus, connected with the old Jesuit college; the new parish of Santa Lucia. Among the benevolent institutions are: the civil and military hospital of San Rafael, built in 1791 by Bishop Rafael Tomás Menendez de Luarca; the House of Charity; the Asylum of San José, for the education of poor boys; the Casa Cuna (foundling hospital); the provincial inclusa (foundling asylum), founded in 1778 by Bishop Francisco Laso de San Pedro. The intermediate school, Institute de Segunda Enseñanza, has been established in the old convent of the nuns of St Clare since 1839; and the ecclesiastical seminary since 1852 in the monastery of Santa Catalina de Monte Corbán, formerly Hieronymite, a short distance from the city. There is also the pontifical seminary of Comillas, founded by Antonio Lopez, Marqués de Comillas, placed under the care of the Jesuit Fathers, and raised to the rank of a pontifical university. The distinguished men whom this diocese has produced are numberless; among them may be mentioned: St. Beatus, of Liébana, Fray Antonio de Guevara, Juan de Herrera, Amador de los Rios, and Pereda. FLOREZ, Esp. sagrada, XXVII (2nd ed., Madrid, 1824); AMADOR DE LOS RIOS, Santander, España. sus monumentos (Barcelona, 1891); MARIANA, Hist. gen. de Esp. (Valencia, 1794). RAMON RUIZ AMADO Sant' Angelo De' Lombardi Sant' Angelo de' Lombardi (SANCTI ANGELI LOMBARDORUM ET BISACCIENSIS). Diocese in the Province of Avellino, Southern Italy. The city was established by the Lombards at an unknown period. There are sulphurous springs in its vicinity. In 1664 it was almost completely destroyed. It became an episcopal see under Gregory VII, but its first known bishop is Thomas, in 1179, when the see was a suffragan of Conza. In 1540 under the episcopate of Rinaldo de' Cancellieri, it was united to the Diocese of Bisaccia (the ancient Romulea), a Samnite town captured by the Romans in 295 B.C.; it appears first as a bishopric in 1179. Another of its prelates, Ignazio Cianti, O.P. (1646), was distinguished for his learning. In 1818 it was incorporated with the See of Monteverde, the earliest known bishop of which is Mario (1049), and which in 1531 was united to the Archdiocese of Canne and Nazareth, from which it has been again separated. The see contains 9 parishes with 40,000 souls, 45 secular priests, and some religious, 3 monastic establishments, and a girls' school. CAPPELLETTI, Le chiese d'Italia, XX (Venice, 1857). U. BENIGNI Sant' Angelo in Vado and Urbania Sant' Angelo in Vado and Urbania (SANCTI ANGELI IN VADO ET URBANIENSIS). Diocese; S. Angelo in Vado is a city in the Marches, on the site of the ancient "Tifernum Metaurense", a town of the Umbrian Senones, near the River Metaurus, believed to have been destroyed by the Goths. Later there arose a new burg called, from the Church of S. Michele, Sant' Angelo in Vado, which in 1635 became a city and an episcopal see. Urbania is situated on the River Candiano near S. Angelo, on the site of the ancient Aleria, considerable ruins of which still remain. It was destroyed at an unknown date, and rebuilt under the name of Castel Ripeggiano, but, in 1280, being in favor of the Guelphs it was demolished by the Ghibellines. It was restored again through the munificence of the. Dominican bishop, Guglielmo Durante and called Castel Durante; it was included in the Duchy of Urbino, and contained a magnificent ducal palace. It is uncertain whether the Tifernate bishops Eubodius (Euhodius?), Marius, and Innocent, who assisted at the Roman Councils of 465, 499, and 500 belonged to Tifernum Tiberiacum (Citta di Castello) or to S. Angelo. At the beginning of 1635 S. Angelo was an archpresbyterate nullius, subject to the Abbot of the Monastery of S. Cristoforo of Castel Durante to whom the Archpresbyterate of Castel Durante was also subject. In that year Urban VIII erected the two towns into dioceses, changing the name of Castel Durante to Urbania, and uniting them aeque principaliter under Onorato degli Onorati, who governed it for forty-eight years. Other bishops were: Gian. Vincenzo Castelli, O.P. (1711), who restored the cathedral of Urbania, and Paolo Zamperoli, O.P. (1779) sent into exile under Napoleon, dying there. The diocese is a suffragan of Urbino and has 78 parishes with about 20,000 souls, a Capuchin convent, and 8 houses of nuns. CAPPELLETTI, Le chiese d'Italia, III (Venice, 1857). U. BENIGNI Santarem Santarem Prelature nullius created in 1903, in the ecclesiastical Province of Belem do Pará, with a Catholic population of 200,000. The present bishop is Rt. Rev. Armando Bahlmann, titular Bishop of Argos, b. 8 May, 1862, appointed 10 Jan., 1907 consecrated 19 July, 1908. The residence of the bishop is at Santarem, State of Pará, created a city by law of 24 Oct., 1848. It is beautifully situated on the northern shores of the Tapajos River, and has a population of 28,000. The city is divided into four parishes: Santarem, Alter do Chao. Boim, and Villa Franca. The monastery of the Franciscan friars, who have charge of the missions of the prelature, is located also in Santarem. In this town, the government of the State of Pará supplies the necessary funds for a school of over 200 pupils; there are also 3 colleges for boys, 2 for girls, and 1 for boys and girls. JULIAN MORENO-LACALLE Santa Severina Santa Severina (SANCTA SEVERINAE) Diocese in the Province of Catanzaro in Calabria, Southern Italy. Situated on a rocky precipice on the site of the ancient Siberena, it became an important fortress of the Byzantines in their struggles with the Saracens. It is not known whether it was an episcopal see from the beginning of the Byzantine domination; when It became an archbishopric, probably in the tenth century, its suffragan sees were Orea, Acerenza, Gallipoli, Alessano, and Castro. The Greek Rite disappeared from the diocese under the Normans, but was retained in the cathedral during a great part of the thirteenth century. The earliest known bishop was one Giovanni, but his date is uncertain. From 1096, when the name of Bishop Stefano is recorded, the list of prelates is uninterrupted. Among them we may mention Ugo (1269), formerly prior of the Holy Sepulchre in Jerusalem; Jacopo (1400), who died in repute of sanctity; Alessandro della Marra (1488), who restored the episcopal palace and the cathedral; Giov. Matteo Sertori, present at the Lateran Council; Giulio Sertori (1535), legate to Ferrara under Charles V and Philip II; Giulio Antonio Santorio (1566), later a cardinal, and Fausto Caffarello (1624), both renowned for learning and piety; Gian Antonio Parravicini (1654), even as parish priest of Sondrio in Valtellina was distinguished for his zeal in combatting and converting heretics; Francesco Falabello (1660), who suffered much in defense of the rights of his church; Carlo Berlingeri (1678), a zealous pastor; Nicolo Carmini Falco (1743), the learned editor of the history of Dio Cassius. In 1818 the territories of the suppressed dioceses of Belcastro and S. Leone were united to Santa Severina. Belcastro, considered by some authorities to be the ancient Chonia, had bishops from 1122; the most noted was Jacopo di Giacomelli (1542), present at the Council of Trent. Bishops of S. Leone are known from 1322 till 1571, when the diocese was united to that of S. Severina. The archdiocese has now only one suffragan see, Caritati, and contains 21 parishes with 42,000 inhabitants, 80 priests, 4 convents, and 2 houses of nuns. CAPPELLETTI, Le chiese d'Italia, XXI (Venice, 1857). U. BENIGNI University of Santiago University of Santiago It has been asserted by some historians that as early as the ninth century a course of general studies had been established at the University of Santiago by King Ordono who sent his sons there to be educated, but no absolute proof can be adduced to prove it. The first reliable sources say that it was founded in 1501 by Diego de Muros (Bishop of the Canaries), and Lope Gómez Marzo, who on 17 July, 1501, executed a public document establishing a school and academy for the study of the humanities, intending, as the document proves, to later include all the other faculties. The founders endowed the school from their private fortunes. On 17 December, 1504, Julius II issued a Bull in which the foundation was declared of public utility for the whole of Galicia and granted it the same privileges as those enjoyed by all the other general schools (estudios generales). In 1506 the faculty of canon law was founded by Bull of Julius II. The faculties of theology and Sacred Scripture were founded in 1555 and those of civil law and medicine in 1648, thus completing the university courses which were required at that time. The real founder of the University of Santiago was Archbishop Alfonso de Fonseca, who founded the celebrated college which bears his name. He endowed it munificently and obtained from Clement VIII (1526) the right to found faculties, assign salaries, frame statutes for the rector, doctors, lectors, and students and for conferring degrees. The faculty of grammar and arts was installed in the hospital of Azabacheria which had been suitably arranged. In 1555 Charles V sent Cuesta as royal delegate with instructions to organize the infant university. Knowing, doubtless, the wrangling which generally existed between the higher colleges and the universities, Cuesta's first care was to completely separate the University and the College of Fonseca, both as to organization and administration. During the first period of its existence, that is from its foundation to the time of Fonseca, among the distinguished professors of the university may be mentioned Pedro de Vitoria and Alvaro de Cadabal, and in the second epoch Villagran and Jose Rodriguez y Gonzalez, professor of mathematics, appointed by the Emperor of Russia to direct the observatory of St. Petersburg, and associated with Blot and Arago in the measurement of the meridional circle, and many others. After many disputes and agreements the Jesuits were given charge of the grammar courses in 1593, and remained in charge until their expulsion from the Spanish possessions in 1767. The department of arts was transferred from the Azabacheria to the university. The constitutions of Cuesta were modified by Guevara, by Pedro Portocarrero in 1588, and finally by Alonso Munoz Otalora. All these changes were approved by Philip II and were in vogue until the general reforms which took place in the eighteenth century. The colleges of Fonseca, San Clemente San Martin, Pinario, and that of the Jesuits were independent colleges which were founded and which thrived in the shadow of the university. In the seventeenth century, in this as in all other universities, studies fell into a state of decadence; between the university and Fonseca College arose serious differences which were not settled until the middle of the eighteenth century in time of Ferdinand VI. About this time (1751), however, many notable reforms were introduced, the number of professorships was increased, and more extensive attributes were granted to the university; a treasurer was also appointed and the rector was named by royal order. In 1769 the university was transferred to the building formerly occupied by the Jesuits and the faculties were increased making a total of thirty-three, seven of theology, five of canon law, six of civil law, five of medicine, one of mathematics, one of moral philosophy, one of experimental physics, three of arts, and four of grammar. After the university had taken possession of the old Jesuit college it soon became evident that some additions would have to be made, and although these were carried out without any special plan they resulted in a spacious building with a severe and dignified facade. In 1799 the faculty of medicine was suppressed, but it was restored once more in 1801. Canon Juan Martinez Oliva was appointed royal visitor; his visit, however, was not productive of lasting results, the recommendations he had made being set aside in 1807. From then until the present time the university has suffered from the constantly altering plans of the Government which has deprived all colleges and universities of their former state of autonomy. The faculty of theology was definitely suppressed in 1852. The influence of the university in Galicia has been great, and from its halls men eminent in all walks of life have passed. The library of 40,000 volumes is good, as are also the laboratories of physics, chemistry, and natural history. The latter possesses a crystallographical collection of 1024 wooden models which formerly belonged to the Abbé Haüy. The present number of students reaches between 700 and 1000, the majority of whom follow the medical and law courses. VINAS, Anurio del la Universidad de Santiago para el curso de 1856 to 1857; DE LA FUENTE, Hist. de las Universidades (Madrid, 1884); DE LA CAMPA, Hist. filosofica de la Instruccion Publica de Espana (1872); SEMPER Y GUARINOS, Ensayo de una Biblioteca espanola de los Mejores escritores del reinado de Carlos III (1785); Boletin oficial de la Direccion Publica del ano de 1895. TEODORO RODRIGUEZ Diocese of Santiago Del Estero Santiago del Estero (SANCTI JACOBI DE ESTERO) Diocese in the Argentine Republic, erected 25 March, 1907, suffragan of Buenos Aires. Its territory exactly corresponds with that of the State of Santiago, bounded by the States of Salta and Tucuman on the N. W., La Rioja on the W., Cordova on the S., Sante Fé on the E., and by the Territory of El Chaco on the N. E. It has an area of nearly 40,000 sq. miles and a population averaging about 5 to the sq. mile. Santiago, the cathedral city as well as the capital of the state, is situated on the Rio Dulce, about forty miles north of the Salinas Grandes, or Great Salt Marshes, of Northern Argentina. Although the newest diocese in the republic, its capital was the seat of the first bishop in that part of South America The ecclesiastical organization of what afterwards became the Argentine Republic began in 1570 under St. Pius V, who erected what was at first known as the Diocese of Tucuman. This, the original diocese of all but the seaboard of that country, covered a vast and almost unexplored territory of the same name. The Spanish settlement of Santiago del Estero was then designated as the seat of the Bishop of Tucuman, and its church, built about 1570, was the cathedral. Not until nearly one hundred and thirty years later (1699), in the episcopate of Juan Manuel Mercadillo, O.P., was the see transferred to Cordova. The old diocese thenceforward took its name from its capital, being known as the Diocese of Cordova. Thus Cordova is still regarded as the most ancient diocese of Argentina, while the most ancient cathedral in the country is at Santiago del Estero. Early in the nineteenth century the Diocese of Salta was formed out of that part of the Cordova jurisdiction which included Tucuman and Santiago; from a portion of the Salta jurisdiction the (new) Diocese of Tucuman was formed in 1897, and from this new diocese, again, was formed, ten years later, the Diocese of Santiago del Estero. For three years after its erection the diocese was governed by Right Rev. Pablo Padilla, Bishop of Tucuman, as administrator Apostolic, until in 1907 Right Rev. Juan Martin Janiz, its first bishop, was appointed by Pius X. It is divided into twelve parishes. The parochial clergy are few for so large a territory—not more than one priest to each parish, besides a vicar forane and the bishop's personal staff. There are, however, three schools for boys, and an orphanage under the care of religious at the capital, besides several other approved Catholic educational institutions. Guia ecles. de la Rep. Argentina (Buenos Aires, 1910); BATTANDIER, Annuaire pont. (1911). E. MACPHERSON Giovanni Sante Gaspero Santini Giovanni Sante Gaspero Santini Astronomer, b. at Caprese in Tuscany, 30 Jan., 1787; d. at Padua, 26 June, 1877. He received his first instruction from his parental uncle, the Abate Giovanni Battista Santini. This excellent teacher implanted at the same time the deep religious sentiments which Santini preserved throughout his life. After finishing his philosophical studies in the school year 1801-2, at the seminary of Prato, he entered in 1802 the University of Pisa. He very soon abandoned the study of law in order to devote himself, under the direction of Prof. Paoli and Abate Pacchiano, exclusively to mathematics and the natural sciences. It appears that at Pisa Santini still wore the cassock. This circumstance, and possibly also his being confused with his uncle Giovanni Battista, may account for the fact that in bibliographical dictionaries he still figures under the title of abate. It is certain, however, that he never received major orders. In 1810 he married Teresa Pastrovich, and one year after her death, in 1843, he contracted a second marriage with Adriana Conforti, who outlived him. During his stay at Pisa he won by his diligence the love and confidence not only of his professors but also of the rector of the university and of the influential Fossombroni. At their urgent suggestion Santini's family, especially his uncle, made great sacrifices to enable him to continue his studies in Milan (1805-1806) under Oriani, Cesaris, and Carlini. On 17 Oct., 1806, the Italian Government appointed him assistant to the director of the observatory at Padua, Abate Chiminello, whom he succeeded in 1814. In 1813 the university offered him the chair of astronomy, a position in which he was confirmed by the Emperor Francis I in 1818 after the Venetian territory had become part of Austria. In addition he taught for several years, as substitute, elementary algebra, geometry, and higher mathematics. During the school years 1824-1825 and 1856-7 he was rector of the university, and from 1845 to 1872 director of mathematical studies. Towards the end of 1873 he suffered repeatedly from fainting spells which were followed by a steadily increasing physical and mental weakness and final breakdown. He died in his ninety-first year at his villa, Noventa Padovana. Both as a practical and theoretic astronomer, Santini has made the Observatory of Padua famous. When he took charge the observatory was located in an old fortified tower, in a precarious condition. The most valuable instrument he found was a Ramsden mural quadrant eight feet in diameter. On account of the political complications and Chiminello's protracted illness, the practical work was reduced to a minimum—regular meteorological observations. Santini at once began to take careful observations of comets, planets, planetoids, occultations, and eclipses. In 1811 he determined the latitude of Padua with the aid of Gauss's method of three stars in the same altitude, and in 1815 again, with a new repeating circle. In 1822, '24, and '28 he assisted the astronomical and geodetic service of Italy by making observations in longitude. Constantly striving to equip this institute in accordance with the latest requirements of science, he installed in 1823 a new Utzschneider equatorial, and in 1837 a new meridian circle. With these last he began at once to make zonal observations for a catalogue of stars between declination +10° and -10°, an undertaking which he carried out on a large scale, and which he, with the aid of his assistant, Trettenero, completed in 1857, after ten years of work. In 1843 he made a scientific journey through Germany, and in the most scientific centres he conferred with distinguished savants in his own and related fields. As a theoretic astronomer, Santini deserves notice for his researches concerning the comets. In the Encke-Galle catalogue he is credited with the calculation of nineteen orbits. He acquired his greatest fame by his calculations of the orbital disturbances during the period from 1832-1852 caused by the- great planets on the comet of Biela. The time and place of the appearance of this comet in 1846 corresponded exactly with previous calculations. In 1819-20 he published his "Elementi di Astronomia" (2nd ed., Padua, 1830), a work in two parts, of classic soberness and thoroughness. In 1828 appeared his "Teorica degli Stromenti Ottici", also published in Padua, in which he explains by means of the most simple formulas the construction of the different kinds of telescopes, microscopes etc. A number of dissertations on geodetic and astronomic subjects from his pen appeared in the annals of learned associations, in the "Correspondence du Baron de Zach", "Astronomische Nachrichten", etc. Besides some twenty Italian scientific societies, Santini became a member in 1825 of the London Royal Astronomical Society; in 1845 a corresponding member of the Institut de France; and in 1847 member of the Kaiserliche Akademie der Wissenschaften of Vienna. When in 1866 Venice was separated from Austria, he became a corresponding member of the last-named association. Danish, Austrian, Spanish, and Italian decorations were bestowed upon him. A complete list of his writings may be found in the "Discorso" (pp. 42-67) by Lorenzoni, mentioned below. LORENZONI, Giovanni Santini, la sua vita e le sue opere. Discorso letto nella chiesa di S. Sofia in Padova (Padua, 1877; IDEM, In occasione del primo centenario dalla nascita dell' astronomo Santini (Padua, 1887); VON WURZBACH, Biograf. Lexikon des Kaiserthums Ostreich mit Unterstutzung durch die Kais. Akad. der Wiss. (Vienna, 1874), s. v,; POGGENDORFF, Biograf. litt. Handb., II (Leipzig, 1859), s. v. J. STEIN Archdiocese of Santo Domingo Archdiocese of Santo Domingo (SANCTI DOMINICI) Erected on 8 August, 1511, by Julius II who by the Bull "Pontifex Romanus" on that date established also the Sees of Concepción de la Vega and of San Juan of Porto Rico. Three prelates, who had been appointed to the sees comprising the ecclesiastical province created previously (1504) by the same sovereign pontiff, united their petition to that of the Crown in requesting the Holy See (see PORTO RICO) to suppress the same and to establish the three new dioceses as suffragans to the See of Seville. This alteration was effected before any one of the prelates in question had taken possession of his diocese or had received consecration. Father Francisco Garcia de Padilla, Franciscan, who had been in 1504 the prelate designed to occupy the See of Bayuna (Baynoa, Baiunensis), on the extinction of the same was chosen the first Bishop of Santo Domingo, having been so mentioned in the Bull of the erection of the diocese. He died before his consecration, after having named Rev. Carlos de Aragón his vicar-general and having authorized him to take possession of the diocese in the name of the bishop, who never reached America. The first bishop to occupy the See of Santo Domingo was Alessandro Geraldini, appointed in 1516 and died in 1524. He was a native of Italy, and perhaps the only representative of all America to assist at the Fifth Lateran Council. Paul III on 12 Feb., 1545, elevated Santo Domingo to the rank of an archdiocese, the incumbent of the see at the time, Bishop Alonso de Fuenmayor, becoming the first archbishop. Santo Domingo as the first metropolitan see of America, according to the terms of the Bull of erection "Super Universas Orbis Ecclesias", had five suffragan sees, as follows: San Juan in Porto Rico, Santiago in Cuba, Coro in Venezuela, Santa Marta of Cartagena, and Trujillo in Honduras. The Diocese of Concepción de la Vega had been united, after the death of its first bishop, Pedro Suárez de Deza, to the See of Santo Domingo by Apostolic authority. Nothing in the text of the Bull of erection would warrant the use of the title of Primate of the Indies by the archbishop of this see, although it remains indisputable that it is the first metropolitan see of all America. Santo Domingo is equally entitled to be called the cradle of Christianity in America, being the centre of the religious and missionary zeal that radiated thence to the adjoining islands and mainland. The Bull of Alexander VI, dated 24 June, 1493, designated the Franciscan Father Buil (Boil) to accompany Columbus on his second voyage of discovery, with ample faculties as Apostolic delegate or vicar, and to bring to the New World a body of zealous missionaries. The unfortunate incident which deprived America of his services doubtless marred the growth of the Church in the beginning. But on 30 August, 1495, a band of Franciscans and other missioners arrived in Hispaniola to replace a discontented element that occasioned no small annoyance to the great discoverer, and to lay the solid foundation of the Faith among the native Indians. The archdiocese contains 600,000 Catholics; 66 secular and 12 regular priests; 32 Sisters of Charity; 68 churches; 103 chapels; 1 seminary; 257 schools. The present archbishop, Mgr Adolfo Nouel, was born at Santo Domingo, 12 December, 1862; elected titular Archbishop of Methymna, 8 October, 1904; consecrated at Rome eight days later as coadjutor to Archbishop de Merino of Santo Domingo, whom he succeeded in August, 1906. Boletin eclesiastico de la arquidiocesis de Santo Domingo; Bull Pontifex Romanus in Archivo de Simancas; BRAU, La colonizacion de Puerto Rico (San Juan, 1907); Documents in episcopal archives, San Juan, Porto Rico.a W.A. JONES Joao Dos Santos Joao dos Santos Dominican missionary in India and Africa, b. at Evora, Portugal; d. at Goa in 1622. His book "Ethiopia Oriental" is the best description of the Portuguese occupation of Africa at the end of the sixteenth century, when Portugal was at the zenith of her power there. His account of the manners and customs of the Bantu tribes at that date is most valuable; he was a keen observer, and generally a sober narrator of things that he saw. This work is now a Portuguese classic. On 13 August, 1586, four months after leaving Lisbon, dos Santos arrived in Mozambique. He was at once sent to Sofala, where he remained four years with Father Joao Madeira. Between them they baptized some 1694 natives and had built three chapels when they were ordered back to Mozambique. After a journey of great hardships they were forced to remain on the Zambesi River, dos Santos staying at Tete for eight months. From registers found there he discovered that the Dominicans had baptized about 20,000 natives before the year 1591 at Tete alone. From Mozambique he was sent to the small island of Querimba, where he remained for two years. The registers here gave the information that 16,000 natives had been baptized before the year 1593. Next he was appointed commissary of the Bulla da Cruzada at Sofala, where he stayed more than a year. His labors in Africa ended on 22 August, 1597, when he left Mozambique for India. With the exception of eleven years spent in Europe (1606-17) he lived the rest of his life in India. Ethiopia Oriental (Lisbon, 1891); THEAL, The Portuguese in South Africa (Cape Town, 1896). SIDNEY R. WELCH Mission of San Xavier Del Bac Mission of San Xavier del Bac One of the eight missions founded by the Spanish Padres between 1687 and 1720 in the Pimeria Alta, within the present limits of the State of Arizona, viz. Guevavi, San Xavier del Bac (of the water), Tumacacuri (San Jose, which has been reserved by Act of Congress as a national monument), Tubac (Santa Gertrudis), Sonoitag (San Miguel), Arivaca, Santa Ana, and Calabasas (San Cayetano). Of these only Tumacacuri and San Xavier del Bac are extant: the former, situated forty five miles south of Tucson, is in a ruinous condition, the latter, nine miles south of Tucson, in the fertile Santa Cruz valley and close to the Papago village, has remained in a remarkable state of preservation and is visited annually by a great number of pilgrims, tourists and students of art and history. Founded in 1699 by the Jesuit missionary Eusebius Kino (Kuhne), a native of the Austrian Tyrol who resigned the chair of mathematics at the University of Ingolstadt to evangelize the aborigines of the New World, the Church of San Xavier del Bac was completed by the Spanish Franciscans at a later date, with the exception of one of the towers, which remained unfinished. It is built of stone and brick, with a mortar the process of which is now lost and which has retained to this day the consistency of cement. Its inside dimensions are 105 feet by 70 in the transept and 27 in the nave. It has the form of the Latin cross. Experts have been at variance regarding the style of architecture at San Xavier, some pronouncing it Moorish, others Byzantine, others again describing it as a mixture of both. It seems now established that it may not be called Moorish, as it has nothing in common with the Moorish architecture as exemplified in the Orient and Southern Spain, although it bears traces of the influence exercised by Moorish art over the Renaissance in Spain. The proper denomination should be the Spanish Mission style, viz. Spanish Renaissance as modified by local conditions in the Spanish colonies of the New World. Directly in front of the church is an atrium, enclosed by a fence wall, where the Indians used to hold their meetings. The façade, profusely adorned with arabesques of varied colors and bearing the coat-of-arms of St. Francis, is flanked by two towers 80 feet high. From the top, made accessible by easy winding stairs cut in the thickness of the walls, a comprehensive view may be obtained over the verdant Santa Cruz valley, the distant city of Tucson and the circle of lofty, pinnacled mountains. The interior is frescoed throughout, and contains a great number of artistic statues made of wood. The reredos of the main altar and of the side chapels are elaborately decorated in bas-relief with scroll work covered with gold leaf, and are supported by columns of unique designs. Above the centre of the transept a cupola rises to a height of 55 feet. Six minor domes divide the remaining space. Two figures of lions carved in wood guard the access to the sanctuary. The terraced roof is surrounded by a balustrade in masonry, each baluster tapering into a cement finial and supporting on either side a lion's head, reminiscent of the escutcheon of Castile and Leon. To the west of the church is an open cortile, the ancient burying ground, with fourteen pillars in the wall bearing niches for the Stations of the Cross worked in high-relief. At the west end of the cortile stands a domed chapel with a belfry, used formerly as a mortuary chapel, since dedicated to Our Lady of Sorrows. Adjacent to the church are gathered the mission buildings, surrounding a spacious patio lined with arcades and a monumental entrance consisting of seven arches. As it now stands, San Xavier del Bac is considered the most remarkable relic of the Spanish period north of Mexico; many important features which had gradually disappeared were replaced during the years 1906-10 by the Bishop of Tucson on his own responsibility, in an effort to restore the ancient and venerable pile to its pristine grandeur and to preserve it for future generations. From 1827, the date of the expulsion of the Spanish missionaries, to 1866, when the Rev. J. B. Salpointe (later Archbishop of Santa Fé) came to Tucson, the mission of San Xavier del Bac was completely abandoned and left to the care of the Papago Indians, who saved it from destruction by the Apaches. Since 1868, when the Vicariate Apostolic of Arizona was erected, the bishops of Tucson have, by unremitting care and frequent outlay, warded off decay and ultimate ruin from the precious monument, constantly devoting at the same time especial and personal attention to the spiritual welfare of the Papago Indians gathered around the mission. For the past thirty-five years a school has been maintained by the clergy of the parish of Tucson for the benefit of the Papago children. It is located in the mission buildings and is conducted by the Sisters of Saint Joseph of Carondelet. ARRICIVITA, Cronica serafica del Apostolico colegio de Queretaro; GUITERAS in Bull. Am., Cath. Hist. Soc., V, no. 2 (June, 1894); ORTEGA, Historia del Nayarit, Sonora, Sinaloa y Ambas Californias (MEXICO, 1887); CRETINEAU-JOLY, Hist. de la compagnie de Jesus, V (Paris, 1859), iii; DE LONG, Hist. of Arizona; HAMILTON, Resources of Arizona; History of Arizona Territory (San Francisco, 1884); SALPOINTE, Soldiers of the Cross (Banning, Cal., 1898; FRANCISCO GARCES, Diary, tr. COUES (New York, 1900). HENRY GRANJON Diocese of Sao Carlos Do Pinhal São Carlos do Pinhal (S. CAROLI PINHALENSIS). Diocese; suffragan of the Archdiocese of São Paulo, Brazil, South America, created on 7 June, l908. The Rt. Rev. José Marcondes Homem de Mello, the present bishop, was born on 13 Feb., 1860, and elevated in May, 1906; he had been Archbishop of Pará, from which he resigned. The residence of the bishop is at São Carlos do Pinhal, State of São Paulo, founded in 1857 and raised to thc rank of city on 21 April, 1880. It is connected with the city of São Paulo, capital of the state, by a railroad, the trip occupying about six hours. Its population is estimated at 67,000, mostly Catholics. Besides the public schools and those maintained by the diocese, there is an excellent institution for the education of girls, known as "Collegio de São Carlos" and directed by the Sisters of the Most Holy Sacrament. JULIAN MORENO-LACALLE Diocese of Sao Luiz de Ciceres São Luiz de Cáceres (SANCTI ALOYSII DE CACERES). Diocese in Brazil, suffragan of Cuyabá, from which diocese (archdiocese since 5 April, 1910) it was separated by a papal Decree of 10 March, 1910. São Luiz de Cáceres, otherwise known as Villa Maria, is situated in the State of Matto Grosso on the left bank of the Rio Paraguay about 115 miles W. S. W. of Cuyabá and 50 miles from the Bolivian boundary. Founded in 1776 by Luiz de Albuquerque de Mello Pereira e Cáceres as a fort to oppose the Spaniards and called Maria in honor of the Queen of Portugal, it was chartered as a town in 1859. In 1895 its population was only about 1500 (mostly Indians), but owing to the increasing commerce between Matto Grosso and the South which is carried on entirely by river, São Luiz (being the most southerly Brazilian port on the Rio Paraguay) has become an important centre. The cathedral church is dedicated to St. Aloysius. The diocesan statistics are not yet available. GALANTI, Compendio de historia do Brazil, III (São Paulo, 1902), 226-41. A.A. MACERLEAN Joseph E. O'Connor Sao Luiz de Maranhao São Luiz de Maranhão (SANCTI LUDOVICI DE MARAGNANO). Diocese; suffragan of Belém de Pará, comprises the State of Maranhão in Northern Brazil. The Prefecture of São Luiz was annexed to the See of Olinda by Innocent XI, 15 July, 1614; on 30 Aug., 1677, it was created a bishopric dependent on Lisbon; Frei Antonio de S. Maria, a Capuchin of S. Antonio, was appointed to the see, but before he took possession he was transferred to Miranda, and Gregorio dos Anjos, a secular canon of the Congregation of St. John the Evangelist, became its first bishop. It comprised then all Maranhão, Pará, and Amazonas. The see was vacant from 1813 till 1820; Leo XII made it suffragan to São Salvador (15 June, 1827). In Jan., 1905, the Diocese of Piahuy was separated from São Luiz, which became suffragan to Belem de Pará, 3 May, 1906. The Diocese of São Luiz has an area of 177,560 square miles, and contains about 500,000 inhabitants, practically all Catholics; 57 parishes; 36 secular clergy; 12 Lazarists and Capuchins; 2 congregations of nuns and about 100 churches and chapels. The present bishop, Francisco de Paula Silva, C.M., successor of Mgr Albano, was born at Douradinho on 31 Oct., 1866; joining the Lazarists he was professed in 1891; ordained on 24 Jan., 1896; appointed master of novices at Petropolis, and later rector of the Lazarist College, at Serra de Caracas, named Bishop of São Luiz on 18 April, 1907; consecrated on 14 July following by Cardinal Arcoverde of Rio de Janeiro. The territory of Maranhão was discovered by Pinzón in 1500 and granted to João de Barros in 1534 as a Portuguese hereditary captaincy. The Island of Maranhão lies between the Bays of São Marcos and São José. It was seized in 1612 by the French under Daniel de La Touche, Seigneur de La Rividière, who founded São Luiz, near the Rio Itapicurú, the site being blessed by the Capuchins who accompanied him and who established the Convent of St. Francis. The island was seized by the Portuguese under Albuquerque in 1614. Very successful Indian missions were soon begun by the Jesuits, who were temporarily expelled as a result of a civil war in 1684 for their opposition to the enslavement of the Indians. São Luiz city has about 30,000 inhabitants, and contains several convents, charitable institutes, the episcopal palace, a fine Carmelite church, and an ecclesiastical seminary. GALANTI, Hist. do Brazil (São Paulo, 1896-l905). A.A. MACERLEAN Archdiocese of Sao Paulo (Brazil) São Paulo (S. PAULI IN BRASILIA). The ecclesiastical province of São Paulo, in the Republic of Brazil, South America, comprises the Dioceses of Campinas, Riberão Preto, Taubaté, Botucatú, Corityba, and São Carlos do Pinhal, all these dioceses being in the State of São Paulo. Created a bishopric in 1745 it was raised to metropolitan rank in 1908, when the above mentioned dioceses were also created. The Catholic population in the province in 1910 amounted to over 2,500,000 souls. There are 203 secular priests; 50 regular priests, distributed among 7 religious orders and institutions of learning; 4 convents; 530 churches and chapels; and 36 Catholic schools. In the city of São Paulo, the seat of the archdiocese, are located: the Seminario Provincial, for ecclesiastical students; the Seminario Central; the Seminario das Educandas, under the Sisters of St. Joseph, for the education of poor girls; the Gymnasio de S. Bento, directed by the Benedictines; the Gymnasio Diocesano de S. Paulo, under the Marist Brothers; the Gymnasio de Nossa Senhora do Monte Carmo; and the Lyceu de Artes e Officios do Sagrado Coração de Jesus. The Catholic publications in the diocese are: the "Boletin ecclesiastico", the official organ; "Ave Maria"; "Estandarte Catholico"; "União Catholica". The city of São Paulo, founded in 1561, is one of the most populous (350,000 in 1910) and prosperous in Brazil; it is the centre of the coffee trade, Brazil's greatest industry. The present archbishop, the Most Rev. Duarte Leopoldo da Silva (b. 4 Apr., 1864), was transferred to São Paulo in 1907, and consecrated in 1908. JULIAN MORENO-LACALLE Sao Salvador de Bahia de Todos Os Santos São Salvador de Bahia de Todos os Santos (SANCTI SALVATORIS OMNIUM SANCTORUM). A Brazilian see erected by Julius III, 25 Feb., 1551, as suffragan of Lisbon, and raised to archiepiscopal rank by Innocent XI, 16 Nov., 1676. The diocese at first comprised all Brazil, which had previously formed part of the Diocese of Funchal; the first Mass in Brazil was celebrated on 26 April, 1500, at Cocoa Vermelha Island by Henrique de Coimbra, O.F.M. In 1537 the Mercy Hospital was erected at Santos. The first bishop, Pedro Fernandes Sardinha, arrived at Bahia on 22 June, 1552; he left on 2 June, 1556, to return to Europe, but was shipwrecked between the rivers São Francisco and Cururipu and murdered by the Indians, 16 June, 1556. The Church was then governed by Francisco Fernandes till the arrival of the second bishop, Pedro Leitão (1559), who held the first Brazilian synod at Bahia, where he died in 1573. By 1581 there were sixty-two churches at Bahia and in the neighboring region, the Reconcavo. The first archbishop, Gaspar de Mendonca, took possession of his see by procuration on 3 June, 1677. Archbishop Sebastião Monteiro da Vida (1702-22) held a provincial council and published the statutes, known as "Constituicão do Arcebispado da Bahia" The first governor of Brazil, Thomé de Souza, arrived at Bahia on 29 March, 1549; with him were six Jesuits, the first sent to the New World, under Manoel da Nobrega. Two days later the first Mass was said at Bahia. On 1 July, 1553, there arrived at Bahia the Venerable José Anchieta, S.J., the Apostle of Brazil. A native mission, São Andre, was begun forthwith near the city. In 1554 Father da Nobrega opened a college at Piratininga. The early Jesuit missionaries contributed greatly to the progress of the new colony, giving free education, curbing the violence of the pioneers, and protecting the Indians from slavery, for which purpose they obtained a royal decree in 1570. They also constructed, from Santos to São Paulo, a road which for three centuries remained the principal highway of the region. They compiled many important works on the native Indian languages, among which may be mentioned the grammars by Anchieta, Manoel da Veiga, Manoel de Moraes, Luiz Figueira, and Montoya; and Mammiani's "Catechismo da doutrina christã na lingua brazilica da nação kiriri". The seminary at Bahia was founded by Damasus de Abreu Vieira, O.F.M.; in 1583 the Benedictines established the Abbey of São Sebastião at Bahia. The episcopal city, Bahia, was founded by Thomé de Souza in 1549 near the site of Victoria which had been established in 1536 by Francisco Pereira Coutinho. At the beginning of the nineteenth century it contained houses of the Benedictines, Franciscans, Carmelites, Augustinians, Italian Capuchins, and the Mendicants of the Holy Land; also the Carmelite, Trinitarian, Franciscan, and Dominican tertiaries, a mercy hospital, a leper hospital, and two orphanages in addition to many schools. It has now a population of over 200,000 inhabitants; the archdiocese contains about 2,500,000 Catholics, 5000 Protestants, 208 parishes, 240 secular and 80 regular priests, 3 colleges, and 725 churches and chapels. The present archbishop, Jerome Thomé da Silva, was born at Sobral on 12 June, 1849; educated at the Collegio Pio-latino-americano, Rome; ordained there on 21 Dec., 1872; appointed Vicar-General of Olinda; named Bishop of Belém do Pará on 26 June, 1890; and transferred as successor of Mgr Macedo Costa to São Salvador on 12 Sept., 1893, being enthroned in Feb., 1894. GALANTI, Compendio de historia do Brazil (São Paulo, 1896-1905), an excellent account of the early Indian tribes, their languages, customs, and religions is given in I, 90-139; SOUTHEY, Hist. of Brazil (London, 1810-19). A.A. MACERLEAN Sao Sebastiao Do Rio de Janeiro São Sebastião do Rio de Janeiro (S. SEBASTIAN FLUMINIS JANUARII). The ecclesiastical province of Rio de Janeiro, the third of the seven constituting the Brazilian episcopate, was first created a bishopric, as a suffragan see of the Archdiocese of São Salvador da Bahia, by a Bull of 22 Nov., 1676. It was raised to an archbishopric in 1893, its jurisdiction comprising the Dioceses of Nietheroy (1893) and Espirito Santo (1892) and the Prefecture of Rio Branco. The total Catholic population of the whole province in 1910 was 2,051,800, and that of the archdiocese proper, 800,000. The jurisdiction of the latter extends over the whole territory of the federal district in which Rio de Janeiro, the capital of the republic and seat of the archdiocese, is located. There are in the federal district 20 parish churches, 59 chapels, various monasteries and nunneries, and 63 Catholic associations prominent among which are: the "Irmandade do Sanctissimo Sacramento da Candelaria", founded in 1669 and in charge of the bureau of charities caring for nearly 1000 indigent persons, and of the Asylum of Our Lady of Piety for the education of orphan girls; the "Irmandade da Santa Casa da Misericordia", operating since 1545 and maintaining a general hospital, a foundling asylum, an orphan asylum, and a funeral establishment for the burial of the poor. These benevolent associations, known in Brazil as irmandades (brotherhoods), do a highly charitable and eminently Christian work, assisting the poor and caring for the orphans and the sick, by the maintenance of hospitals, asylums, savings banks, schools, etc. There are also several associations of St. Vincent of Paul, performing similar work. Of religious orders, there are in the archdiocese Jesuits, Franciscans, Carmelites, Lazarists, Dominicans, and Benedictines; of female orders, there are Sisters of Charity, Ursulines, Carmelites, Poor Clares, and others. The archdiocese maintains at Rio de Janeiro the Seminary of St Joseph. Among other Catholic institutions of learning are: the College of the Immaculate Conception for girls; the Jesuit college; the College of the Sacred Heart of Jesus; the College of the Sacred Heart of Mary for girls. Mention should also be made of the "Circulo Catholico", a large association founded on 15 Sept., 1899, for the propagation of the Faith, and to provide young men with moral recreation. The organ of the Church in Rio de Janeiro is "O Universo" (Rue Evaristo Vega No. 61). Rio de Janeiro was the first spot in the New World where a colony of Protestants settled. A little island in the bay was colonized and fortified by Villegaignon under the patronage of Admiral Coligny in 1555. This Huguenot settlement was destroyed by the Portuguese in 1566, and the name of the island changed to São Sebastião. The city of Rio de Janeiro was proclaimed the capital of Brazil in 1763. After the empire was established, the imperial chapel near the palace was selected for a cathedral, which building is at present being reconstructed. Adjacent to it is the Church of Our Lady of Mount Carmel. Both are small structures, but preserve to a wonderful degree the effects of Latin-American architecture. The most noteworthy place of worship in Rio de Janeiro is the Church of the Candelaria. The corner-stone was laid about 1780, the funds having been donated by a pious Brazilian lady in gratitude for her rescue from a great peril at sea. The building was planned by a Brazilian architect, Evaristo de Vega. Its two towers, surmounted by glittering domes, are among the first objects to attract the eye on entering the Bay of Rio de Janeiro; they rise to a height of 228 feet above the street, but, unfortunately, the narrowness of the thoroughfare prevents a good impression of the size and beauty of the structure. The three bronze doors, with relief work showing extraordinary artistic detail, and the interior, finished in marble, with fine wall and ceiling paintings, are among the best of their kind in Latin-America. The present Archbishop of São Sebastião do Rio de Janeiro is His Eminence Joaquim Cardinal Arcoverde de Albuquerque Cavalcanti, born 18 Jan., 1850, elected 26 June, 1890, transferred to Rio de Janeiro, 24 July, 1898, and created cardinal on 11 Dec., 1905. (See BRAZIL, THE UNITED STATES OF.) ALLAIN, Rio de Janeiro (Paris, 1886); FERREIRA DA ROSA, Rio de Janeiro (RIO de Janeiro, 1905). JULIAN MORENO-LACALLE Sao Thiago de Cabo Verde São Thiago de Cabo Verde (SANCTI JACOBI CAPITIS VIRIDIS). This diocese has the seat of its bishopric on the Island of S. Nicolau and comprises the Cape Verde Archipelago, which forms one civil province, and Portuguese Guinea, on the coast of Senegambia, which forms another. Each of these two provinces is under a governor who is appointed by the national Government. THE PROVINCE OF CAPE VERDE (CABO VERDE), with the seat of the civil and military Government at Praia, on the Island of S. Thiago, lies between 14°40' and 17°14' N. latitude and between 22°50' and 25°30' longitude W. of Greenwich. It is made up of ten islands which are divided into the two groups of Barlavento and Sotavento. The Barlavento group consists of the islands of Boa-Vista, Sal, S. Nicolau, Santa Luzia, S. Vicente, and S. Antão; the Sotavento group, of Maio, S. Thiago, Fogo, and Brava. In the Barlavento group of islands there are two judicial districts, one with its seat at Santo Antão, the other at Mindello, on the Island of S. Vicente. The Sotavento group forms but one judicial district, the seat of which is at Praia, on the Island of S. Thiago. Each of these islands is under a municipal council (municipio), except Maio, which belongs to the municipio of Praia, and Santa Luzia, which is still uninhabited. The province has a population of 142,000, of whom 4718 are whites, 50,033 blacks, and 87,249 mulattoes. The number of foreigners is very small, not exceeding 828. The areas and population of the islands are: Boa Vista, 236.5 square miles, 2691 inhabitants; Sal, 79.5 square miles, 640 inhabitants; S. Nicolau, 94.5 square miles, 10,462 inhabitants; S. Vicente, 75.5 square miles, 10,086 inhabitants; Santa Luzia, 15.5 square miles, uninhabited; Santo Antão, 302.5 square miles, 33,838 inhabitants; Maio, 42 square miles, 1895 inhabitants; S. Thiago, 419.75 square miles, 56,082 inhabitants; Foga, 204& 2/3 square miles, 17,582 inhabitants; Brava, 21.75 square miles, 8970 inhabitants. S. Vicente is an important port and coaling station. Ecclesiastically the province is divided as follows: Boa Vista, 2 parishes; Sal, 1; S. Nicolau, 2; S. Vicente, 1; Santo Antão, 6; Maio, 1; S. Thiago, 11; Fogo, 4; Brava, 2. Boa Vista contains 3 primary schools; Sal, 2; S. Nicolau, 1 lyceum-seminary and 6 primary schools; S. Vicente, 1 school of navigation, and 7 primary schools; Maio, 1; S. Thiago, 22; Fozo, 7; Brava, 6. THE PROVINCE OF PORTUGUESE GUINEA has an area of about 14,270 square miles, with a population of 300,000. Its capital, Bolama, is the seat of the only judicial district in the province, and of the municipal council. It has also three military districts, Bissau, Cacheu, and Geba. Portuguese Guinea has a vicar-general who is nominated by the bishop of the diocese. It contains six parishes: Bolama, Bissau, Cacheu, Farim, Buba, and Geba. There are a few primary schools, which, however, are poorly attended. Ethnography The population of Cape Verde consists of European and native whites, blacks, and mixed (mestiços). The language is a dialect called crioulo, which is made up from various languages with Portuguese predominating. The people are half civilized, are mild in disposition, not incIined to hard work, and by no means provident, so that whenever the rains fail they are liable to suffer from great scarcity of food. They have little practical ability and are given to pleasure, particularly to dancing; balls, which are organized on the slightest pretext, being their favourite pastime. The arts are not cultivated; industry and commerce—what little there is—are exclusively in the hands of Europeans. The Catholic religion is professed, but its practice is mingled with many superstitions. The average annual frequentation of the sacraments is: baptisms, 4872; marriages, 534; confessions and communions, 36,000. With respect to Guinea little can be said, its population being still in a condition of savagery. Its annual statistics are: baptisms, 330; marriages, 10; confessions and communions, 20. Arabic and various African dialects are spoken. History It is known that the Cape Verde Archipelago was discovered by the Portuguese in 1460, and Guinea in 1445. In 1553 these territories were erected into a diocese by a Bull of Clement VII dated 31 January. The diocese has been governed by prelates of great learning, some of them also of great virtue, and to them is due all the improvemept that has been wrought in the condition of Cape Verde. It has no charitable organizations except a Confraternity of the Blessed Sacrament on the Island of S. Nicolau, which supports a primary school and supplies the lack of rural banks by lending capital at a low rate of interest. Mitra, Cabido, and some of the parishes enjoy the benefit of legacies made by benefactors of the diocese, which are liberally administered. There are no religious societies. The clergy are subsidized by the State and are exempt from the public burdens of military service, jury duty, etc. It is expected, however, that the legal separation of Chureh and State, already put in force at the national capital, will very soon be applied in this colony, and the changes which will result are as yet unknown. JOSÉ ALVES MARTINS Diocese of Sappa Sappa (SAPPENSIS, SAPPATENSIS, ZAPPATENSIS). Diocese in Albania, established in 1062, by Alexander II. In 1491 Innocent VIII joined to it the See of Sarda (Sardoniki), and the united sees were suffragans of Antivari until the end of the eighteenth century. The See of Sarda comprised also the Diocese of Daynum (Dagnum, Dagno, Danj; Daynensis), founded as suffragan of Antivari about the second half of the fourteenth century and united with Sarda by Martin V in 1428. The exact number of bishops of Sappa is unknown. The first Bishop of Sappa mentioned is Paulus about 1370. The most famous bishops of Sappa were George Blanko (1623-35), deliverer of his fatherland from the Turks, and Lazarus Vladanja of Scutari (1746-49). The present, forty-first, Bishop of Sappa is Mgr. James Serecci, suffragan of Scutari. He has his residence at the village of Nensat (Nensciati). His diocese comprises about 22,000 inhabitants of various creeds, of whom 17,280 are Catholics. By the Albanian Council in 1703 the Bishop of Sappa obtained some parishes pertaining to the Diocese of Pulati. The ecclesiastical students of this diocese are educated at the seminary of Scutari. The Diocese of Sappa also includes the Franciscan monastery at Trosan (Trosciani), where the Minorites have a "Collegium seraphicum" for their students of philosophy. FARLATI-COLETI. Illyricum sacrum, VII (Venice, 1819), 229-32, 271-91; GAMS, Series episcoporum ecclesiae catholicae (Rastisbon, 1873 and 1886), 405-406, 415-416; THEINER, Monumenta Slavorum, I, nos. 233, 219; HOFFER in Zeitschrift fur kath. Theol. (Innsbruck, 1895), 360 (1896), 164; MIHACEVIC, Serafinski Perivoj, XXIII, 126; MARKOVIC, Dukljansko-barska metropolija (Agram, 1902), 47-50. ANTHONY LAWRENCE GANCEVIC Sara Sara Sara (Hebrew for "princess"; another form, Sarai, the signification of which is doubtful, is found in passages occurring before Genesis 17:15). Sara was the wife of Abraham and also his step-sister (Genesis 12:15; 20:12). We do not find any other account of her parentage. When Abraham goes down to Egypt because of the famine, he induces Sara, who though sixty-five years of age is very beautiful, to say that she is his sister; whereupon she is taken to wife by the King of Egypt, who, however, restores her after a Divine admonition (Genesis 12). In a variant account (Genesis 20), she is represented as being taken in similar circumstances by Abimelech, King of Gerara, and restored likewise to Abraham through a Dine intervention. After having been barren till the age of ninety, Sara, in fulfilment of a Divine promise, gives birth to Isaac (Genesis 21:1-7). Later we find her through Jealousy ill-treating her handmaiden Agar the Egyptian, who had borne a child to Abraham, and finally she forces that latter to drive away the bond-woman and her son Ishmael (Genesis 21). Sara lived to the age of one hundred and twenty-seven years, and at her death was buried in the cave of Macphelah in Hebron (Genesis 23). Isaiah 51:2 alludes to Sara as the mother of the chosen people; St. Peter praises her submission to her husband (1 Peter 3:6). Other New Testament references to Sara are in Romans 4:19; 9:9; Galatians 4:22-23; Hebrews 11:11. JAMES F. DRISCOLL Sarabaites Sarabaites A class of monks widely spread before the time of St. Benedict. They either continued like the early ascetics, to live in their own homes, or dwelt together in or near cities. They acknowledged no monastic superior, obeyed no definite rule, and disposed individually of the product of their manual labour. St. Jerome speaks of them under the name of Remoboth, and Jolm Cassian tells of their wide diffusion in Egypt and other lands. Both writers express a very unfavourable opinion concerning their conduct, and a reference to them in the Rule of St. Benedict (c. i) is of similar import. At a later date the name Sarabaites, the original meaning of which cannot be determined, designated in a general way degenerate monks. ST. JEROME, Epist., xxii, 34; CASSIAN, Coll., xviii, 4, 7; FUNK, tr. CAPPADELTA, CHURCH HISTORY, I, 213. N.A. WEBER Saragossa Saragossa (CAESARAUGUSTANA) Diocese in Spain; comprises a great part of the civil Province of Saragossa (Zaragoza). It is bounded on the north by Navarre and Huesca; on the east by Huesca, Lerida, and Tarragona; on the south by Valencia and Teruel; on the west by Guadalajara and Soria. The episcopal city, situated on the Ebro, has 72,000 inhabitants. Before the Roman period the site of Saragossa appears to have been occupied by Salduba, a little village of Edetania, within the boundaries of Celtiberia. Here in A.U.C. 727 Octavius Augustus, then in his seventh consulate, founded the colony of Caesar Augusta, giving it the Italian franchise and making it the capital of a juridical conventus. Pomponius Mela called it "the most illustrious of the inland cities of Hispania Tarraconensis." In A.D. 452 it fell under the power of the Suevian king Reciarius; in 466 under that of the Visigoth Euric. St. Isidore extolled it as one of the best cities of Spain in the Gothic period, and Pacensis called it "the most ancient and most flourishing." The diocese is one of the oldest in Spain, for its origin dates back to the coming of the Apostle James — a fact of which there had never been any doubt until Baronius, influenced by a fabulous story of García de Loaisa, called it in question. Urban VIII ordered the old lesson in the Breviary dealing with this point to be restored (see Compostela). Closely involved with the tradition of St. James's coming to Spain, and of the founding of the church of Saragossa, are those of Our Lady of the Pillar (see Nuestra SeÑora del Pilar) and of Sts. Athanasius and Theodore, disciples of St. James, who are supposed to have been the first bishops of Saragossa. About the year 256 there appears as bishop of this diocese Felix Caesaraugustanus, who defended true discipline in the case of Basilides and Martial, Bishops, respectively, of Astorga and Merida. St. Valerius, who assisted at the Council of Iliberis, was bishop from 290 to 315 and, together with his disciple and deacon St. Vincent, suffered martyrdom in the persecution of Dacian. It is believed that there had been martyrs at Saragossa in previous persecutions as Prudentius seems to affirm; but no certain record is to be found of any before this time, when, too, St. Engratia and the "numberless saints" (santos innumerables), as they are called, gained their crowns. It is said that Dacian, to detect and so make an end of all the faithful of Saragossa, ordered that liberty to practice their religion should be promised them on condition that they all went out of the city at a certain fixed time and by certain designated gates. As soon as they had thus gone forth, he ordered them to be put to the sword and their corpses burned. Their ashes were mixed with those of criminals, so that no veneration might be paid them. But a shower of rain fell and washed the ashes apart, forming those of the martyrs into certain white masses. These, known as the "holy masses" (las santas masas) were deposited in the crypt of the church dedicated to St. Engratia, where they are still preserved. St. Vincent was taken to Valencia, where he suffered a long and terrible martyrdom. St. Valerius was exiled to a place called Enet, near Barbastro, where he died, and whence his relics were translated first to Roda, the head and arm being brought thence to Saragossa when that city had been reconquered. The See of Saragossa was occupied during the Gothic period by two illustrious bishops: St. Braulius, who assisted at the Fourth, Fifth, and Sixth Councils of Toledo; and Tajón, famous for his own writings and for having discovered at Rome the third part of St. Gregory's "Morals." From 592 to 619 the bishop was Maximus, who assisted at the Councils of Barcelona and Egara, and whose name, combined with that of the monk Marcus, has been used to form an alleged Marcus Maximus, the apocryphal continuator of Flavius Dexter. In 542, when the Franks laid siege to Saragossa to take vengeance for the wrongs of the Catholic princess, Clotilde, the besieged went forth in procession and delivered to the enemy, as the price of their raising the siege, a portion of the blood-stained stole of St. Vincent, the deacon. Before the Saracen invasion three national councils were held at Saragossa. The first, earlier than those of Toledo, in 380, when Valerius II was bishop, had for its object the extirpation of Priscillianism; the second, in 592, in the episcopate of Maximus was against the Arians; the third, under Bishop Valderedus, in 691, provided that queens, when widowed, should retire to some monastery for their security and for the sake of decorum. During the Saracen occupation the Catholic worship did not cease in this city; the churches of the Virgin and of St. Engratia were maintained, while that of the Saviour was turned into a mosque. Of the bishops of this unhappy period the names are preserved of Senior, who visited St. Eulogius at Cordoba (849), and of Eleca, who in 890 was driven from the city by the Moslems and took refuge at Oviedo. Paternus was sent by Sancho the Great to Cluny, to introduce the Cluniac reform into Spain in the monasteries of S. Juan de la Pena and S. Salvador de Leyre, and was afterwards appointed Bishop of Saragossa. Alfonso I, the Fighter, of Aragon, reconquered the city on 18 Dec., 1118, and named as bishop Pedro de Librana, whose appointment was confirmed by Gelasius II. López, in his "Historia de Zaragoza," says that Librana first resided at the Church of the Pillar, and on 6 Jan., 1119, purified the great mosque, which he dedicated to the Saviour, and there established his episcopal see. Hence the controversy which began in 1135, in the episcopate of García Guerra de Majones, between the canons of the Pillar and those of St. Saviour as to the title of cathedral. In 1318 the See of Saragossa was made metropolitan by a grant of John XXII (14 June), Pedro López de Luna being bishop. For more than a century (1458-1577) princes of the royal blood occupied the see: Juan of Aragon, natural son of Juan II (1458); Alonso of Aragon (1478); another Juan of Aragon (1520); Fernando of Aragon, who had been the Cistercian Abbot of Veruela. In the factions which followed upon the death of King Martin, Archbishop García Fernández de Heredia was assassinated by Antonio de Luna, a partisan of the Count of Urgel (1411). In 1485 the first inquisitor-general, St. Peter Arbues, fell a martyr in the cathedral, slain by some relapsed Jews who were led by Juan de la Abadia. The cathedral is dedicated to the Saviour, as it had been before the Mohammedan invasion. It shares its rank with the Church of Nuestra Señor del Pilar, half of the chapter residing at each of the two churches, while the dean resides six months at each alternately. The building of the cathedral was begun by Pedro Tarrjao in the fourteenth century. In 1412 Benedict XIII caused a magnificent baldachinum to be erected, but one of its pillars fell down, and it was reduced to its present condition. In 1490 Archbishop Alonso of Aragon raised the two lateral naves, which had been lower, to an equal height with the central, and added two more; Fernando of Aragon added three other naves beyond the choir, to counterbalance the excessive width of the building, and thus, in 1550 was the Gothic edifice completed. The great chancel and choir were built by order of Archbishop Dalmau de Mury Cervellón (1431-58). In the chapel of S. Dominguito del Val are preserved the relies of that saint, a boy of seven who was crucified by the Jews in 1250. The facade of the cathedral is Renaissance, and beside it rises the tower, more modern than the body of the church, having been begun in 1790. The Church of Nuestra Señor del Pilar is believed to have originated in a chapel built by the Apostle James. Bishop Librana found it almost in ruins and appealed to the charity of all the faithful to rebuild it. At the close of the thirteenth century four bishops again stirred up the zeal of the faithful to repair the building, which was preserved until the end of the seventeenth century. In 1681 work was commenced on the new church, the first stone being laid by Archbishop Diego de Castrillo, 25 July, 1685. This grandiose edifice, 500 ft. (about 457 English feet) in length, covers the capella angelica, where the celebrated image of the Blessed Virgin is venerated. Though the style of the building is not of the best period, attention is attracted by its exterior, its multitude of cupolas, which are reflected in the waters of the Ebro, giving it a character all its own. Saragossa possesses many very noteworthy churches. Among them are that of St. Engratia, built on the spot where the victims of Dacian were martyred. It was destroyed in the War of Independence, only the crypt and the doorway being left; a few years ago, however, it was rebuilt, and now serves as a parish church. The University of Saragossa obtained from Carlos I (the Emperor Charles V) in 1542, the privileges accorded to others in Spain. Its importance was afterwards promoted by Pedro Cerduna, Bishop of Tarazona; he gave it a building which lasted until it was blown up by the French in 1808. A separate building has been erected for the faculties of medicine and sciences. The archiepiscopal palace is a splendid edifice erected by Archbishop Agustin de Lezo y Palomeque. There are two ecclesiastical seminaries: that of Sts. Valerius and Braulius, founded by Archbishop Lezo in 1788, was destroyed by an explosion and was rebuilt in 1824 by Archbishop Bernardo Frances Caballero; that of St. Charles Borromeo, formerly a Jesuit college, was converted into a seminary by Carlos III. FLOREZ-RISCO, Esp. sagrada, XXX, XXXI (2nd ed., Madrid); LAMBERTO DE ZARAGOZA, Teatro hist. de las iglesias. . .de Aragon (Pamplona, 1780); CUADRADO, Aragon in Espana, sus monumentos y artes (Barcelona, 1886); BLANCAS, DIEGO DE ESPES, CARRILLO, Episcopalogios; DE LA FUENTE, Hist. de las universidades de Espana (Madrid, 1899); O'REILLY, Heroic Spain (New York, 1910). RAMÓN RUIZ AMADO University of Saragossa University of Saragossa This university was not definitively established until 1585 its real founder being Don Pedro Cerbunc, Prior of the Cathedral of Saragossa, and later Bishop of Tarrazona, who, by commission of the city of Saragossa, organized the university, prepared its statutes, and endowed it with an income of 30,000 reales. At the end of the sixteenth century theology, philosophy, canon and civil law, medicine, and the humanities were taught. The university was subject to the municipality that had created it until the time of Charles III. The influence of this university was always great in lower Aragon, and during the reign of Charles III, it was great throughout the kingdom. It produced the economists and the principal Jesuits who contributed so much to give to the reign of Charles III the laicist character that it developed. At about this time the so-called Voltairean ideas were introduced into the university, the "Academia de Buen Gusto" was established, and political economy began to be dealt with, which gave rise to many noisy polemics, led by Normante and Carcaviella. The study of economics was introduced by Aio and Aurano, and the Royal Academy of Aragon and the Academia de San Lucas helped in the development of letters. Among the professors were the physician Juan Sobrarias, the poet Antonio Geron, Pedro Malon de Chaide, Juan Lorenzo Palmireno, Pedro Simon de Abril, the Jesuit Mice Andrés Serveto de Aviñon, Clemente Comenge, Bishop of Ciudad Rodrigo, Juan Francisco Guillén, Archbishop of Burgos, Ustarroz, Aramburo, Carrillo, Portolés, Vargas Machuca, etc. With regard to its government and to the programme of its studies, the University of Saragossa, like all the universities of Spain, has lost its individual life, the professors being reduced to the level of state officials, each having the anarchical individual license of explaining the matter assigned to him according to any programme he may see fit, or according to no programme at all. The university has faculties of law, medicine, exact sciences, physics and chemistry, and letters (historical section). There are on an average 600 students, nearly half of whom study medicine, and about one quarter each, law and science, while the remainder follow the studies of letters. TRAYLLA, Historia de la Universidad de Zaragoza (1603); LAJANA AND QUARTANET, Estatutos de la Universidad y estudio general de la ciudad de Zaragoza (1618); JOSEF, Discursos historicos politicos (1684); DE CARMON Y TRAMULLES, Memorias literarias de Zaragoza (1768); BORAO, Historia de la Universidad de Zaragoza (s. d.); DE LA FUENTE, Historia de las Universidades de Espana (1887). TEODORO RODRIGUEZ Sarayacu Mission Sarayacú Mission The chief Franciscan mission of the Ucavali river country, Department of Loreto, north-east Peru, in the eighteenth century, and situated upon a small arm of the river, on the west side, about 6 deg. 45 min. south and 275 miles above its junction with the Amazon. The name signifies "River of the Wasp." The evangelization of the wild tribes of Eastern Peru, in the forests beyond the main Cordillera, was divided between the Jesuits and the Franciscans, the former having the territory immediately along the Maranyon (Amazon) and its northern affluents, directed from the college of Quito, while the Franciscans took under their care the territory along the middle and upper courses of the Huallaga and Ucayali, directed latterly from the Franciscan college of Ocopa, near Jauja, Central Peru, founded in 1712, especially for the education of missionaries. Sarayacú was established in 1791 by Father Narciso Girbal, his first colonists being some of the wild Setebo Indians. These were soon joined by bands from other tribes, and the population grew rapidly. In 1801 it was placed in charge of Fr. Manual Plaza, who remained with it nearly fifty years until his death and was succeeded by Fr. Vicente Calvo. In the half century during which Fr. Plaza with his three or four assistants thus governed their little community in the heart of a savage wilderness, they saw visitors from the outside world only twice, viz. Smyth and Lowe in 1835 and Castelnau in 1846. Under his direction a church and residence were built, and the grass-thatched houses laid out upon a regular town plan. The portico of the church, which called forth the admiration of these travelers, was designed and executed by one of the fathers, an Italian with architectural training. With the opening of the revolutionary struggle in 1815 all governmental aid was withdrawn from the missions, most of which were abandoned, a part of the Indians, in some cases, joining these at Sarayacú, which continued to prosper through the tireless energy of Fr. Plaza. In 1835 it contained a population of about 2000 souls, representing many tribes — Pano, Omagua, Yameo, Conibo, Setebo, Sipibo, Sensi, Amahuaca, Remo, Campa, Mayoruna, and Capanahua, some of them from as far as the Huallaga and the Amazon. Each of the three principal tribes first named occupied a distinct section of the town. The Pano language was the medium of intercommunication. Besides the main town there were several other branch villages along the river, chief of which was Tierra Blanca. All of the few travellers who have left records of their visits to Sarayacú are full of praise for the hospitable kindness of the fathers and the good effect of their teaching upon the mission Indians as compared with the wild tribes of the forest, except as to the besetting sin of drunkenness, from the drinking of chicha, a sort of beer made from corn or plantains (bananas), in which both sexes constantly indulged, despite the protests and warnings of the missionaries. Smyth, the English officer, who saw it at perhaps its best in 1835, gives an interesting account of the town, the various tribes, the routine of mission life, and the holiday celebrations. Ten years later a general epidemic wasted all the tribes of the Ucayali, and in 1846 Castelnau found only 1200 Indians at the mission. A large part of this decrease, however, was due to the removal of the men to engage with the rubber gatherers and the boat crews on the Amazon. In 1851 the American Lieutenant Herndon stopped there and was kindly received by Fr. Calvo, who was then in charge. "Father Calvo, meek and humble in personal concerns, yet full of zeal and spirit for his office, clad in his long serge gown, belted with a cord, with bare feet and accurate tonsure, habitual stoop and generally bearing upon his shoulder a beautiful and saucy bird of the parrot kind, was my beau ideal of a missionary monk. He is an Arragonese, and had served as a priest in the army of Don Carlos." Two other priests an Italian and a Catalan, with a lay brother, who did the cooking and as unwearied in his attentions, made up the household. He adds, "I was sick here, and think that I shall ever remember with gratitude the affectionate kindness of these pious and devoted friars of St. Francis." The government was patriarchal, through Indian officers under supervision of the priest. The Indians were tractable and docile, but drunken, and although the location was healthy, and births exceeded deaths, the population constantly diminished from emigration down the river. From various industries they derived an annual income of about twelve hundred dollars, from which, with their garden, the four priests and lay brother supported themselves, bought vestments and supplies, and kept the church in repair and decoration. In 1856 the mission was visited by an- other epidemic. In 1859 the official geographer Raimondi found there 1030 inhabitants and a flourishing school, besides about 200 more at Tierra Blanca. In the same year Fr. Calvo established another branch station at Callaria, higher up the Ucayali, as a meeting-ground for the wild tribes in that direction. This has the effect of further drawing from the diminishing importance of Sarayacú, which was finally abandoned as a mission in 1863. It continues, however, as the chief port of the Ucayali, with a mixed Indian and Spanish population with the Quichua language as the medium. (See also PANO INDIANS; SETEBO INDIANS.) CASTELNAU, Expedition dans les partes centrales de l'Amerique du Sud, IV (Paris, 1851); HERNDON, Exploration of the Valley of the Amazon, I (Washington, 1854); ORDINAIRE, Les Sauvages du Perou in Revue d'Ethnographie, VI (Paris, 1887); RAIMONDI, El Peru, III (Lima, 1879); IDEM, Apuntes sobre la Provincia litoral de Loreto (Lima, 1862); SMYTH AND LOWE, Narrative of a Journey from Lima to Para (London, 1836). JAMES MOONEY Mathias Casimir Sarbiewski Mathias Casimir Sarbiewski The Horace of Poland, b. near Plonsk, in the Duchy of Masovia, 24 February, 1595; d. 2 April, 1649. He entered the novitiate of the Jesuits at Vilna on 25 July, 1612; studied rhetoric and philosophy during 1614-17; taught grammar and humanities during 1617-18 and rhetoric at Polotsk during 1618-20; studied theology at Vilna from 1620-22; was sent in 1622 to complete his theology at Rome, and was there ordained priest in 1623. Returning to Poland he taught rhetoric, philosophy, and theology at Vilna from 1626 to 1635, was then made preacher to King Wladislaw, and was for four years companion in his travels. The fame of Sarbiewski is as wide as the world of letters. He was gifted with remarkable general talent, especially in music and the fine arts, but his chief excellence was as a poet versed in all the metres of the ancients. He was especially devoted to Horace, whose odes he knew by heart. He also made the lyrical poetry of Pindar his own. To his familiarity with these great poets he added an industry which has given the splendid yield of his poetic works. The latest edition of these, printed at Starawiés in 1892, embraces four books of lyrics, a book of epodes, his posthumous "Silviludia" (Woodland Notes), and his book of epigrams. Of all these the lyrics furnish the best example of his qualities of mind and heart. All are pitched in a high key of thought, sentiment, or passion. His themes are for the most part love and devotion for Christ Crucified, for Our Blessed Lady, or friendship for a noble patron, such as Bishop Lubienski, Cardinal Francis Barberini, nephew to Urban VIII, and that pontiff himself, whom he hailed as his Maecenas in several odes of exquisite finish. His noblest and most sustained efforts, however, are his patriotic odes upon the fatherland, the Knights of Poland, and kindred subjects. His tenderest pieces are those in praise of the rose, the violet, and the grasshopper, in which he rivals the grace and happy touch of Horace himself. He was crowned with the poet's wreath by King Wladislaw IV. Urban VIII named him one of the revisers of the hymns of the Breviary, and he in particular is credited with having softened their previous ruggedness of metre. Some critics have urged that in his love of Horace he went so far as to become servile in imitating him, while others again have made a very virtue out of this close imitation. As a religious he was noted for his love of solitude, turning from the attractions of court life to solitude, prayer, and useful study and occupation. His prose works are: (1) "De acuto et arguto liber unicus"; (2) "Dii gentium," a speculative work on the ancient arts and sciences; (3) "De perfecta poesi libri quattuor"; (4) "De Deo uno et trino tractatus"; (5) "De angelis"; (6) "De physico continuo"; (7) "Memorabilia"; (8) scattered orations, sermons, and letters. Select poems of Sarbiewski have been translated from the original Latin into other languages. But his poetical works, as a whole, have found few translators. In Polish may be counted no less than twenty-two versions of the poet; yet, only two of these are in any measure complete, the rest being translations of chosen odes. The most notable Polish version, embracing almost all the poems, is that of Louis Kondratowicz, who also wrote the life of Sarbiewski and translated his letters. There is also a copy in Polish of all the odes extant in manuscript at Starawiés, the work of some few Jesuit fathers of the province of White Russia. Detached translations also exist in Italian, Flemish, and Bohemian. In German there are at least eight or nine translations, principally from the odes, and also incomplete. The French versions are of the same character: they are three or four in number, choice odes or pieces taken from the "Poems." The English translations are fuller and more complete than any others. There are at least four that may be styled integral versions: "Odes of Casimire by G.H.," printed for Humphrey Moseley at the Princes Armes in St. Paul's Church Yard, 1646; "Translations from Casimir with Poems, Odes, and specimens of Latin Prose", J. Kitchener (London and Bedford, 1821); "Wood-notes, the Silviludia Poetica of M.C. Sarbievius with a translation in English verse," by R.C. Coxe (Newcastle-on-Tyne, 1848); "Specimens of the Polish poets, with notes and observations on the Literature of Poland," by John Bowring (printed for the author, London, 1827). SOMMERVOGEL, Bibl. de lu C. de J., t. VII, vol.II; Mathiae Casimiri Sarbiewski, S.J. Poemata Omnia (Starawies, 1812); Father Prout's Reliques; BAUMGARTNER, Weltlitteratur, IV; KOLANOWSKI, De M.C. Sarbievio Polonia Horatio dissertatio; DIEL in Stimmen aus Maria-Laach (1873); DANIEL, Etudes classiques. JOHN F. QUIRK Sardes Sardes A titular see of Lydia, in Asia Minor probably the ancient Hyde of Homer (Iliad, II, 844; XX, 385), at the foot of Mount Tmolus; see also Strabo (XIII, iv, 5); Pliny (Hist. nat., v, 29), Stephen of Byzantium, s.v. The name Sardes, which replaced that of Hyde, seems to have been derived from the Shardani, a people mentioned in the cuneiform inscriptions as inhabiting this region. At an early period Sardes was the capital of the Lydians, an early dynasty of whom reigned from 766 to 687 B.C.; a second, that of Mermnades founded by Gyges in 687 B.C., reigned until 546 B.C. Its last king, the celebrated Croesus, was dethroned by Cyrus. Thenceforth it was the residence of the Persian satraps, who administered the conquered kingdom. The capture of the city by the Ionians and the Athenians in 498 B.C. was the cause of wars between the Persians and Greeks. In 334 it surrendered without a struggle to Alexander the Great, after whose death it belonged to Antigonus until 301, when it fell into the power of the Seleucides. Antiochus III having been defeated at Magnesia by the Romans 190 B.C., Sardes was incorporated with the Kingdom of Pergamus, then with the Roman Empire, becoming the capital of the Province of Lydia. The famous river Pactolus flowed through its agora, or forum. In the Apocalypse (iii, 1-3) a letter is written to the Church of Sardes by St. John, who utters keen reproaches against it and its bishop. Among its martyrs are mentioned the priest Therapon, venerated 27 May, and Apollonius (10 July). Among its bishops, of whom Le Quien (Oriens Christ., I, 859-66) gives a long list, were St. Meliton (second century), writer and apologist; St. Euthymius, martyred for the veneration of images (26 Dec., 824); John, his successor who also suffered for the Faith; Andronicus, who made several attempts for the reunion of the Churches. As religious metropolis of Lydia, Sardes ranked sixth in the hierarchy. As early as the seventh century (Gelzer, "Ungedruckte. . .Texte der Notitiae episcopatuum," 537), it had 27 suffragans, which number scarcely varied until the end of the tenth century. At the beginning of the fourteenth century the town, which was still very populous, was captured and destroyed by the Turks. In 1369 it ceased to exist, and Philadelphia replaced it as metropolis (Waeechter,"Der Verfall des Griechentums in Kleinaim XIV Jahrhundert," 44-46). Since then it has been a Greek titular metropolitan see. At present, under the name of Sart, it is but a miserable Turkish village in the sandjak of Saroukhan, and the vilayet of Smyrna. Not one well-preserved and important monument is found among the very extensive ruins. ARUNDELL, Discoveries in Asia Minor, I (London, 1834), 26-28; FELLOW, Journal written during an excursion in Asia Minor (London, 1839), 289-295; HEAD, Catalogue of the Greek Coins of Lydia (London, 1901, 236-77); RAMSAY, The Letters to the Seven Churches of Asia (London, 1908), 354-68; SMITH, Dict. Greek and Roman Geog., s.v.; FILLION in VIG., Dict. de la Bib., s.v.; RADET, La Lydie et le monde grec au temps des Mermnades (Paris, 1893); TCHIHATCHEF, Asie Mineure, I, 232-42; TEXIER, Asie Mineure (Paris, 1862): 252-59; PARGOIRE, Saint-Euthyme et Jean de Sardes in Echos d'Orient, V, 157-61; LE CAMUS, Les sept Eglises de l'Apocalypse (Paris, 1896), 218-30; LAMPAKES, The Seven Stars of the Apocalypse, in Greek (Athens, 1909). S. VAILHÉ Sardica Sardica A titular metropolitan see of Dacia Mediterranea. The true name of the city (now Sophia, the capital of Bulgaria) was Serdica, the city of the Serdi, a Thracian people defeated by Crassus in 29 B.C. and subjected to the Kingdom of Thrace, the vassal of Rome. When this kingdom was suppressed in 49 B.C. the Serdi were included in the Roman Province of Thracia. The Emperor Trajan transformed the borough of the Serdi into a city which he called Ulpia Serdica. In 275 Aurelian caused Dacia beyond the Danube to be evacuated, and transplanted to Moesia and Thracia the soldiers and colonists who were faithful to the Roman cause. The country occupied by these immigrants formed the new Province of Dacia, Sardica being included in this province (Homo, "Essai sur le règne de l'empereur Aurélien," 313-21). Later, Diocletian divided Dacia into Dacia Ripensis and Dacia Mediterranea. Sardica was the civil and ecclesiastical metropolis of the latter. Gallienus established a mint at Sardica, and Constantine the Great, who was born in the region, contemplated making it his capital. Ecclesiastically, Sardica belonged to the Patriarchate of Rome until 733, when it was annexed to that of Constantinople until 809. Upon the conversion of the Bulgarians, in 865, Sardica was one of the first cities which had a see. Until 1204 it was included in the Graeco-Bulgarian Patriarchate of Achrida, until 1393 in the Bulgarian Patriarchate of Tirnovo, and until 1872 in that of Constantinople. Since then Sardica, or, as it is now called, Sophia, belongs to the national Church of Bulgaria. The earliest known bishop is Protagenes, who assisted at the Council of Nicaea in 325; the best known is Bonosus, who shortly afterwards attacked the virginity of the Blessed Virgin. (For the council held here in the fourth century see SARDICA, COUNCIL OF.) Although taken by Attila and often destroyed by the Slavs, the town remained under Byzantine dominion until 809, when it was captured by the Bulgars, who changed its name to Sredetz, later transformed by the Greeks into Sraditza and Triaditza. Again occupied by the Greeks from 1018 to 1186, it enjoyed great prosperity; a section of the population was Paulician or Manichaean. After some years of troubles it again fell into the power of the Bulgars. Its present name of Sophia dates from the Middle Ages, though the precise date of its first use cannot be assigned. In the sixteenth century Sredetz and Sophia were used simultaneously. In 1382 the city was captured by the Turks, and for more than four centuries it was the residence of the beglerbeg, or governor general, of Rumelia. In 1878 Sophia was chosen as the capital of the Principality of Bulgaria, and since 1908 has been the capital of the Kingdom of Bulgaria. A vicariate Apostolic was created here at an early date and confided to the Franciscans. In 1610 Rome reestablished the See of Sophia, which in 1643 was made archiepiscopal. It was suppressed towards the end of the eighteenth century, because the Catholics were persecuted by the Turks and had emigrated, mostly to Austria and Russia. Relative peace was restored in 1835, and Rome confided the direction of the Catholics to the Redemptorists, under a vicar Apostolic who had not received episcopal consecration. The Redemptorists were replaced by the Capuchins in 1841, their superior being consecrated bishop in 1848. At present an archbishop is at the head of this vicariate Apostolic. Sophia has 105,000 inhabitants, of whom a small number are Catholics. The Christian Brothers have a school there, and the Sisters of St. Joseph of the Apparition three convents. LE QUIEN, Oriens christ., II, 301-06; GAMS, Series episcoporum, 416; Echos d'Orient, VII, 209-11; JIRECK, Das Fuerstenthum Bulgariens (Prague, 1891), 357-78; VAILHE in VACANT, Dict. de theol. cath., II, 1233; HILAIRE DE BARENDON, La France catholique en Orient (Paris, 1902), 260-63; MENNINI, Relazione. . .sullo stato del suo apostolico vicario nel 1890-1891 (Milan, 1891); DUPUY- PEYOU, La Bulgarie aux Bulgares (Paris, 1895), 278-324; Missiones Catholicae (Rome, 1790), 117. S. VAILHÉ Council of Sardica Council of Sardica One of the series of councils called to adjust the doctrinal and other difficulties caused by the Arian heresy, held most probably in 343. (For date see Hefele, French Tr., "Histoire des conciles", II, pt. II, 737-42, and Duchesne, "Hist. ancienne de l'Eglise", II, 215.) It was convoked by the Emperors Constans and Constantius at the urgent entreaty of Pope Julius. Hosius of Cordova and other Western bishops, desirous of peace and hoping to secure a final judgment in the case of St. Athanasius and other bishops alternately condemned and vindicated by councils in the East and the West; desirous, also, of settling definitively the confusion arising from the many doctrinal formulx in circulation, suggested that all such matters should be referred to a general council. In order to make the council thoroughly representative, Sardica in Dacia (now Sofia, in Bulgaria), was chosen as the meeting place. Athanasius, driven from Alexandria by the Prefect Philadrius in 339, was summoned by the Emperor Constans from Rome, where he had taken the latter place he met Hosius, who was commissioned by the pope and the emperor to preside over the council, and whom he accompanied to Sardica. Pope Julius was represented by the priests Archidamus and Philoxenus, and the deacon Leo. Ninety-six Western bishops presented themselves at Sardica: those from the East were not so numerous. Being in the minority, the Eastern bishops decided to act as a body, and, fearing defections, they all lodged in the same place. On the ground of being unwilling to recognize Athanasius, Marcellus of Ancyra, and Asclepas, who had been excommunicated in Eastern synods, they refused to sit in council with the Western bishops. Hosius of Cordova attempted to effect a compromise by inviting them to present privately to him their complaints against Athanasius, and by promising, in case Athanasius should be acquitted, to take him to Spain. These overtures failed. The Eastern bishops -- although the council had been called expressly for the purpose of reopening the case in regard to those who had been excommunicated -- defended their conduct on the fictitious plea that one council could not revise the decisions of another. They withdrew from Sardica and met at Philippopolis, where they composed an encyclical and a new creed, which they falsely dated from Sardica. The Western bishops, thus abandoned, examined the cases of Athanasius, Marcellus, and Asclepas. No fresh investigation of charges against Athanasius was considered necessary, as these had already been rejected, and he and the other two bishops, who were permitted to present exculpatory documents, were declared innocent. In addition to this, censure was passed on the Easterns for having abandoned the council, and several of them were deposed and excommunicated. The question of a new creed containing some additions of that of Nicxa was discussed, but although the forumlx had been drawn up, the bishops wisely decided to add nothing to the accepted symbol, and thus gave the Arians no pretext for saying that hitherto they had not been explicitly condemned. Though the form of the proposed creed was presented to the council, it was bit inserted in the encyclical addressed by the council to "all the bishops of the Catholic Church". Before separating, the bishops enacted several important canons, especially concerning the transfer and trial of bishops and appeals. These canons, with the other documents of the council, were sent to Pope Julius with a letter signed by the majority of the attending bishops. The council failed entirely to accomplish its purpose. The pacification of the Church was not secured, and the Eastern bishops grew bolder and more contumacious. PATRICK J. HEALY Sardinia Sardinia The second largest Italian island in the Mediterranean, lying between 41°15' and 38°51' N. lat. and having an area of 9294 square miles. The principal gulfs, almost all on the western coast, are those of Cagliari, the largest, Teulada, Palmas, Carloforte, Terranova, and Tortoli. These gulfs give their names to as many ports, all of which, like the smaller ports, are fine natural harbours. The largest islands belonging to Sardinia are: S. Antioco, S. Pietro, Asinara, Caprera, and S. Stefano. There are three mountain ranges in the island; the most northerly -- the mountains of Limbara -- rise to an elevation of 4468 feet; the central range contains Gennargentu, the culminating point of Sardinia, 6016 feet high; and the southern Monte Linas, 4055 feet. There are numerous extinct volcanos: Monte Ferru (3448 ft.), Monte Mannu Nurri (3104 ft.), Cheremule (2924 ft.), etc. The largest river is the Tirso, 94 miles long, rising in the Budduso mountains, with two estuaries, one at the lagoon of St. Giusta, the other at the sea near Oristano. Among the other rivers are the Rio di Porto Torres, Coquinas, Mannu, Flumendosa, and Samassi. There are thirty-seven lagoons along the seacoast (Cagliari, a great fishing centre, Oristano, Sassu, Palmas, etc.). In addition there are many marshes now being reclaimed for agricultural purposes. The most extensive plains are the Campidano near Cagliari, the Piano della Nurra, and the Carnpo di 0zieri. The island is formed chiefly of granite, trachyte, basalt, other volcanic rocks, and of chalk deposits. The climate is temperate, but malaria prevails in the plains in summer, which accounts for the small population. The fata morgana (mirage) is of common occurrence. In 1901 the population was 791,754; at present (1911) it is estimated to be about 850,000 (90 to the square mile). Sardinia is rich in minerals; the most plentiful metal is lead, mingled with silver. The richest beds of ore lie in the circumscriptions of Iglesias, Nuoro, Lanusei, Sassari, and in the. mountains of Nurra. Iron is found chiefly in the mountains of the southwest, especially about Capoterra and Ogliastra. Copper, manganese, antimony, and zinc are mined in certain districts. Lignite occurs in fairly extensive beds near Gonnesa, Iglesias, and Sulcis; anthracite and graphite in smaller quantities. There are 117 mines, employing 12,000 men, and having an output valued at about 21,000,000 francs (1903). The flora of the island includes vast, forests of oak which supply an immense quantity of cork, olives, oranges, quinces, chestnuts, walnuts, and carob-beans. Among the fauna the principal are the numerous herds of mouf flons (Ovis Ammon), with large curving horns, and of goats; deer, stags, and wild boars are plentiful in the wooded mountains; wild horses disappeared only a few decades ago. The domesticated horses are remarkably sturdy; a species of small horse is largely exported to Algeria. The small Sardinian ass is in great demand as a pet on the peninsula. Oxen are used in ploughing, the beef is good, but the milk supply very short. In the oak forests there still exists a species of wild pig, like the wild boar. Agriculture is in a backward state owing to the scanty population; the farms are mostly medium-sized or small; 618.75 square miles are incapable of cultivation. One of the worst agricultural pests in Sardina is the locusts which come over from Africa in large swarms. The total produce for 1903 was wheat, 4,824,090 bushels; Indian corn, 178,775 bushels, wine, 63,664,970 gallons; oil, 221,110 gallons; tile salt pans of Cagliari are the most productive in Italy, the output for the year 1905 being 1,403,372 pounds. The birds most worthy of notice are the pelicans, herons, and flamingos which come over during August in large flocks from Africa. The seas abound in fish of every kind, sardines, anchovies, and especially tunny-fish, of which more than 661,386 pounds are exported annually. Near the island of S. Pietro, the Gulfs of Palmas, Asinara, Oristano, and Cape Caxbonara there are extensive beds of coral, 5512 pounds of which are exported each year. In historic times the people of Sardinia have undergone less amalgamation than any other Italian population. According to the ancient geographers, the primitive population of Sardinia was akin to the Libyans; Iberians, Greeks, Phoenicians, Carthaginians, and Italians came later. Certainly the Latin language was adopted in the island, and even to-day the Sardinian resembles Latin more than any other of the Italian dialects. There are three chief Sardinian dialects: that of Sassari which approaches Corsican and Tuscan, that of Logudoro, and that of Cagliari (Sardinian properly so-called, somewhat like Sicilian). The most striking characteristic of the Sardinian language is that, while throughout the peninsula of Italy the article is derived from the Latin pronoun ille (il, lo, la, 'o, 'u), in Sardinian it is derived from ipse (su, masculine; sa, feminine). In the neighbourhood of Alghero, Catalan is spoken. The Sardinian is by nature taciturn and laborious, but clings to his ancient customs; linen, cloth etc.); they like bright coloured. clothing, especially red, while the men dress in black: the latter wear a peculiar cap, which is like a long stocking covering the head and hanging down the back. They are vivacious and love singing and dancing to the accompaniment of the launedda, the ancient tibia. In the environs of Gallura the people meet together in the winter evenings and practise improvisation. There is little education among the poorer classes, but the wealthier families fully appreciate the value of higher education, jurisprudence being a favourite study. The percentage of illiterates is comparatively speaking lower (68.3 per cent of those under the age of 21 and 69.6 for those over 21) than in the Abruzzi, Apulia, Sicily, Basilicata, and Calabria. There are in the island 1056 public elementary, and 40 private, schools, 48 evening and vacation schools, 4 normal schools, 9 public academics and one not yet completed, 2 lyceums and one in course of construction, 3 technical schools, 2 technical institutes, I school of applied art, 2 schools of music, 2 universities in Cagliari and Sassari. The bonds of family life are very strong, there being few illegitimate births; the Sardinian is quick to avenge the honour of his wife or family. The percentage of convictions is higher than that of the kingdom, but serious offences are less frequent (25 per 100,000 inhabitants against 25-3)'. Brigandage, which in times gone by afflicted the island, was caused partly by the sparseness of the population, which offered malefactors a greater chance of escaping, or by the custom of the vendetta, on account of which one who had been guilty of an act of vendetta or who feared to fall a victim to it had to conceal himself and to become a brigand; another cause in the last century, was the radical changes introduced in the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries in regard to economic customs and rights (the right of cutting timber, of pasturage etc.). However, for some years there have been no properly authenticated cases of brigandage in Sardinia. The island is divided civilly into two provinces: Cagliari (called under the Spanish regime Cape di sotto) and Sassari (Cape di sopra). These two provinces contain 9 departments, 92 boroughs, and 363 communes. Ecclesiastically it is divided into 3 archdioceses and 8 dioceses: Cagliari, with its suffragan sees Galtelli-Nuoro, Iglesias, Ogliastra; Oristano with its suffragans Ales and Terralba; Sassari with its suffragans Alghero, Ampurias and Tempio, Bisarchio, Bosa. Formerly there existed the Sees of Doglia, Forum Traianum, Fasiana, Suello (Cagliari), Sulcis (Iglesias), Torres, Sorra, Ploaghe (Sassari), Ottaba, Castro (Alghero), Civita (Ampurias), Sta Giusta (Oristano). HISTORY The name of the island is derived from Sardon or Sardus, the principal god venerated by the inhabitants, who had a large temple at the Gulf of Oristano. Some writers wish to identify the Sardinians with the Shardana who, in the reign of Rameses III, invaded Egypt. Concerning their race, ancient writers believe them akin to the Libyans, the Iberians, or the Corsicans. A comparison of the idols of the most ancient inhabitants with the style of dress of the present inhabitants shows that the present Sardinian race is practically identical with the primitive race. To the latter must be attributed the peculiar monuments (about 3000 in number), called nuraghe, scattered through the island, which are like truncated cones, 53 feet high, and 99 wide at the base, constructed of large masses of limestone, granite, or tufa, superimposed without mortar. The entrance to the nuraghe faces the south and is about five or six feet high, and two feet wide; it leads to a spiral stairway in the wall of the nuraghe, which communicates with the two or three superimposed circular rooms, having a sharp angular roof like that of the treasury of Mycenae. Other smaller cones are frequently found around the principal nuraghe. There are various opinions as to the object of these buildings: fortified towers, dwellings, sacerdotal sepulchres (in none have arms been found; all contained skeletons and ornaments), pyres etc. Scattered throughout the length of the entire island and not unlike the nuraghe in appearance are a number of groups of circular dwellings of stone measuring from fifteen to twenty-five feet in diameter. Their proximity to each other would suggest that they had once formed part of villages. They are not often met with in the north-eastern extremity, but in the middle of the island they are very frequent. Close to each of these buildings was the tombe de gianti or giant's tomb; a vaulted chamber of about thirty or forty feet in length, with sides of rough masonry and a roof formed by a superimposed slab. Smaller tombs (domus de gianas) were also found in a great many places, but were more often met with in the most inaccessible regions, and assumed the shape of grottoes chiselled from the rock rather than that of vaulted chambers. The Phoenician traders naturally visited the island; Caralis (Cagliari) was their great market; Phoenician inscriptions too have been found. The Carthaginians were not content to trade with Sardinia, they wished to subdue it (about 500 B.C); bitter wars were waged. Nevertheless, various cities were founded. In the First Punic War, L. Cornelius Scipio defeated the Carthaginians (259) near Olbia (Terranova). A little later the mercenaries rebelled against their Carthaginian masters and established a military government against which the natives revolted, thus giving the Romans an excuse for intervening (238) and taking possession of the island, which along with Corisca was formed into a province under a praetor. Native uprisings were repressed with extreme severity: Sempronius Gracchus (181) partly killed and partly sold into slavery 80,000 of the inhabitants; again in 114 Caecilius Metellus had to crush an insurrection. The Romans by constructing roads improved the economic conditions of the island, which, although it was considered by the Government for the most part poor and unproductive and a place of punishment for those condemned to the mines, enjoyed great prosperity. The chief towns were Caralis, Sulci, Nura, Neapolis, Tharros, Othoca, Olbia, Forum Traiani, Bosa, Tibulae. The province . was now imperial and now senatorial. It is possible that the first seeds of Christianity were introduced into Sardinia by the few Christians who with 4000 Jews were exiled to the island by Tiberius. In the second and third centuries many Roman Christians, including Callistus, later pope, Pope St. Pontianus, and the antipope Hippolytus, were sent to the island (described as nociva): the last two died there. Among the Sardinian martyrs are the bishops who preceded St. Lucifer of Cagliari, of whom St. Athanasius speaks, which shows that at least in the time of the Diocletian persecution that city was the seat of a bishopric; St. Bonifacius, Bishop of Cagliari, whose tombstone' was discovered in 1617 in the cathedral (Corpus Inscript. Lat. Siciliae et Sardiniae, II, n. 7753), was not a personal disciple of Christ but belonged to the age after Constantius. Other martyrs are recorded at Cagliari, Sulci, Torres; not all of them, however, have been authenticated. Up to the present time only one Christian cemetery is known, that of Bonorva near Cagliari; there are ruins of a fourth-century Christian basilica at Tharros. Christian inscriptions have been found in Cagliari (66), Tharros, Torres, Terranova. In 456 the island was taken by the Vandals, who were wont to exile thither, especially to the neighbourhood of Cagliari, the African bishops and Catholics. In 534 it was recovered for the empire by Cyrillus, and included in the Diocese of Africa. In 551 it was captured by Totila. As far as is known the Longobards raided the island only once (589), but did not obtain control of it. Sardinia, moreover, was abandoned to its fate by the Byzantines more than the peninsula, and consequently the tradition which dates in the sixth century the origin of the three (later four) judicatures, into which the island was later divided, may have a historical foundation. The tradition runs that Taletus, a citizen of Cagliari, rebelled against the Byzantine Government, proclaimed himself King of Sardinia, and divided the island among his three sons. From the letters of St. Gregory we know that in some parts of the island, especially in the ecclesiastical possessions there were many pagans who had to pay a tax to the judex of the island for each sacrifice. In the ninth century such was the general depravity that Paulus, Bishop of Populonia, and Abbot Saxo, legate of Nicholas I, placed the whole island under excommunication. The episcopal sees were reduced to four in the tenth century. This decadence is to be attributed in part to the inroads in the seventh century of the Saracens, who were, however, always repulsed by the Sardinians. The latter had to establish an autonomous military organization, which naturally led to a political organization, the chiefs of which, while preserving the title of Byzantine governor, were called judges. In the tenth century there were four of these judges in Torres, Arborea, Gallura, and Cagliari; this distribution of the island remained till the Aragonese conquest. Shortly after 1000, Mughebid, Emir of the Balearic Islands, conquered Sardinia and from there made descents on the Tuscan coast (Pisa and Luni). Encouraged by the pope, to whom Charlemagne had given Sardinia, the Pisans with the assistance of the Sardinians drove him out. Mughebid was defeated a second time with the help of the Pisans and Genoese. The pope's suzerainty was then recognized willingly by the judges. The Genoese and the Pisans had a monopoly of the trade and also possession of several towns on the coast, and moreover acted as arbiters in the quarrels of the judges. But later a dispute arose between the two cities, in regard to the limits of their respective rights. Moreover, as Pisa was an imperial city, the emperors claimed rights over the island. In the struggle only the seaboard towns suffered, but the commercial advantages compensated the damage caused by war. The interior which was under the control of the judges exclusively continued to flourish. Barbarossa named his uncle Welf, King of Sardinia, but in 1164 sold the kingdom to Barisone, judge of Arborea, who was crowned at Pavia. Other families in the peninsula like the Malaspina of Luni, the Visconti of Pisa, and the Doria of Genoa, had acquired property in the island and become related to the judges by marriage. The judicatures of Cagliari, Torres, and Gallura were suppressed by the Pisans. When later Adelasia, widow of Ubaldo Visconti and mistress of the judicatures of Torres and Gallura, married (1238) Enzo, Frederick II's bastard, the latter proclaimed himself King of Sardinia; but be was soon overthrown and after twenty-two years' imprisonment died at Bologna. The marriage of the Genoese Michele Zanche with Enzo's mother embittered the war between Pisa and Genoa. When Pisa was victorious their vassals, the della Gherardesca and Nino di Gallura, rose in revolt, some signiories passing to the Visconti of Milan. Finally the Genoese got the northwest and the Pisans the south-east. In 1297 Boniface VIII, in order to induce the King of Aragon to restore Sicily to Charles of Anjou granted the investiture of Sardinia to Alfonso f Aragon . The latter aided by Branca Doris, judge of Logudoro and lord of Alghero, Ugone of Arborea, and the commune of Sassari, began war against the Pisans, who in 1324 had to sign a treaty which left them only the port and lagoon of Cagliari and two suburbs; and from these they were expelled later. On the defeat of the Pisans it was necessary to subdue the ancient allies: i.e. the Genoese and the rulers of Arborea. Mariano IV fought successfully against the Aragonese, but was carried off by a pestilence (1367); his son Guglielmo IV abdicated in favour of the Aragonese, and died little later. In the beginning the King of Aragon planted colonies of Catalonians and Aragonese in the island. Sardinia had a viceroy and a parliament composed of the three orders: barons, clergy, and the commons meeting separately and communicating among themselves by means of deputies. The charter of Eleanora was adopted as a Constitution; and the King of Aragon swore in the presence of the Sardinian deputies to observe it. Nevertheless, the Aragonese Government succeeded in establishing in the island a dominant Spanish class, either by granting most of the fiefs to Spanish nobles or by appointing Spanish prelates to most of the sees. This stirred up enmity between the natives and the ruling classes; but only one attempt at rebellion is recorded, that of Leonardo Alagon (1470). In the history of the succeeding years we may note the expulsion of all the Corsicans (1479) and Jews (1492), some Saracen inroads, and three attempts of the French to conquer the island (1528 at Castel Sardo; 1637 at Oristano; 1644 at Alghero). The War of the Spanish Succession plunged the island in anarchy. By the Peace of Utrecht (1713) Sardinia was given to Austria, for which the mountaineers of Gallura had declared themselves from the beginning. Cardinal Alberoni's bold attempt (1717) regained the island for the Spaniards; but in 1718 by the Treaty of London it was given to Savoy in exchange for Sicily which was awarded to Austria. The dukes of Savoy then assumed the title of King of Sardinia. The kingdom comprised at that time the Island of Sardinia, the Duchies of Savoy, Aosta, and Monferrato, the Principality of Piedmont, the Marquisate of Saluzzo, the Counties of Asti and Nizza, and some Lombard towns as far as the Ticino. King Charles Emmanuel III (1720-73) and his minister Bogino began certain reforms in the island, a work which was interrupted from 1773 till 1820. In 1792 the French admiral, Truquet, attempted to land at Cagliari but was repulsed. In the following years there were several attempts to throw off the power of the Piedmontese. King Charles Emmanuel IV took refuge in the island from 1799 till 1806, when his domains were invaded by the French. The Congress of Vienna gave the Republic of Genoa to the Sardinians. The kingdom then contained thirty-seven provinces. Between 1820 and 1848 feudalism, which in 1807 had caused widespread rebellion of the burgesses against the nobles, was abolished. Another project was the construction of a vast network of roads which were greatly needed. In general however the Savoy and Italian Governments have neglected the wants, and interests of the Sardinians. In 1861 after the annexation of almost all the peninsula the Kingdom of Italy was proclaimed at Florence and that of Sardinia came to an end. The following is a list of the kings: Victor Amadeus II (1718-30), who abdicated in favour of his son Charles Emmanuel 111 (1730-73), regretting which he was imprisoned at Moncalieri where he died (1732). Charles Emmanuel to conquer the Milanese allied himself with France and Spain, in the War of the Polish Succession; he was frequently victorious but only obtained the region on the right of the Ticino (1738). He took part in the War of the Austrian Succession; gained splendid victories (the siege of Toulon, 1746; the battle of Col dell' Assietta, 1747), but with very little profit, gaining only the county of Angers, and Arona, the valley of Ossola, Vigevano, and Bobbio. Victor Amadeus 111 (1773-96), for having crushed the nationalist movement in Savoy (1791) with excessive severity, was overthrown by the revolutionary army which captured Savoy and Nizza. He allied himself with Austria and the campaign was conducted with varying fortunes, but when Bonaparte took command of the French troops Victor Amadeus had to agree to a humiliating peace. Charles Emmanuel IV (1796-1802) made an offensive treaty with France, whereupon his subjects revolted. The rebellion was crushed with severity and thousands of democrats emigrated either into France or to the Cisalpine Republic, whence they returned in arms. The royalists having obtained the upper hand, France intervened and obliged the king to abandon his possessions on the mainland (19 December, 1798). Charles Emmanuel withdrew to Sardinia; and in 1802 abdicated in favour of his brother Victor Emmanuel I (1802-21), who in 1814 was returned to Turin and saw his dominions increased by the inclusion of Genoa. As happened elsewhere the restoration did not do justice to the legitimate aspirations of the democrats. There followed the revolution of 1821 caused by a demand for a Constitution and for war with Austria to obtain possession of Lombardy, which Piedmont had coveted for centuries. As the king had agreed with Austria and Naples not to grant the Constitution, he abdicated in favour of Charles Felix, his brother, who was absent at the time; Charles Albert, Prince of Carignano, assumed the regency and on 13 March, 1821, promulgated the Constitution of Spain, which was not accepted by Charles Felix (1821-31). Meanwhile, the revolutionary party had joined in the movement for Italian unity, but there was difference of opinion as to the form of that unity, whether there should be a great republic, or a federation of republics, or again a single monarchy or a federation of principalities. Many however were indifferent to the form. In 1831, therefore, disturbances began in Central Italy but were easily suppressed. The same year Charles Felix died without offspring and was succeeded by Charles Albert (1831-48). The Piedmontese then decided in favour of a United Kingdom of Italy under the House of Savoy, and to that end all the efforts of the Sardinian Government were henceforward directed. In 1847 Charles Albert granted freedom of the press and other liberal institutions. On 8 February he promulgated the statute which still remains the fundamental law of the Kingdom of Italy. One month later he declared war on Austria in order to come to the rescue of the Lombards who were eager to throw off the Austrian yoke at once. Though victorious in the first engagements, he suffered a severe defeat at Custoza and, after the armistice of Salasco, was again defeated at Novara (1849). The King of Sardinia had for the time being to abandon his idea of conquest. Charles Albert abdicated in favour of his son Victor Emmanuel II (1849-78) and withdrew to Oporto where he died the same year. There followed ten years of military preparations, which were tested in the Crimean War, and vigorous diplomatic and sectarian operations to the detriment of the other Italian rulers, carried out under the direction and inspiration of Count di Cavour, who did not hesitate to enter into league with Mazzini, the head of the Republicans, knowing-well that the latter's principles while bringing about the destruction of the other Italian states on the one hand, could not on the other, serve as a basis for a permanent political organization. In 1859 the Sardinian Government aided by France, declared war on Austria and captured all Lombardy with the exception of Mantua. At the same time in Tuscany, the Duchies of Parma and Modena, the legations, the marquisates, and in Umbria the national committees established provisional governments and declared the supremacy of the House of Savoy. Garibaldi landed in Sicily and passed thence into Calabria. The royal armies everywhere joined with the revolutionary party and on 27 March, 1861, the Kingdom of Italy was proclaimed which included all the peninsula except Venice and the Patrimony of St. Peter. The King of Sardinia was confirmed by Pope Benedict XIII in his right of nominating bishops and other high dignitaries, a right conceded previously by Nicholas V to the dukes of Savoy. In 1742 a concordat was concluded between the Sardinian Government and the Holy See, which granted extensive privileges to the Government, which were increased further by Clement XIV and Pius VI. As the Italian Concordat of 1803 was extended to Piedmont after the restoration there was no doubt as to the validity of the old and the new treaties. Consequently in 1816 Pius VII made suitable provisions, and in 1824 an agreement concerning the administration and distribution of ecclesiastical property was arrived at. In 1854 attempts were made to have a new concordat, but as on the one hand, the demands of the Government were too exorbitant, and, on the other, the civil authorities had enacted laws injurious to the Church nothing was done. After the promulgation of the Constitution of the Kingdom of Sardinia the following dioceses were founded or else reestablished: in Sardinia, Iglesias (1764); Galtelli-Nuoro, (1780); Bisarchio (1805); Ogliastro (1824); on the peninsula: Pinerolo (1748), Susa (1772), Cuneo (1817), Biella (1772). During the Revolutionary epoch (1805) the dioceses of Alba, Fossano, Alessandria, Pinerolo, Susa, Biella, Aosta, Bobbie, Tortona, were suppressed. In 1817 Vercelli became an archiepiscopal see. COSSU, La Sardegna (Rome, 1901); BRESCIANI, I costumi della Sardegna (Milan, 1890): CIMBALI, La Sardegna è in Italia? MATTEI Sardinia Sacra (Rome, 1761); PINTUS, Sardinia Sacra, I (Iglesias, 1904); BOGGIO, La Chiesa e lo Stato di Sardegna dal 1000 al 1854 (Turin, 1854); MANNO Storia di Sardegna (3rd ed., Turin, 1835). U. BENIGNI Sarepta Sarepta A titular see in Phoenicia Prima, suffragan of Tyre. It is mentioned for the first time in the voyage of an Egyptian in the fourteenth century B.C. Chabas, "Voyage d'un Egyptien" (Châlons, 1866), 20, 161, 163. Abdias (i,20), says it was the northern boundary of Chanaan. Sennacherib captured it in 701 B.C. (Schrader, "Die Keilinschriften und das Alte Testament", 1883, 200, and 288). We learn from III Kings, xvii, 8-24, that it was subject to Sidon in the time of Achab and that the Prophet Elias, after having multiplied the meal and oil of a poor woman, raised her son from the dead; the charity of this widow was recalled by Our Saviour (Luke, iv, 26). It was probably near this place that Christ cured the daughter of the Chanaanite or Syro-phoenician woman whose faith He praised (Mark, vii, 24-30). Sarepta is mentioned also by Josephus, "Ant. jud.", VIII, xiii, 2; Pliny, "Hist. natur.", V, 17; the "Itinerarium Burdigalense; the "Onomasticon" of Eusebius and St. Jerome; by Theodosius and Pseudo-Antoninus who, in the sixth century calls it a small town, but very Christian (Geyer, "Intinera hierosolymitana", Vienna, 1898, 18, 147, 150). It contained at that time a church dedicated to St. Elias. The "Notitia episcopatuum" of Antioch in the sixth century, speaks of Sarepta as a suffragan see of Tyre (Echos d'Orient, X, 145); none of its bishops are known. Some Latin bishops, but merely titulars, are mentioned after 1346 (Eubel, "Hierarchia catholica medii aevi", I, 457; II, 253; III, 310; "Revue benedictine", XXI, 281, 345-53, 353-65; XXIV, 72). In 1185, the Green monk Phocas (De locis sanctis, 7) found the town almost in its ancient condition; a century later, according to Burchard, it was in ruins and contained only seven or eight houses (Descriptio Terrae sanctae, II, 9). Today, Sarepta is known as Khirbet Sarfend, between Tyre and Sidon, on the seashore; the ruins show that the town extended 1800 metres north and south, but that it was not very wide. SMITH, Dict. of Greek and Roman Geog., S.V.; RENAN, Mission de Phénicie (Paris, 1864), 663-66; VIGOUROUX in Dict. de la Bible, S.V.; GUÉRIN, Description de la Palestine. Galilée, II (Paris, 1880), 478-81. Januarius Maria Sarnelli Januarius Maria Sarnelli One of S. Alphonsus's earliest companions, fourth son of Baron Angelo Sarnelli of Ciorani, b. in Naples 12 Sept., 1702; d. 30 June, 1744. From his childhood he was remarkable for modesty, self-denial, piety, and great diligence in his studies. At the age of fourteen he desired to become a Jesuit, but his father objected and directed him to study law. He succeeded admirably in the legal profession, while daily Mass, visits to the Blessed Sacrament, and attendance on the sick in the hospital of incurables filled up all his spare time. At twenty-six he abandoned the bar and become a cleric. His zeal showed itself at once in his labours for children, whom he catechized with wonderful success. Admirable instructions on this most important matter may be found in his works for ecclesiastics. He was ordained priest in 1732 and immediately became a member of the Propaganda of Naples, a congregation of secular priests devoted to Apostolic work. A year later he went to Scala and became one of the earliest companions of S. Alphonsus in founding the Congregation of the Most Holy Redeemer. Both these holy men worked together and gave missions along the coast of Amalfi till 1735, when Ven. Sarnelli's health gave way. He had to return to Naples, where he spent nine years in a poor apartment with one lay brother as companion. Scarcely had his health improved than he began a crusade against the immorality of his time which has rarely been surpassed in boldness. In his writings he laid responsibility at the doors of ministers of state, while by his exhortations he created a public opinion which helped him on to success; and God evidently protected him in the dangers to which his zeal exposed him. His triumph was complete. His labours amongst the lowly and abandoned were continual; yet he found time to write many excellent works. He will always be known for his insistence on meditation as morally necessary for perseverance. He showed how simple it is and within the reach of everyone. It was his labours and success in this matter that occasioned, after the servant of God's death, the Apostolic letter of Benedict XIV and the Indulgences then granted to meditation (16 Dec., 1746). A complete edition of Venerable Sarnelli's works have been published at Naples, Tipografia, Largo S. Martino, No. 4, as follows: Il Mondo Santificato, 2 vols.; L'Anima Illuminata; Il Mondo Reformato, 3 vols.; L'Ecclesiastico Santificato; Le Glorie e Grandezze della Divina Madre; Le Discrezione degli Spiriti; Il Cristiano Illuminato; Dirretto ed ammaestrato; Opera contra la Bestemmia; Ragioni Cattoliche, legali e politiche, in difesa della citta rovinata dall'insolentito meretricio; Il Cristiano Santificato; Lettere Spirituali; Devozioni pratiche per onorare la SS. Trinita e Maria e Devozioni per apparecchio ad una buona morte. He died in his forty-second year. His first biographer, S. Alphonsus, writes: "As soon as he had breathed his last breath his countenance suddenly became beautiful -- and his body exhaled a sweet odour -- which remained in the room long after the interment." His body reposes in a side chapel in the Redemptorist church in Naples. He was declared Venerable in 1874. A decree on his heroic virtues was published in 1906, and now only miracles are required for his Beatification. Vita de Gennaro P. D. M. Sarnelli S. Alfonso, tr. in Companions of S. Alphonsus, Oratorian Series; DUMORTIER, Le Venerable Serviteur de Dieu, Le Pere Janvier-Marie Sarnelli (Paris, 1886) -- Introductio causae. See ALPHONSUS LIGUORI, ST. J. MAGNIER Paolo Sarpi Paolo Sarpi A Servite and anti-papal historian and statesman, b. at Venice, 14 August, 1552; d. there 14 or 15 January, 1623. At the age of 13 he joined the Servite Order, exchanging his baptismal name of Pietro for that of Paolo. He was appointed professor of theology and canon law when he was only twenty. After four years he spent a short time at Milan and then taught philosophy in his monastery at Venice. Having been ordained in 1574, he was elected provincial of his order for the Venetian Republic in 1579, and held the office of procurator general, with residence in Rome, from 1585 to 1588. Returning to Venice he devoted himself chiefly to literary pursuits, and about this time his anti-ecclesiastical tendencies became manifest. His intimacy with Protestants and statesmen hostile to the Church caused on various occasions complaints to be lodged against him before the Venetian Inquisitor. His hatred of Rome was further increased when on three different occasions the Roman Curia rejected his nomination for an episcopal see by the Republic of Venice. The three sees to which Venice had nominated him were Milopotamo in 1593, Caorle in 1600, and Nona in Dalmatia in 1601. The more he hated Rome, the more acceptable he was to Doge Leonardo Donato and the Venetian senate, which by a special decree guaranteed him protection against Rome and appointed him theological consultor of the state with an annual salary of two hundred ducats. In this capacity he effected the enactment of various anti-ecclesiastical laws, and it was chiefly due to the influence of "the terrible friar" that the interdict which Paul V placed upon Venice (1606) remained without effect and was revoked (21 April, 1607). A murderous assault made upon him on 5 October, 1607, is often ascribed to his ecclesiastical enemies, but there is not sufficient testimony for their complicity (see the authentic testimony of the witnesses, edited by Bazzoni in "Archivio Storico Italiano", third series, XII, I, Florence, 1870, 8 sq.). When peace had been restored between Venice and the pope, Sarpi's political influence grew less, and during the remainder of his life he gave vent to his hatred of Rome by publishing bitter invectives against the pope and the Catholic Church. Despite his desire to subvert the Catholic religion and make Venice a Protestant republic, he hypocritically performed the ordinary offices of a Catholic priest until his death. His best known work is a history of the Council of Trent, "Istoria del Concilio Tridentino" (London, 1619) published under the pseudonym of Pietro Soave Polano by the apostate Marcantonio de Dominis, with additions by the latter. Without these additions it was published at Geneva, 1629, and was translated into Latin and some modern languages. It is a bitter invective against the popes, and even Protestants, like Ranke, consider it devoid of all authority. For the refutation of this work by Pallavicino see PALLAVICINO, PIETRO SFORZA. His works were published in six volumes (Helmstadt, 1761-5) and two supplementary volumes (Verona, 1768). His letters are: "Lettere Italiane di Fra Sarpi" (Geneva, 1673); Scelte lettere inedite de P. Sarpi", edited by Bianchi-Giovini (Capolago, 1833); Lettere raccolte di Sarpi", edited by Polidori (Florence, 1863); Lettere inedite di Sarpi a S. Contarini", edited by Castellani (Venice, 1892); important new letters (1608-16) edited by Benrath (Leipzig, 1909). BIANCHI-GIOVINI, Biografia di Fra Sarpi (Brussels, 1836); CAMPBELL, Vita di Fra P. Sarpi (Turin, 1880); BALAN, Fra P. Sarpi (Venice, 1887); PASCOLATO, Fra P. Sarpi (Milan, 1893); TROLLOPE, Paul the Pope and Paul the Friar (London, 1860); ROBERTSON, Fra Paolo Sarpi (London, 1894), extremely anti-papal, compare MURPHY in Irish Eccl. Review, XV (1894), 524-40; CAMPBELL, The Terrible Friar in The Messenger, fifth series, V (New York, 1904), 243-59; REIN, Paolo Sarpi und die Protestanten (Helsingfors, 1904); concerning the sources of his history of the Council of Trent see EHSES in Historisches Jahrbuch, XXVI (Munich, 1905), 299-313; XXVII (1906), 66-74. MICHAEL OTT Patrick Sarsfield Patrick Sarsfield Born at Lucan near Dublin, about 1650; died at Huy in Belgium, 1693. On his mother's side he was descended from the O'Mores, princes of Leix, his grandfather being Roger More, the ablest of the leaders who planned the rebellion of 1641; on his father's side from Anglo-Norman stock. One of his ancestors was mayor of Dublin in 1566 and was knighted by Sir Henry Sidney for valuable services rendered to the Government against Shane O'Neill. Another Sarsfield, in the reign of Charles I, became a peer with the title of Lord Kilmallock. His father left him landed property bringing an income of £2000 sterling a year. His elder brother was married to an illegitimate daughter of Charles II, sister of the Duke of Monmouth, and it was as an ensign in Monmouth's Regiment of Foot that Sarsfield first saw service in the army of Luxembourg; but at Sedgemoor, where he was wounded, Sarsfield was on the king's side. In 1688 he followed James II to France, and landed with him at Kinsale in the following year. James recognized his bravery, but thought him incapable of high command. Nevertheless in 1689 he captured Sligo and secured all Connaught for the king. At the Boyne he was compelled to inactivity, and when James fled to Dublin he took Sarsfield with him. After James's departure for France, it was largely through Sarsfield that Limerick was defended so well, and it was he who destroyed William's siege train, the most brilliant exploit of the whole war. James was so well pleased with him that he created him Earl of Lucan. In the campaign of 1691 he held a subordinate position under St. Ruth. The two often disagreed, and at Aughrim St. Ruth allowed Sarsfield no active share in the battle, leaving him in command of the cavalry reserve. When St. Ruth fell Sarsfield could not turn defeat into victory, but he saved the Irish from utter destruction. In the second siege of Limerick he was again prominent, but finding prolonged resistance impossible assented to the Treaty of Limerick, which ended the war. He then joined the army of France, in which with the Irish Brigade he saw much service. At Landen in 1693, he commanded the left wing of Luxembourg's army, and there received his death wound. There is a tradition that as he lay mortally wounded he put his hand to his wound, and drawing it forth covered with blood, he lamented that the blood was not shed for Ireland. He was carried to Huy where he lingered for a few days. His widow married the Duke of Berwick. O'CALLAGHAN, Irish Brigades in the Service of France (Glasgow, 1870); KELLY, Macarioe Excidium, ed. O'CALLAGHAN (Dublin, 1850); D'ALTON, King James's Army List (London, 1861), TODHUNTER, Life of Sarsfield (London, 1895); CLARKE, Memoirs of James II (London, 1816); STORY, Wars of Ireland (London, 1693); D'ALTON, History of Ireland (London, 1910). E.A. D'ALTON Sarsina Sarsina DIOCESE OF SARSINA (SARSINATENSIS) Located in Aemilia, Province of Forli, Italy. Besides agriculture and cattle-raising, the principal employments of the population are the sulphur and manganese industries. There are some deposits of fossilized carbon and various sulphur springs. Ruins of temples, baths, and fortifications; and urns, pillars, bronze objects, etc., show that this town, the birthplace of Plautus, was important in ancient days. It was an Umbrian city, was captured by Cornelius Scipio in 271 and was later a municipium. In the tenth century the bishops obtained the temporal sovereignty of the city and the surrounding district. From 1327 till 1400 it was disputed for by the Ordelaffi of Forli, the popes, and the bishops. In the fifteenth century it was subject in turn to the Malatesta of Cesena, and then to those of Rimini, from whom it was taken by Caesar Borgia (1500-03), on whose death it was captured by the Venetians (1503-09). In 1518 it was enfeoffed to the Pio di Meldola, passing later to the Aldobrandini. The cathedral is a noteworthy monument of the eighth century. The patron of the city is St. Vicinus, believed to have been bishop about the year 300; another bishop was St. Rufinus (fifth century). We may also mention: Benno (770), who erected the cathedral; St. Apollinaris (1158), monk; Guido (1255), who defended the rights of his church and was killed for so doing; Francesco Calboli (1327), had to defend the city by force of arms against Francesco Ordelaffi; Benedetto Mateucci Accorselli (1385), the last prince bishop; Gianfilippo Negusanti (1398), renowned for his piety and erudition; Raffaele degli Alessi (1524), reformed the discipline and the morals of the people; Nicolo Branzi (1602) was imprisoned in the Castle of S. Angelo but liberated later. In 1807 Napoleon suppressed the see, which, having been re-established in 1817, was in 1824 united to that of Bertinoro; but in 1853 was again re-established. The diocese is suffragan of Ravenna, and contains 34 parishes, with 90 secular priests, 32,000 inhabitants, and 2 houses of monks. CAPPELLETTI, Le chiese d'Italia; AZZALLI-FREDIANI, Delle antichita di Sarsina (Faenza, 1769); Copioe quorumdem privilegiorum Ecclesioe Sarsinoe concessorum (Forli, 1692). U. BENIGNI Andrea Del Sarto Andrea del Sarto (ANDREA D'AGNOLO) Born at Florence in 1486; d. there in 1531. He received the surname Sarto from the fact that he was the son of a tailor. At first he was the pupil of an obscure master, G. Barile, but in 1498 he entered the studio of Piero di Cosimo. He visited Rome for a short time. Vasari says, that had he remained there long enough to study its masterpieces, he would have "surpassed all the artists of his day." Naturally diffident, he felt himself a stranger there, and hastened to return to Florence. Despite his brief career, he produced a large number of frescoes and easel pictures. In 1509 he began the fresco decoration of the little cloister of the Annunziata, connected with the Servite church and convent at Florence. He depicted five scenes from the life of St. Philip Benizi, General of the Servites: "His Charity to a Leper"; "The Smiting of the Blasphemers"; "The Cure of the Woman Possessed with a Devil"; "The Resurrection of Two Children near the Tomb of the Saint"; "The Veneration of his Relics." Later he added the "Adoration of the Magi" (1511) and the "Nativity of the Virgin" (1514). In 1525, by way of farewell, he painted for this convent the masterpiece, "The Madonna of the Sack," so called because in it St. Joseph is represented leaning against a sack. In 1514, in the cloister of the Scalzo, he executed a series of ten frescoes, recounting the history of St. John the Baptist. Four allegorical figures, Faith, Hope, Charity, and Justice, complete the decorative cycle. The influence of Albrecht Duerer has been traced in several, but that of Ghirlandajo has been recognized in this as well as in the preceding cycle, though here Andrea displays a more original bent. In Poggio's villa at Cajano he painted the fresco (1521), "Caesar receiving the Tribute of the Animal World," by way of complimenting the zoological tastes of Lorenzo the Magnificent. The work was finished in 1582 by Al. Allori. A beautifully executed series of figures, especially those of Sts. Agnes, Catherine, and Margaret, were painted (1524) in the cathedral of Pisa. His last fresco, "The Last Supper," was done for the refectory in the convent of San Salvi, at the gates of Florence. Here Andrea drew his inspiration from Leonardo da Vinci. The beautiful work shows lively and varied colouring, but lacks the perfection of drawing and especially the dramatic quality of the "Last Supper" of Milan. His principal pictures are: at the Pitti Palace, "The Annunciation" (1513); "Madonna with Sts. Francis and John the Evangelist" (1517); "Disputation concerning the Trinity" (1517), a very careful painting in which the artist "comes closest to intellectual expression" (Burckhardt); "Descent from the Cross" (1524); "Madonna with four saints" (1524); "The Assumption" (1526), of which there are two variations; at the Uffizi "Madonna of the Harpies, with St. Francis and St. John" (1517), so called because of the decorations on the pedestal on which the Blessed Virgin stands with the Infant Jesus in her arms; at the Museum of Berlin, "The Virgin with Saints" (1528); in the Dresden Gallery, "The Sacrifice of Abraham"; "The Marriage of St. Catherine"; at the Hermitage Museum, St. Petersburg, "Madonna between Sts. Catherine and Elizabeth"; at the Museum of Vienna, "The Pieta" (1517); at the Louvre, "The Virgin with the Infant Jesus, St. Elizabeth and St. John," which is an imitation of Raphael's "Madonna Canigiani"; "Charity." These two pictures were purchased by Francis I. According to Vasari, the King of France was charmed with his talent and induced him to come to Paris. His portrait of the dauphin and "Charity" must have been painted during his stay at the court. Obtaining permission to visit Florence, he departed, with money to collect works of art for Francis I; but, being of weak character and dominated by his wife, a beautiful and unscrupulous coquette, he squandered the money and did not return to Paris. He has left several portraits of himself (Pitti Palace, Uffizi, and National Gallery). Andrea del Sarto owes much to Fra Bartolommeo, borrowing from him the architectural arrangement of his compositions as in "Charity" of the Louvre, where triangle grouping is used. Andrea was above all a colourist, "the greatest colourist of the sixteenth century, in the region south of the Apennines" (Burckhardt). In this also he resembles Bartolommeo but shows more care for chiaroscuro. Like Leonardo da Vinci he excels in sfumato. His drawings, many of which are preserved at the Uffizi and the Louvre, are characterized by a melting softness which recalls Correggio's delicate execution, but this excessive love of colour led him to neglect the superior beauty of expression; his pictures lack conviction and character. Not understanding the true character which each face should express, he usually confines himself to repeating the same type of Madonnas and Infant Christs, and thus produces an effect of coldness and artificiality. VASARI, Le vite de' piu eccellenti pittori, ed. MILANESI, V (Florence, 1880), 5-72; REUMONT, Andrea del Sarto (Leipzig, 1835); CROWE AND CAVACASELLE, History of Painting in Italy, III (London, 1866), 542; MANTZ, Gazette des Beaux Arts (1876), I, 465; (1877), I, 38, 261, 338; CHAMPLIN, Cyclopedia of Painters and Paintings, IV (New York and London, 1888); MUENTZ, Hist. de l'art pendant la Renaissance, III (Paris, 1895), 508-10; GUINNESS, Andrea del Sarto (London, 1899); KNAPP, Andrea del Sarto (Bielefeld, 1907); PERATE, Andrea del Sarto in MICHEL, Hist. de l'Art, IV (Paris, 1909), 382-86. GASTON SORTAIS Sarum Rite Sarum Rite (More accurately Sarum Use) The manner of regulating the details of the Roman Liturgy that obtained in pre-Reformation times in the south of England and was thence propagated over the greater part of Scotland and of Ireland. Other, though not very dissimilar Uses, those of York, Lincoln, Bangor, and Hereford, prevailed in the north of England and in Wales. The Christian Anglo-Saxons knew no other Liturgy than that of the Mother Church of Rome. Their celebrated Synod of Clovesho (747) lays down: "That in one and the same manner we all celebrate the Sacred Festivals pertaining to Our Lord's coming in the Flesh; and so in everything, in the way we confer Baptism, in our celebration of Mass, and in our manner of singing. All has to be done according to the pattern which we have received in writing from the Roman Church" (Canon 13). -- "That the Seven Canonical Hours be everywhere gone through with the fitting Psalmody and with the proper chant; and that no one presume to sing or to read aught save what custom admits, what comes down to us with the authority of Holy Scripture, and what the usage of the Roman Church allows to be sung or read" (Canon 15). St. Osmund, a Norman nobleman, who came over to England with William the Conqueror, and was by him made Bishop of Sarum or Salisbury (1078), compiled the books corresponding to our Missal, Breviary, and Ritual, which revised and fixed the Anglo-Saxon readings of the Roman Rite. With these he appears very naturally to have incorporated certain liturgical traditions of his Norman fellow-countryman who, however, equally with the conquered English, ever sought to do all things in church exactly as was done in Rome. In appreciating the wide-spread Sarum Use, concerning which the extant literature is very copious, it is well to bear in mind that just as the Roman Rite itself has always been patient of laudable local customs, so, in medieval times the adopting of the Sarum Service Books did not necessarily mean the rejecting of existing ceremonial usages in favour of those in vogue at Salisbury, but only the fitting thereof into the framework outlined in the Sarum Missal, Breviary, and other liturgical manuals. Again, it must not be forgotten that the Sarum Use represents in the main the Roman Rite as carried out in the eleventh century, and that the reforms introduced by Gregory VII and his immediate successors which culminated in the thirteenth century Franciscan revision of the Breviary, only very slowly and very partially found their way into the service books of the Gallic and British Churches. Hence, the marked resemblance of the Sarum Use to those of the Dominicans, Calced Carmelites, and other medieval religious orders. The following are the more noticeable variants of the Use of Sarum from the developed Roman Rite of our own times. (1) At Mass, as in the Dominican Use, the Sarum priest began by saying a verse of the psalm "Confitemini," with a shortened Confiteor followed by the verse "Adjutorium nostrum in nomine Domini." Nevertheless, at Salisbury every celebrant was bound to have recited the whole psalm "Judica me Deus" in the sacristy before coming to the foot of the altar. The prayer "Aufer a nobis" was said, but not that which now follows it, in lieu of which the priest simply made the sign of the cross and proceeded to read the Officium, or as we call it, the Introit, repeating it not only after its Gloria Patri but also after the psalm-verse which precedes the latter. From the Kyrie to the Offertory the deviations from our actual usage are slight, though on festival days this section of the sacred rite was often enormously lengthened by varied and prolix sequences. Like the Dominican and other contemporaneous Uses, that of Sarum supposes the previous preparation of the chalice (put by the Sarum Missal between the Epistle and Gospel) and thereby materially abbreviates the Offertory ceremonial. According to an archaic usage, still familiar to ourselves from the Roman Good-Friday Rite, the prayer "In spiritu humilitatis" followed in place of preceding the washing of the priest's hands and the psalm "Lavabo" was omitted, so also to the "Orate Fratres" (at Sarum, "Orate Fratres et Sorores") no audible response was made. From the Preface onward through the Canon, the Sarum Mass was word for word and gesture by gesture that of our own Missals, except that a profound inclination of head and shoulders took the place of the modern genuflection and that during the first prayer after the Elevation the celebrant stood with arms stretched out in the form of a cross. As in France and generally in Northern and Western Europe the Benediction given at the breaking of the Sacred Host was not curtailed to the mere pronouncing of the words "Pax Domini sit semper vobiscum" but, more particularly when a bishop officiated, was very solemnly given with a formula varying according to the festival. The Agnus Dei in the Sarum Use was said as by the Dominicans after and not before the Commingling, but the prayers before the priest's Communion were other than those with which we are familiar. The kiss of peace was given as with us but there was no "Domine non sum dignus." The words pronounced by the celebrant at the moment of his own Communion are striking and seem peculiar to the Sarum Missal. They may therefore be fittingly quoted: "Hail for evermore, Thou most holy Flesh of Christ; sweet to me before and beyond all things beside. To me a sinner may the Body of our Lord Jesus Christ be the Way and the Life." The "Quod ore sumpsimus" and some other prayers accompanied the taking of the ablutions, and the Communion and Postcommunion followed as now. But no Blessing was given and the beginning of the Gospel of St. John was recited by the priest on his way from the sanctuary to the sacristy. (2) The Sarum Breviary, like the Sarum Missal, is essentially Roman. The Psalter is distributed through the seven Canonical Hours for weekly recitation exactly as with us, though naturally the psalms (XXI-XXV) left over from the Sunday Matins and assigned by Pius V for the Prime of different ferias are, as in the Dominican and Carmelite Breviaries, marked to be recited together on Sundays in their old place at the beginning of that Canonical Hour. Nor in the Sarum Matins do there occur the short prayers termed Absolutions. On the other hand, a ninth Responsory always preceded the Te Deum which was followed by the so-called "Versus Sacerdotalis," that is to say, a versicle intoned by the officiating priest and not by a cantor. At least on festival days, a Responsory was sung between the Little Chapter and Hymn of Vespers. When there were Commemorations or Memories as they are called in the Sarum, Dominican and allied Uses, the "Benedicamus Domino" of Vespers and Lauds was twice sung; once after the first Collect, and once after the last of the Commemorations. Compline began with the verse "Converte nos Deus," the hymn followed instead of preceding the Little Chapter, and the Confiteor, as at Prime, was said among the Preces. The Compline Antiphons, hymn, etc., varied with the ecclesiastical seasons; but the introduction of a final Antiphon and Prayer of Our Blessed Lady closing the Divine Office (Divine Service, it was called at Sarum) is posterior to Sarum times. The Antiphons of the Sarum Offices differ considerably from those in the actual Roman Breviary, but both from the literary and from the devotional point of view the latter are in most instances preferable to those they have superseded. The proper psalms for the various Commons of Saints and for feast days are nearly always the same as now; but for the First Vespers of the greater solemnities the five psalms beginning with the word "Laudate" were appointed as in the Dominican Breviary. The order of the reading of Holy Scripture at Matins is practically identical with that of the Breviary of Pius V, though in the Middle Ages the First Nocturn was not as now reserved for these Lections only. An interesting feature of the Sarum Breviary is its inclusion of Scripture Lections for the ferias of Lent. The Lections taken from the writings of the Fathers and from the Legends of the Saints were often disproportionately long and obviously needed the drastic revision they received after the Council of Trent. The Sarum hymns are in the main those of the Roman Breviary as sung before their revision under Urban VIII and comprise by consequence the famous "Veni Redemptor" of Christmas Vespers and the "O quam glorifica" of the Assumption with one or two others in like manner now obsolete. (3) Very striking in the Sarum Use is the elaborate splendour of the accompanying ceremonial, which contrasts vividly with the comparative simplicity of Roman practice. Three, five, seven deacons and as many subdeacons, two or more thurifers, three cross-bearers and so on are often prescribed or at least contemplated. Two or four priests vested in copes, termed Rectores Chori or Rulers of the Choir, presided over the sacred chants. There was censing of many altars, and even during the reading of the Lections at Matins priests in their vestments offered incense at the high altar. Processions were frequent, and that preceding the High Mass on Sundays was specially magnificent. On the altar itself rarely more than two or at the most four candlesticks were placed, but standing round or suspended from the roof were many other lights. An ornament used at Sarum, which at present survives only at papal functions, was the ritual fan. It was made of rich materials and was waved by a deacon over the priest during his celebration of the Holy Mysteries. (4) The Sarum churches followed the Roman ecclesiastical calendar, supplementing it, as is still done, with a multiplicity of local feasts. We note one or two variants. The feast of the Apparition of St. Michael at Mont-St-Michel in Normandy (16 Oct.) was kept instead of that of the same archangel in Italy (8 May); Sts. Crispin and Crispinian take as in France and elsewhere the place of Sts. Chrysanthus and Darias (25 Oct.); a feast of Relics is kept in July; that of the Most Sweet Name of Jesus on 7 August; that of St. Linus the Pope in November instead of in September, etc. The classification of festivals in Sarum Use is slightly more complicated than that which now prevails. To the cleverly drawn up Book of Rules for finding out the particulars of the Office or Mass to be said, which was parti-coloured, being written in red and black, the name of "Pica" or "Pie" was given. Feasts are either double or simple, the former being subdivided into principal doubles, non-principal doubles, greater doubles, etc. Simple feasts (among which are reckoned days within octaves) have only three lessons at Matins, though the nocturn preceding these is sometimes of three, sometimes of nine and sometimes of twelve psalms. (5) The order of Collects, Epistles, and Gospels differs from that of our Missals in that the summer Sundays being called First, Second, etc., after Trinity, instead of being counted from Pentecost, there is some slight inversion of order. The Second Sunday of Lent had its proper Gospel (Matt., XV, 21) in lieu of that of the Transfiguration now repeated from the preceding Saturday. For the Sunday next before Advent, Gospel assigned was not that of the Last Judgment, but the entering of our Lord into Jerusalem on Palm Sunday (Matt., XXI, 1), our Gospels of the First, Second, and Third Advent Sundays becoming those of the Second, Third, and Fourth, respectively. It is evident, therefore, that the selection of Sunday Gospels in the Anglican Book of Common Prayer merely perpetuates a Catholic tradition. (6) The Sarum sequence of colours is very ill-defined. However, as in the Dominican Missal, it is expressly laid down that on solemn days the most precious vestments be used irrespective of their hue. Otherwise, the recognized Sarum colours were white, red, green, and yellow, with black for Masses for the Dead. In the later centuries purple or violet, and blue, seem to have been very generally added. Yellow vestments are prescribed for feasts of Confessors. To our Blessed Lady white was allotted, but never blue, which colour, on its introduction from the Continent, was looked upon as merely a substitute for purple or violet. In Passion-tide (Good Friday included) the Sarum liturgical colour was red -- a custom still observed at Milan. A striking peculiarity of the Sarum Use was the appointing of white vestments for Lent, except at the Blessing of Ashes on Ash Wednesday when the celebrant wore a red cope. Similarly the sacred pictures and statues were veiled in white and not as with us in purple. They were thus covered not only during the two last weeks of Lent, but from its beginning until Easter Sunday morning. (7) Sarum customs included elaborate ceremonial observance at Christmas-tide, of the feast of Deacons on St. Stephen's Day (26 Dec.), of the feast of Priests on St. John's Day (27 Dec.), and of the feast of Children or Childermas, on Holy Innocents' Day (28 Dec). Much also was made of the traditional rehearsing of the twofold genealogy of our Blessed Lord; on Christmas Day itself that according to St. Matthew, and on the Epiphany that according to St. Luke. (8) The Sarum Holy Week was imposing. The Palm-Sunday procession moved to a tent or chapel at some distance from the church, whither the Blessed Sacrament had been conveyed at daybreak, and returned preceding two priests bearing the Blessed Sacrament in a feretory on their shoulders. At the words in the Passion: "And the veil of the temple was rent in the midst," a great white curtain which from the first day of Lent had concealed the altar and sanctuary from the choir and people was divided and drawn aside. The Tenebrae candles were twenty-four in number instead of fifteen, and the Office itself was almost identically that now in use among the Dominicans, Calced Carmelites, etc. On Maundy Thursday, three hosts were consecrated: for, in addition to the one to be consumed in the Good-Friday service, another was needed to remain in the sepulchre until Easter Sunday morning, beside which on Good friday, with much ceremony and the formal sealing of the tomb, the unveiled crucifix was laid. The Easter Sepulchre itself was mostly a permanent stone structure recalling in its shape and decoration the altar-tombs of the period. Very much, too, was made of the Easter Sunday procession of the return of the crucifix and of the Blessed Sacrament to the high altar, the latter again to be enshrined in the pendant dove for which our tabernacle has been substituted. The Holy Saturday function was very similar to that of the present day. The grand old hymn of Prudentius "Inventor rutili" has, however, long since given place to our "Lumen Christi," and the prolix fivefold and seven-fold Litanies have been materially abridged. In medieval England, as in French churches almost to our own day, the solemn visit to the font by the officiating clergy during the Second Vespers of Easter was the occasion of much musical display. (9) Holy Church in all ages has tolerated considerable diversity in the accessory ceremonies accompanying the ministering of Sacraments other than that of the Holy Eucharist. The ritual still in use in England perpetuates some of the Sarum peculiarities such as the manner of the plighting of troths, the giving of gold and silver by bridegroom to bride during the marriage ceremony, and the like, though some other observances, such as the holding of a silken canopy over the newly-married couple and the falling of the bride at her husband's feet to kiss them in token of subjection, have dropped out. As evidence of the dependence of the Sarum Use on the Roman tradition, it may also be noted that in place of the Anglo-Saxon form for the Sacrament of Extreme Unction "Ungo oculos tuos," etc., the Sarum books prescribe the Roman formula "Per istam sanctam Unctionem," etc., a change which from the point of view of the theologian is of real importance. During the few years of the reign of Mary Tudor an attempt was made in England to resuscitate the Sarum Use, which lingered on for sometime afterwards among the Seminary priests of persecution times; but it is now wholly obsolete, except, as the reader will have remarked, in so far as the Dominican, Carmelite and kindred Uses, cling, like that of Sarum, to certain liturgical practices derived from early Roman discipline, but which the Church has allowed to fall into desuetude. Sarum Missal (Cambridge, 1880); Sarum Breviary (Cambridge, 1886); ROCK, Church of our Fathers (London, 1903); IDEM, Hierurgia (London, 1892); FRERE, Use of sarum (Cambridge, 1898); WORDSWORTH, Mediaeval Services in England (London, 1898); IDEM, Salisbury Processions and Ceremonies (Cambridge, 1901); MAYDSTON, Tracts (Bradshaw Society, 1894); FEASEY, Ancient English Holy Week Ceremonial (London, 1897); MASKELL, Ancient Liturgy of the Church of England (Oxford, 1882); Proceedings of the St. Paul's and other ecclesiological societies, etc. F. THOMAS BERGH Sasima Sasima A titular see in Cappadocia. Sasima is mentioned only in three non-religious documents: "Itiner. Anton.", 144; "Itiner. Hiersol.", 577; Hierocles, 700, 6. This poor hamlet, hidden in an arid region, is known to all as the first see of St. Gregory of Nazianzus who was appointed to it by St. Basil. The saint soon left it without having exercised any episcopal functions there. One of the reasons was that Anthimus, metropolitan of Tyana, claimed jurisdiction over the see, which is, in fact, said by all the Greek "Notitiæ episcopatuum" to be subject to Cappadocia Secunda; however, the official catalogue of the Roman Curia continues to place it under Cappadocia Prima, i.e., as a suffragan of Cæsarea. Ambrose of Sasima signed the letter of the bishops of the province to Emperor Leo in 458. About the same time Eleusius appears as an adversary of the Council of Chalcedon. Towards 1143 Clement was condemned as a Bogamile. The "Notitiæ" mention the see until the following century. Sasima is the present village of Zamzama, a little to the north of Yer Hissar, in the vilayet of Koniah, where a few inscriptions and rock tombs are to be found. SMITH, Dict. of Greek and Roman Geography, s. v.; RAMSAY, Asia Minor, 293 and passim; LE QUIEN, Oriens Christianus, I, 405; GRÉGOIRE in Bulletin de correspondance hellÈnique, XXXIII 129. S. PÉTRIDÈS Saskatchewan and Alberta Saskatchewan and Alberta The twin provinces of the Canadian West, so called because they were formed on the same day (1 Sept., 1905), by an Act of the Dominion Parliament, which gave them an identical constitution. The former derives its name from the important river, Kissiskatchiwan, or Swift Current, now better known under the abbreviation of Saskatchewan, whose two branches drain it from west to east. The latter was called after the episcopal borough of St. Albert, nine miles from Edmonton, which itself had been named after its founder, Father Albert Lacombe, O.M.I., the veteran missionary of the Far West. Boundaries and Area Saskatchewan was made up of the unorganized districts of Assiniboia, Saskatchewan, and Eastern Athabasca, while the original Territory of Alberta and the remaining half of Athabasca contributed to form the second province. Both provinces have identical southern and northern boundaries (49 deg. and 60 deg. N. lat.). Saskatchewan lies between 102 deg. and 110 deg. W. long. while the western frontier of Alberta is the summit of the Rocky Mountains as far as 54 deg. N. lat. and the 120th meridian. The greatest length of both provinces is 760 miles. Saskatchewan is 393 miles wide in the south, and 277 in the north, thus forming an immense quadrangle of 250,650 sq. miles, of which 8318 are water. The breadth of Alberta varies from 200 miles in the south, to nearly 400 in its northern half. Its total area is estimated at 253,450 square miles. Physical Characteristics Saskatchewan may be described as a vast plain, quite treeless in the south, with an average elevation of 1500 feet above the sea-level. Its northernmost part is considerably lower, since Lake Athabasca, in the extreme north-east is only 690 feet above sea-level. The mean altitude of Alberta is 3000 feet, which likewise notably decreases in the north. The climate of both provinces is exceedingly healthful, though the cold is at times intense on the treeless prairies of Saskatchewan. A warm south-west wind, called Chinook, occasionally crosses the Rocky Mountains, and renders the winters of Alberta appreciably milder and shorter in spite of its great altitude. This immense region is traversed by the River Saskatchewan which has its source in the Rocky Mountains, and after winding its way for some 1200 miles, empties into Lake Winnipeg. There is also in the Province of Saskatchewan proper the Beaver River which, after passing through a long chain of more or less important lakes, becomes the Churchill, and pursues its course in an easterly direction until it empties itself into Hudson Bay, at the trading post of the same name. Northern Alberta is drained by still larger rivers, such as the Peace, which rises in Lake Thutage (Thutade), British Columbia. It is first called the Finlay, and after its confluence with the Parsnip, is known as the Peace, but north of Lake Athabasca it again changes its name to the Slave, only to course further on the great Canadian Northland as the Mackenzie River. South of the Peace is the Athabasca River, which flows into the lake of the same name. This fine sheet of water is common to both provinces. It has an area of 2842 square miles. Alberta can boast only one important lake, namely Lesser Slave Lake, which in spite of its name is almost 70 miles in length. Saskatchewan on the other hand, counts such bodies of water as Cree Lake, 407 square miles; Wollaston Lake, 906 square miles; Reindeer or Caribou Lake, 2437 square miles, and a host of smaller ones, which lie mostly in the north. There are in either province few mountains, none of which are important. Resources Saskatchewan is par excellence the wheat-growing region of Canada. Its plains are famous for their fertility. They extend from the international boundary, practically to Prince Albert, 53 deg. 15 min. N. lat., where the northern forest, which itself contains important stretches of agricultural land, commences. The total area under cultivation (1910) was 7,558,170 acres. The crops were then poorer than usual. The previous year (1909) the yield in the various cereals had been as follows: wheat, 90,215,000 bushels; oats, 105,465,000; barley, 7,833,000; and flax, 4,448,700. The acreage under cultivation this year (1911) is considerably larger. Alberta's best farming-lands are in the northern interior (the region of which Edmonton is the centre), and this extends much farther north than in Saskatchewan, while the southern portion of Alberta, being rather high and of lighter soil, is better adapted to stock-raising. In addition to the above cereals the province also grows alfalfa, and all classes of roots, notably the sugar-beet, whose cultivation constitutes one of its most important industries. Lumbering is carried on around the upper waters of the North Saskatchewan and Athabasca Rivers in Alberta, while in Saskatchewan large sawmills have been established at or near Prince Albert. Alberta is also rich in coal and oil. Its principal mining centres are Lethbridge, Coleman, Frank, Canmore, Edmonton, and Morinville. Oil is also found at the last-named place, as well as in the south of the province. Population Few countries have such a cosmopolitan population as the twin provinces of the Canadian West. The British Isles, the United States, Austro-Hungary, and Germany, together with Eastern Canada are the great feeders of the stream of immigration, which is there so active that statistics, which are perfectly correct one day are far below the mark a few months afterwards. The total population of Saskatchewan is now estimated at over 453,508 though five years ago it was barely 255,211. Of the present inhabitants almost one-fourth, or 104,000, are Catholics. Among the latter some 31,000 are of French origin; 28,000 came from Galicia, and follow the Ruthenian rite; 26,900 are Germans; and 8000 have English for their mother-tongue. In Alberta the present (1911) population is given as 372,919, its two chief cities, Calgary and Edmonton (the capital), having of late grown rapidly. The former has 43,736 inhabitants, and the latter 41,000. Regina, the capital of Saskatchewan to-day counts about 30,210 inhabitants. The Catholics of Alberta number about 70,000, of whom perhaps 6,000 are Indians. The total native population of Saskatchewan is officially put down at 7971 by the Blue Book of the Ottawa Indian Department, which gives the number of Catholics among them as 2939. The aboriginal races within the two provinces are the Blackfeet and cognate tribes, in the south of Alberta; the Sarcees, a small Dene division adopted by the Blackfoot confederacy; the Assiniboines, or Stone Indians, a branch of the Sioux family; the Sioux proper, groups of whom have remained in Saskatchewan ever since Custer's Massacre (1876); the Saulteux, an Algonquin tribe formerly stationed considerably to the east of its present haunts, and the Crees, who can claim as their own the great Saskatchewan plains, the muskegs of the north-east, and the southern fringe of the great northern forest. To these may be added a few Dene tribes, who are to be found near the northern boundaries of both provinces at Ile à la Crosse on Lake Athabasca near Caribou Lake, etc. The French and the French half-breed population of Alberta is estimated at 23,000, who have at least a score of parishes, mostly around and north of Edmonton. Ecclesiastical Organization The two provinces of Saskatchewan and Alberta comprise to-day five ecclesiastical divisions, viz.: The Diocese of St. Albert, in Alberta; those of Prince Albert and Regina, in Saskatchewan, and the two Vicariates Apostolic of Athabasca, mostly in Northern Alberta, and of Keewatin, partly in Northern Saskatchewan (separate articles are devoted to those dioceses and to the Vicariate Apostolic of Athabasca). The Vicariate Apostolic of Keewatin was erected on 4 March, 1910, the Right Rev. Ovide Charlebois, O.M.I., being appointed vicar Apostolic 8 August following, and consecrated Bishop of Berenice by Msgr. Langevin, Archbishop of St. Boniface on 30 Nov. of the same year. The limits of the new vicariate are very complicated. They run from the North Pole along 100 deg. W. long. as far as 60 deg. N. lat. then follow the watershed 56 deg. N. lat., where they coincide with the eastern boundaries of the Athabasca vicariate, and the northern limits of the Dioceses of Prince Albert and St. Boniface as far as 91 deg. W. long., which they then follow to Hudson Bay. The territory included is of the most desolate character; marshes and dreary wastes, which afford meager support to a native population of 10,000 or 12,000 souls, almost all of whom are Crees, Denes, or Eskimos. Among these there are about 6000 Catholic converts. The most prosperous group is that which has settled at the pioneer mission of Ile a la Crosse, established in 1844. Education In the west as in the east of Canada the education of youth has long been a bone of contention between the secular and the religious authorities. What is now Saskatchewan and Alberta had been for five years governed from Ottawa, under the name of North-West Territories, when, in 1875, some sort of autonomy was granted them, and the Catholics settled therein were accorded the right of having their own schools without contributing to the maintenance of any others. This equitable arrangement coming from a higher or constitutive authority, should have been considered beyond the reach of a lower legislature. Yet in 1892 it was abrogated by an ordinance of the territories, which decreed the absolute neutrality, from a denominational standpoint, of all the schools of the Far West. This act was afterwards admitted by some lawyers of note to be unconstitutional. Therefore when the new provinces were created in 1905 Sir Wilfrid Laurier, then Premier of Canada, made an effort to insert in their constitution a proviso (clause xvi) whereby the school system of 1875 was reintroduced. Unfortunately he did not succeed in overcoming the opposition of one of his co-ministers supported by the clamours of the anti-Catholic element in the east. The result was a sort of compromise, which does not satisfy the Catholic minority, though it certainly gives it some appreciable advantages. The present educational situation is this: conformably to the Act of 1905 there are in Saskatchewan and Alberta public and separate schools. The former are established by the majority of the rate-payers of a place, the latter may be set up by the minority of the same. Either kind is supported by the taxes levied on that part of the population for which it is intended, to which is added a Government grant based on the quality of the teaching and the number of days the school is open. On the petition of three resident rate-payers, a separate school district may be erected, which will thenceforth be governed by commissioners, elected by the rate-payers interested therein, and will enjoy the same rights and privileges as those of a public school district. One of these consists in the right to choose the teacher who, whether in separate or public schools, must hold a certificate of qualification. No religious instruction is allowed except during the last half-hour of the afternoon class. All the schools must be taught in English, though it is permissible for the board of any district to cause a primary course to be taught in French. This is the only concession made to the spirit of the Federal Constitution, such as is represented by the North America Act of 1867, which practically declares both English and French to be the official languages of the Dominion. By the side of real advantages the school laws in force in Saskatchewan and Alberta have regrettable drawbacks. The advantages consist in the fact that, wherever they are, Catholics can have schools of their own. If they form the majority of a place, their school is termed public. They elect the commissioners best suited to their wants and aspirations, and through them the teachers. If they are in the minority, they can, with the consent of the proper authority, erect a separate school district with exactly the same privileges. The drawbacks consequent on present conditions lie mostly in the text-books used, since some of the histories prescribed unfortunately contain assertions and omissions that are quite objectionable from a Catholic standpoint. A short time ago the Government of Saskatchewan authorized the use of Catholic readers for the Catholic separate schools of that province. It happens also that both in Saskatchewan and in Alberta there is a council of public instruction composed of five members, two of whom are Catholics. But neither of these advantages is guaranteed by the constitution. Furthermore, Catholic normal schools are a boon which is beyond the reach of the Catholic population of either province. As exemplifying the educational activities of that part of Canada, it may be stated that (1905) there were in Saskatchewan 716 schools; 873 (1906); 1101 (1907), and 1422 in 1908. Between 1 Sept., 1905, and the close of 1909, the number of school districts increased from 942 to 2001. There are in each province a number of non-denominational collegiate schools, as well as two State Universities, whose seats are at Saskatoon, and at Strathcona (Edmonton) respectively. In this connection it may be worth while to remark that the first unofficial lecturer appointed by the University of Saskatchewan was a Catholic priest, who was also its first graduate, though his degree was conferred ad honorem. History The first white man to set foot in what is now the Province of Saskatchewan, was Henry Kelsey, a boy in the employ of the Hudson Bay Company traders. He started from Fort Nelson, and reached a point between the valley of the Saskatchewan and Lake Athabasca. This was in the summer of 1691. In the autumn of 1748, the sons of De Lavérendrye, the real discoverer of the Canadian West, navigated the Saskatchewan to its forks, where they established Fort Poskoyac. In the course of 1751 Boucher de Niverville sent ten Frenchmen from that post up the river, who erected a fort (La Jonquière) on the Bow River, where Calgary now stands. Two years later St-Lue de la Corne, one of the successors of De Laverendrye, explored the valley of the Carrot River, where he established (1754) Fort Pasquia, and made the first attempt on record to cultivate land within the limits of the present Saskatchewan province. Fort Pasquia was visited the same year by an English adventurer, Anthony Hendry, who crossed the whole north-west, and went as far as the country of the Blackfeet, in Alberta. Then follows the founding of Cumberland House, in 1742, and owing to the rivalry between the North-West Company (founded 1784), and the older Hudson Bay Company, various other trading posts were soon after established, such as Forts Ile à la Crosse (1791), Carlton (1793), Augustus (or Edmonton) (1798), and a few others. Until the arrival of the first missionaries, Father F. N. Blanchet and Father M. Demers in 1838, revelry and lawlessness prevailed in the north-west, which were due to intoxicants furnished by the rival traders. The religious history of the two provinces will be found under the heads of the various dioceses within their boundaries. Further events of a secular character are the explorations of Captain Palliser (1857); the Hind-Daws on surveys (1858); the journey of the Earl of Southesk to the sources of the Saskatchewan (1859); that of Lord Milton and Dr. Cheadle in 1862; and the surveying expedition of Sandford Fleming ten years later. The Louis Reil Rebellion To understand the event which took place in 1885 we must go back to the troubles which agitated Manitoba in 1869-70. Half the population of that country was then made up of French half-breeds, whose native land was sold, without their consent, to the newly-formed Dominion of Canada. Prompted by the arrogance of the agents of Ottawa, and by their interference with the rights of the original settlers, now threatened with being dispossessed of their farms by parties who had at the time no jurisdiction over them, the French and some of the English rose against the intruders under the lead of Louis Riel (b. at St. Boniface, 22 Oct., 1844), a young man with a college education, and for about ten months held possession of the country, sending demands to Ottawa, the reasonableness of which was so far recognized that corresponding clauses were inserted in what was called the Manitoba Act. Sore at the thought that they had been outdone by mere Métis, the anti-Catholic and anti-French strangers from the East wreaked vengeance, after the arrival of Wolseley's troops, on the leaders and partisans of the insurrection which had been perfectly legitimate. To escape the petty persecution that ensued numbers of half-breeds headed for the north and settled in the valley of the Saskatchewan, between Saskatoon and the forks of that river, just below Prince Albert. Unfortunately with the increase of white immigration to the prairies, difficulties similar to those which had resulted in trouble on the Red River soon arose among them. They vainly petitioned for the titles to their lands, which were threatened with being surveyed in such a way as to render useless the improvements they had made on them, and even jeopardized their rights to the same. They also repeatedly asked for the redress of several other grievances in which claims they had the sympathy of their clergy and the respectable part of the white population. Tired of being ignored by the Federal authorities, they next called to their assistance Louis Riel. He was then teaching school in Montana, after having been in various asylums as a result of the persecution of those who tracked him for the sake of the money put on his head by the Ontario Government. Unfortunately his mind proved unequal to the task of leading a second agitation successfully. He gradually broke away from the control of the clergy who, conscious of the fact that the case was now quite different from that of 1869, when the proper authority had abdicated its rights, were striving to keep him within legal bounds. As the priests refused their ministrations to him and his abettors, he tried to replace them by his own, and proclaimed himself a prophet. At the same time he raised the standard of revolt against the Canadian Government, and, 26 March, 1885, was present at the engagement of Duck Lake in which the troops were defeated. Then followed the battles of Fish Creek (24 April), Cut Knife (2 May), and Batoche, where the Metis were finally routed (12 May) after four days' fighting with troops vastly superior in number and equipment. Perhaps the most regrettable incident of this ill-advised insurrection was the massacre of Fathers Fafard and Marchand, O.M.I., with a number of white settlers of Frog Lake, at the hands of pagan Crees. The country was laid waste and numerous missions were ruined by the same tribe of natives. Despite the testimony of the physicians, who declared his irresponsibility, Louis Riel was sentenced to death and executed at Regina, dying in the profession of the most Christian-like sentiments (16 Nov., 1885). Then the Government of Canada did what it had so long neglected. It examined the claims of the half-breeds and redressed their grievances. Later History The one good result of the Saskatchewan Rebellion, apart from the necessity to which the Ottawa Government was put of recognizing the rights of the northern Metis, consisted in the fact that it drew the attention of the civilized world to the fertile plains of the Canadian West. The first transcontinental railway was completed (7 Nov., 1885). It served to bring thither large numbers of colonists of all nationalities, some of whom (the Doukhobors of Saskatchewan and the Mormons of Alberta) were scarcely of a desirable class. The new inhabitants soon clamoured for a larger share of influence in the territorial government than had previously been enjoyed by the people, and their agitation resulted in the Federal Parliament granting the territories, in the course of 1888, a legislative assembly with a correspondingly larger degree of autonomy. On 4 July of that year, a French Catholic, in the person of Joseph Royal, was appointed lieutenant-governor. The territories had then a common capital in Regina, previous to 27 March, 1882 this had been at Battleford (at the confluence of the Battle and Saskatchewan Rivers). The total white population was (1888) 69,500. Then, following a long agitation for still fuller provincial rights, there came (1905), the formation of the territories into the two provinces of Saskatchewan and Alberta, each with a lieutenant-governor and a legislative assembly, together with a constitution which among other things, determined the nature of the education which was to be imparted, as stated above. At the same time Edmonton, heretofore scarcely more than a Hudson's Bay Company trading-post by the Northern Saskatchewan, was made the capital of Alberta, while Regina continued to hold the same rank with regard to the Province of Saskatchewan. The first lieutenant-governor of the latter was A. E. Forget, a Catholic, who had long been employed in Governmental offices. Ever since, the two provinces have smoothly pursued identical lines of self- development, and the few events worth recording have been of a purely political character. ROBSON, An Account of Six Years' Residence in Hudson's Bay (London, 1752); KANE, Wanderings of an Artist (London, 1859); DAWSON, Report of the Exploration of the Country (Toronto, 1859); HIND, Northwest Territory: Report of Progress (Toronto, 1859); IDEM, Narrative of the Canadian Red River Expedition (2 vols., London, 1860); PALLISER, Further Papers Relative to the Expedition (London, 1860); BUTLER, The Great Lone Land (London, 1873); MILTON AND CHEADLE, North-West Passage by Land (London, 1865); GRANT, Ocean to Ocean (London, 1873); FLEMING, England and Canada (London, 1884); BEGG, History of the Northwest (3 vols., Toronto, 1894); WILLSON, The Great Company (Toronto, 1899); LAUT, The Conquest of the Great Northwest (2 vols., New York, s. d.); BURPEE, The Search for the Western Sea (Toronto. s. d.); MORICE, History of the Catholic Church in Western Canada (2 vols., Toronto, 1910); also other works. Also The School Act (Regina, 1911); Saskatchewan, Canada (Regina, s. d.); Land and Agriculture in Alberta (Edmonton, 1911). A.G. MORICE Sassari Sassari (TURRITANA) Archdiocese in Sardinia, Italy, situated on the River Rossello in a fertile region: a centre of the oil, fruit, wine, and tobacco industries. The city has a university founded in 1634. There is a monument to the Duke of Maurienne in the cathedral; the Church of the Most Blessed Trinity contains a beautiful picture by an unknown artist of the Quattrocento. Other noteworthy buildings are the palace of the Duke of Vallombrosa, the Aragonese castle with its high tower, the Fontana del Rossello and a thirteenth-century wall. Sassari was unknown till about the eleventh century; it developed with the decay of the ancient Torres (Turris Lybissonis), which till then had been the principal city on the island. It was sacked by the Genoese in 1166. In 1291 it became a republic with the consent of the Genoese, who were pleased to see it thus withdrawn from the control of the Pisans. Its statutes of 1316 are remarkable for the leniency of the penalties imposed when compared with the penal laws of the Middle Ages. In 1390 it was united to the giudicatura of Arborea, of which it became the capital, but in 1420 it fell into the hands of the Aragonese. In 1527 it was sacked by the French. The ecclesiastical history of Sassari commences with that of Torres. In 304 the soldier Gavinus, Protus a priest, and the deacon Januarius suffered martyrdom there. Later Gavinus and Protus were reputed bishops, and said to have lived in the second and third centuries respectively. St. Gaudentius, who seems to have belonged to the beginning of the fourth century, is also venerated there. The first bishop whose date is known is Felix (404). Other bishops: Marinianus, a contemporary of St. Gregory the Great; Novellus (685), whose ordination caused a controversy between John V and the Archbishop of Cagliari; Felix (727), who took refuge at Genoa to escape the cruelty of the Saracens; almost nothing is known concerning bishops of Torres for the next three centuries, till Simon (1065). His successor, Costantino de Crasta (1073), was an archbishop. Other archbishops: Blasius (1199), representative of Innocent III, on several occasions; Stefano, O.P. (1238), legate of Innocent IV in Sardinia and Corsica; Trogodario (about 1278) who erected the episcopal palace in Sassari, to which Teodosio (1292) added the Church of St. Andrea; after this the archbishops resided habitually at Sassari. Pietro Spano (1422) was a restorer of discipline; under him the episcopal see was definitively transferred to Sassari by Eugenius IV. This bishop intended to erect a seminary for the training of the clergy, but his death frustrated the plan. Angelo Leonini (1509) was at the Fifth Lateran Council; Salvatore Salepusi (1553) was distinguished at the Council of Trent; Alfonso de Sorca (1585), highly esteemed by Clement VIII. At about the year 1500 there were united to the Archdiocese of Sassari the Sees of Sorca (Saralapsis) which is mentioned as a bishopric in 1106, and whose last bishop was Jacopo Poggi; and of Ploaghe (Plubium), the first known bishop of which is Jacentius (1090). The sees suffragan to Sassari are: Alghero, Ampurias and Tempio, Bisarchio, Bosa. The archdiocese contains 35 parishes, 140 secular; 41 regular priests: 112,500 inhabitants, 9 convents of religious, and 13 monasteries, 7 boys', and 5 girls' institutions. CAPPELLETTI, Le chiese d'Italia (Venice, 1870); FILIA, La Sardegna cristiana, I (Sassari, 1909). U. BENIGNI Giovanni Battista Salvi Da Sassoferrato Giovanni Battista Salvi da Sassoferrato Born at Sassoferrato in the March of Ancona, 1609; died at Rome, 1689, where he had passed the greater part of his life. His father, Tarquinio Salvi was his first master. At Naples, he studied under Dominichino and through him was a pupil of the Carracci. Several of his pictures are direct imitations of Perugino, Raphael, and Titian. His Madonnas, especially, are inspired by Raphael, and in their quiet sweetness rival those of Carlo Dolci. In the seventeenth century the Blessed Virgin was too frequently portrayed with a cold dignity, and reserve so austere towards the Child Jesus that it is difficult to realize her motherhood. "Consequently, men grew more fond of Sassoferrato whose Madonnas, tender, lovely, carefully painted, all reveal the mother's heart, as men more readily forgive certain errors when they are lofty, and certain weaknesses when they are picturesque" (Burckhardt). Sassoferrato gave to his compositions a pleasing air of intimacy, and a certain naivete, in happy contrast to the melancholy expression too frequently found in the paintings of his time. Among others the "Adoration of the Shepherds," and the "Workshop of the Carpenter Joseph with the Infant Jesus Sweeping the Shavings" (Museum of Naples) present this charming character of intimacy. His masterpiece, however, is to be found in Rome, in the Church of St. Sabina on the Aventine: "Our Lady of the Rosary with St. Dominic and St. Catherine." This was painted at the request of the Princess de Rossano, and finished in 1643, the artist receiving the sum of one hundred écus (crowns) in payment. "The Virgin in a blue cloak and purple dress is seated in the centre with the Infant Jesus on her left knee; kneeling at the right is St. Dominic to whom she presents the rosary, whilst the Divine Child with one hand extending the rosary to St. Catherine, who kneels at the left, with the other places upon her head reverently bent, the crown of thorns. Circling the head of the Virgin is a crown of five small angels of ravishing grace and devotion" (Berthier). Besides these, there is at the Louvre, the "Assumption of the Blessed Virgin"; at the Muscé des Offices, the "Infant Jesus asleep on His Mother's knees" (this last subject is also found in the Museums of Dresden and Madrid); his Portrait; "The Virgin of Sorrows"; at the Vatican there is the "Madonna with Angels"; at Turin, the "Madonna of the Rose"; at Berlin, the "Holy Family"; at Frankfurt-on-the-Main, Galerie Städel, the "Virgin praying." Madonnas of Sassoferrato are likewise to be found in the Museums at London, St. Petersburg, Brussels, Vienna. LANZI, History of Painting in Italy, tr. from the Italian by ROSCOE, I (London, 1847), 469; BLANC, Histoire des peintres de toutes les Ecoles; Ecole ombrienne (Paris, 1869-77); BERCKHARDT AND BODE, Le Cicerone, tr. GERARD, II (Paris, 1892), 810-11; BRYAN, Dictionary of Painters and Engravers, V (London, 1905); BERTHIER, L'Eglise de sainte Sabine a Rome (Rome, 1910), 313-16. GASTON SORTAIS Satala Satala A titular see in Armenia Prima, suffragan of Sabastia. Satala according to the ancient geographers was situated in a valley surrounded by mountains, a little north of the Euphrates, where the road from Trapezus to Samosata crossed the boundary of the Roman Empire. Later it was connected with Nicopolis by two highways. This site must have been occupied as early as the annexation of Lesser Armenian under Vespasian. Trajan visited it in 115 and received the homage of the princes of the Caucasus and the Euxine. It was he doubtless who established there the Legio XV Apollinaris and began the construction of the great castra stativa (permanent camp) which it was to occupy till the fifth century. The town must have sprung up around this camp; in the time of Ptolemy it was already important. In 530 the Persians were defeated under its walls. Justinian constructed more powerful fortifications there, but these did not prevent Satala from being captured in 607-8 by the Persians. It is now Sadagh, a village of 500 inhabitants, in the vilayet of Erzeroum. The remains of the camp still exist strewn with fragments of brick bearing the stamp of the legion; there are also the ruins of an aqueduct and of Justinian's citadel; some Latin and Greek inscriptions, the latter Christian, have been discovered. The Christians were numerous in the time of Diocletian. Le Quien, "Oriens Christianus," I, 431, mentions seven of its bishops: Evethius, at Nicaea, 325; Elfridius, 360; Poemenius, about 378; Anatolius, 451; Epiphanius, 458; Gregory, 692; Philip, 879. The see is mentioned in the "Notitiae episcopatuum" until the thirteenth century, and we know the name of the bishop, Cosmas, in 1256. SMITH, Dict. of Greek and Roman Geog., s.v.; MUELLER, (ed. DIDOT), Notes a Ptolemy, I, 884; CHAPOT, La frontiere de l'Euphrate de Pompee a la conquete arabe (Paris, 1907), 351; CUMONT, Studia Pontica (Brussels, 1906), 343-51. S. PÉTRIDÈS Francesco Satolli Francesco Satolli Theologian, cardinal, first Apostolic delegate to the United States, b. 21 July, 1839, at Marsciano near Perugia; d. 8 Jan., 1910, at Rome. He was educated at the seminary of Perugia, ordained in 1862, and, after receiving the doctorate at the Sapienza, was appointed (1864) professor in the seminary of Perugia. In 1870 he became pastor at Marsciano and in 1872 went to Montecassino, where he remained two years. Called to Rome by Leo XIII in 1880, he was appointed professor of dogmatic theology in the Propaganda and (1882) in the Roman Seminary, rector of the Greek College (1884), president of the Accademia dei Nobili Ecclesiastici (1886), and Archbishop of Lepanto (1888). As professor he had an important share in the neo-Scholastic movement inaugurated by Leo XIII. His lectures, always fluent and often eloquent, aroused the enthusiasm of his students for the study of St. Thomas, while his writings opened the way for an extended literature in Thomistic philosophy and theology. Satolli came to the United States in 1889, was present at the centenary of the hierarchy celebrated in Baltimore, and delivered an address at the inauguration of the Catholic University of America in November. On his second visit, he attended (16 Nov. 1892) a meeting of the archbishops held in New York City, and formulated in fourteen propositions the solution of certain school problems which had been for some time under discussion. He then took up his residence at the Catholic University of America, where he gave a course of lectures on the philosophy of St. Thomas. On 24 Jan., 1893, the Apostolic Delegation in the United States was established at Washington, and Satolli was appointed first delegate. He was created cardinal-priest on 29 Nov., 1895, with the title of Sta. Maria in Ara Coeli. Returning to Rome in October, 1896, he was appointed prefect of the Congregation of Studies and archpriest of the Lateran Basilica. He became Cardinal Bishop of Frascati 22 June, 1903. His last visit to the United States was on the occasion of the St. Louis Exposition, 1904. Satolli's works include: "Enchiridion Philosophiae" (Rome, 1884); Commentaries on the Summa Theol. of St. Thomas (5 vols., Rome, 1884-88); "Prima principia juris publici eccles. de concordatis" (Rome, 1888); "Loyalty to Church and State" (Baltimore, 1895). America, 15 Jan., 1910; Catholic University Bulletin, Feb., 1910. EDWARD A. PACE St. Saturninus St. Saturninus St. Saturninus was, says Tillemont, one of the most illustrious martyrs France has given to the Church. We possess only his Acts, which are very old, since they were utilized by St. Gregory of Tours. He was the first bishop of Toulouse, whither he went during the consulate of Decius and Gratus (250). Whether there were already Christians in the town or his preaching made numerous conversions, he soon had a little church. To reach it he had to pass before the capitol where there was a a temple, and according to the Acts, the pagan priests ascribed to his frequent passings the silence of their oracles. One day they seized him and on his unshakeable refusal to sacrifice to the idols they condemned him be tied by the feet to a bull which dragged him about the town until the rope broke. Two Christian women piously gathered up the remains and buried them in a deep ditch, that they might not be profaned by the pagans. His successors, Sts. Hilary and Exuperius, gave him more honourable burial. A church was erected where the bull stopped. It still exists, and is called the church of the Taur (the bull). The body of the saint was transferred at an early date and is still preserved in the Church of St. Sernin (or Saturninus), one of the most ancient and beautiful of Southern France. His feast was entered on the Hieronymian Martyrology for 29 November; his cult spread abroad. The account of his Acts was embellished with several details, and legends linked his name with the beginning of the churches of Eauze, Auch, Pamplona, and Amiens, but these are without historic foundations. RUINART, Acta Martyrum (Ratisbon, 18569), 177-80; Gregorii Turonensis opera Hist. Francorum, ed. ARNDT AND KRUSCH, I (Hanover, 1884), xxxix; TILLEMONT, Hist. ecclesiastique, III (Paris, 1701), 297; LABAN, Vie de Saint Saturnin (Toulouse, 1864); DUCHESNE, Fastes épiscopaux de l ancienne Gaule (Paris, 1894), 25, 295. ANTOINE DEGERT Sauatra Sauatra A titular see of Lycaonia, suffragan or Iconium. Nothing is known of the history of this town, but some of its coins have been preserved and it is mentioned by Strabo, XIV, 668; Ptolemy, V, 4, 12; Hierocles, 672, 2; and the Tabula Peutingeriana. The name in this title is spelled as it occurs on the coins; Sabatra which is its equivalent in pronunciation is also found, also Soatra, in Strabo. The town was situated in an arid region on the road from Laodicea to Archelais, that is, near the village of Souverek, in the vilayet of Koniah: according to Ramsay "Asia Minor," 343, at the ruins four hours south-west of Eskil; according to Müller, "Notes to Ptolemy," ed. Didot, I, 858, near Djelil between Obrouklou, or Obrouk, and Sultan Khan. Le Quien, "Oriens Christianus," I, 1083, mentions two bishops of Sauatra: Aristophanes, present at the First Ecumenical Council of Constantinople, 381; and Eustathius, who was living at thc time of the Council of Chalcedon, 451. The Greek "Notitiae episcopatuum" mention the see till the thirteenth century. SMITH, Dict. of Greek and Roman Geog., s.v.; RAMSAY, Asia Minor (London, 1890), 343, and passim. S. PÉTRIDÈS Saul Saul Hebrew for postulatus, referring probably to the petition mentioned in I Kings, viii, 5. The first King of Israel, the son of Cis of the tribe of Benjamin (ix, 1, 2). Waiving critical discussion of the parallel, though often divergent, sources underlying I Kings, suffice it to say that the narrative of the life and times of Saul is constructed from two traditional accounts, each of which has its particular viewpoint. This appears especially in the divergent accounts relative to the circumstances attending the election of Saul and his fall from Divine favour. The prophet Samuel, who is counted as the last of the great Judges of Israel, was growing old and the administration of civic and religious affairs had been confided to his sons. These proved unfaithful to their trust and the people being dissatisfied petitioned Samuel to select a king to rule over them after the manner of the other nations. Samuel resents this request, and the Lord, though affirming it to be an offence against Himself, a virtual rejection of the theocratic regime, nevertheless instructs the prophet to accede to the demands of the people. Samuel informs them of the Lord's displeasure and predicts the retributory evils that will come upon them through the exactions of the future king (I Kings, viii). The choice of the new ruler is determined by a providential incident. Saul, in quest of his father's strayed asses, happens to consult Samuel the "seer" in the hope of obtaining information as to their whereabouts. The prophet assures him of their safety, and after entertaining Saul, reveals to him his mission with regard to the Chosen People and anoints him king. Forthwith Saul's heart is changed, and to the surprise of many he prophesies in the midst of the company of prophets (I Kings, x, 10). A month after these events the newly-chosen king, who had hitherto refrained from asserting his royal prerogatives, justifies his election by defeating the Ammonites and delivering Jabes Galaad. Later he engages in war with the Philistines and being in straits, he presumes to offer the holocaust because of Samuel's unexplained delay in arriving on the scene. For this usurpation of the priestly function he is reproved by the prophet and already the end of his kingdom is announced (I Kings, xiii). Illustrative of the composite character of the narrative is the fact that an entirely different motive for his rejection is given in chapter xv, viz. his failure to carry out fully the command of the Lord to utterly destroy the tribe of Amalec. Consequently upon the Lord's disfavour Samuel is directed to anoint David to be a king "after God's own heart," and though merely a shepherd boy he is taken into Saul's household. The many graphic incidents connected with Saul's jealousy and persecution of David are narrated in I Kings xviii-xxvii. The narrative goes on to relate how on the occasion of a new invasion by the Philistines, Saul being now forsaken by Yahweh and still seeking superhuman guidance, has recourse to a witch living at Endor. Through her mediation the spirit of Samuel, who in the meantime had passed to his reward, is recalled. The departed prophet reproaches Saul for his infidelity and announces his impending fate at the hands of the Philistines (I Kings, xxviii). The fulfilment of this dire prediction is related in the final chapter of the First Book of Kings. Saul and his forces are overwhelmed by the Philistines; the valiant Jonathan and his brothers are slain in the battle, and the king, fearing lest he fall into the hands of the uncircumcised, begs his armour bearer to take his life. The latter, fearing to lay hands on the Lord's anointed, refuses, and Saul being in desperate straits ends his life by falling on his own sword. His head was cut off by the victorious Philistines and sent as a trophy to the various towns of their country, while his body and those of his sons were hung on the walls of Bethsan, but the inhabitants of Jabes Galaad hearing of these things came in the night, and removing the bodies carried them to their own town and burnt them there burying their ashes in the neighbouring woods (I Kings, xxxi). Achinoam is mentioned as the wife of Saul (I Kings, xiv, 50). Three of his sons perished with him (I Kings, xxxi, 2), and another, Isboseth, who endeavoured to continue the dynasty of his father's house, was assassinated by two captains of his own army (II Kings, v, 6). Thus was removed the last obstacle to the accession of King David. SCHULTZ, Diss. Saul regimen antecedentia exhibens (Strasburg, 1674). JAMES F. DRISCOLL Sault Sainte Marie Sault Sainte Marie (SANCTAE-MARIAE-ORMENSIS) Diocese erected by Decree of 16 September, 1904. It embraces the southern parts of the districts of Thunder Bay, Algoma, and Nipissing (i.e. between the height of land and the Lakes Superior Huron, and Nipissing. The Recollects were the first missionaries in the Nipissing region. Father Guillaume Poullain (1622) and Jacques de la Foyer (1624) spent a few months there and baptized several children on the point of death. However, Father Claude Pijart, a Jesuit, was the principal apostle of the Algonquins at Nipissing and around Georgian Bay. He devoted to their conversion nine years of indefatigable zeal (1641-50), being aided in his work by Father Charles Raymbault (1641-42), René Maynard (1641-44; 1648-50), Léonard Gareau (1644-46), Joseph Poncet (1646-50), Adrien Daran (1649-50). They were the first who preached the Gospel to the tribes of the Manitoulin Islands and Georgian Bay as far as Sault Sainte Marie. As early as 1641 Fathers Jogues and Raymbault had visited the latter place. The Jesuits established three missions in the midst of the Algonguins of this country: St-Esprit, St-Charles and St-Pierre. Their ministry was not altogether fruitless: travelling to Lake Nipigon, in 1667, Father Allouez found some of their neophytes who had stood firm in the Faith, although they had not seen a priest for nearly twenty years. The ruin of the Algonquin missions accompanied the destruction of the Huron nation. In 1668 the Jesuits founded the mission of Sault Sainte Marie. From this centre they evangelized the adjacent country, and pushed their apostolic expeditions as far as the regions of the Nipissirinians. Well-known among the apostles of this period are Fathers Gabriel Druillettes, Louis André, Henri Nouvel, and Pierre Bailloquet. In the beginning of the eighteenth century, the founding of Detroit caused the centre of the western missions to be transferred eastward; those of Georgian Bay were abandoned, being resumed only in 1836, when Rev. Jean Baptiste Proulx, a diocesan priest, settled in Manitoulin Island. In 1838 another secular priest, the zealous Father Pierz, founded the missions of Grand Portage, Michipicoton, etc. Hardly had the Jesuits returned to the country, when the evangelization of the savages of what is now New Ontario was entrusted to their care. In 1844 they replaced Father Proulx at Wikwemikong, founded Garden River in 1846, and two years later erected at Rivière aux Tourtes (Pigeon River), a mission which they transferred in 1849 to Fort William. From these different stations they bore the consolations of religion, not only to the Indians, but also to the miners and woodcutters scattered along the shores of Lakes Huron and Superior. Among the new missionaries Fathers Choné, Hanipaux, Duranquet, Hébert, and Baxter are to be mentioned. In 1874 Pius IX, adding to the territory already described the districts of Parry Sound, created the Vicariate Apostolic of Northern Canada, with Msgr. Jean-François Jamot as its first titular. The Catholics of the new vicariate numbered 8500. A few other districts were added in 1882, when the Vicariate Apostolic became the Diocese of Peterborough. The construction of the Canadian Pacific Railway opened these regions to progress and brought thither numbers of workmen and colonists. Msgr. Jamot called in the Jesuits, and opened to their zeal the eastern country extending from North Bay to Sudbury, and later the country as far as Bonheur (a stretch of 800 miles). At its erection the Diocese of Sault Sainte Marie had a fixed population of 26,064 Catholics, 20,090 of whom were French Canadians, the rest being of different nationalities. There were besides 5000 Catholic Indians. Today (1911) the Catholics number 37,875, including 24,470 French Canadians. The diocese has 50 churches, 3 hospitals, 30 parishes, and 50 missions. The school system is the same as that of the Province of Ontario (see ONTARIO). The Daughters of the Immaculate Heart of Mary (from Buffalo) direct the Indian industrial school and the boarding-school at Wikwemikong. The Sisters of Saint Joseph, besides many other schools, have at Fort William a boarding-school for the Indians and the whites, and a hospital and boarding school at Port Arthur. The Grey Nuns (from Ottawa) have charge of the two hospitals of Sudbury and of Sault Sainte Marie, and also a few schools. The Daughters of Wisdom direct the schools of Blind River and Sturgeon Falls. Right Rev. David Joseph Scollard, the first bishop was born at Ennismore, Ontario, 4 Nov., 1862, and was ordained priest on 21 December, 1890. He was curate at the cathedral of Peterborough until his appointment to the rectory of North Bay (1896), and was consecrated bishop at Peterborough on 24 Feb., 1905. He resides temporarily at North Bay. Jesuit Relations, 1640-1671; JONES, Huronia (published by the Bureau of Archives, Toronto 1907); REZEK, Hist. of the Dioc. of Sault Ste. Marie and Marquette (Houghton, Michigan, 1906); Congres d'Education des Canadiens-Francais d'Ontario (Ottawa, 1910); Missiones catholicae (Rome, 1907). ARTHUR MELANÇON Savannah Savannah DIOCESE OF SAVANNAH (SAVANENSIS) The Diocese of Savannah comprises the State of Georgia and was created as such by Pius IX, 1850. The first bishop, Rev. F.X. Gartland, V.G. of Philadelphia, was consecrated, 10 September, 1850; died, 20 September, 1854; succeeded by Rev. John Barry of Augusta, who was consecrated, 2 August, 1857, and died, 21 November, 1859. Rev. Augustus Verot, Vicar-Apostolic of Florida, was appointed to succeed Bishop Barry but resigned in 1870 and returned to Florida where he died, 10 June, 1876. Rt. Rev. Ignatius Persico, then in the Diocese of Charleston, was transferred to Savannah, 11 March, 1870, resigning two years after through ill health. On 27 April, 1873, Rev. William H. Gross, C.SS.R., was consecrated but transferred to the Archiepiscopal See of Oregon City in 1885, and was succeeded by the Rt. Rev. Thomas A. Becker, who was transferred from the See of Wilmington, 16 May, 1886. He died, 27 July, 1899, and was succeeded by the present incumbent Very Rev. B.J. Keiley. Bishop Keiley was born in 1847; went to school at Petersburg, Va.; entered the Confederate service in 1864; went to St. Charles College, Ellicott City, Md., for a brief period in 1868; went to Rome in 1869; was ordained priest, 31 December, 1873; appointed pastor of New Castle, Delaware, 24 September, 1873; transferred to rectorship of pro-cathedral, Wilmington, Delaware, August, 1880. On the transfer of Bishop becker to Savannah in May, 1886, he obtained permission from Rome to go to that diocese, where he was made pastor of Immaculate Conception Church and vicar-general, 3 December, 1886. Called to Savannah, 12 July, 1896, he was made rector of the cathedral, appointed Bishop of Savannah, 19 April, 1900, and consecrated by Cardinal Gibbons, 3 June, 1900, in St. Peter's Cathedral, Richmond. The Bishop of Savannah is a corporation sole and title to church property rests in him. A majority of the secular priests are of Irish descent, with a few German and French. There is no diocesan seminary; students are sent to St. Bernard's, Rochester, Dunwoodie, N.Y., and Belmont, N.C. The present cathedral, that of St. John the Baptist, was finished during the administration of the present bishop upon the ruins of the one completed by Bishop Gross, destroyed by fire, 6 February, 1898. The cornerstone of the first church of St. John the Baptist was laid, 30 May, 1800. There are academies in Savannah, Macon, Augusta, Columbus and Washington under the care of the Sisters of St. Joseph and Sisters of Mercy; day colleges for boys: in Augusta, under the Jesuit Fathers; in Savannah, under the Benedictine Fathers; and in Atlanta under the Marist Fathers. There is an orphanage for girls in Savannah, in charge of the Sisters of Mercy, and for boys, in Washington, in charge of the Sisters of St. Joseph. Hospitals, at Savannah and Atlanta, are under the Sisters of Mercy. Under certain restrictions, Mass is said in the Federal prison at Atlanta, where a Catholic priest exercises the duties of chaplain under a salary from the Government. Under the administration of Bishop Keiley the entire charge of the coloured people has been given to the Fathers of the African Mission, who have established churches in Savannah, Atlanta, and one at Macon, adjoining the novitiate of the Jesuits. Diocesan collections are taken annually. The Eucharistic League is widely established, St. Vincent de Paul Conferences and Holy Name Societies are local throughout the diocese, as well as Sodalities of the Sacred Heart and of the Blessed Virgin Mary. In addition to the orders mentioned there are Sisters of St. Francis for the coloured people at Savannah and Augusta, and Little Sisters of the Poor at Savannah. The annual retreats are attended by every priest in the diocese. The statistics in May, 1911, were: priests, regular and secular, 74; churches with resident priests, 19; missions with churches, 14; stations regularly attended, 81; chapels, 14; colleges, 3; academies, 10; parish schools, 16; white orphanages, 2; coloured, 2; home for aged poor, 1; hospitals, 2; population, 15,583. SHEA, History of the Catholic Church in the U.S., IV (New York, 1892), passim. JARVIS KEILEY Savaric Savaric Bishop of Bath and Glastonbury, and cousin of the Emperor Henry VI, date of birth unknown, d. at Rome, 1205. He was archdeacon of Canterbury, 1175, and archdeacon of Northampton, 1180. In 1191, while on the continent with the crusaders, he was elected Bishop of Bath, and the following year was ordained priest at Rome. Pope Celestine III consented to the annexation of Glastonbury Abbey to the See of Bath, and Savaric's plan was to be joint Bishop of Bath and Glastonbury. The monks of Glastonbury objected to the incorporation and appealed to Rome, but their appeal was disallowed in 1196. In spite of the fact that Savaric had been one of the hostages at Mainz for the ransom of Richard I, the king, on his release, supported the monks, and it was not till 1199 that the bishop, after a forcible entry, was enthroned in the abbey. A second appeal of the monks to the new pope, Innocent III, was dismissed and in 1202 Savaric was again declared abbot. From that time all opposition vanished and Savaric became a considerable benefactor to Glastonbury. At Wells he instituted a daily Mass in honour of Our Lady, and left instructions for the feeding of 100 poor persons both at Wells and at Bath. Savaric also gave a charter to Wells, and persuaded King John to grant a charter from the crown to that city. Not the least of his services to Bath was his intervention to save the treasury of the abbey from being emptied for the ransom of Richard I. Savaric died whilst busying himself on behalf of Peter des Roches, episcopus designatus of Winchester. Epistoloe Cantuariensis; BENEDICT OF PETERBORO, Chronicle of Henry II and Richard I; Roger de Hoveden; R. de Diceto; Gertase of Canterbury; ed. STUBBS. R. de Coggeshall, ed. STEVENSON, All in Rolls Series. CHURCH, Chapters in Wells History; Wells Cathedral MSS. (Historic MSS. Commission). JOSEPH CLAYTON Savary Savary A noble French family of the seventeenth century especially devoted to trade and to the publication of works on commercial matters of lasting and widespread authority. The most illustrious member was Jacques Savary, b. at Doué in Anjou, 22 September, 1622; d. 7 October, 1690. He belonged to the younger branch of the Savary. His parents being in the commercial class had destined their son Jacques for that career. After having studied law in Paris with a procureur he entered the ranks of the haberdashers as a wholesale merchant, and in 1658 his fortune was made. His relations with the superintendent, Fouquet, enabled him to devote his abilities to the service of the State; the contract for collecting the revenues of crown lands was given to him. After Fouquet's fall Savary gained the favour of the Chancellor Séguier, and as the numerous arbitrations with which Savary was charged in all commercial questions daily increased his prestige, he was summoned in 1670 to take an active part in the commission for the revision of the laws pertaining to trade. So well did he acquit himself there that Poussort, president of this commission, named the ordinance of 1673 the "Code Savary." On the appearance of this ordinance Poussort and several other commissioners requested Savary to publish in book form the numerous memoirs read by him before the Commission during the preparation of the ordinance. This book appeared in 1675 under the title, "Le parfait négociant ou Instruction générale pour ce qui regarde le commerce des marchandises de France et des pays étrangers." (The Perfect Merchant or General Instruction regarding the mercantile trade of France and foreign countries). Numerous editions followed, and it was translated into various languages. "Les Parères, ou Avis et Conseils sur les plus importantes Matières de Commerce" was published by Savary in 1688 as a sequel to "Le parfait négociant." Such was the authority of Savary that during his lifetime lawyers quoted his opinion as equal in value almost to a law. After the death of Colbert (1683), the controller general of finances, Pelletier, continued his patronage of Savary, and ordered him to make an investigation of the financial affairs of the Western crown lands. His family was very numerous. He had seventeen children, eleven of whom survived him. His son Jacques Savary des Bruslons (b. 1657; d. 1716) was appointed by Louvois, in 1686, inspector general of the Customs House in Paris. He undertook the composition for his personal use of an alphabetical list of all objects subject to duty, then of all the words relating to commerce and industry. He added a repertoire of the ordinances and rules regarding commerce in France and abroad. This double work was the starting-point of his "Dictionnaire du Commerce," which he undertook in collaboration with his brother Louis-Philémon and which he left unfinished. But Louis-Philémon Savary (b. 1654; d. 1727), at first a preacher, later canon of the Chapter of Saint-Maur, and French agent for the reigning house of Mantua, finished the dictionary and published it in 1723. This Dictionary of Commerce was translated into English in 1774. At the time of his death Louis Philémon had nearly completed a supplementary volume, which appeared in 1730. Vie de Savary, prefixed to Le parfait négociant (Paris, 1721); MORERI, Grand Dict. Hist., s.v. GEORGES GOYAU Abbey of Savigny Abbey of Savigny Situated on the confines of Normandy and Brittany, Diocese of Coutances, France. Founded by Vital de Mortain, Canon of the Collegiate Church of St. Evroul, who, resigning his prebend to embrace an eremitical life under Robert of Arbrissel in the forest of Craon (Anjou), and leaving the latter, retired to the forest of Savigny (1105), where he built a hermitage. Soon, however, the number of disciples who gathered around him necessitated the construction of adequate buildings, in which was instituted the monastic life, following the Rule of St. Benedict, and interpreted in a manner similar to the Cistercians. Rudolph, lord of Fougeres, confirmed to the monastery (1112) the grants he had formerly made to Vital, and from then dates the foundation of the monastery. Once firmly established, its growth was rapid, and it soon became one of the most celebrated in France. Its founder was judged worthy of canonization, and many of his successors in the abbatial office, as well as simple religious of the Abbey, were canonized or beatified by the Church; the best known of them being St. Aymon.=20 From the number of its foundations Savigny became the head of a Congregation, numbering thirty-three subordinate houses, within thirty years of its own inception. In 1119 Pope Celestine II, then in Angers, took it under his immediate protection, and strongly commended it to the neighbouring nobles. Under Geoffroy, successor to Vital, Henry I, of England, established and generously endowed twenty-nine monasteries of this Congregation in his dominions. St. Bernard also held them in high esteem, and it was at his request that their monks, in the troubled times of the antipope Anacletus, declared in favour of Pope Innocent II. Serlon, third successor of the Founder, found it difficult to retain his jurisdiction over the English monasteries, who wished to make themselves independent, and so determined to affiliate the entire Congregation to Citeaux, which was effected at the General Chapter of 1147. Several English monasteries objecting to this, were finally obliged to submit by Pope Eugene III (1148). Little by little discipline became relaxed, and commendatory Abbots being introduced (1501) it never regained its first greatness. In 1509 it was pillaged and partly burned by the Calvinists, and records of the following year mention but twenty-four monks remaining. It continued to exist until the Revolution reduced it to a heap of ruins, and scattered its then existing members. The church, a model of Cistercian architecture, was restored in 1869, and now serves for parish purposes. Of all its former dependencies, there remains only La Grande Trappe. This, though not founded directly was a daughter of the Abbey of Breuil-Benoit, which latter was a direct filiation of Savigny. TISSIER, Bibliotheca patrum cisterciensum (Bonnefont, 1660-69); MERLET AND MOUTIER, Cartulaire des Vaux de Cernay (Paris, 1857); DE DION, Etudes sur les eglises de l'ordre de Citeaux (Tours, 1889); DU MONSTIER, Neustria Pia (Rouen, 1663); Hist. Litt. de la France, by the Benedictines of St. Maur IX, X, XII (Paris, 1868-70); MANRIQUE, Annales cistercienses (Lyons, 1642œ59); MARTENE AND DURAND, Thesaurus novus anecdotorum (Paris, 1717); Gallia christiana, XI (Paris, 1805); JANAUSCHEK, Originum cisterciensum (Vienna, 1877), I; DODSWORTH, Monasticon anglicanum (London, 1682), II; JONGELINUS, Notitia abbatiarum ord. cist. (Cologne, 1640); MIGNE, Dict. des Ord. Relig. (Paris, 1850). EDMOND M. OBRECHT Savona and Noli Savona and Noli (SAVONENSIS ET NAULENSIS) Province of Genoa, on the Gulf of Genoa, having a small but safe harbour. In addition to its maritime trade and ship-building, the population is chiefly engaged in manufactures of steel, glass, delph, majolica, and in the quarrying of lignite and marble. The cathedral, dating from 1589, restored in the nineteenth century, has three naves and a cupola; it contains beautiful frescoes by Coghetti. Close by the cathedral is the Sistine chapel, erected by Sixtus IV, whose ancestors belonged to Savona. The other churches contain paintings of great value. Among the secular buildings the most noteworthy is the Palazzo della Rovere, constructed by Sangallo; the paintings of Semini were destroyed when the palace was converted into a convent. Savona was formerly called Sabbatia or Savo. In the tenth century its bishops were counts of Savona, but later the countship passed to the marquesses of Monferrato (981) and afterwards to the marquesses of Vasto (1084); Savona was even then obliged to recognize a certain protectorate of the Republic of Genoa. From 1191 till 1215 it was a free commune. In 1238 it became subject to Genoa, but succeeded later on several occasions in gaining its independence (1238-51; 1318-1332; 1335-50). In 1525, the Genoese through jealousy obstructed its port. In 1745 it was bombarded by the English; the following year it was taken by the King of Sardinia, who restored it to Genoa, whose fortune it thenceforward shared. In 1809 Pius VII was imprisoned there by the French; he returned thither in 1816 to crown the Madonna della Misericordia. Savona is the birthplace of Popes Sixtus IV and Julian II, and also of the poet Gabriele Chiebrera. The See of Savona derives from that of Vadum Sabbatium, now a small village three miles from Savona. The first known bishop was Benedict (680); Bishop Bernard in 992 established the monastery on the island of Berzezzi, after the see had been transferred to Savona; Blessed Amicus (1049) reformed the canons. Grossolanus (1098), previously Abbot of Ferrania, founded by Marquese Boniface of Savona (1097), was selected as Archbishop of Milan, but was opposed by others and passed his days in continued turmoil; Blessed Vidone Lomello was present at the Lateran Council of 1179; Ambrogio del Carretto (1191) induced the marquess, his brother, to grant independence to the Commune of Savona; Blessed Alberto di Novara had frequent conflicts with the commune, which took possession of the property of the Church; Enrico Ponsoni (1288) made peace with the neighbouring cities. In 1327 the city adhered to tho antipope Nicholas V, for which it was put under interdict for several years; Antonio Viale, a soldier rather than a bishop, had trouble with the Genoese, who kept him imprisoned at Noli; later, he avenged himself by having the doge, Antoniotto Adorno, deposed; Vincenzo Viale (1413) was famous for his erudition; Jacopo della Rovere (1504) is said to have died because he was not made a cardinal. In the sixteenth century the Republic of Genoa destroyed, without compensation, many churches and religious places to make way for fortifications. As the cathedral, constructed by Julian II, was amongst these, the canons in 1550, of their own accord, occupied the church of the Conventuals, who were absent that day, and the latter were deprived of their church till 1589, when the new cathedral was completed. Bishop Gio. Batt. Centurione (1592) was distinguished by his zeal in introducing reforms; Francesco Spinola (1632) had frequent disputes with the Genoese government, by whom he was exiled; Domenico M. Gentile (1775) restored the seminary; Vinc. M. Maggiolo (1804) entertained Pius VII for several years; Agostino M. de' Mari (1833), a zealous pastor, instituted evangelical works. In 1820 the Diocese of Noli, the ancient Naulum, was united to Savona. That diocese had been separated from Savona in 1239, at the request of the Republic of Genoa. The first bishop was Filippo (1248); among his successors may be mentioned the pious and gifted Barnabite Paolo Andrea Borelli (1700) and Benedetto Solaro, O.P. (1778), a supporter of the Synod of Pistoia. Savona is suffragan of Genoa and contains 60 parishes with 88,000 inhabitants, 170 secular and 75 regular priests, 9 educational institutions for boys and 15 for girls. CAPPELLETTI, Le chiese D'Italia; RISSO, Notizie della chiesa vescovile di Vado (Genoa, 1829); TARTEROLI, Storia de Comune di Savona (Savona, 1849); Savonensis reipublicae monumenta historica (Savona, 1851); GABONI, Delle memorie particolari, etc. di Savona (Savona, 1885-91); VERZELLINIO, Guida storica e artistica di Savona (Savona, 1874). U. BENIGNI Girolamo Savonarola Girolamo Savonarola Born at Ferrara, 21 September, 1452; died at Florence, 23 May, 1498. The Dominican reformer came from an old family of Ferrara. Intellectually very talented he devoted himself to his studies, and especially to philosophy and medicine. In 1474 while on a journey to Faenza he heard a powerful sermon on repentance by an Augustinian and resolved to renounce the world. He carried out this decision at once and entered the Dominican Order at Bologna without the knowledge of his parents. Feeling deeply the widespread depravity of the era of the Renaissance, as is evident from the poem "On the Decline of the Church", which he wrote in the first year of his monastic life, the young Dominican devoted himself with great zeal to prayer and ascetic practices. In the monastery at Bologna he was entrusted with the instruction of the novices. He here began to write philosophical treatises based on Aristotle and St. Thomas Aquinas. In 1481 or 1482 he was sent by his superior to preach in Florence. In this centre of the Renaissance he immediately opposed with great energy the pagan and often immoral life prevalent in many classes of society and especially at the court of Lorenzo de Medici. Savonarola's sermons made no impression, for his method and mode of speaking were repulsive to the Florentines; but this did not discourage his reforming zeal. He preached in the other cities of Italy during the years 1485-89. At Brescia, in 1486, he explained the Book of Revelation and from that time became more and more absorbed in Apocalyptic ideas concerning his own era, the judgment of God which threatened it, and the regeneration of the Church that was to follow. At the same time he was filled with an intense zeal for the salvation of souls, and was ready to risk all in order to combat wickedness and to spread holiness of life. In 1489 he returned to Florence which was to be the scene of his future labours and triumphs as well as of his fall. In August, 1490, Savonarola began his sermons in the pulpit of San Marco with the interpretation of the Apocalypse. His success was complete. All Florence thronged to hear him, so that from his sermons in the cathedral he acquired a constantly growing influence over the people. In 1491 he became prior of the monastery of San Marco. He made manifest his feelings towards the ruler of Florence by failing to visit Lorenzo de Medici, although the Medici had always shown themselves generous patrons of the monastery. Lorenzo took no notice of this but continued his benefits, without however changing the opinion of the new prior. Savonarola began at once with the inner reform of the monastery itself. San Marco and other monasteries of Tuscany were separated from the Lombard Congregation of the Dominican Order and were formed in 1493 with papal approval into an independent congregation. Monastic life was reformed in this new congregation by rigid observance of the original Rule. Savonarola, who was the vicar-general of the new congregation, set the example of a strict life of self-mortification; his cell was small and poor, his clothing coarse, his food simple and scanty. The lay brothers were obliged to learn a trade and the clerics were kept constantly at their studies. Many new brethren entered the monastery; from 50 the number of the monks of San Marco rose to 238, among them being members of the first families of the city. Meanwhile Savonarola preached with burning zeal and rapidly won great influence. He was looked upon and venerated by his followers as a prophet. His sermons, however were not free from extravagance and vagaries. Without regard to consequences he lashed the immoral, vain-glorious, pleasure-seeking life of the Florentines, so that a very large part of the inhabitants became temporarily contrite and returned to the exercise of Christian virtue. Both his sermons and his whole personality made a deep impression. He bitterly attacked Lorenzo the Magnificent as the promoter of paganized art, of frivolous living, and as the tyrant of Florence. Nevertheless, when on his death bed, Lorenzo summoned the stern preacher of morals to administer spiritual consolation to him. It is said that Savonarola demanded as a condition of absolution that Lorenzo restore its liberties to Florence; which, however, the latter refused to do. This however cannot be proved with absolute historical certainty. From 1493 Savonarola spoke with increasing violence against the abuses in ecclesiastical life, against the immorality of a large part of the clergy, above all against the immoral life of many members of the Roman Curia, even of the wearer of the tiara, Alexander VI, and against the wickedness of princes and courtiers. In prophetic terms he announced the approaching judgment of God and the avenger from whom he hoped the reform of Church life. By the avenger he meant Charles VIII, King of France, who had entered Italy, and was advancing against Florence. Savonarola's denunciation of the Medici now produced its results. Lorenzo's son Pietro de Medici, who was hated both for his tyranny and his immoral life, was driven out of the city with his family. The French king, whom Savonarola at the head of an embassy of Florentines had visited at Pisa, now entered the city. After the king's departure a new and peculiar constitution, a kind of theocratic democracy, was established at Florence, based on the political and social doctrines the Dominican monk had proclaimed. Christ was considered the King of Florence and protector of its liberties. A great council, as the representative of all the citizens, became the governing body of the republic and the law of Christ was to be the basis of political and social life. Savonarola did not interfere directly in politics and affairs of State, but his teachings and his ideas were authoritative. The moral life of the citizens was regenerated. Many persons brought articles of luxury, playing-cards, ornaments, pictures of beautiful women, the writings of pagan and immoral poets, etc., to the monastery of San Marco; these articles were then publicly burned. A brotherhood founded by Savonarola for young people encouraged a pious, Christian life among its members. Sundays some of this brotherhood went about from house to house and along the streets to take away dice and cards from the citizens, to exhort luxuriously dressed married and single women to lay aside frivolous ornament. Thus there arose an actual police for regulating morality, which also carried on its work by the objectionable methods of spying and denunciation. The principles of the severe judge of morals were carried out in practical life in too extreme a manner. Success made Savonarola, whose speech in his sermons was often recklessly passionate, more and more daring. Florence was to be the starting point of the regeneration of Italy and the Church. In this respect he was constantly looking for the interposition of Charles VIII for the inner reform of the Church, although the loose life and vague extravagant ideas of this monarch in no way fitted him to undertake such a task. These efforts of Savonarola brought him into conflict with Alexander VI. The pope, like all Italian princes and cities, with the exception of Florence, was an opponent of the French policy. Moreover, Charles VIII had often threatened him with the calling of a reform council in opposition to him. This led Alexander VI to regard all the more dubiously the support that Florence under the influence of Savonarola gave the French king. Furthermore the Dominican preacher spoke with increasing violence against the pope and the Curia. On 25 July, 1495, a papal Brief commanded Savonarola in virtue of holy obedience to come to Rome and defend himself on the score of the prophecies attributed to him. Savonarola excused himself on the plea of impaired health and of the dangers threatening him. By a further Brief of 8 September the Dominican was forbidden to preach, and the monastery of San Marco was restored to the Lombard Congregation. In his reply of 29 September, Savonarola sought to justify himself, and declared that, as regards his teaching, he had always submitted to the judgment of the Church. In a new papal Brief of 16 October written with great moderation the union of the monastery of San Marco with the Lombard Congregation was withdrawn, Savanarola's conduct was judged mildly, but the prohibition to preach, until his vindication at Rome, was maintained. In the meantime Savonarola had again entered the pulpit on 11 October in order to rouse the Florentines against Pietro de Medici and on 11 February the Signoria of Florence actually commanded the Dominican to preach again. Savonarola now resumed his sermons on 17 February and was thus unjustifiably disobedient to ecclesiastical authority. In these Lenten sermons he violently lashed the crimes of Rome thereby increasing the passionate excitement at Florence. A schism threatened and the pope was again forced to interpose. On 7 November, 1496, the Dominican monasteries of Rome and Tuscany were formed into a new congregation, the first vicar of which was Cardinal Caraffa. Even then Savonarola refused obedience and again during the Lenten season of 1497 preached with uncontrolled violence against the Church in Rome. On 12 May, 1497, he was excommunicated. Under the date of 19 June he published a letter "against the excommunication" as being fraudulently obtained and sought to show that the judgment against him was null and void. The Florentine ambassadors at Rome probably hoped to prevent any further measures on the part of the pope, but their hopes were unfounded, especially as Savonarola became more defiant. Notwithstanding his excommunication he celebrated Mass on Christmas Day and distributed Holy Communion. Moreover, disregarding an archiepiscopal edict, he began again on 11 February, 1498, to preach at the Cathedral and to demonstrate that the sentences against him were void. Even at this juncture the pope desired to act with gentleness, if the obstinate monk would submit, but the latter remained defiant and with his adherents set about calling a council in opposition to the pope. He drew up letters to the rulers of Christendom urging them to carry out this scheme which, on account of the alliance of the Florentines with Charles VIII, was not altogether beyond possibility. In Florence itself the opposition to Savonarola grew more powerful, and an adversary from the Franciscan Order offered to undergo the ordeal by fire in order to prove him in error. Savonarola himself did not want to take up the challenge, but some of his ardent adherents among the Dominicans declared themselves ready for it. The ordeal for both sides was to take place on 7 April, 1498, before a large public gathering. everything was ready for the test, but it did not take place. The people now turned against Savonarola. There were outbreaks and the monastery of San Marco was attacked; Savonarola and a fellow-member of the order, Domenico da Pescia, were taken prisoners. The papal delegates, the general of the Dominicans and the Bishop of Ilerda were sent to Florence to attend the trial. The official proceedings, which were, however, falsified by the notary, still exist. The captured monks were tortured; Savonarola's following in the city fell away. On 22 May, 1496, Savonarola and two other members of the order were condemned to death "on account of the enormous crimes of which they had been convicted". They were hanged on 25 May and their bodies burned. In the beginning Savonarola was filled with zeal, piety, and self-sacrifice for the regeneration of religious life. He was led to offend against these virtues by his fanaticism, obstinacy, and disobedience. He was not a heretic in matters of faith. The erection of his statue at the foot of Luther's monument at Worms as a reputed "forerunner of the Reformation" is entirely unwarranted. Among his writings mention should be made of: "Triumphus Crucis de fidei veritate" (Florence, 1497), his chief work, an apology for Christianity; "Compendium revelationum" (Florence, 1495); "Scelta di prediche e scritti", ed. Villari Casanova (Florence, 1898); " Trattato circa il Reggimento di Firenze", ed. Rians (Florence, 1848); further letters edited by Marchese in the "Archivio. storico italiano", App. XIII (1850); poems edited by Rians (Florence, 1847). The "Dialogo della verita" (1497) and fifteen sermons were placed later on the Index. DELLA MIRANDOLA, Vita Savonarolae, ed. Quétif (Paris, 1674); BURLAMACCHI, Vita del Fra G. Savonarola, ed. Mansi (Lucca, 1761), GHERARDI, Nuovi documenti e studi intorno a Gir. Savonarola (2nd ed., Florence, 1887); VILLARI, Storia di Girl. Savonarola (3rd ed., 2 vols., Florence 1898); CAPPELLI, Fra. G. Savonarola e Notizie intorno al suo tempo (Modena, 1869); PROCTER, Il domenicano Savonarola e la Riforma (Milan 1897); FERRETTI, Per la causa di Fra Gir. Savonarola (Milan, i897); PASTOR, History of the Popes, ed. Antrobus, V (St. Louis, 1902), passim; IDEM, Zur Beurteilung Savonarolas (Freiburg, 1898); LUOTTO, Gir. Savonarola (Florence, 1897); SCHNITZER, Quellen u. Forschungen zur Gesch. Savonarolas, I-III (Munich, 1902-), IV (Leipzig, 1910); OLSCHKI, Bibliotheca Savonaroliana (Florence, 1898); RYDER Essays (London, 1911), s. v.. HOGAN, A Great Reformer -- Fra Gir. Savonarola in Irish Eccl. Record (Dublin, July, 1910); LUCAS, Fra Girolamo Savonarola (2nd ed., London, 1906); O'NEIL, Jerome Savonarola (Boston, 1898); IDEM, Was Savonarola really excommunicated? (Boston, 1900), J.P. KIRSCH Savoy Savoy (Ital. Savoja; Fr. Savoie) A district in the south-eastern part of France that extends from the Lake Geneva to south of the River Arc, and forms to-day the French Department of Savoie and Haut-Savoie. The House of Savoy which at the present time rules the Kingdom of Italy takes its name from this country. Savoy, the Roman Sabaudia, was inhabited in antiquity by the Celtic Allobroges who were conquered by the Romans in the first century before Christ and gradually became Romanized. When in A.D. 437 the kingdom of the Germanic Burgundians, with Worms as its capital, was destroyed by the Hunnic hordes, King Gundikar and the greater number of his people were killed. With the permission of the Roman general Ætius, the remainder of the Burgundians, with Gundiok as their ruler, settled in Sabaudia, as allies of the Romans, and after the fall of the Roman power they established a new kingdom which, towards the end of the fifth century, extended over the entire basin of the Rhone as far as the Cevennes and to the Mediterranean. In 532 Savoy was incorporated along with this Burgundian kingdom in the Frankish empire. During the supremacy of the Franks the people changed from Arianism to Catholicism. In the ninth century the Empire of the Franks was divided into several kingdoms, and Savoy fell to the Kingdom of Arles, or Lower Burgundy, which was founded in 879 by Count Boso of Vienne. Together with this territory it passed in 930 to the Kingdom of Upper Burgundy, established in 887 by the Guelph Rudolph between the Swiss Jura Alps and the Pennine Alps. Rudolph III (964-1032) had no direct heirs, and bequeathed his land to the German Emperors Henry II and Conrad II who were related to him. After Rudolph's death Conrad II maintained his claim to the country against Odo of Champagne, the candidate whom a number of Burgundian spiritual and secular lords set up for the throne. In these struggles much aid was given the German ruler by a Burgundian noble, Count Humbert White Hands of Savoy; for these services the count was rewarded with large gifts of land. The ancestors of this Humbert came apparently from eastern Saxony, not far from Magdeburg; the earliest known members of the family are the brothers Amadeus and Humbert, who are mentioned in the second half of the tenth century. The oldest possessions of the line of Savoy were the counties of Maurienne (the upper valley of the River Arc), Savoy (the district between Arc, Isère, and the middle course of the Rhone), and also Belley, with Bugey as its chief town. In the eleventh century there was added to this territory the valley of Aosta, the Tarantaise (the upper valley of the Isère), and Chablais (the district on the Rhone between Martigny and Lake Geneva). About 1050 Humbert's son Odo married Adelaide, the oldest daughter and heiress of Count Manfred of Turin, and by this marriage the House of Savoy gained large possessions in Italy, particularly the greater part of Piedmont, while at the same time the possessions east and west of the Alps were joined together. Odo's second son, Amadeus II, aided his brother-in-law, the Emperor Henry IV, while on his expedition to Canossa, in return for which Henry resigned to him the secular administration of five Italian dioceses. After the death of his mother Adelaide, Humbert II took possession of the Italian inheritance (1091). His son Amadeus III joined the Second Crusade and died in 1149 on the Island of Cyprus while returning home. Thomas I (1189-1233), grandson of Amadeus, as imperial vicar did much to aid Frederick II, and enlarged his possessions by acquiring Chambéry, Romont, etc. His eight sons divided the inheritance among themselves, yet the eldest Amadeus IV (1233-53), who was an adherent of Frederick II in his contest with the popes, maintained a certain supremacy over his brothers. Of all the brothers only Thomas II (d. 1259) left any male heirs; his sons Thomas III and Amadeus V were the founders of the two lines of Savoy and Piedmont that were reunited in 1418. Amadeus V (1285-1323), who inherited Savoy, obtained in 1290 the secular governorship of the city of Geneva. He accompanied Henry VII on his expedition to Italy, and was, as a reward, made a prince of the empire (1311). He was succeeded by his sons Edward (1323-29) and Aymon (1329-43). The latter by marriage gained a claim to Montferrat. Aymon's son Amadeus VI (1343-83), called the "Green Count" because of the colour of his ensign at tournaments, was a famous warrior who fought over half of Europe and in 1366 battled the Turks in Greece; he won Vaud, Gex, and parts of the dioceses of Ivrea and Vercelli, and made a law that his territories should never be divided and that the succession should be by primogeniture. In order to form a barrier against the increasing influence of the French kings the Emperor Charles IV in 1361 separated Savoy from Arles and appointed Amadeus imperial vicar for Arles (until 1378). Amadeus VII (1383-91), the "Red Count", gained Nice, Ventimiglia, and Chivasso. Amadeus VIII (1391-1434), known as the antipope Felix V (q. v.), was made a duke by Emperor Sigismund in 1416; in 1422 he received the County of Geneva in fief, and in 1426 gained Vercelli and feudal supremacy over Montferrat. Under his weak and idle son Louis (1334-65) the power of the rising house declined. Amadeus IX the Fortunate (1465-72) left the government to his wife Yolande, sister of the French king Louis XI, who was also regent for her minor son Philibert I (1372-82). French influence increased in Savoy and involved the country in the wars between France and the emperors. Philibert II (1497-1504) inclined in politics more to the Austrian and Spanish side; this was also the policy of Charles III (1504-53). The latter received Asti in 1530 from his brother-in-law, the Emperor Charles V, but in 1534 lost Geneva, in 1536 Vaud and the southern shore of the Lake of Geneva as far as the Swiss cantons of Berne, Freiburg, and Valais, and in 1536 he was driven out of Savoy and Piedmont by the French king. The Truce of Nice in 1538 left the French in possession of their conquests, and Charles retained only Cuneo, Asti, and Vercelli. However, his son Emmanuel Philibert (1553-80) regained nearly all his territories in 1559 by the Peace of Cateau-Cambrésis; in 1564 he concluded the Treaty of Lausanne with the Swiss Confederation, in agreement with which he recovered Chablais, but renounced his claim to Geneva and the Vaud. He acquired Tenda and Oneglia, founded the University of Mondovi, and replaced the feudal system by an enlightened absolutism which afterwards became a model for Europe. Emmanuel I the Great (1580-1630), son of Emmanuel Philibert, sided in politics sometimes with Spain and the emperor, sometimes with France, according as he hoped to gain the greater advantage. In 1588 he conquered the Margraviate of Saluzzo, to which France also laid claim, and retained it in the Peace of Lyons (1601) as the ally of Philip of Spain. In return, however, he was obliged to concede the provinces of Gex, Bresse, and Valromy to France. During this reign Chablais, which had become almost entirely Protestant during its dependency on Berne, was regained to the Catholic Faith by the labours of St. Francis of Sales (q. v.). The ambition of Emmanuel I even led him in 1619 to aim at the imperial crown. On account of his claims to Montferrat, which in 1536 had fallen to Mantua, he took part in the War of the Mantuan Succession (1628-31). His son Victor Amadeus I (1630-37) by the treaty of peace obtained parts of Montferrat, but was obliged to yield Pinerolo and the valley of Perosa to France. In 1635 he supported the French army in the struggle with the emperor for the Duchy of Milan. Charles Emmanuel II (1638-75), a prince fond of art and anxious for the prosperity of his people, came into possession of the lands of the counts of Geneva, a branch of the House of Savoy. Victor Amadeus II (1675-1730), son of Charles Emmanuel, refused in 1690 to bring an army to the aid of Louis XIV against the alliance between the emperor, England, Sweden, Spain, and the Netherlands; in return the French seized Savoy and Piedmont. When in 1696 the duke withdrew from the alliance by an independent treaty he received from France not only all that had been lost but also Pinerola and Perosa. Consequently in the War of the Spanish Succession Victor Emmanuel at first was a partisan of Louis XIV, but in 1703 he joined Austria and its confederates. Upon this the French took possession once more of his country; the victory of Eugene of Savoy (a member of the Carignan branch of the family) at Turin in 1706 freed Piedmont from the enemy. In the Peace of Utrecht in 1713 the duke recovered Savoy and Nice from the French, while the emperor gave him Montferrat from the Spanish inheritance, parts of the Duchy of Milan, and the Island of Sicily, as well as the title of king. In 1718 he was obliged to abandon Sicily to Austria and accept in return the much less valuable island of Sardinia, but in consideration of this he was acknowledged as king by Spain. The House of Savoy now took the title of King of Sardinia from the island of that name, although Savoy and Piedmont remained its chief possessions. Henceforth the history of Savoy is in general the same as that of the Kingdom of Sardinia (q.v.). During the French Revolution Savoy was occupied by the French, and by the Treaty of Nice in 1796 was surrendered to France together with Nice. It was restored to Sardinia by the Congress of Vienna. In the war of 1859 with Austria Lombardy fell to Piedmont, but in 1860 King Victor Emmanuel II was obliged to cede Savoy and Nice to France in return for the aid that Napoleon III, in accordance with the secret treaty of Plombières (1858), had given the king in this war. Thus the ancestral lands of the Italian royal family belong to-day to the French, much to the vexation of the Italians. MANNO, Bibliografia storico degli stati della monarchia di Savoia (8 vols., Turin, 1884-1908); CIBRARIO, Notizia sopra la storia dei principi di Savoia (2nd ed., Turin, 1866); IDEM, Storia della monarchia di Savoia (3 vols., Turin, 1840-44); IDEM, Origini e progresso delle istituzioni della monarchia di Savoia (2 vols., Florence, 1869); RICOTTI, Storia della monarchia piemontese (6 vols., Florence, 1861-70); ST-GENIS, Hist. de Savoie (3 vols., Chambéry, 1869); CARUTTI, Storia della diplomazia delle corte di Savoia (4 vols., Turin, 1875-80); IDEM, Regesta comitum Sabaudia ab ultima stirpis origine ad annum 1253 (Turin, 1889); GERBAIX DI SONNAZ, Studi storici sul contado di Savoia e sul marchesato in Italia (3 vols., Turin, 1883-1903); GABOTTO, Lo stato Sabaudo da Amadeo VIII ad Emanuele Filiberto (3 vols., Turin, 1892-95); PERRIN, Hist. de Savoie (Chambéry, 1900); HELLMAN, Die Grafen von Savoyen u. das Reich bis zum Ende des staufisch. Periode (Innsbruck, 1900); DE ANGELI, Storia de casa Savoia (Milan, 1906); ARDOUIN-DUMAZET, Voyage en France, VIII-X (Paris and Nancy, 1903). JOSEPH LINS Jean de Saxe Jean de Saxe For a long time two astronomers of the Middle Ages were confounded under this name. (1) Joannes Danko (Also DE DANEKOWE or DE SAXONIA). Composed (1297) the "Notulae super compotum"; there is also in Paris a copy of the Canons of Jean de Linières made by him (1323). (2) Jean de Counnout (Also DE CONNAUGHT or DE SAXONIA) Jean de Counnout was likewise a disciple and great admirer of Jean de Linières, and a composer of various astronomical and astrological works. In 1327 he drew up the "Canones super tabulas Alfonsii regis Castellae", of great and lasting fame; in 1331 he reviewed the "Introductorium ad judicia astronomiae" of Al-Kabici (Alchabitius). In 1355 he composed examples of numerical computation on the "Canons" of Jean de Linières, later on his own "Canons", to give the students of the University of Paris practice in the use of astronomical tables. The "Canones in tabulas Alfonsii" were printed following the "Alfonsian Tables" in 1483. The "Scriptum super Alkabicium" was published at Venice, 1489, 1491, 1502, 1503, and in Paris in 1520. BONCOMPAGNI, Intorno alle vite inedite di tre matematici (Giovanni Danck di Sassonia, Giovanni de Lineriis e Fra Luca Pacioli di Borgo San Sepolcro) scritte da Bernardino Baldi in Bulletino di Bibliografia e di Storia delle Scienze matematiche e fisiche, t. XII, 1879. PIERRE DUHEM Saxe-Altenburg Saxe-Altenburg One of the Saxon duchies in the east of Thuringia; situated on the west frontier of the Kingdom of Saxony. It has an area of 511 sq. miles and consists of two parts (separated by the principality of the younger branch of the Reuss family), the Ostkreis (254 sq. miles) and the Westkreis (257 sq. miles). It contained 216,312 inhabitants in 1910; 206,508 in 1905, including 5,449 Catholics (3 per cent), 200,511 Protestants, and 131 Jews. The duchy became a separate state in 1826, when in consequence of the extinction of the Saxe-Gotha line (1821), its possessions were divided among the Saxon ducal lines, the territory of Altenburg falling to the Saxe-Hildburghausen line as an independent domain. Duke Ernest II (b. 1871) has ruled since 1902. The present duchy was separated from the former Burgraviate of Altenburg, which belonged to the ancestral estates of the House of Saxe-Meissen, by the partition treaty of 1485, to which is to be traced the division of the princely House of Saxony into the Ernestine Line, ruling over the various Thuringian states, and the Albertine Line, ruling in the Kingdom of Saxony. Altenburg fell to the Ernestine Line. A special Duchy of Saxe-Altenburg was founded in 1603, but, on the extinction of the ruling family (1672), the territory fell to Saxe-Gotha. The inhabitants of the territory constituting the modern duchy were prevailingly Protestant from the beginning of the Reformation movement. The few Catholics in the duchy are mostly immigrants who settled there during the latter half of the nineteenth century; in 1871 the Catholics formed only 0.14 per cent of the population. Catholic services have been held in the city of Altenburg by priests from Leipzig (Kingdom of Saxony) since the third decade of the nineteenth century—in the beginning only at long intervals. Since 1880 Altenburg has had its own priest, and to-day Catholic service and religious instruction are held in seven places in the duchy, partly by priests from the Principality of Reuss and the neighboring Prussian territories. By a Rescript of the Propaganda of 27 June, 1869, the Catholics of the duchy were placed under the Bishop of Paderborn, and by Decree of the Propaganda of 19 Sept., 1877, under the vicar Apostolic in the Kingdom of Saxony. There are no legal provisions governing the relations between the Catholic Church and the State, the government usually conforming to the principles observed in the Kingdom of Saxony. The public primary schools are all Evangelical-Lutheran; there is a Catholic private school (220 pupils in 1910) in the town of Rositz, to which the State has granted a subsidy since 1909. The erection of a private Catholic elementary school in the city of Altenburg (120 Catholic children under obligation to attend school) has not yet materialized owing to lack of funds. The Catholics are mostly poor immigrant factory hands. BRAUN, Erinnerungsblatter aus der Gesch. Altenburgs von 1525 bis 1826 (Altenburg, 1876); LOBE, Gesch. der Kirchen u. Schulen des Herzogtums Sachsen-Altenburg (3 vols., Altenburg, 1887-91). Protestant; FREISEN, Staat U. kath. Kirche in den deutschen Bundesstaaten, II (Stuttgart, 1906), 327 sq. HERMANN SACHER Saxe-Coburg and Gotha Saxe-Coburg and Gotha One of the Saxon-Thuringian duchies; has an area of 751 sq. miles and two chief divisions, the Duchy of Coburg (216 sq. miles) and the Duchy of Gotha (541 sq. miles). These divisions are separated from each other by a portion of Saxe-Meiningen and a strip of land belonging to Prussia (Kreis Schleusingen). In 1910 the territory had 257,208 inhabitants; in 1905 its population of 242,432 included 3897 Catholics (2 per cent), 237,187 Evangelicals, and 714 Jews. The two duchies were united in 1826 but each territory has still its own constitution, diet, and internal administration, even as regards religion and education. Only for certain specified kinds of business do the diets hold a common session. Apart from the separation of the two states — and the marked difference in the extent of their Crown lands which greatly influences questions of taxation — racial differences also contribute to keep the states separate, the inhabitants of Saxe-Gotha being of Saxon stock and the inhabitants of Saxe-Coburg of Frankish. The two duchies originated in the division of the ancestral estates of Duke Ernest the Pious (d. 1675), the founder of all the Saxon ducal lines (except the grand-ducal line of Saxe-Weimar-Eisenach), among his seven sons. With Duke Frederick IV, who had become a Catholic at Rome in 1807, the line of Saxe-Gotha became extinct (1821), and, after long disputes concerning the succession, the territory of Gotha fell to the line of Coburg-Saalfeld in 1826. Members of the ruling house of Coburg-Gotha ascended the thrones of several European countries during the nineteenth century. By his marriage with Queen Victoria (1840), Prince Albert became the founder of the present royal house of England; Prince Leopold was elected hereditary King of Belgium in 1831, the Belgian branch of the House of Saxe-Coburg becoming Catholic. The line of the House of Saxe-Coburg and Gotha (often called Coburg-Kohary), founded through the marriage of Prince Ferdinand with the heiress of the Hungarian princely House of Kohary (1816), is also Catholic. A son of this marriage, Ferdinand, was the founder (1837) of the dynasty which ruled in Portugal until 1910; a grandson, also named Ferdinand, became in 1887 hereditary Prince, and in 1909 King (Tsar) of Bulgaria. In the Duchy of Saxe-Coburg and Gotha the main line became extinct in 1893, the succession falling to the English branch; Duke Charles Edward (b. 1884), son of the Duke of Albany and grandson of the Prince Consort Albert and Queen Victoria, has reigned since 1899 (until 1905 under a guardian). In the old Catholic days the territory of the present Duchy of Gotha belonged to the Archdiocese of Mainz, the episcopal jurisdiction being exercised by the coadjutor bishop living at Erfurt. The Reformation destroyed all Catholic life, and it was only at the end of the eighteenth century that a small Catholic community was again formed in the town of Gotha, the religious ministration being supplied from Erfurt and by the Franciscans of the Saxon province. Though accorded parish rights in 1807, this community had not a special priest until 1857. In 1868 all Catholics in the Duchy of Gotha were assigned to the parish of Gotha. The relations between the Catholic Church and the State were fixed in one-sided fashion by the "Regulativ fur die kirchliche Verfassung der romisch-katholischen Glaubensgenossen im Herzogtum Gotha" of 23 August, 1811; regulations were therein made for the state supervision of the entire ecclesiastical life, for the establishment of the ruler's placet, etc. The validity of this "Regulativ" has never been recognized by the Catholic Church. On the reorganization of the German sees at the beginning of the nineteenth century the Catholics of Gotha were assigned to no diocese. At the desire of the Government of Gotha expressed through the medium of Prussia, the Catholics of the duchy were assigned to the Diocese of Paderborn by papal Decree of 13 Dec., 1853. The publication of this Decree, however, was forbidden by the Government of Gotha, because the Bishop of Paderborn refused to recognize the validity of the "Regulativ" of 1811, and the sovereign prerogatives of the duke in ecclesiastical affairs. Despite frequent attempts at settlement (the last in 1899), this dispute continues to the present day, the bishop being allowed to discharge episcopal functions in the duchy only after securing the permission of the Government. The duke and diet grants a small annual subsidy (about $200) for Catholic objects. The raising of church taxes is forbidden, and the administration of church property is controlled by the State. There are no special legal regulations concerning religious orders; the Sisters of St. Elizabeth (Grey Sisters) from Breslau have an establishment in the duchy. The territory of the Duchy of Coburg was ecclesiastically subject to the Diocese of Würzburg until the Reformation, after the inauguration of which the few remaining Catholics were ministered to by the Benedictines from the Monastery of Banz (on the Main). At the end of the eighteenth century a small Catholic community was again formed in Coburg. The relations between Church and State were regulated here also in a partial manner by the "Herzoglich-Coburgische Regulativ fur die kirchliche Verfassung der katholischen Glaubensgenossen" of 30 October, 1812. This "Regulativ" has also failed to find recognition from the Church. At the request of the Archbishop of Bamberg, the Catholics of the Duchy of Coburg were assigned to that see; the duke refused, however, to give his consent to the Decree, pending the results of the negotiations then being conducted by some German princes concerning the formation of a new diocese (Frankfort Conferences), but offered no objection to the provisional assignment of priests and the provisional exercise of episcopal jurisdiction in the duchy. There has been no change in these relations to the present day. The priests take an oath to uphold the constitution. In 1868 all the Catholics of the duchy were assigned to the parish of Coburg; the parish priest has for some years received a small annual allowance from the State (about $125). No church tax may be levied. Religious orders which care for the sick are free to enter without State permission. The question of the religious training of the children of mixed marriages is left open in both duchies; until 1900, however, the principle religio sequitur sexum was applied to such children. The public elementary schools of both duchies are Evangelical-Lutheran, although religious supervision has been abolished since 1863, and a complete separation of Church and State thus effected. Private Catholic elementary schools exist in Gotha (since 1857; 100 pupils in 1910) and Coburg (since 1807; 100 pupils in 1910). BECK, Gesch. des gothaischen Landes (3 vols., Gotha, 1868-76); LOTZ, Coburgische Landesgesch. (Coburg, 1892); FREISEN, Staat u. kath. Kirche in den deutschen Landesstaaten, II (Stuttgart, 1906), 361 sqq.; IDEM, Der kathol. u. protest. Pfarrzwang (Paderborn,.1906), 94 sqq. HERMAN SACHER Saxe-Meiningen Saxe-Meiningen A Saxon-Thuringian duchy. It has an area of 953 sq. miles, and 278,792 inhabitants (1910). In 1905 its population of 268,916 included 4870 Catholics (2 percent), 262,283 Evangelicals, and 1276 Jews. The duchy came into existence in 1681, as the result of the various succession agreements among the seven sons of Duke Ernest the Pious of Saxe-Gotha. Later agreements increased the territory of the duchy, especially that of 1826, when the previously independent Duchy of Saxe-Hildburghausen was assigned to it (560 sq. miles, with 70,000 inhabitants). In the Austro-Prussian War of 1866, Duke Bernard II (d. 1882) was the only Thuringian prince of the Saxon house to adhere to Austria or the German Confederation. Prussia therefore occupied his territory and had the government transferred to his son, George II (b. 1826), who is still reigning (1911). The heir apparent is Prince Bernard, who married Charlotte, sister of the German Emperor. In pre-Reformation times the territory of the present Duchy of Saxe-Meiningen belonged to the Diocese of Würzburg, to whose care today also the few Catholics of the country are committed. The Reformation caused the disappearance of Catholicism. In 1808, in consequence of a treaty between Saxe-Meiningen and the then Grand Duchy of Würzburg, the Catholic parish of Wolfmannshausen was ceded to Saxe-Meiningen. In the course of the nineteenth century, Catholic pastoral stations were established at Meiningen, Hildburghausen, Poessneck, and Sonneberg (seat of the celebrated toy industry). The legal statute of the various parishes or stations is regulated by special treaties between the bishop and the Government. Before making an appointment, the bishop presents to the ducal Government a priest of the Diocese of Würzburg provided with the royal Bavarian titulus mensae, and asks if this cleric is a persona grata to the duke. On the approval of the duke, the priest receives episcopal institution, and promises on oath before the ducal Government that he will observe the laws of the land and faithfully fulfil his duty. The State grants a small subsidy towards the payment of the clergy. Several districts are attended as a matter of charity by priests of neighboring dioceses. If Catholic priests wish to exercise their priestly functions outside of their appointed district, they must first inform the Evangelical clergyman of their intention. In the case of interments, the Catholic priest must, even within their special district, obtain the approbation of the Evangelical clergyman as regards the time. There are no legal ordinances concerning religious orders. For the establishment in Meiningen of the Daughters of the Divine Redeemer from Würzburg notice to the police only was necessary. The primary schools are Evangelical Lutheran, although this is not expressly provided for in the law. Religious instruction for the denominations in the minority (and thus for Catholics) must be provided in a manner deemed sufficient by the representatives of such churches. A public Catholic primary school exists at Wolfmannshausen (70 pupils), and a private school without state or communal support at Poessneck (since 1883; 31 pupils in 1910). The Primary School Law of 1908 definitively set aside the religious supervision of schools, and effected a sharp division of church and school; even the supervision of religious instruction no longer pertains to the parish priest. BRUCKNER, Landeskunde des Herzogtums Meiningen (2 vols., Meiningen, 1851-53); ZERTEL, Kleine Landeskunde (Hildburghausen, 1903); FREISEN, Der kath. und evang. Pfarrzwang (Paderborn, 1906). HERMANN SACHER Saxe-Weimar-Eisenach Saxe-Weimar-Eisenach A grand duchy in Thuringia, also known in recent times as the Grand duchy of Saxony. It has an area of 1397 sq. miles, and consists of three non-contiguous parts: Weimar (678 sq. miles); Eisenach (465); and Neustadt (254). In 1910 the grand duchy had 417,166 inhabitants; in 1905 it had a population of 388,095, including 18,049 Catholics (5 per cent), 367,789 Protestants, and 1412 Jews. Like the other Saxon-Thuringian minor states, the grand duchy originated in the partitions among the heirs of the House of Wettin, which ruled in Saxony. The House of Saxe-Wettin divided in 1485 into the Ernestine and Albertine lines. John Frederick the Magnanimous, of the former line, lost in the Wittenberg Capitulation of 1547 (see SAXONY), in addition to his electoral dignity, his estates with the exception of Thuringia. Even under the sons of John Frederick, Thuringia began to be divided up into separate principalities. Since the division of 1672 the Ernestine line is represented by two main branches — the Weimar (now the grand ducal) line which rules in Saxe-Weimar-Eisenach, and the Gotha line, from which three ducal lines have issued, ruling today in Saxe-Coburg-Gotha, Saxe-Meiningen, and Saxe-Altenburg respectively. The Weimar line also divided into three branches — the lines of Weimar, Jena, and Eisenach. The last two lines however became extinct, so that the three duchies were reunited in 1741. The best-known ruler of the grand-duchy is Charles Augustus (1758-1828), who made his capital, Weimar, the intellectual centre of Germany by attracting to his court the most famous Germans of his day; the poets Goethe, Schiller, Wieland, and Herder shed luster on his reign. In the war between Prussia and France (1806) Charles Augustus first espoused the cause of Prussia, but to save his domains he was compelled to join the Rheinbund formed by Napoleon after the defeat of Prussia at Jena (14 Oct., 1806). In consequence of the Congress of Vienna (1815) Prussia surrendered to Saxe-Weimar a territory of 6600 sq. miles with 78,000 inhabitants including Neustadt, which had previously belonged to the Kingdom of Saxony, and the Catholic Eisenach Highlands. On 31 April, 1815, Duke Charles Augustus received the title of grand duke. In the Austro-Prussian War of 1866 Saxe-Weimar supported Prussia; it was a member of the North German Confederation, and in 1871 became a federal state of the German Empire. William Ernest (b. 1876) has been the reigning grand duke since 1901. Before the Reformation of the sixteenth century, the territories constituting the present grand duchy were, ecclesiastically speaking, under the Archdiocese of Mainz, the coadjutor bishop residing at Erfurt exercising jurisdiction in the name of the archbishop. The Reformation removed every vestige of Catholic life. In the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries some Catholics immigrated sporadically into the territories of Weimar, Jena, and Eisenach. Spiritual ministration was supplied, as far as possible, by the Benedictines and secular priests of the city of Erfurt, which remained a secular possession of the Archbishop of Mainz until 1802, when it fell to Prussia. Duke Ernest Augustus II (1748-58) of Weimar erected a chapel for his Catholic soldiers, so that they could not desert under pretense of attending service at Erfurt. Catholic Divine Service was inaugurated in 1795 for the Catholic students of the University of Jena. The spiritual care of the students was entrusted to the French priest Gabriel Henry, who had been compelled to leave France on the outbreak of the Revolution, because he refused to take the oath of the civil constitution of the clergy demanded by the French National Assembly. After the battle of Jena, Napoleon, at the request of Father Henry, proclaimed the political and religious equality of Catholics and Protestants; it was also due to Father Henry that the declaration of the various German states on joining the Rheinbund contained the article concerning the equality of Catholics and Protestants. Through Father Henry's exertions the first Catholic parish in Jena was established in 1808; it was endowed by Napoleon, and all the Catholics of the territory were assigned to it. In 1819 the seat of the parish was transferred to Weimar. In 1815 Prussia ceded the Eisenach Highlands to the grand duchy. Until 1802 this territory, entirely Catholic, had belonged to the immediate ecclesiastical domain of Fulda; it contained nine parishes, united in the deanery of Geisa. Today (1911) the grand duchy contains altogether 14 parishes and a number of curacies and chaplaincies, 21 priests, and about 30 churches, all of which are subject to the deanery of Geisa. The Sisters of Merey from Fulda have establishments in four places; the Sisters of St. Elizabeth (Grey Sisters) from Breslau have a house at Eisenach. Male religious orders are forbidden to open houses in the grand duchy. With the agreement of the grand ducal government, the grand duchy was placed under the ecclesiastical jurisdiction of the Diocese of Paderborn by the Bull "De salute animarum" of 16 July, 1821; the Bull "Provida solersque" of 16 Aug., 1821, placed the nine parishes of the deanery of Geisa under the Diocese of Fulda; but it was only in 1829 that the grand ducal government recognized the jurisdiction of the Bishop of Fulda over these parishes. In answer to the petition of the Bishop of Fulda (17 Dec., 1856), the whole grand duchy was placed under his jurisdiction by brief of Cardinal Secretary of State Antonelli (17 Feb., 1857). The ecclesiastical jurisdiction of each new Bishop of Fulda in the grand duchy is recognized by the Government only after the receipt of an announcement of his entry into office and of a written guarantee (a bond), in which the bishop promises to observe all the grand ducal rights and powers and promises, in the name of his Catholic subjects, fidelity, homage, and obedience. The State has regulated the conditions of the Catholic Church in a narrow spirit by the law of 1 Oct., 1823; these conditions have not been substantially changed by the laws of 6 May, 1857, and 10 April, 1895. "For the preservation and exercise of the rights of the State, which, as regards the Catholic Church, its goods, and servants, are derived from the secular supreme direction and the power to maintain order", there exists an "Immediatkommission fur das katholische Kirchen- und Schulwesen" (Commission for the Catholic Church and Schools) immediately responsible to the Government; to this must be referred all matters in which the cognizance, agreement, confirmation etc. of the Government have been expressly required. Purely dogmatic decrees and decrees relating to the domestic discipline of the Church and not affecting the State are excepted. In the course of time custom has given rise to the state regulations that all episcopal ordinances, papal briefs etc., in so far as they affect the grand duchy, must be laid before the Government for inspection before promulgation or delivery, and that spiritual precepts may not be published without the ruler's placet, except they be of purely moral or dogmatic import. Until 1857 processions outside the church and churchyards and to places of pilgrimage were forbidden. Parochial positions and prebends are assigned by the bishop with the approval of the grand duke, in so far as the right of patronage does not pertain to the latter alone. In every parish and succursal church there is a church directorate, which consists of the pastor and two Catholic parishioners, and is entrusted with the administration of the church property, the maintenance of buildings, etc. For a long period the territorial dean (Landdechant), the pastor of Geisa, had to visit each pastor and church once annually, and forward a report of his visitation to the Immediatkommission. Should the bishop wish to make a visitation in person, he must first inform the territorial ruler of his purpose, whereupon it is decided whether or not a secular counsel shall be co-ordinated with the visitation. As regards the children of mixed marriages and change of religion the law of 10 April, 1895, decrees that the children must follow the religion of the father, even when he changes his religion. However, the change of religion in the case of the father does not affect the denomination of the children who are more than twelve years old. The father can also agree to the training of the children in the religion of the mother, although not before the birth of the first child and only by means of a declaration before the courts. Persons who have completed their eighteenth year may choose their own denomination. Whoever wishes, after the completion of his eighteenth year, to leave the Catholic or Evangelical Church, must first declare his intention to the proper clergyman, who will instruct him as to the importance of the step, and draw up an attestation of the conversion. The declaration of secession must be made before the courts. The school system is regulated by the law of 24 June, 1874, in the form published on 5 December, 1903. The public primary schools are maintained by the political community or a special school community. They are denominational — either Catholic or Evangelical according as either creed is in the majority. Only in one place (Dermbach) is there both a Catholic (170 pupils in 1910) and an Evangelical division of the public primary school. In Geisa there are Catholic and Jewish divisions in the public primary schools, thanks to the tolerance of the Catholics an example not imitated in the Evangelical towns. In six places, where the Catholics are in a minority (Weimar, Eisenach, Apolda, Jena, Neustadt on the Orla, and Weida), there are Catholic private primary schools, to which the State grants no subsidy. Negotiations between the Catholic primary schools and the Supreme School Board are effected through the medium of the Immediatkommission for the Catholic Church and Catholic Schools. KRONFELD, Landeskunde des Grossherzogtums Sachsen (2 vols. Weimar, 1878-79); FREISEN, Die bischofliche Jurisdiction uber die Katholiken im Grossherzogtum Sachsen-Weimar-Eisenach (Stuttgart, 1910). HERMANN SACHER Saxo Grammaticus Saxo Grammaticus Danish historian of the thirteenth century, author of the "Gesta Danorum". The scanty information we have concerning his life is based chiefly on statements in his work, especially in the preface. His father and grandfather took part in the campaigns of Waldemar I of Denmark (1157-1182). He himself was a cleric; a layman of that time would hardly have had his knowledge of theology and classic lore. No doubt, he studied at foreign universities, probably in Paris. In the eleventh book of his history he speaks of the funeral of Bishop Asker (Esger) as having taken place in his own time. As that event happened in 1158 we may conclude that Saxo was born about 1150, but we do not know where; from the favour shown to Zealand, it has been inferred that that was his birthplace. Saxo's history was written at the suggestion of Archbishop Absalon of Lund, who died in 1201 before the work was finished, whereupon the historian addressed himself to Absalon's successor Anders, who held the see until 1222. There is some doubt as to Saxo's position. In his preface he modestly refers to himself as the least among the followers of Absalon, but it is not likely that the bishop would have entrusted to an obscure and unimportant man the important task of writing a history of his native land. It is much more probable that Saxo held a high office, possibly a secretaryship, and that he enjoyed the bishop's intimate acquaintance. More than this we do not know. Attempts to identify him with a provost at Roskilde, a subdeacon in the monastery of St. Laurentius at Lund, or with a scribe named in Absalon's will, are purely conjectural and cannot be verified. The date of his death is also uncertain. The writing of the history occupied the greater part of Saxo's life. About the year 1185 the chronicler Swen Aggeson referes to the history as already planned, and the preface was not written until Waldemar II (1202-1241) had "encompassed the ebbing and flowing waves of the Elbe". This seems to refer to events of 1215 (or 1208?). Originally the work was to be a history of Absalon's own time, but it grew to be a complete history of Denmark from the earliest mythical period to the year 1187. It is written in an elegant, highly ornate Latin which excited the admiration of Erasmus of Rotterdam. The style is carefully modelled on that of the Latin authors of the "Silver Age", especially Valerius Maximus and Martinus Capella. The work is divided into sixteen books, of which the first nine contain mainly mythological and legendary material, which is presented in uncritical fashion. The last seven, however, relating the events nearer Saxo's time, are historical, and are believed to have been written first. For these he relied on oral communication, especially on Absalon's own reports which, so Saxo tells us, he accepted like a Divine revelation. For the first nine books dealing with Northern antiquity the sources are old Danish poems, Runic inscriptions, and Norwegian-Icelandic sagas. These books possess a special interest for us on account of the ancient legendary material preserved therein, much of which has come down to us in no other form. Among the famous legends found here may be mentioned those of Balder and Hother (Book III), of Amleth (ibid.), the basis of Shakespeare's Hamlet, and of the archer Toko or Palnatoki (Book X), the prototype of the Tell of Swiss legend. No complete MS. of Saxo's history is extant. Even in his own time the work received scant attention, partly, no doubt, because it was written in such difficult Latin. An epitome was made by an anonymous writer in 1431 and here the epithet "Grammaticus" (the lettered one) was first used. The first printed edition, made from a MS. since lost, appeared in Paris in 1514 and has been the basis of all subsequent editions. The first critical edition was given by Stephanus Johannes Stephanius (Sor÷, 1644). The best modern editions are those of Mⁿller-Velschow (3 vols., Copenhagen, 1839-58) and of Alfred Holder (Strasburg, 1886). The latter contains alsoa careful bibliography. Translations were made into Danish by Anders S÷ffrins÷n Vedel (Copenhagen, 1575), by Grundtvig (Copenhagen, 1818) and by W. Horn (Christiania and Copenhagen, 1898). The first nine books have been translated into English by O. Elton, with notes by F. York Powell (London, 1894); into German by H. Jantzen (Berlin, 1900) and Paul Herrmann (Leipzig, 1901). Consult the introductions to the works of ELTON and POWELL; MץLLER-VELSCHOW; JANTZEN; see also HERRMANN, op. cit., 466-470; OLRIK, Kilderne til Sakses Oldhistorie (Copenhagen, 1892 and 1894); PINEAU, Saxo Grammaticus (Tours, 1901); WATTENBACH, Deutschlands Geschichtsguellen, II (6 ed., 1893), 347. ARTHUR F.J. REMY Saxony Saxony I. THE SAXON TRIBE There arose in Germany during the third and fourth centuries after Christ the great tribal confederations of the Alamanni; Bavarians, Thuringians, Franks, Frisians, and Saxons, which took the place of the numerous petty tribes with their popular tribal form of government. With the exceptions of the Saxons all these confederations were ruled by kings; the Saxons were divided into a number of independent bodies under different chiefs, and in time of war they elected a duke. The Saxons (Lat., Saxones) were originally a small tribe living on the North Sea between the Elbe and Eider Rivers in the present Holstein. Their name, derived from their weapon called Sax, a stone knife, is first mentioned by the Roman author Claudius Ptolemæus (about 130 A.D.). In the third and fourth centuries the Saxons fought their way victoriously towards the west, and their name was given to the great tribal confederation that stretched towards the west exactly to the former boundary of the Roman Empire, consequently almost to the Rhine. Only a small strip of land on the right bank of the Rhine remained to the Frankish tribe. Towards the south the Saxons pushed as far as the Harz Mountains and the Eichsfeld, and in the succeeding centuries absorbed the greater part of Thuringia. In the east their power extended at first as far as the Elbe and Saale Rivers; in the later centuries it certainly extended much farther. All the coast of the German Ocean belonged to the Saxons excepting that west of the Weser, which the Frisians retained. The history of the powerful Saxon tribe is also the history of the conversion to Christianity of that part of Germany which lies between the Rhine and the Oder, that is of almost the whole of the present Northern Germany. From the eighth century the Saxons were divided into the four sub-divisions: Westphalians, between the Rhine and Weser; the Engern or Angrians, on both sides of the Weser; the Eastphalians, between the Weser and Elbe; the Transalbingians, in the present Holstein. The only one of these names that has been preserved is Westphalians, given to the inhabitants of the Prussian Province of Westphalia. In company with the German tribe of Angles a part of the Saxons settled on the Island of Britain from which the Romans had withdrawn, where as Anglo-Saxons, after having accepted Christianity about 600, they laid the foundation of Anglo-Saxon civilization and the present Great Britain. In attempting to reach Gaul by land the Saxons came into violent conflict with the Franks living on the Rhine. The Frankish king Clovis (481-511) united the various Frankish tribes, conquered Roman Gaul, and with his people accepted Christianity. The new Frankish kingdom was able to bring all German tribes except the Saxons under its authority and to make them Christian. For more than a hundred years there was almost uninterrupted warfare between Frank and Saxon. Many Anglo-Saxon Christian missionaries sought to convert the Saxons, some were killed, some driven away; the names of only a few of these men have been preserved, as St. Suitbert, St. Egnert, the saint called Brother Ewald, St. Lebuin, etc. St. Boniface also preached without success among the Saxons. The Saxons were finally brought under Frankish supremacy by the great Frankish ruler, Charlemagne, after a bloody struggle that lasted thirty years (772-804). Charlemagne was also able to win them to Christianity, the Saxons being the last German tribe that still held persistently to belief in the Germanic gods. At different times the Saxon wars of Charlemagne have been called "religious wars" and the assertion, which cannot be proved, has been made that Pope Adrian had called upon Charlemagne to convert the Saxons by force. Charlemagne's campaigns were intended mainly to punish the Saxons for their annual marauding expeditions to the Rhine, in which they burned churches and monasteries, killed the priests, and sacrificed their prisoners of war to the gods. The earliest date at which it can be proved that Charlemagne had the conquest of the Saxon districts in view is 776. It is evident that if peace was to be permanent the overthrow of the Saxons must be accompanied by their conversion to Christianity. The necessity for this was based also on the nature of the Frankish kingdom in which politics and religion were never separated. At the same time it is true that various measures taken by Charlemagne, as the execution of 4500 Saxons at Verdun in 782 and the hard laws issued to the subjugated, were shortsighted and cruel. The Church, however, cannot be made responsible in any case for this policy of Charlemagne's which it never approved. Although the opposition in Saxon territories to Christian teaching had been obstinate only a few decades before, the Saxons grew accustomed to the new life. The Christian conception of life sank deep into the hearts of the people, and in little more than a hundred years the Saxons were the messengers and defenders of a Christian, German civilization among the Slavonic tribes. The work of converting Saxony was given to St. Sturmi, who was on terms of friendship with Charlemagne, and the monks of the monastery of Fulda founded by Sturmi. Among the successful missionaries of the Faith were also St. Willihad, the first Bishop of Bremen, and his Anglo-Saxon companions. After St. Sturmi's death (779) the country of the Saxons was divided into missionary districts, and each of these placed under a Frankish bishop. Parishes were established within the old judicial districts. With the generous aid of Charlemagne and his nobles large numbers of churches and monasteries were founded, and as soon as peace and quiet had been re-established in the different districts, permanent dioceses were founded. The Medieval Duchy of Saxony When the Frankish kingdom was divided by the Treaty of Verdun (843) the territory east of the Rhine became the East Frankish Kingdom, from which the present Germany has developed. A strong central authority was lacking during the reigns of the weak East Frankish kings of the Carlovingian dynasty. Each German tribe was forced to rely upon itself for defence against the incursions of the Normans from the north and of the Slavs from the east, consequently the tribes once more chose dukes as rulers. The first Saxon duke was Otto the Illustrious (880-912) of the Liudolfinger line (descendants of Liudolf); Otto was able to extend his power over Thuringia. Otto's son Henry was elected King of Germany (919-936); Henry is justly called the real founder of the German Empire. His son Otto I (936-973) was the first German king to receive from the pope the imperial Roman crown (962). Otto I was followed as king and emperor by his son Otto II (973-983), who was succeeded by his son Otto III (983-1002); both the kings last mentioned vainly endeavoured to establish German authority in Italy. The line of Saxon emperors expired with Henry II (1002-1024), who was canonized in 1146. Henry I had been both King of Germany and Duke of Saxony at the same time. Mainly for the sake of his ducal possessions he had carried on a long and difficult struggle with the Slavs on the eastern boundary of his country. The Emperor Otto I was also for the greater part of his reign Duke of Saxony. Otto I brought the Slavonic territory on the right bank of the Elbe and Saale under German supremacy and Christian civilization. He divided the region he had acquired into several margravates, the most important being: the North Mark, out of which in the course of time the present Kingdom of Prussia developed, and the Mark of Meissen, from which has sprung the present Kingdom of Saxony. Each mark was divided into districts, not only for military and political purposes but also for ecclesiastical: the central point of each district was a fortified castle. The first churches built near these castles were plain buildings of wood or rubble-stone. Otto I laid the basis of the organization of the Church in this territory, that had been won for the German race and Christianity, by making the chief fortified places which he established in the different marks the sees of dioceses. The Ottoman emperors also aided much in bringing to Christianity the great Slavonic people, the Poles, who lived on the right bank of the Oder, as for a time the Polish country was under German suzerainty. Unfortunately the promising beginnings of Christian civilization among the Slavs were largely destroyed by the violence of the Slavonic rebellions in the years 980 and 1060. In 960 Otto I had transferred the ducal authority over Saxony to a Count Hermann, who had distinguished himself in the struggle with the Slavs, and the ducal title became hereditary in Count Hermann's family. This old Duchy of Saxony, as it is called in distinction from the Duchy of Saxe-Wittenberg, became the centre of the opposition of the German princes to the imperial power during the era of the Franconian or Salian emperors. With the death of Duke Magnus in 1106 the Saxon ducal family, frequently called the Billung line, became extinct. The Emperor Henry V (1106-25) gave the Duchy of Saxony in fief to Count Lothair of Supplinburg, who in 1125 became King of Germany, and at his death (1137) transferred the Duchy of Saxony to his son-in-law, Duke Henry the Proud, of the princely family of the Guelphs. The hundred years of war waged by the family of Guelph with the Hohenstaufen emperors is famous in history. The son of Henry the Proud (d. 1139) was Henry the Lion (d. 1195), who extended German authority and Christianity into the present Mecklenburg and Pomerania, and re-established Christianity in the territories devastated by the Slavonic revolts. Henry the Lion refused to aid the Emperor Frederick I Barbarossa in his campaign against the cities of Lombardy in 1176, consequently in 1180 the bann of the empire was proclaimed against Henry at Würzburg, and 1181 the old Duchy of Saxony was cut up at the Diet of Gelnhausen into many small portions. The greater share of its western portion was given, as the Duchy of Westphalia, to the Archbishop of Cologne. The Saxon bishops who had before this possessed sovereign authority in their territories, though under the suzerainty of the Duke of Saxony, were now subject only to the imperial government; the case was the same with a large number of secular countships and cities. The Diet of Gelnhausen is of much importance in the history of Germany. The Emperor Frederick executed here a great legal act. Yet the splitting up of the extensive country of the Saxons into a large number of principalities subject only to the imperial government was one of the causes of the system of petty states which proved so disadvantageous to Germany in its later history. The territory of the old duchy never again bore the name of Saxony; the large western part acquired the name of Westphalia. However, as regards customs and peculiarities of speech, the designation Lower Saxony is still in existence for the districts on the lower Elbe, that is, the northern part of the present Province of Saxony, Hanover, Hamburg, etc., in distinction from Upper Saxony, that is, the present Kingdom of Saxony, and Thuringia. From the era of the conversion of the Saxons up to the revolt of the sixteenth century, a rich religious life was developed in the territory included in the medieval Duchy of Saxony. Art, learning, poetry, and the writing of history reached a high degree of perfection in the many monasteries. Among the most noted places of learning were the cathedral and monastery schools of Corbie, Hildesheim, Paderborn, and Münster. This era produced architecturally fine churches of the Romanesque style that are still in existence, as the cathedrals of Goslar, Soest, and Brunswick, the chapel of St. Bartholomew at Paderborn, the collegiate churches at Quedlinburg, Königslutter, Gernrode, etc. Hildesheim, which contains much Romanesque work, has especially fine churches of this style. The cathedrals at Naumberg, Paderborn, Münster, and Osnabrück are striking examples of the Transition period. Only a few of these buildings still belong to the Catholic Church. II. ELECTORAL SAXONY After the dissolution of the medieval Duchy of Saxony the name Saxony was first applied to a small part of the ancient duchy situated on the Elbe around the city of Wittenberg. This was given to Bernard of Ascania, the second son of Albert the Bear, who was the founder of the Mark of Brandenburg, from which has come the present Kingdom of Prussia. Bernard's son, Albert I, added to this territory the lordship of Lauenburg, and Albert's sons divided the possessions into Saxe-Wittenberg and Saxe-Lauenburg. When in 1356 the Emperor Charles IV issued the Golden Bull, the fundamental law of the empire which settled the method of electing the German emperor, the Duchy of Saxe-Wittenberg was made one of the seven electorates. The duke as elector thereby received the right to elect, in company with the other six electors, the German emperor. In this way the country, though small in area, obtained an influential position. The electoral dignity had connected with it the obligation of primogeniture, that is, only the eldest son could succeed as ruler; this excluded the division of the territory among several heirs and consequently the disintegration of the country. The importance of this stipulation is shown by the history of most of the German principalities which were not electorates. The Ascanian line of Saxe-Wittenberg became extinct in 1422. The Emperor Sigismund bestowed the country and electoral dignity upon Margrave Frederick the Valiant of Meissen, a member of the Wettin line. As was mentioned above, the Margravate of Meissen had been founded by the Emperor Otto I. In 1089 it came into the possession of the Wettin family, who from 1247 also owned the eastern part of the Margravate of Thuringia. In 1422 Saxe-Wittenberg, and the Margravates of Meissen and Thuringia were united into one country, which gradually received the name of Saxony. Elector Frederick the Valiant died in 1464, and his two sons made a division of his territories at Leipzig on 26 August, 1485, which led to the still existing separation of the Wettin dynasty into the Ernestine and Albertine lines. Duke Ernest, the founder of the Ernestine line, received by the Partition of Leipzig the Duchy of Saxony and the electoral dignity united with it, besides the Landgravate of Thuringia; Albert, the founder of the Albertine line, received the Margravate of Meissen. Thus the Ernestine line seemed to have the greater authority. However, in the sixteenth century the electoral dignity fell to the Albertine line, and at the beginning of the nineteenth century it received the royal title as well. The Protestant revolt of the sixteenth century was effected under the protection of the electors of Saxe-Wittenberg. The Elector Frederick the Wise established a university at Wittenberg in 1502, at which the Augustinian monk Martin Luther was made professor of philosophy in 1508; at the same time he became one of the preachers at the castle church of Wittenberg. On 31 October, 1517, he posted up on this church the ninety-five theses against indulgences with which he began what is called the Reformation. The elector did not become at once an adherent of the new opinions, but granted his protection to Luther; consequently, owing to the intervention of the elector, the pope did not summon Luther to Rome (1518); also through the elector's mediation Luther received the imperial safe-conduct to the Diet of Worms (1521). When Luther was declared at Worms to be under the ban of the entire empire the elector had him brought to the Castle of the Wartburg in Thuringia. The new doctrine spread first in Saxe-Wittenberg. The successor Frederick the Wise (d. 1525) was his brother John the Constant (d. 1532). John was already a zealous Lutheran; he exercised full authority over the Church, introduced the Lutheran Confession, ordered the deposition of all priests who continued in the Catholic Faith, and directed the use of a new liturgy drawn up by Luther. In 1531 he formed with a number of other ruling princes the Smalkaldic League, for the maintenance of the Protestant doctrine and for common defence against the German Emperor Charles V, because Charles was an opponent of the new doctrine. The son and successor of John the Constant was John Frederick the Magnanimous (d. 1554). He was also one of the heads of the Smalkaldic League, which was inimical to the emperor and Catholicism. In 1542 he seized the Diocese of Naumburg-Zeitz, and attacked and plundered the secular possessions of the Dioceses of Meissen and Hildesheim. The Catholic Faith was forcibly suppressed in all directions and the churches and monasteries were robbed. John Frederick was defeated and captured by Charles V at the Battle of Mühlberg on the Elbe, 24 April, 1547. In the Capitulation of Wittenberg, 19 May, 1547, the elector was obliged to yield Saxe-Wittenberg and the electoral dignity to Duke Maurice of Saxe-Meissen. After this the only possession of the Ernestine line of the Wettin family was Thuringia, which, however, on account of repeated divisions among the heirs was soon cut up into a number of duchies. Those still in existence are: the Grand Duchy of Saxe-Weimar-Eisenach, the Duchies of Saxe-Coburg-Gotha, Saxe-Meiningen, and Saxe-Altenburg. Duke Albert (d. 1500) was succeeded in the Duchy of Saxe-Meissen by his son George the Bearded (d. 1539). George was a strong opponent of the Lutheran doctrine and had repeatedly sought to influence his cousins the Electors of Saxe-Wittenberg in favour of the Catholic Church, but George's brother and successor, Henry the Pious (d. 1541), was won over to Protestantism by the influence of his wife Catharine of Mecklenburg, and thus Saxe-Meissen was also lost to the Church. Henry's son and successor Maurice was one of the most conspicuous persons of the Reformation period. Although a zealous Protestant, ambition and desire to increase his possessions led him to join the emperor against the members of the Smalkaldic League. The Capitulation of Wittenberg gave him, as already mentioned, the electoral dignity and Saxe-Wittenberg, so that the Electorate of Saxony now consisted of Saxe-Wittenberg and Saxe-Meissen together, under the authority of the Albertine line of the Wettin family. Partly from resentment at not receiving also what was left of the Ernestine possessions, but moved still more by his desire to have a Protestant head to the empire, Maurice fell away from the German Emperor. He made a treaty with France (1551) in which he gave the Dioceses of Metz, Toul, and Verdun in Lorraine to France, and secretly shared in all the princely conspiracies against the emperor who only escaped capture by flight; and during the same year the emperor was obliged by the Treaty of Passau to grant freedom of religion to the Protestant Estates. Maurice died in 1553 at the age of thirty-two. His brother and successor Elector Augustus took the Dioceses of Merseburg, Naumburg, and Meissen for himself. The last Bishop of Merseburg, Michael Helding, called Sidonius, died at Vienna in 1561. The emperor demanded the election of a new bishop, but the Elector Augustus forced the election of his son Alexander, who was eight years old, as administrator; when Alexander died in 1565 he administered the diocese himself. In the same manner after the death of Bishop Pflug (d. 1564), the last Catholic bishop of Naumburg, the elector confiscated the Diocese of Naumburg and forbade the exercise of the Catholic religion. Those cathedral canons who were still Catholic were only permitted to exercise their religion for ten years more. In 1581 John of Haugwitz, the last Bishop of Meissen, resigned his office, and in 1587 became a Protestant. The episcopal domains fell likewise to Saxony, and the cathedral chapter ceased to exist. During the reigns of the Elector Augustus (d. 1586), and Christian (d. 1591), a freer form of Protestantism, called Crypto-Calvinism prevailed in the duchy. During the reign of Christian II (d. 1611) the chancellor, Crell, who had spread the doctrine, was overthrown and beheaded (1601) and a rigid Lutheranism was reintroduced and with it a religious oath. The great religious war called the Thirty Years' War (1618-48) occurred during the reign of Elector John George (1611-56). In this struggle the elector was at first neutral, and for a long time he would not listen to the overtures of Gustavus Adolphus, King of Sweden. It was until the imperial general Tilly advanced into Saxony that the elector joined Sweden. However, after the Battle of Nördlingen (1634) the elector concluded the Peace of Prague (1635) with the emperor. By this treaty Saxony received the Margravates of Upper and Lower Lusatia as a Bohemian fief, and the condition of the Church lands that had been secularized was not altered. The Swedes, however, revenged themselves by ten years of plundering. The Treaty of Westphalia of 1648 took from Saxony forever the possibility of extending its territory along the lower course of the Elbe, and confirmed the preponderance of Prussia. In 1653 the direction of the Corpus Evangelicorum fell to Saxony, because the elector became the head of the union of the Protestant Imperial Estates. Under the following electors religious questions were not so prominent; a rigid Lutheranism remained the prevailing faith, and the practice of any other was strictly prohibited. About the middle of the seventeenth century Italian merchants, the first Catholics to reappear in the country, settled at Dresden, the capital and at Leipzig, the most important commercial city; the exercise of the Catholic religion, however, was not permitted to them. A change followed when on 1 June, 1697, the Elector Frederick Augustus I (1694-1733) returned to the Catholic Faith and in consequence of this was soon afterwards elected King of Poland. The formation of a Catholic parish and the private practice of the Catholic Faith was permitted at least in Dresden. As the return of the elector to the Church aroused the fear among Lutherans that the Catholic religion would now be re-established in Saxony, the elector transferred to a government board, the Privy Council, the authority over the Lutheran churches and schools which, until then, had been exercised by the sovereign; the Privy Council was formed exclusively of Protestants. Even after his conversion the elector remained the head of the Corpus Evangelicorum, as did his Catholic successors until 1806, when the Corpus was dissolved at the same time as the Holy Roman Empire. His son, Elector Frederick Augustus II (1733-63), was received into the Catholic Church on 28 November, 1712, at Bologna, Italy, while heir-apparent. With this conversion, which on account of the excited state of feeling of the Lutheran population had to be kept secret for five years, the ruling family of Saxony once more became Catholic. Before this, individual members of the Albertine line had returned to the Church, but they had died without issue, as did the last ruler of Saxe-Weissenfels (d. 1746). Another collateral line founded in 1657 was that of Saxe-Naumburg-Zeitz, which became extinct in 1759. Those who became Catholics of this line were Christian Augustus, cardinal and Archbishop of Gran in Hungary (d. 1725), and Maurice Adolphus, Bishop of Leitmeritz in Bohemia (d. 1759). The most zealous promoter of the Catholic Faith in Saxony was the Austrian Archduchess Maria Josepha, daughter of the Emperor Joseph I, who in 1719 married Frederick Augustus, later the second elector of that name. The Court church of Dresden was built 1739-51 by the Italian architect, Chiaveri, in the Roman Baroque style; this is still the finest and most imposing church edifice in Saxony and is one of the most beautiful churches in Germany. Notwithstanding the faith of its rulers, however, Saxony remained entirely a Protestant country; the few Catholics who settled there remained without any political or civil rights. When in 1806 Napoleon began a war with Prussia, Saxony at first allied itself to Prussia, but afterwards joined Napoleon and entered the Confederation of the Rhine. Elector Frederick Augustus III (1763-1827) received the title of King of Saxony as Frederick Augustus I. III. THE KINGDOM OF SAXONY The new kingdom was an ally of France in all the Napoleonic wars of the years 1807-13. At the beginning of the great War of Liberation (1813) the king sided neither with Napoleon nor with his allied opponents, but united his troops with those of France when Napoleon threatened to treat Saxony as a hostile country. At the Battle of Leipzig (16-18 October, 1813), when Napoleon was completely defeated, the greater part of the Saxon troops deserted to the allied forces. The King of Saxony was taken as a Prussian prisoner to the Castle of Friedrichsfeld near Berlin. The Congress of Vienna (1814-15) took from Saxony the greater part of its land and gave it to Prussia, namely 7800 square miles with about 850,000 inhabitants; this ceded territory included the former Duchy of Saxe-Wittenberg, the former possessions of the Dioceses of Merseburg and Naumburg, a large part of Lusatia, etc. What Prussia had obtained, with the addition of some old Prussian districts, was formed into the Province of Saxony. The Kingdom of Saxony had left only an area of 5789 square miles with a population at that era of 1,500,000 inhabitants; under these conditions it became a member of the German Confederation that was founded in 1815. King John (1854-73) sided with Austria in the struggle between Prussia and Austria as to the supremacy in Germany. Consequently in the War of 1866, when Prussia was successful, the independence of Saxony was once more in danger; only the intervention of the Austrian Emperor saved Saxony from being entirely absorbed by Prussia. The kingdom, however, was obliged to join the North German Confederation of which Prussia was the head. In 1871 Saxony became one of the states of the newly-founded German Empire. King John was followed by his son King Albert (1873-1902); Albert was succeeded by his brother George (1902-04); the son of George is King Frederick Augustus III (b. 1865). Prince Maximilian (b. 1870), a brother of the present king, became a priest in 1896, was engaged in parish work in London and Nuremberg, and since 1900 has been a professor of canon law and liturgy in the University of Freiburg in Switzerland. The Kingdom of Saxony is the fifth state of the German Empire in area and third in population; in 1905 the average population per square mile was 778.8. Saxony is the most densely peopled state of the empire, and indeed of all Europe; the reason is the very large immigration on account of the development of manufactures. In 1910 the population amounted to 5,302,485; of whom 218,033 were Catholics; 4,250,398 Evangelican Lutherans; 14,697 Jews; and a small proportion of other denominations. The Catholic population of Saxony owes its present numbers largely to immigration during the nineteenth century. Catholicism that can be traced back to the period before the Reformation is found only in one section, the governmental department of Bautzen. Even here there is no continuous Catholic district, but there are a number of villages where the population is almost entirely Catholic, and two cities (Ostritz and Schirgiswalde) where Catholics are in the majority. It should also be mentioned that about 1.5 of the inhabitants of Saxony consists of the remains of a Slavonic tribe called by the Germans Wends, and in their own language "Serbjo". These Wends, who number about 120,000 persons and live in Saxon and Prussian Lusatia, are entirely surrounded by a German population; consequently owing to German influence the Wendic language, manners, and customs are gradually disappearing. About 50,000 Wends live in the Kingdom of Saxony; of these about 12,000 belong to the Catholic Church; some fifty Wendic villages are entirely Catholic. There is also a large Wendic population in the city of Bautzen, where among 30,000 inhabitants 7,000 are Wends. The Vicariate Apostolic of Saxony, and the Prefecture Apostolic of Saxon Upper Lusatia. As regards the Catholic Church the Kingdom of Saxony is divided into two administrative districts: the Vicariate Apostolic of Saxony, and the Prefecture Apostolic of Saxon Upper Lusatia. The vicariate Apostolic includes the hereditary lands, that is, those portions of Saxony which before 1635 belonged to the Electorate of Saxony and which the Treaty of Vienna of 1815 did not take from the country; the vicariate also includes the Duchy of Saxe-Altenburg, and the two principalities of Reuss. The Prefecture Apostolic of Lusatia includes the former Margravate of Lusatia, which in 1635 was separated from Bohemia and given to Saxony; since the Treaty of Vienna of 1815, however, this ecclesiastical district comprises only that part of Upper Lusatia that has remained Saxon, the present fifth Saxon administrative Department of Bautzen. Since the adjustment of the parishes in 1904 the Vicariate Apostolic of Saxony comprises (including the small principalities of Reuss and Saxe-Altenburg), 26 parishes and 7 expositorships, with, in 1909, 55 priests; Upper Lusatia comprises 16 parishes, of which 7 are Wendic, and 2 expositorships, with altogether 30 priests. The clergy are educated at the Wendic seminary at Prague, the capital of Bohemia; this seminary, which was founded in 1740 by two Wends, was originally intended only for Lusatia but now is used for the whole of Saxony. Its pupils first attend the gymnasium of Prague and then the university there. The Vicariate Apostolic of Saxony was established in 1763 by Pope Clement XIII; before this the confessors of the electors, who like all the priest in Saxony at that era were Jesuits, conducted the affairs of the Church under the title of superior. The most celebrated of these was Father Carlo Maurizio Voltor, an Italian, the confessor of the elector and King Frederick Augustus I. Father Voltor was also a noted diplomatist who had much influence at the court of Vienna, for example, he had some share in obtaining the title of King of Prussia (1701) for the Protestant Elector of Brandenburg. The first vicar Apostolic was Father Augustin Eggs, S.J.; for some unknown reason he left Saxony after the death of the Elector Frederick Christian (1764). He was followed by Father Franz Herz, S.J., who continued to administer his office after the suppression of the Jesuits in 1773; after his death (1800) Dr. Johann Alois Schneider (d. 1818) was appointed vicar Apostolic. In 1816 Dr. Schneider was consecrated titular Bishop of Argia, being the first Saxon vicar to be made a bishop. In the troubled times of 1813-14 he was the true friend and trusted adviser of the royal family; he also accompanied the king when the latter was imprisoned by Prussia. His successor, Ignatz Bernhard Mauermann (d. 1845), had the title of titular Bishop of Pellia. In 1831 the canons of the cathedral of Bautzen elected Bishop Mauermann as cathedral dean of Bautzen. After Bishop Mauermann's death this union of the two highest ecclesiastical offices in Saxony was dissolved, but since the death of the cathedral dean of Bautzen, Johann Kutschank (1844), the bishop has held both offices with the exception of the years 1900-04. Bishop Mauermann was succeeded by his older brother Franz Lorenz Mauermann (d. 1845) with the title of Bishop of Rama. The next bishop was Johann Dittrich (d. 1853), titular Bishop of Korykus, who in 1844 had been elected cathedral dean of Bautzen; he was followed by Ludwig Forwerk (d. 1875), titular Bishop of Leontopolis. After the Vatican Council (1869-70) Bishop Forwerk's skill enabled him to prevent the spread of Old Catholicism in Saxony at the time when the proclamation of the Dogma of Infallibility led to its development in Germany. He was followed by Franz Bernert (d.1890), titular Bishop of Azotus, who was succeeded by Dr. Ludwig Wahl (d. 1904), titular Bishop of Cocusus (Cocrun). From 1900 this bishop was not able to exercise his office on account of severe illness; during this period the Apostolic See appointed the prothonotary, Monsignor Karl Maas, administrator for the vicariate Apostolic, and the canon of the cathedral of Bautzen, Monsignor Georg Wuschanski, as administrator for Upper Lusatia. In 1904 Wuschanski was made Vicar Apostolic of Saxony and titular Bishop of Samos. Bishop Wuschanski died, however, by the end of 1905. In 1906 his placed was filled by Dr. Alois Schäfer. Dr. Schäfer was born at Dingelstädt in the Eichfelde (Prussian Province of Saxony) on 2 May, 1853, and in 1863 his parents settled at Chemnitz in the Kingdom of Saxony. In 1878 Dr. Schäfer was ordained priest, and was at first active in parish work; in 1881 he was made professor of exegesis at the lyceum at Dillingen in Bavaria; in 1885 he became professor of New Testament exegesis at the University of Münster in Westphalia; in 1894 he was a professor of the same at the University of Breslau, and in 1903 at the University of Strasburg. His title is: Titular Bishop of Abila, Vicar Apostolic in the Kingdom of Saxony, Administrator Ecclesiasticus in Saxon Upper Lusatia. The vicar Apostolic is appointed by the pope upon the nomination of the King of Saxony. According to the Constitution of Saxony the dean of the cathedral at Bautzen is a permanent member of the Upper House of the Saxon diet, but not the vicar Apostolic as such; he is a member only because the two offices are generally united. The two ecclesiastical offices are combined on account of the revenues, and the union is effected thus: the chapter of Bautzen elects as dean the vicar Apostolic who has already been appointed for the hereditary possessions of Saxony. It should be said, however, that the union is only a personal one and that the two administrative districts of the Church exist the same after as before the union. At the time of the Reformation Lusatia belonged politically, as has already been said, to Bohemia, i.e., to Austria. Before his resignation the last Bishop of Meissen transferred in 1581, with the approval of the Holy See, the ecclesiastical administration of Lusatia to Johann Leisentritt of Juliusberg, dean of the cathedral chapter of Bautzen, as administrator episcopatus. When the Reformation entered the country Dean Leisentritt was able to keep at least a part of the population faithful to the Catholic Church. Most important of those bodies that remained Catholic were: the cathedral chapter of St. Peter's at Bautzen; the two celebrated Cistercian abbeys for women, Marienthal near Ostritz on the Neisse and Marienstern between the cities of Kamenz and Bautzen; a part of the parishes that had been under the control of the monasteries, and some other independent towns. The only members of the chapter of St. Peter's at Bautzen that remained Catholic were the dean, the senior, the cantor, and the scholasticus; the provost, who according to the rules of the foundation was elected from the chapter at Meissen, became a Lutheran. Ever since that time the provostship has been granted by the Saxon government to a Protestant, generally to one of the higher state officials. This secular provost has, however, no connexion whatever with the cathedral chapter; he receives from the government ministry the revenues yielded by the lands belonging to the provostship. The cathedral chapter consists of four resident canons and eight honorary ones; when the position of dean is vacant the power of administration belongs to the cathedral canons; the dean is elected by the regular and honorary canons in the presence of a royal commissioner and is confirmed by the Apostolic See. The Cathedral of St. Peter's at Bautzen is the oldest church in Lusatia, and was built 1215-21; at the end of the fifteenth century it was much altered. Since the Reformation the choir has belonged to the Catholics, and the rest of the cathedral, which is divided from the choir by a grating, belongs to the Protestants. Another church in Bautzen retained by the Catholics is the Church of Our Lady, built in the thirteenth century, in which the services of the Catholic Wends are held. The cathedral chapter has the right of patronage for six Catholic parishes, the right of appointment for the Catholic seminary for teachers at Bautzen, the same for the cathedral school, and also the right of patronage for five Protestant parishes. The convent of Marienstern, in the Wendic district of Lusatia, that was founded in the middle of the thirteenth century, and the convent of Marienthal in the German section, that was founded before 1234, have done much to preserve Catholic life in Lusatia. For hundreds of years the pastoral care of the two convents has been exercised by priests of the Cistercian monastery of Osseg in Bohemia. A pilgrimage church much visited, especially by the Wends, is at Rosenthal in the Wendic parish of Ralbitz. In the treaty between Saxony and Austria of 13 May, 1635, by which Lusatia was transferred to Saxony, the Saxon elector was obliged to grant his special sovereign protection to the Catholic communities of Lusatia and the two convents, the emperor,as suzerain, retaining the supreme right of protection. The Catholics of Lusatia had the right to the free exercise of religion, but in agreement with the earlier legal rights of the State Church, only so far as they belonged to one of the old parishes. Catholics who lived within the boundaries of Protestant parishes were obliged to call upon the Protestant pastor of the community for all baptisms, marriages, and burials, or at least must pay for these the customary fees. This compulsion exercised upon the Catholics living in Protestant parishes was not annulled for Lusatia until 1863. By a treaty of peace between Saxony and France that was signed at Posen 11 December, 1806, Saxony was made a kingdom and entered the Confederation of the Rhine. This treaty granted the Catholics of Saxony nominally, although not in reality, civil and political equality with the Lutherans. The fifth article of the treaty declared that the Roman Catholic Church services were placed on an absolute parity with the services of the Augsburg and allied confessions, and subjects belonging to both religions were to enjoy civil rights. Now for the first time the bells of the Court Church at Dresden, which had hung silent in the tower for fifty years, could be rung. The concessions to Saxon Catholics made in the convention of 1806 were confirmed by the royal edict of 16 February, 1807, and by the Constitution of the German confederation of 1815 (art. XVI). The relations between Church and State were still further defined by the Edict of 19 February, 1827, which is still in force. This edict abrogated for the hereditary territories the compulsory dependence of Catholics on Protestant pastors and created the Catholic Consistory for the administration and jurisdiction of the Church including matters pertaining to marriage. This consistory is made up of three ecclesiastical and two secular councillors. The vicar Apostolic has the right of nomination for the appointments. A vicarial court was created as, with the exception of Rome, the highest court of appeal; it consists of the vicar Apostolic, two ecclesiastical councillors, one secular Catholic councillor, a legal assistant, and in addition for matters pertaining to marriage two Protestant councillors. At the same time the vicariate Apostolic was declared to be simply a special department for Church and school matters under the supervision of the Protestant state ministry. In Upper Lusatia the ecclesiastical administration and jurisdiction was placed in the hands of the "consistory of the chapter at Bautzen", which consists of the the dean, three ecclesiastical councillors and a secular justiciary. The vicarial court was made the court of appeal. The Constitution of 4 September, 1831, confirmed the ordinances and arrangements that were then valid. It was forbidden to establish new monasteries in addition to the two convents of Marienthal and Marienstern already in existence in Lusatia, or to admit into Saxony the Jesuits or other religious orders. It was not until a few years ago that a few Grey Sisters and nuns of St. Charles Borromeo were allowed to settle in Saxony, in all in thirteen places within eight cities. The authority of the State over the Church, the supreme supervision and the right of protection were assigned by the Constitution to the king as jus circa sacra. By the Law of 7 November, 1837, this authority was given to the department of the minister of education and worship, who by the Constitution must always be a Protestant. The administration and use made of the property of the Church is also under the supervision of the State. Money for the needs of the Church beyond what is provided by the property of the parish or endowments is obtained from a Church tax laid by the State (law of 2 August, 1878). The tax is raised as a supplementary income tax; the yearly amount of the tax is fixed by the Protestant minister of worship and education, while the Protestants can fix the amount of their Church tax themselves. In the years succeeding 1870 there was a bitter struggle in most of the German states between Church and State called the Kulturkampf (q. v.); during this period a law was issued in Saxony concerning the exercise of State supervision. This law contains the greater part of the ordinances which had been up to then in effect, and in its measures for putting the law into action follows the Austrian and Prussian laws of the decade of 1870-1880, that were inimical to the Church. Public church service can only be held in the 57 parishes, dependent parishes, and chapels; mission services and religious instruction can further be held at certain periods of time in about sixty places. In addition there are 8 churches and chapels that are private property. Very few church processions are permitted. The approval of the State is necessary for the general decrees of the Church authorities when these in any way encroach upon State or municipal affairs; the State authorities are to decide whether infringement has taken place. The approval of the ministry is necessary for the founding of new churches and institutions for priests, for settling or changing the boundaries of parishes, for establishing church service at new stations, in general for new acts of ecclesiastical administration of any kind, which in any way whatever come into contact with national affairs or the ordinary ones of civil life. A Catholic ecclesiastical office, whether in public or private service, permanent or subject to recall, can only be given to a German who has finished the course at a gymnasium, studied three years at a university, and has passed a theological examination for his office. Whoever has been trained at a seminary conducted by the Jesuits or a similar order is excluded. Further, the national Government can reject anyone who has been chosen for an ecclesiastical office, if it believes that he will use his influence against the State laws or ordinances. The State Government is to be notified at once of every vacancy and of every appointment of a spiritual office. As a rule change of religion is not permitted before the twenty-first year; before change of faith the convert must notify the pastor of the parish of his intention and may have a four weeks' period of reflection assigned to him; after the expiration of this term the convert can demand a certificate of dismissal. The religion of the father is determinative for children of mixed marriages, unless the parents have made a legal agreement otherwise before the child is six years old. All the State schools are denominational; they are not established and maintained by the political communes but by special school communes. In localities where the population is of different faiths the religious minority, if able to do so, can form a new school commune; special religious instruction for the benefit of the religious minority is not given at the expense of the school commune of the majority where that alone exists. Up to the twelfth year Protestant religious instruction is legally permissible for Catholic children. At present a new school law is being prepared, as the School law of 1873 contains many ordinances that are now out of date; however, the confessional character of the schools and the religious supervision of the schools by the pastor of the respective place is to be retained; but efforts have been and are still made to set aside at least the religious supervision of the schools. As regards Catholic schools there is a preparatory gymnasium in Dresden, a seminary at Bautzen, for training Catholic teachers for the primary schools, that is supported by the cathedral chapter of Bautzen, and 51 Catholic public primary schools. There are about 300 Catholic male teachers and about 20 Catholic female teachers. Special Catholic religious instruction is given at more than one hundred and thirty places where there are only Protestant schools. Only about 15,000 of the 24,000 Catholic school children attend Catholic schools; of the remaining 9000 children about 3500 have no Catholic religious instruction. The pressing necessity of new schools cannot be met on account of the lack of money, as most of the Catholics who have come into the country are poor factory hands. On account both of this lack of schools and of the equally great lack of churches, far more than 10,000 Catholics became Protestant during the years 1900 and 1910. IV. THE PRUSSIAN PROVINCE OF SAXONY The province has an area of 9,746 square miles, and in 1905 had 2,979,221 inhabitants. Of its population 230,860 (7.8 per cent) are Catholic, 2,730,098 (91 per cent) are Protestant; 9981 hold other forms of Christian faith, and 8050 are Jews. During the summer months about 15,000 to 20,000 Catholic labourers, called Sachsengänger, come into the country; they are Slavs from the Prussian Province of Posen, from Russian Poland, or Galicia. The province is divided into the three government departments of Magdeburg, Merseburg, and Erfurt. The Prussian Province of Saxony was formed in 1815 from the territories, about 8,100 square miles in extent, ceded by the Kingdom of Saxony, with the addition of some districts already belonging to Prussia, the most important of which are the Altmark, from which the State of Prussia sprang; the former immediate principalities of the Archbishop of Magdeburg and of the Bishop of Halberstadt, which Prussia had received by the Peace of Westphalia (1648) at the close of the Thirty Years' War; and the Eichsfeld, with the city of Erfurt and its surroundings. Up to 1802 the Eichsfeld and Erfurt had belonged to the principality of the Archbishop of Mainz; a large of the population had, therefore, retained the Catholic Faith during the Reformation. As regards ecclesiastical affairs the Province of Saxony had been assigned to the Diocese of Paderborn by the papal Bull "De salute animarum" of 16 July, 1821. The province contains three ecclesiastical administrative divisions: the episcopal commissariat of Magdeburg that embraces the entire governmental department of Magdeburg and consists of four deaneries and 25 parishes; the "ecclesiastical Court" of Erfurt, which includes the governmental Department of Merseburg and the eastern half of the governmental Department of Erfurt; and consists of 2 deaneries (Halle and Erfurt) and 28 parishes; the episcopal commissariat of Heiligenstadt, which embraces the western half of the governmental department of Erfurt, that is called the Upper Eichsfeld, and consists of 16 deaneries and 129 parishes. In those parts of the governmental Department of Magdeburg which belonged originally to the former Archdiocese of Magdeburg and the Diocese of Halberstadt all Catholic life was not entirely destroyed during the Reformation. Besides fourteen monasteries that continued in existence, there were in Halberstadt a number of benefices in connexion with the cathedral and the collegiate Church of Sts. Peter and Paul. As the entire native population had become Protestant these monasteries were only maintained by the immigration of Catholics who, from the time of the Treaty of Westphalia, though in small numbers, steadily came into the country; thus there arose around the monasteries small Catholic communities. The monasteries were all suppressed during the great secularization of the beginning of the nineteenth century, and thirteen parishes were formed, for which the State provided a fund from a part of the property of the monasteries. The other parishes in the governmental Department of Magdeburg were created after the middle of the nineteenth century, when, in consequence of the development of the manufacture of sugar, increasing numbers of Catholics came into the country; the St. Boniface Association gave the money to found these parishes. In 1905 the governmental Department of Magdeburg contained 76,288 Catholics, that is, 6.25 per cent of the population. The Reformation of the sixteenth century had its origin in the present governmental Department of Merseburg, which includes parts of the old dioceses of Magdeburg, Halberstadt, Merseburg, Naumburg-Zeitz, and Brandenburg; in this region all Catholic life was destroyed. It was not until after the Peace of Westphalia that small Catholic communities arose, from the entrance into the district of miners, merchants, pedlars, etc.; these communities grew especially in the nineteenth century on account of the development of manufactures. The first Catholic church service to be held again in this district was established in 1710 at Halle on the Saale by Franciscans of the Monastery of St. Andreas at Halberstadt; the first parish was also erected at Halle in 1810; the other parishes were founded by the St. Boniface Association. In 1905 the governmental Department of Merseburg contained 47,382 Catholics, that is, 4 per cent of the population. The governmental department of Erfurt is an almost entirely Protestant district in which, during the nineteenth century, scattered Catholics settled near districts which had preserved their faith amid the storms of the Reformation era; these districts are the Eichsfeld and a part of the population of Erfurt and its vicinity. Erfurt was founded in 742 by St. Boniface as the See of Thuringia. The first and only bishop, St. Adelar, suffered martyrdom in 755 with St. Boniface, and the territory of the diocese was united with the Archdiocese of Mainz. From the beginning, however, the archbishops of Mainz had episcopal assistants at Erfurt, who, from early in the fourteenth century, were in reality coadjutor bishops and gradually retained almost the same position as a diocesan bishop. After the suppression of the Archdiocese of Mainz (1802), the Diocese of Erfurt was assigned to the Diocese of Ratisbon, then in 1807 to Corbie, and in 1821 to Paderborn. Up to the present day there is still in existence at Erfurt an ecclesiastical board with certain episcopal powers which is called the "Ecclesiastical Court". Celebrated Catholic churches of Erfurt are: the cathedral that was begun about the middle of the twelfth century upon the spot where had stood a church built by St. Boniface; and the Church of St. Severus, erected in the fourteenth century. In 1905 the governmental Department of Erfurt contained 107,190 Catholics, that is, 21.53 per cent of the population; the number of Catholics steadily declines, in 1817 it amounted to 29 per cent. Outside of Erfurt and its immediate vicinity, where the Catholics form 12 per cent of the population, the Catholics in the main live together in communities in the Upper Eichsfeld in the three counties of Heiligenstadt (91 per cent Catholic), Worbis (77 per cent Catholic), and Mülhausen-Land (43 per cent Catholic). The soil of the Upper Eichsfeld is not productive; it does not offer, therefore, any of the conditions for industrial development, and many of its inhabitants are forced to emigrate. In the Department of Erfurt the collegiate foundation of Nordhausen has also remained Catholic from the early times; in 1811 it was made into a parish. As regards schools, the religious orders, and the other questions concerning the relations between Church and State, the laws of the Kingdom of Prussia are in force. WEISSE, Gesch. der kursächischen Staaten (7 vols., Leipzig, 1802-12); GRETSCHEL-BÜLAU, Gesch. des sächischen Volkes (3 vols., 2nd ed. Leipzig, 1863-64); BÖTTIGER-FLATHE, Gesch. des Kurstaates und Königreichs Sachsen (3 vols., 2nd ed., Gotha, 1867-73); STURNHÖFEL, Gesch. der sächischen Lande u. ihrer Herrscher (2 vols., Chemnitz, 1898-1909); JACOBS, Gesch. der in der Provinz Sachsen vereinigten Gebiete (Gotha, 1884); THEINER, Gesch. der Rückkehr der regierenden Häuser von Braunschweig u. Sachsen in den Schloss der kath. Kirche im 18. Jahrh. (Einsiedeln, 1843); FORWERK, Gesch. der kath. Hofkirche zu Dresden nebst einer kurzen Gesch. der kath. Kirche in Sachsen (Dresden, 1851); MACHATSCHEK, Gesch. des Königreichs Sachsen (Leipzig, 1861); IDEM, Gesch. der Bischöfe des Hochstiftes Meissen (Dresden, 1884). HERMANN SACHER Albert of Saxony Albert of Saxony (Albert of Helmstädt) Fourteenth-century philosopher; nicknamed Albertus Parvus, Albertutius, and Albertilla by the Italian Scholastics of the Renaissance. In 1351 he passed the first examination (determinatio) at the University of Paris, where he figured as a member of the English Nation. In the same year he was elected procurator of the English Nation; in 1353 rector of the university; in 1361, collector of dues of the English Nation; in 1358 he had been one of the representatives of this Nation in the concordat with the Picard Nation. In 1361 the English Nation suggested him for the suburban parish of Sts. Cosmas and Damian, which depended on the university. In 1368 he still belonged to the faculty of arts at the University of Paris, where he compiled his questions on Aristotle's "De Cælo et Mundo". Owing to their common surname of Albert of Saxony, Albert of Helmstädt has often been confused with Albert, son of Bernard the Rich, of Ricmestorp (Diocese of Halberstädt). The latter's name occurs for the first time in 1362 among the masters of the English Nation at the University of Paris; in 1363 he was rector of the university; in 1365 Rudolf, Duke of Austria, sent him as ambassador to Pope Urban V. In that same year the University of Vienna was founded and through the influence of Rudolf, Albert of Ricmestorp was elected first rector. He was consequently appointed a canon of Hildesheim and (21 Oct., 1366) Bishop of Halberstädt. All the works which we possess under the name of Albert of Saxony belong to Albert of Helmstädt. Some were devoted to logic, others to physics. The study of these books is admirably calculated to inform us on the views current at the University of Paris in the middle of the fourteenth century. The treatises on logic written by Albert of Saxony are devoted to the detailed and subtle dialectic which at the end of the thirteenth century Petrus Hispanus had introduced into the teaching of the Parisian Scholasticism, but they present neither the disorder nor the multitude of empty quibbles which about the same time were introduced into the instruction at the University of Oxford and which became predominant there under the influence of William Heytesbury. Albert of Saxony's treatises on physics consist of a "Tractatus proportionum" and questions on Aristotle's "Physics", "De Coelo", and "De generatione et corruptione". These contain, in a clear, precise, and concise form, an explanation of numerous ideas which exercised great influence on the development of modern science, which ideas, however, were not wholly personal to Albert of Helmstädt, many of the most important of them being derived from his master, Jean Buridan. He abandoned the old Peripatetic dynamics which ascribed the movement of projectiles to disturbed air. With Buridan he placed the cause of this movement in an impetus put into the projectile by the person who threw it; the part he assigned to this impetus is very like that which we now attribute to living force. With Buridan he considered that the heavens were not moved by intelligences, but, like projectiles, by the impetus which God gave them when He created them. With Buridan he saw in the increase of impetus the reason of the acceleration in the fall of a heavy body. He further taught that the velocity of a falling weight increased in proportion either to the space traversed from the beginning of the fall or to the time elapsed, but he did not decide between these two. The equilibrium of the earth and seas is the subject of a favourite theory of Albert's. The entire terrestrial element is in equilibrium when its centre of gravity coincides with the centre of the world. Moreover, the terrestrial mass has not everywhere the same density, so that its centre of gravity does not coincide with the centre of its figure. Thus the lightest part of the earth is more distant from the centre of gravity of the earth than the heaviest part. The erosion produced by rivers constantly draws terrestrial particles from the continents to the bosom of the sea. This erosion, which, by scooping out the valleys, has shaped the mountains, constantly displaces the centre of gravity of the terrestrial mass, and this mass is in motion to bring back the centre of gravity of the earth to the centre of its figure. Through this motion the submerged portions of the earth constantly push upwards the emerged parts, which are incessantly being eaten away and afterwards replaced by the submerged parts. At the beginning of the sixteenth century this theory of Albert's strongly attracted the attention of Leonardo da Vinci, and it was to confirm it that he devoted himself to numerous observations of fossils. Albert of Saxony, moreover, ascribed the precession of the equinoxes to the similar very slow movement of the terrestrial element. His "Tractatus proportionum" went through eleven editions; one bears no date or indication of its origin; three were issued at Padua in 1482, 1484, and 1487; four were printed at Venice in 1487, 1494, and twice in 1496; two were printed at Venice in 1502 and 1506; finally, an edition without date or printer's name was issued at Paris. The "Subtilisimæ quæstiones super octo libros Physicorum" were printed at Padua in 1493, at Venice in 1504 and 1516. The "Quæstiones in Aristotelis libros de Coelo et Mundo" were published at Pavia in 1481, at Venice in 1492 and 1497. The "Quæstiones in libros de generatione et corruptione", with the commentaries and questions which Gilles of Rome and Marsilius of Inghen had compiled on the same subject, were printed at Venice in 1504, 1505, and 1518. Albert's "Quæstiones" on the Physics, the "De Coelo", and the "De generatione", followed by the questions of Thémon and of Buridan on the "De anima", were printed in Paris in 1516 and 1518. The "Quæstiones super libros posteriorum Aristotelis" were printed at Venice in 1497; the "Sophismata" at Paris in 1489; the "Tractatus obligationum" at Lyons in 1498; the two last-named works, joined with the "Insolubilia", were published at Paris in 1490, 1495, and at an unknown date. In 1496 was printed at Bologna the "Expositio aurea et admodum utilis super artem veterem, edita per venerabilem inceptorem fratrem Gulielmum de Ocham cum questionibus Alberti parvi de Saxonia". Finally, the "Logica Albertucii" was edited at Venice in 1522. PRANTL, Geschichte der Logik im Abendlande, IV (Leipzig, 1867); THUROT, Recherches historiques sur le principe d'Archimède, 3rd article in Revue archéologique, new series, XIX (1869); BONCOMPAGNI, Intorno al Tractatus proportionum di Alberto di Sassonia in Bulletino di Bibliografia e di Storia delle Scienze matematiche e fisiche, IV (1871); JACOLI, Intorno ad un comento di Benedetto Vittori, medico Faentino, al Tractatus proportionum di Alberto di Sassonia in ibid.; SUTER, Der Tractatus, "De quadratura circuli" des Albertus de Saxonia in Zeitschrift für Mathematik und Physik, XXIX (1884); SUTER, Die Questio "De proportione dyametri quadrati ad costam ejusdem" des Albertus de Saxonia, ibid., XXXII (1887); DUHEM, Les origines de la statique, II (Paris, 1906); IDEM, Etudes sur Lèonard de Vinci, ceux qu'il a lus et ceux qui l'ont lu, 1st ser. (Paris, 1906); 2nd ser. (Paris, 1909); 3rd ser. (in press). PIERRE DUHEM Scala Sancta (Holy Stairs) Scala Sancta (Holy Stairs) Consisting of twenty-eight white marble steps, at Rome, near the Lateran; according to tradition the staircase leading once to the prætorium of Pilate at Jerusalem, hence sanctified by the footsteps of Our Lord during his Passion. The historians of the monument relate that the Holy Stairs were brought from Jerusalem to Rome about 326 by St. Helena, mother of Constantine the Great. In the Middle Ages they were known as Scala Pilati, the Stairs of Pilate. From old plans it can be gathered that they led to a corridor of the Lateran Palace, near the Chapel of St. Sylvester, were covered with a special roof, and had at their sides other stairs for common use. When Sixtus V in 1589 destroyed the old papal palace and built the new one, he ordered the Holy Stairs be transferred to their present site, before the Sancta Sanctorum (Holy of Holies). The latter is the old private papal chapel, dedicated to St. Lawrence, and the only remaining part of the former Lateran Palace, receiving its name from the many precious relics preserved there. The Sancta Sanctorum also contains the celebrated image of Christ, "not made by human hands", which on certain occasions used to be carried through Rome in procession. These holy treasures, which since Leo X (1513-21) have not been seen by anybody, have recently been the object of learned dissertations by Grisar and Lauer. In its new site the Scala Sancta is flanked by four other stairs, two on each side, for common use, since the Holy Stairs may only be ascended on the knees, a devotion much in favour with pilgrims and the Roman faithful, especially on Fridays and in Lent. Not a few popes are recorded to have performed this pious exercise; Pius IX, who in 1853 entrusted the Passionist Fathers with the care of the sanctuary, ascended the Holy Stairs on 19 Sept., 1870, the eve of the entrance of the Piedmontese into Rome. Pius VII on 2 Sept., 1817 granted those who ascend the stairs in the prescribed manner an indulgence of nine years for every step. Finally Pius X, on 26 Feb., 1908, granted a plenary indulgence to be gained as often as the stairs are devoutly ascended after confession and communion. Imitations of the Scala Sancta have been erected in various places, as in Lourdes and in some convents of nuns, and indulgences are attached to them by special concessions. LIVARIUS OLIGER Julius Caesar Scaliger Julius Caesar Scaliger (It., DELLA SCALA). Humanist, b. at Riva on Lake Garda in 1484; d. at Agen, France, 21 Oct., 1558. He was brought to France as physician to Antonio de la Rovera, Bishop of Agen, and became a French citizen under the name of Jules Cesar de l'Escale de Bordonis. He took part in the discussion concerning Ciceronianism and began his career as a humanist by a violent work against Erasmus, "Oratio pro Cicerone contra Erasmum" (Paris 1531). He defended the absolute perfection of Cicero's style and denounced Erasmus as a mere proof corrector, a parasite, and a parricide. Erasmus kept silence. In 1536 Scaliger issued a still more violent discourse. The two discourses were combined: "Adversus D. Erasmum orationes duae eloquentiae romanae vindices cum auctoris opusculis" (Toulouse, 1621). He wrote a more solid work in a calmer tone in "De causis linguae latinae libri XIII" (Lyons, 1540; Geneva, 1580), in which he analyzed the correct style of Cicero and indicated 634 mistakes of Valla and his predecessors. He was the first to attempt a systematic treatise on poetry: "Poetices libri octo" (Lyons, 1561; Leyden, 1581; Heidelberg, 1607). The general principles of this work are derived from Aristotle whom he calls "imperator noster; omnium bonarum artium dictator perpetuus". Like Aristotle he makes imitation the basis of all poetry. He spoiled his work by exaggerations; not only does he place Virgil above Homer but he places the Homeric epics below the "Hero and Leander" of Musaeus, a poet of the Byzantine period; it is true that Scaliger identifies him with the legendary Musaeus, a disciple of Orpheus (Poet., V, 2). He declared that Seneca was not surpassed in grandeur by any of the Greek tragedians. This last opinion was not without its consequences; it explains the excessive liking of Shakespeare, Corneille, and many of their contemporaries for the tragedies of Seneca. Scaliger is also the author of the following works: "De comicis dimensionibus" (Lyons, 1539); "Exotericarum exercitationum de subtilitate ad H. Cardanum" (Paris, 1537; Basle, 1560); "Poemata" (Geneva, 1574; Heidelberg, 1600); "Epistolae et Orationes " (Leyden, 1600). He translated into Latin Aristotle's "Natural History" (Toulouse 1619), the "Insomniae" of Hippocrates, and wrote commentaries on the treatises on plants of Theophrastes and Aristotle. As a physician he was much interested in botany; he demonstrated the necessity of abandoning the classification of plants based on their properties and of establishing one based on their distinctive characteristics. He was violent, vain, and given to exaggeration. His faults spoiled pleasing natural gifts and wide learning. NISARD, Les gladiateurs de la republique des lettres aux XVe XV/e, et XVlle siecles, I (Paris, 1860), 305-400; SAlNTSBURY, History of literary criticism, II (Edinburgh and London, 1902), 69; LINTILHAC, De J. C. Scaligeri Poetica (Paris, 1887); SANDYS, A History of Classical Scholarship, II (Cambridge, 1908), 177. PAUL LEJAY Scalimoli Scalimoli Theologian, better known by his religious name, ANDREA DI CASTELLANA, from his place of origin in Apulia. He entered the Order of the Conventual Franciscans in the Province of St. Nicholas (Bari), of which he was later appointed provincial. His experience as a missionary in Moldavia, Wallachia, and Transylvania, as Prefect Apostolic of Hungary, and as visitor general of the Franciscan missions in Russia led him to the composition of a work which was approved by the general of the order in 1642, and is dedicated to Cardinal Barberini "Missionarius apostolicus a Sacra Congregatione de Propaganda Fide instructus quomodo debeat inter haereticos vivere, pravitates eorum convincere, et in fide catholica proficere per Germaniam, Poloniam, Ungariam, et per omnes partes ubi vigent blasphemiae lutheranae" (Bologna, 1644). WADDING, Scriptores ordinis minorum (Rome, 1906), 16; SBARAGL1A, Supplementum et castigatio ad scriptores trium ordinum S. Francisci (Rome, 1908), 35-36; FRANCHINI, Bibliosofia e memorie letterarie di scrittori francescani conventuali (Modena, 1693, 36). C.A. DUBRAY Ellakim Parker Scammon Ellakim Parker Scammon Educator, b. at Whitefield, Maine, U.S.A., 27 Dec., 1816; d. at New York, 7 Dec., 1894. Having received an appointment to the U. S. Military Academy at West Point he made the usual course there and graduated (1837) fifth in a class of fifty-two. He remained at the academy as a tutor in mathematics, having among his pupils the future Generals Grant, Rosecrans, Newton, and other famous army officers. During the Seminole war he saw active service and was one of General Scott's aides in the Mexican war (1846-47), his bravery at Vera Cruz winning him promotion Just before starting from New York for the war in 1846 he became a convert. From 1847 to 1854 he was attached to the topographical corps surveying the Upper Lakes. In 1856 he left the army. Later he taught mathematics at St. Mary's College, and at the Polytechnic College, Cincinnati, Ohio. He took an active part as a volunteer in the Civil War, receiving the commission of brigadier-general on 15 Oct., 1862. He was U. S. Consul at Prince Edward Island from 1866 to 1871, and, from 1875 until his retirement (1882), was professor of mathematics at Seton Hall College, South Orange, New Jersey. CULLUM, Biog. Register Officers and Graduates U. S. Military Acadamy (Boston, 1891); FLYNN, Catholic Church in Neu Jersey (Morristown, 1904); Nat. Cyclopedia Am. Biog., s. v.; Freeman's Journal (New York), files. THOMAS F. MEEHAN Scandal Scandal I. NOTION OF SCANDAL According to St. Thomas (II-II, Q. liii, a. 1) scandal is a word or action evil in itself, which occasions another's spiritual ruin. It is a word or action, that is either an external act—for an internal act can have no influence on the conduct of another—or the omission of an external act, because to omit what one should do is equivalent to doing what is forbidden; it must be evil in itself, or in appearance; this is the interpretation of the words of St. Thomas: minus rectum. It is not the physical cause of a neighbor's sin, but only the moral cause, or occasion; further, this moral causality may be understood in a strict sense, as when one orders, requests, or advises another to commit the sin (this is strictly inductive scandal, which some call co-operatlon in a broad sense), or in a large sense, as when a person without being directly concerned in the sin nevertheless exercises a certain influence on the sin of his neighbor, e.g. by committing such a sin in his presence (this is inductive scandal in a broad sense). For scandal to exist it is therefore essential and sufficient, with regard to the nature of the act and the circumstances under which it takes place, that it be of a nature to induce sin in another; consequently it is not necessary that the neighbour should actually fall into sin; and on the other hand, for scandal strictly so-called, it is not enough that a neighbour take occasion to do evil from a word or action which is not a subject of scandal and exercises no influence on his action; it must be a cause of spiritual ruin, that is of sin, consequently that is not scandal which merely dissuades the neighbour from a more perfect act, as for instance, prayer, the practice of the Evangelical virtues, the more frequent use of the sacraments, etc. Still less can that be considered scandal, which only arouses comment, indignation, horror etc., for instance blasphemy committed in the presence of a priest or of a religious; it is true that the act arouses indignation and in common parlance it is often called scandalous, but this way of speaking is inaccurate, and in strictly theological terminology it is not the sin of scandal. Hence scandal is in itself an evil act, at least in appearance, and as such it exercises on the will of another an influence more or less great which induces to sin. Furthermore, when the action from which another takes occasion of sin is not bad, either in itself or in appearance, it may violate charity (see below), but strictly speaking it is not the sin of scandal. However, some authorities understanding the word scandal in a wider sense include in it this case II. DIVISIONS (1) Scandal is divided into active and passive. Active scandal is that which has been defined above; passive scandal is the sin which another commits in consequence of active scandal. Passive scandal is called scandal given (scandalum datum), when the act of the scandalizer is of a nature to occasion it; and scandal received (acceptum), when the action of the one who scandalizes is due solely to ignorance or weakness—this is scandal of the weak (infirmorum),—or to malice and evil inclinations—this is pharisaical scandal, which was that of the Pharisees with regard to the words and actions of Christ. (2) Active scandal is direct when he who commits it has the intention of inducing another to sin; such is the sin of one who solicits another to the crime of adultery, theft etc. If one prevails upon another to commit the sin not only because of an advantage or pleasure believed to accrue therefrom but chiefly because of the sin itself, because it is an offence to God or the ruin of a neighbor's soul, direct scandal is called by the expressive name of diabolical scandal. On the other hand scandal is only indirect when without the intention to cause another to fall into sin we say a word or perform a deed which is for him an occasion of sin III. MALICE (1) That active scandal is a mortal sin Christ Himself has taught (Matt., xviii, 6 sqq.) and reason makes evident. If charity obliges us to assist our neighbor's temporal and spiritual necessities (see ALMS; CORRECTION) it obliges us still more strongly not to be to him a cause of sin or spiritual ruin. Hence it follows that every sin of scandal is contrary to charity. Moreover (2) direct scandal is obviously contrary to the virtue against which another is induced to sin; in fact every virtue forbids not only its violation by ourselves but also that we should desire its violation by another. (3) Indirect scandal is also contrary to charity (see above); but is it also opposed to the virtue violated by another? St. Alphonsus answers in the affirmative; others, and this seems the true opinion, deny this. In fact no one has hitherto proved this species of malice, and those who admit it are not consistent with themselves, for they should also maintain, which no one does, that anyone who is indirectly the cause of an injustice by another is also bound to restitution; what is true of justice should hold good for the other virtues. IV. CASES IN WHICH THE SIN OF SCANDAL OCCURS The question remains: When is there a sin of scandal? for it is obvious not all who an occasion of sin to others are thereby guilty. (1) As a general rule the sin of scandal exists when one directly induces another to do a thing which he cannot do without sin, either formal or material, e.g. by soliciting a person to perjury, drunkenness, sins of the flesh, etc., even though the person induced to this act is habitually or at the time disposed to commit it. It is otherwise when the thing we ask is good or indifferent; this may be done without scandal and without sin, when there is a just cause or serious reason for asking it; even though one foresees that the other will probably sin in granting it; thus for the common weal a judge may demand an oath even from those who will probably commit perjury; one who has need of money and who cannot find anyone who will lend to him may have recourse to an usurer although he foresees that the latter will exact exorbitant and unjust interest, etc. The thing asked must be without sin either formal or material because it is not allowed to profit by the ignorance of another to induce him to commit what is forbidden, to cause a child to utter blasphemies, to induce someone who is unaware of the precept of the Church to eat flesh on a fast day and so on. In fact in all these cases the sin is to be ascribed to the person who endeavors to cause it This is the general rule, but here the question arises, may one advise another bent on committing a great crime to be satisfied instead with doing something less evil? This question is much discussed, but the opinion which considers such a course justifiable is probable and may be followed in practice. In fact the advice thus given is not properly speaking advice to do evil but to do a lesser evil or rather not to do the greater evil which a man intends to commit; therefore some writers exact that the words or circumstances must demonstrate that one advises the evil solely as the lesser evil; others, however, consider it sufficient that such be the intention, even when not made manifest, of the person who gives the advice. Nevertheless, if a man had decided to do an injury to a certain person one could not—unless in exceptional circumstances—induce him to do a lesser injury to any other person. (2) He is guilty of the sin of scandal who without positively pledging or inducing to sin nevertheless performs an act evil in itself which will be an occasion of sin to another. The same must be said when the act is evil only in appearance, unless there be sufficient reason to act and to permit the fault of another Thus those who blaspheme before others when they foresee that their example will cause the latter to blaspheme are guilty of scandal; so also those who attack religion or morals, hold immoral conversation, sing immoral songs or (by their behaviour dress, writings etc.) offend against the laws of decency and modesty, when they foresee, as is usual, that those who see, hear, or read will be impelled to sin. (3) To prevent another's sin one may even be bound to forego an act which is sinful neither in itself nor in appearance, but which is nevertheless the occasion of sin to another, unless there be sufficient reason to act otherwise. It has already been shown that when there is a just cause we may ask of another a thing which he can do without sin although we may foresee that he will not do it without fault. Likewise we are not bound to be disturbed by pharisaical scandal, which may follow an action we perform; but we must avoid scandalizing the weak if we can do so easily. The application of these principles depends on concrete circumstances, which vary with each case; however, the following general rules may be given: + To prevent scandalizing another we must never transgress the negative precepts of the natural law, nor its positive precepts in cases where they truly bind; thus it is not permitted to lie to prevent a mortal sin, neither can one neglect receiving baptism to avoid the blasphemies of one's parents. + It is not permitted to pass over any precept whatever in order to prevent pharisaical scandal, but we may and even should, in special cases and for one or two occasions, pass over a precept whether Divine or human, to avoid scandalizing the weak. + We should, to avoid scandal, forego good or indifferent works which are not of precept, if we can do so without great inconvenience. + Finally, to prevent the scandal of the weak we are sometimes obliged to sacrifice some temporal good of less importance, but we are not bound to do this when the goods are of greater importance. BERARDI, Theologia moralis, theorico-practica (Faenza, 1904); BULOT, Compend. theol. mor. ad mentem P. Gury (Paris, 1908): D'ANNIBALE, Summula theol. Mor. (Rome, 1908); GENICOT-SALSMANS, Theol. mor. instit. (Brussels, 1909); LEHMKUHL, Theol. mor. (Freiburg, 1910; NOLDIN, Summa theolgiae moralis: De praeceptis et ecclesia (Innsbruck, 1908); ST. THOMAS, Summa theol. II-II, Q. Xliii, with Cajetan's commentary, S. ALPHONSUS, Theol. mor. II, tr. III (Rome, 1905); BOUQUILLON, De virtutibus theologicis (Bruges, 1890) with annotations by WAFFELAERT (Bruges, 1900); WAFFELAERT, Quelle espece de peche commet celui qui donne le scandale? in Nouvelle revue theologique, XV (Tournai, I883); Collationes brugenses (Bruges, 1896), especially VIII (1903) and XIV (1909). A. VAN DER HEEREN Filippo Scannabecchi Filippo Scannabecchi [DALMASIO; LIPPO DI DALMASIO; LIPPO DALLE MADONNE; MURATORI(?)]. Bolognese painter, born about 1360; died about 1410. Of his life and career we know exceedingly little. Malvasia gives few details, but regards his work as of the highest importance, and says that no great family in Bologna was without an example of it. It is not easy at the present day to know upon what basis Malvasia wrote, because there is no work of Scannabecchi which seems to modern critics to deserve such praise. He was, however, one of the earliest painters of Bologna, and one of the first to reveal beauty in the features of the Madonna and Child. His father, Dalmasio Scannabecchi, who painted in the same city, trained him, and also Vitale da Bologna. We have no definite dates concerning him, save that he made his will in 1410. The name Muratori, by which one or two writers have styled him, really belongs to another artist of the name of Scannabecchi, a woman, Teresa, a seventeenth-century painter, and should not be applied to him. His name of Lippo Dalle Madonne was given him because he usually painted the Madonna. There is a reference to him in Le Pubbliche Pitture di Piacenza (Piacenza, 1780); MALVASIA, Felsina Pittrice (Bologna, 1678); the unpublished memoirs of ORETTI in the Bologna Museum. GEORGE CHARLES WILLIAMSON Scapular Scapular I. NAME, MEANING, AND ORIGIN The scapular (from Lat., scapula, shoulder) forms a part, and now the most important part, of the habit of the monastic orders. Other orders and numerous religious congregations (both male and female) have also adopted the scapular from the monastic orders. It is usually worn over the habit or soutane. Description. It consists essentially of a piece of cloth about the width of the breast from one shoulder to the other (i.e. about fourteen to eighteen inches), and of such a length that it reaches not quite to the feet in front and behind. There are also shorter forms of the scapular. In the middle is the opening for the head, the scapular thus hanging down from two narrow connecting segments resting on the shoulders. Originally the longitudinal segments of cloth were connected by cross segments passing under the arms -- a form which exists even today. In former times also two segments of cloth hung over the shoulders, which they covered, and thus formed a cross with the longitudinal segments over the breast and back (cf. P.L., CIII, 1231, editorial note). Origin. This monastic scapular, like the whole monastic habit and indeed the liturgical vestments of the priest, developed from the ordinary clothing of the laity. And, just as the stole is the special sign of the priestly dignity and power, the scapular is now the sign of the monk. In the West, in the case of St. Benedict, the scapular was at first nothing else than a working garment or apron such as was then worn by agricultural labourers. Thus, in the Rule of St. Benedict, it was expressly termed "scapulare propter opera" (c. xxv in P.L. LXXVI, 771). From this developed the special monastic garment, to which a hood could be fastened at the back. In fact, the original scapular of the Dominican Order was so made that it acted also as a covering for the head, and thus as a hood. The scapular of the West corresponded to the analabus of the East. Ceremony and symbolism. Monastic formulae of profession of the West from the ninth century make no mention of the investment with the scapular. It was only gradually that it became one of the important part of the monastic habit. Later, like the analabus, it was solemnly presented during the clothing and the symbolism of the scapular is emphasized in the formula used during this ceremony. Especially the analabus but also the scapular was often called simply crux (cross) on account of its shape, and symbolism introduced accordingly. It was thus natural to term the scapular jugum Christi (the yoke of Christ); it was also called scutum (shield), as it was laid over the head, which it originally covered and protected with one portion (from which the hood afterwards developed). Small nighttime scapulars. In the rules of the religious it is expressly prescribed under penalties that even at night the scapular must be worn, e.g. in the case of the Servites and Carmelites. For night the Carmelites have now a special smaller scapular which, however, is still much larger than the so-called great scapular of the Third Order of St. Francis; it measures about twenty inches in length and ten in width. In the Constitutions of the Carmelite Order of 1369 (Cod. Vatic. lat. 3991 fol. 33 v.) it is appointed that each candidate of the order must bring with him his bed and in addition: "habeat etiam cum rauba sua parvum scapulare cum tunica ad jacendum" (cf. Wessels, "Analecta Ord. Carmel.", Rome, 1911, p. 122). Perhaps the smaller scapular for the night is here hinted at or foreshadowed. Perhaps even the small scapular of the confraternity (that for the laity) may be suggested, since the reference is to persons coming from the world (novices) who should have this small scapular. It is likewise prescribed in the Constitutions of the Servites of 1257 "quod nullus accedat sine scapulari et tunica dormitum". Again, after St. Benedict had declared in his Rule XXII: "Vestiti dormiant et cincti cingulis aut funibus", it was prescribed in the "Consuetudines sublacenses": "Vestiti autem dormiant id est ad minus in una tunica et scapulari et cincti ut sint parati surgere" (Albers, "Consuet. monasticae", II, 126). This scapular thus appears to have been a portion of the night clothing of monks. II. THE SCAPULAR OF THE THIRD ORDERS To the first orders have been gradually added the second and third orders and the oblates, who receive the proper habit from the first orders. Third order use of the full habit. Early in the Middle Ages numerous lay persons had already joined the Benedictine Order as oblates, these often received from the first order the entire monastic habit which they wore either constantly in the world or at least during Divine Service. It was regarded as a great grace and privilege to be able to die and be buried in the monastic habit, which was frequently given to the dying or placed on the deceased before burial. In the revised statutes of the Oblates of the Benedictine Order, confirmed in 1891 and 1904, it is stated in conclusion: "The Oblates may be buried in the black habit of the order, with scapular and girdle, wherever the conditions allow the fulfilment of this pious wish". In the first Rule of the Third Order of St. Francis of 1221 (also in that of 1289), the investment is fairly exactly described, but there is no mention of a scapular. The first Rule of the Third Order of St. Dominic in the first half of the thirteenth century prescribed likewise a formal and complete investment. Here also there is no mention of the scapular. As in the case of the other third orders this made its appearance later, until finally it became usual to wear the scapular under one's ordinary clothing instead of the full habit of the order. By the Decree of the Sacred Congregation of Bishops and Regulars of 20 December, 1616, it was declared that the Bizzoche who lived in the houses of relatives (and thus quite without restraint in the world), might wear the tertiary habit, but without supriectum, sottogola, and patientia (i. e., without veil, pectorale, and scapular). Later, the wearing of the special habit of an order became unusual, and the constant wearing of such was regarded as a privilege. Third order use of the large scapular. Gradually, however the most distinctive article of the monastic habit, the scapular, was given, and is in an ever smaller form. It has thus come to pass that the third orders for the laity, such as those of the Franciscans, Servites and Dominicans, wear today as their special badge and habit a "large" scapular, consisting essentially of two segments of woollen cloth (about four and a half inches long and two and three eighths inches broad in the case of the Franciscan scapular, much longer and broader in the case of the Carmelite although no particular length or breadth is prescribed) connected with each other by two strings or bands. The best known scapular is that of the Third Order of St. Francis, or, as it is simply called, the Scapular of St. Francis; it is brown, grey, or black in colour and has (at least generally) on one of the woollen segments the image of St. Francis and on the other that of the little church of Portiuncula. For these large scapulars the same general rules hold good as described in detail below in the case of the small scapulars. It is especially necessary that persons who desire to share in the indulgences and privileges of the third orders shall wear the scapulars constantly. However, the Congregation of Indulgences expressly declared on 30 April, 1885, that the wearing of the scapulars of smaller form and of the same size as those of the confraternities entitled one to gain the indulgences of the third order (cf. Constit. Leonis XIII, "Misericors Dei Filius", 30 May, 1883; "Acta S. Sed.", XV, 513 sqq.). III. THE SMALL SCAPULARS The four oldest small scapulars. Like the large scapulars the first and oldest small scapulars originated to a certain extent in the real monastic scapular. Pious lay persons of either sex attached themselves to the Servites for instance; many of those who were in a position to do so attached themselves to the third order with vows, but in the case of many others either this was impossible or the idea of doing so had as yet not occurred to them. In this manner developed, shortly after the foundation of the Servite Order, the Confraternity of the Servi B. Mariae Virginis. Similarly originated the Confraternity of Our Lady of Mount Carmel; that this existed in 1280 is proved by the still extant "Libro degli ordinamenti de la compagnia di Santa Maria del Carmine scritto nel 1280" (edited by Giulio Piccini at Bologna, 1867, in "Scelta di Curiosità letterarie"). The members of these confraternities were called the confratres and consores of the respective orders; they had special rules and participated in the spiritual goods of the order to which then belonged. It is probable also that many of those who could not be promoted to the third order or who were special benefactors of the first order received the habit of the order or a large scapular similar to that of the oblates, which they might wear when dying and in which they might be buried. It was only later and gradually that the idea developed of giving to everyone connected with the order the real scapular of the order in miniature as their badge to be always worn day and night over or under their ordinary clothing. It was now that these confraternities developed into scapular confraternities in the modern sense. On account of the scapulars the faithful resorted ever more to these confraternities, especially after they had heard of the wonderful graces which members had received through the scapulars, and above all when the story of the apparition of the Blessed Virgin and of her promise to all who wore the Scapular of Mount Carmel faithfully until death became known. Consequently, the four oldest small scapulars are likewise the badges of four confraternities, attached respectively to the Carmelites, Servites, Trinitarians and Mercederiansy. Later on the Franciscans gave the members of their third order for the laity the large scapular, and founded also a Franciscan confraternity the members of which were given as their badge not a small scapular, but a girdle. The Dominicans likewise assigned to their third order the large scapular as its badge, and to their principal confraternity the rosary. Since 1903, however, there is a small scapular of St. Dominic provided with an indulgence but connected with no confraternity ("Analecta eccl.", 1904, p. 261). The Benedictines, on the other hand founded a special confraternity in the latter half of the thirteenth century, and gave to its members a small scapular of St. Benedict. An attempt was later made to give the oblates of the Benedictines a larger scapular which could be worn constantly. However, the regulation which was already quoted from the new statutes of the Benedictine Oblates still remain in force. The newer small scapulars. In the course of time other orders received the faculty of blessing small scapulars and investing the faithful with them, although such scapulars were not always connected with a confraternity. Thus originated the Blue Scapular of the Theatines in the seventeenth century, in connexion with which a confraternity was not founded until the nineteenth century. The Fathers of the Precious Blood have a scapular and confraternity named after their order. Similarly the Camillians have the Confraternity and Scapular of Our Lady the Help of the Sick, and the Augustinians the Confraternity and Scapular of the Mother of Good Counsel, in which cases the scapular and confraternity are not inseparably united; finally the Capuchins have the Scapular of St. Joseph without a corresponding confraternity. The Lazarists have the Red, and the Passionists the Black Scapular of the Passion. Under Leo XIII originated in Rome the Scapular Confraternity of St. Michael the Archangel, which is attached not so much to an order as to the church in which it exists. Also under Leo XIII, in 1900, were approved the Scapular of the Sacred Heart, the Scapular of the Sacred Hearts of Jesus and Mary (both without a corresponding confraternity), and the Scapular of the Immaculate Heart of Mary, which originated in 1877. These complete the list of the seventeen known small scapulars. The history of the origin of the first four small scapulars is still to a great extent obscure. It is probable that the revival of the religious life in the sixteenth century (the Counter-Reformation) gave the chief impetus to the development of the scapulars, as to other institutions and practices (e.g., confraternities and novenas). To assign an exact date to the origin of the first small scapular is still impossible; it appears, however, that the Carmelite scapular antedated all the others, as a prototype well worthy of imitation, and had its origin the above mentioned scapular prescribed for wearing at night. At the end of the sixteenth century the scapular was certainly widespread, as is clear from the information given by the Carmelite Joseph Falcone in "La Cronica Carmelitana", a book which was published at Piacenza in 1595. Before entering into further detail concerning the individual scapulars, we must give the general rules and regulations which apply to all the small scapulars. IV. GENERAL ECCLESIASTICAL REGULATIONS CONCERNING THE SMALL SCAPULARS The small scapulars consist essentially of two quadrilateral segments of woolen cloth (about two and three-quarter inches long by two inches wide), connected with each other by two strings or bands in such a manner that, when the bands rest on the shoulders, the front segment rests before the breast, while the other hangs down an equal distance at the back. The two segments of cloth need not necessarily be equally large, various scapulars having the segment before the breast of the above dimensions while the segment at the back is much smaller. The material of these two essential parts of the scapular must be of woven wool; the strings or bands may be of any material, and of any one colour. The colour of the segments of woollen cloth depends on the colour of the monastic habit, which it to a certain extent represents, or on the mystery in honour of which it is worn. Here, however, it must be remarked that the so called Brown Scapular of the Carmelites may be black, and that the bands of the Red Scapular of the Passion must be of red wool. On either or both of the woollen segments may be sewn or embroidered becoming representations or other decorations (emblems, names etc.) of a different material. It is only in the case of the Red Scapular that the images are expressly prescribed. Several scapulars may be attached to the same pair of strings or bands; each scapular must of course be complete, and must be attached to both bands. In many cases the five best-known of the early scapulars are attached to the same pair of bands; this combination is then known as the "fivefold scapular". The five are: the Scapular of the Most Blessed Trinity, that of the Carmelites, of the Servites, of the Immaculate Conception, and the Red Scapular of the Passion. When the scapulars are thus joined together, the bands must be of red wool, as required by the Red Scapular; it is customary to wear the Red Scapular uppermost and that of the Most Blessed Trinity undermost, so that the images specially prescribed in the case of the Red, and the small red and blue cross on the Scapular of the Blessed Trinity, may be visible. Only at the original reception of any scapular is either the blessing or the investment with such by an authorized priest necessary. When a person needs a new scapular, he can put on an unblessed one. If the investment with a scapular be inseparably connected with reception into a confraternity, the reception and enrollment must take place on the same occasion as the blessing and investment. To share in the indulgences and privileges of a scapular, one must wear it constantly; it may be worn over or under one's clothing and may be laid aside for a short time, if necessary. Should one have ceased wearing the scapular for a long period (even through indifference), one gains none of the indulgences during this time, but, by simply resuming the scapular, one again participates in the indulgences, privileges, etc. Every scapular, which is not merely an object of private devotion (for there are also such) but is also provided with an indulgence, must be approved by the ecclesiastical authorities, and the formula of blessing must be sanctioned by the Congregation of Rites. In this article we speak only of scapulars approved by the Church. V. THE SCAPULAR MEDALS Since 1910 and the regulation of the Holy Office of 16 December of that year (Acta Apost. Sedis, III, 22 sq.) it is permitted to wear, instead of one or more of the small scapulars a single medal of metal. This medal must have on one side a representation of Jesus Christ with His Most Sacred Heart and on the other an image of the Mother of God. All persons who have been validly invested with a blessed woollen scapular may replace such by this medal. The medal must be blessed by a priest possessing the faculty to bless and invest with the scapular or scapulars which the medal is to replace. The faculties to bless these medals are subject to the same conditions and limitations as the faculties to bless and invest with the corresponding scapulars. If the medal is to be worn instead of a number of different scapulars, it must receive the blessing that would be attached to each of them, i.e. as many blessings as the number of scapulars it replaces. For each blessing a sign of the Cross suffices. This medal must also be worn constantly, either about the neck or in some other seemly manner, and with it may be attained all the indulgences and privileges of the small scapulars without exception. Only the small (not the large) scapulars may be validly replaced by such medals. VI. THE INDIVIDUAL SMALL SCAPULARS A. The Scapular of the Most Blessed Trinity. The small white scapular, provided with the blue and red cross, is the badge of the members of the Confraternity of The Most Blessed Trinity. To Innocent III, who sanctioned the Order of the Trinitarians on 28 January, 1198, an angel is said to have appeared wearing a white garment and on his breast a cross of which the transverse shaft was blue and the longitudinal shaft red. The Trinitarians were accordingly assigned this as their habit. When later the faithful sought to associate themselves more closely with their order in confraternities the Trinitarians gave them as their outward badge the scapular described above. The red and blue cross is essential only on the front segment of woollen cloth which hangs before the breast. Each person who joins the Confraternity of the Blessed Trinity must be invested with this scapular and must constantly wear it. The indulgences of this confraternity were last approved by a Decree of the Congregation of Indulgences of 13 August, 1899. The General of the Trinitarians may communicate to other priests the faculty of receiving into the confraternity and of blessing and investing with the scapular. B. The Scapular of our Lady of Ransom (B. Maria V. de Mercede redemptionis captivorum). Like the Trinitariansy, the Fathers of the Order of Our Lady of Mercy for the Ransom of Prisoners give the faithful a special scapular on their entering the confraternity erected by them. The order was founded by St. Peter Nolasco (1256). The scapular is of white cloth, and bears on the front part, which hangs over the breast, the picture of Our Lady of Ransom. The other part consists simply of a smaller segment of white cloth. The summary of indulgences of the confraternity was last approved by the Congregation of Indulgences on 30 July, 1868 (Rescr. auth. S. C. Indulg., pp. 483 sqq., n. 36). The General of the Mercedarians communicates to other priests the faculty of receiving into the confraternity and of blessing and investing with the scapular. In the "Bullar. Ord. B.M.V. de Mercede" (Barcelona, 1696), p. 16, mention is made of a Constitution of Urban IV issued at Viterbo on 25 March, 1263 granting afresh to the laity who wear the scapular of the order (habitum nostrum) in the world many graces and indulgences. We do no more than record this circumstance exactly as it is related in the "Bullarium". However, the encyclical could not have been issued from Viterbo on 25 March, 1263, for Urban IV was at that time in Orvieto. C. The Scapular of Our Lady of Mount Carmel. Also known as the Brown Scapular, this is the best known, most celebrated, and most widespread of the small scapulars. It is spoken of as "the Scapular", and the "feast of the Scapular" is that of Our Lady of Mount Carmel on 16 July. It is probably the oldest scapular and served as the prototype of the others. According to a pious tradition the Blessed Virgin appeared to St. Simon Stock at Cambridge, England, on Sunday, 16 July, 1251. In answer to his appeal for help for his oppressed order, she appeared to him with a scapular in her hand and said: "Take, beloved son this scapular of thy order as a badge of my confraternity and for thee and all Carmelites a special sign of grace; whoever dies in this garment, will not suffer everlasting fire. It is the sign of salvation, a safeguard in dangers, a pledge of peace and of the covenant". This tradition, however, appears in such a precise form for the first time in 1642, when the words of the Blessed Virgin were given in a circular of St. Simon Stock which he is said to have dictated to his companion secretary, and confessor, Peter Swanyngton. Although it has now been sufficiently shown that this testimony cannot be supported by historical documents, still its general content remains a reliable pious tradition; in other words, it is credible that St. Simon Stock was assured in a supernatural manner of the special protection of the Blessed Virgin for his whole order and for all who should wear the Carmelite habit, that the Blessed Virgin also promised him to grant special aid, especially in the hour of death, to those who in holy fidelity wore this habit in her honour throughout life, so that they should be preserved from hell. And, even though there is here no direct reference to the members of the scapular confraternity, indirectly the promise is extended to all who from devotion to the Mother of God should wear her habit or badge, like true Christians, until death, and be thus as it were affiliated to the Carmelite Order. Heretofore no authenticated testimony has been discovered proving that the small scapular was known from the second half of the thirteenth century and was given to the members of the Confraternity of Our Lady of Mount Carmel. On the contrary there are many reasons for the view that the small scapular, as we now know it and in the form it has certainly had since the sixteenth century, is of much later origin. Zimmerman (Mon. hist. Carmelit.) and Saltet give very reasonable grounds for this view. In any case, the scapular was very widespread in European countries at the end of the sixteenth century, as is evident from "La cronica Carmelitana" of the Carmelite Joseph Falcone (Piacenza, 1595). In 1600 appeared at Palermo the "Giardino Carmelitano" of the Carmelite Egidio Leoindelicato da Sciacca (the approval is dated 1592). Towards the end the author gives after the formulas of benediction for the Fratelli and Sorelle della Compagnia della Madonna del Carmine (who receive the complete habit of the order) the formula for the blessing of the scapular for the Devoti della Compagnia Carmelitana (pp. 239 sqq.). This is the earliest form of benediction for the small scapular with which we are acquainted. It is also noteworthy that the formula for the sisters contains no reference to the scapular, while in that for the brothers there is a special blessing for the scapular. Nevertheless, even should we admit that the small scapular of Our Lady of Mount Carmel originated even as late as the beginning of the sixteenth century, yet the above promise, which is designated the first privilege of the Carmelite Scapular, remains unimpaired. For this privilege declares nothing else than that all those who out of true veneration and love for the Blessed Virgin constantly wear the scapular in a spirit of fidelity and confiding faith, after they have been placed by the Church itself with this habit or badge under the special protection of the Mother of God, shall enjoy this special protection in the matter and crisis which most concerns them for time and eternity. Whoever, therefore, even though he be now a sinner, wears the badge of the Mother of God throughout life as her faithful servant, not presumptuously relying on the scapular as on a miraculous amulet, but trustfully confiding in the power and goodness of Mary, may securely hope that Mary will through her powerful and motherly intercession procure for him all the necessary graces for true conversion and for perseverance in good. Such is the meaning and importance of the first privilege of the Carmelite Scapular, which is wont to be expressed in the words: "whoever wears the scapular until death, will be preserved from hell". The second privilege of the scapular otherwise known as the Sabbatine privilege, may be briefly defined as meaning that Mary's motherly assistance for her servants in the Scapular Confraternity will continue after death, and will find effect especially on Saturday (the day consecrated to her honour), provided that the members fulfill faithfully the not easy conditions necessary for obtaining this privilege. As regards the external form of the scapular, it should consist of two segments of brown woollen cloth; black, however, is also admissible. This scapular usually bears on one side the image of our Lady of Mount Carmel, but neither this nor any other image is prescribed. The authentic list of indulgences, privileges, and indults of the Scapular Confraternity of Mount Carmel was last approved on 4 July, 1908, by the Congregation of Indulgences. It is noteworthy that this summary says nothing of the above-mentioned first privilege; what it says of the Sabbatine privilege is explained in the article on that subject. Concerning the often miraculous protection which Mary on account of this her badge has granted to pious members of the Scapular Confraternity in great perils of soul and body, there exist many records and reliable reports (some of recent times), to which it is impossible to refuse credence. Like the rosary, this scapular has become the badge of the devout Catholic and the true servant of Mary. D. The Black Scapular of the Seven Dolours of Mary. Shortly after Alexander IV had sanctioned the Servite Order in 1255, many of the faithful of either sex associated themselves with the order in ecclesiastical confraternities in honour of the Seven Dolours of Mary. The members of this Confraternity of the Seven Dolours of Mary also wore in later times a scapular which, like the habit of the order, had to be of black cloth. In other respects nothing is prescribed concerning this scapular, although it usually bears on the front portion (over the breast) an image of the Mother of Sorrows. This scapular must likewise be worn constantly, if one wishes to gain the indulgences of the confraternity. The summary of indulgences was last approved by the Congregation of Indulgences on 7 March, 1888. Priests may obtain from the General of the Servites the faculty to receive the faithful into the confraternity and to bless and invest with the scapular. E. The Blue Scapular of the Immaculate Conception. The Venerable Ursula Benicasa, foundress of the Order of Theatine Nuns, relates in her autobiography how the habit which she and her sisters were to wear in honour of the Immaculate Conception was revealed to her in a vision. When Jesus Christ had in return promised great favours for her order, she begged the same graces for all the faithful who should devoutly wear a small sky-blue scapular in honour of the Immaculate Conception and to secure the conversion of sinners. Her petition having been granted she herself disseminated such scapulars, after they had been blessed by a priest. This devotion bore such rich fruits that Clement X by the Brief of 30 January, 1671, expressly granted the faculty to bless and invest with this scapular. Clement XI granted certain indulgences for the wearing of the scapular and succeeding popes increased the number. The summary was approved by the Congregation of Indulgences first in 1845 and finally on 26 August 1882 (Rescr. auth. S. C. Indulg., pp. 574 sqq., n. 57). Only the blue woollen cloth is essential and necessary. The scapular usually bears on one portion a symbolization of the Immaculate Conception and on the other the name of Mary. In 1894 a confraternity of the Immaculate Conception of the Blessed Virgin and Mother of God Mary was erected in the Theatine Church of S. Andrea della Valle at Rome. In the same year it was endowed with various indulgences, and then raised to an archconfraterity (cf. Analecta ecclesiastica, p. 189 sq.). According to the statutes of the confraternity admission is effected by the blessing and investing with the Blue Scapular, the presentation of the small chaplet of the Immaculate Conception, and the enrolling of the name in the register of the confraternity. However those who received the scapular before 18 September, 1894, are not obliged to have themselves enrolled in the confraternity. Similarly, priests who may have received the faculty only of blessing and investing with the scapular may continue to exercise it at present priests who receive this faculty from the General of the Theatines, receive simultaneously the faculty of admitting the faithful into the confraternity and must forward the names of those admitted to Rome or to some other canonically erected confraternity of this kind. F. The Scapular of the Most Precious Blood. Priests who can receive the faithful into the Confraternity of the Precious Blood have also the faculty of blessing and investing these with this red scapular (or a red girdle). No special indulgences, however, are connected with the wearing of this scapular, and the wearing of it is left optional to the members of the confraternity. For the scapular it is prescribed only that it be of red cloth. The scapular as used in Rome bears on one portion a representation of the chalice with the Precious Blood adored by angels; the other segment which hangs at the back is simply a smaller portion of red cloth. G. The Black Scapular of the Passion. It is related in the life of St. Paul of the Cross that before founding the Congregation of the Passionists he received in apparitions the black habit of the order with the badge on the breast. Later, after the foundation of the congregation, the Passionist Fathers gave the faithful who wished to associate themselves more closely with their order a black scapular in honour of the Passion of Christ. This bears an exact replica of the badge of the Passion, namely a heart above a cross, on which is written "Jesu XPI Passio" and below "sit semper in cordibus nostris". The other portion of the scapular hanging at the back, consists simply of a small segment of black woollen cloth. At various times indulgences have been granted to the faithful who wear this scapular, the Summary being last approved by the Congregation of Indulgences on 10 May, 1877. The Superior-General of the Passionists communicates to other priests the faculty to bless and invest with the scapular. H. The Red Scapular of the Passion. This scapular owes its origin to an apparition which Jesus Christ vouchsafed to a Sister of Charity of St. Vincent de Paul in 1846. Jesus Christ showed the sister a scapular, such as is worn, and promised to all who should wear it on every Friday a great increase of faith, hope, and charity. The apparition having been several times repeated, and finally in the following year reported to Pius IX, the latter sanctioned the scapular by a Rescript of 25 June, 1847, and granted the Priests of the Mission (the Lazarists) the faculty of blessing the scapular and investing the faithful with it. He simultaneously granted many indulgences for the wearing of the scapular. The Superior-General of the Lazarists can communicate the faculty of blessing and investing with this scapular to other regular or secular priests. The scapular and bands must both be of red woollen material. On one woollen segment Jesus Christ is represented on the Cross; at the foot of the Cross are the implements of the Passion, and about it are the words: "Holy Passion of Our Lord Jesus Christ Save us." On the other are represented the Hearts of Jesus and Mary, and above these a cross with the inscription: "Sacred Hearts of Jesus and Mary, protect us." These images also are essential to the scapular (Acta S. Sedis XXX, 748). I. Scapular of the Blessed Virgin Mary under the title of "Help of the Sick". In the Church of St. Magdalen at Rome, belonging to the Clerks Regular of St. Camillus, a picture of the Blessed Virgin is specially venerated under the title of Help of the Sick. This picture is said to have been painted by the celebrated Dominican painter, Fra Angelico da Fiesole and before it Pope St. Pius V is said to have prayed for the victory of the Christian fleet during the battle of Lepanto. This picture suggested to a brother of the Order of St. Camillus. Ferdinand Vicari, the idea of founding a confraternity under the invocation of the Mother of God for the poor sick. He succeeded in his plan, the confraternity being canonically erected in the above-mentioned church on 15 June, 1860. At their reception, the members are given a scapular of black woollen cloth; the portion over the breast is a copy of the above picture of the Mother of God and at her feet Sts. Joseph and Camillus, the two other patrons of the sick and of the confraternity. On the small segment at the back is sewed a little red cloth cross; although this receives separate and special blessing for the sick, it does not constitute an essential portion of the scapular. The scapular is the badge of the confraternity, which received its indulgences from Pius IX and Leo XIII in 1860 and 1883; these were last ratified by a Rescript of the Congregation of Indulgences, 21 July, 1883. J. The Scapular of the Immaculate Heart of Mary. This scapular originated with the Sons of the lmmaculate Heart of Mary in 1877, and was sanctioned and endowed with indulgences by Pius IX on 11 May of that year. The scapular was later approved by the Congregation of Rites in 1907, and its form more exactly decreed; in the same year it was assigned new indulgences. The superior general of the above congregation can communicate to other priests the faculty of blessing and investing with this scapular ("Acta Pontificia", Rome, March 1911, appendix). The scapular is of white woollen cloth: on the portion which hangs before the breast is represented the burning heart of Mary, out of which grows a lily; the heart is encircled by a wreath of roses and pierced with a sword. K. The Scapular of St. Michael the Archangel. While this scapular originated under Pius IX, who gave it his blessing, it was first formally approved under Leo XIII. In 1878 a confraternity in honour of St. Michael the Archangel was founded in the Church of St. Eustachius at Rome, and in the following year in the Church of Sant' Angelo in Pescheria (Sancti Angeli in foro Piscium). In 1880 Leo XIII raised it to the rank of an archconfraternity, which was expressly called the Archconfraternity of the Scapular of St. Michael. At first (1878) the confraternity received indulgences from Leo XIII for seven years; the summary of indulgences of the Pious Association of St. Michael was last approved for ever by a Decree of the Congregation of Indulgences, 28 March, 1903. The scapular is so associated with the confraternity that each member is invested with it. The formula for blessing and investing with the scapular, given in the Rituale Romanum was first approved by the Congregation of Rites on 23 August, 1883. In outward form this scapular is different from the others, inasmuch as the two segments of cloth have the form of a small shield; of these one is made of blue and the other of black cloth, and of the bands likewise one is blue and the other black. Both portions of the scapular bear the well-known representation of the Archangel St. Michael slaying the dragon and the inscription "Quis ut Deus". L. The Scapular of St. Benedict. To associate the faithful, who were not Oblates of St. Benedict, in a certain measure with the Benedictine Order, a confraternity of St. Benedict was founded in the second half of the nineteenth century, at first by the English Congregation. Reception is effected by the enrollment of the members and investment with a small blessed scapular of black cloth. One of the segments usually has a picture of St. Benedict but no picture is necessary. The confraternity was endowed with indulgences in 1882 and 1883. M. The Scapular of the Mother of Good Counsel. At the petition of the Augustinian monks this scapular was approved and endowed with indulgences by Leo XIII in a Decree of the Congregation of Rites of 19-21 December, 1893. The faculty of blessing and investing with the scapular belongs primarily to the Augustinian monks, but the General of the Augustinians communicates this privilege to other priests. The two segments of cloth must be of white wool, though the bands are usually also white, this is not essential. The segment of cloth which hangs before the breast bears the image of the Mother of Good Counsel (after the well-known picture in the Augustinian church at Genazzano) with the inscription: "Mother of Good Counsel". On the other segment the papal arms (i.e., the tiara and the keys of Peter) with the inscription: "Son, follow her counsel. Leo III". N. The Scapular of St. Joseph. This scapular was approved for the Diocese of Verona by a Decree of the Congregation of Rites of 8 July, 1880. On 15 April, 1898, Leo XIII granted to the General of the Capuchins the faculty of blessing and investing the faithful everywhere with this scapular. From the Diocese of St-Claude in France this scapular (at first white) was spread by the Capuchins (cf. Analecta ord. Min. Capuc., IX, 1893, pp. 161 sqq.); but it was later decreed that the shape and colour of that used in Verona should be used. Nevertheless, owing to a mistake, a slight difference crept in, and it was expressly declared later by the Congregation of Indulgences that the scapular might be lawfully retained in the form now customary among the Capuchins. In this form, the two segments of woollen cloth are of a violet colour; to these are sewed two pieces of gold-coloured material (linen, cotton, etc.) of equal size. On the gold-coloured segment before the breast is the representation of St. Joseph with the Child Jesus on his right arm and the staff of lilies in his left hand, while underneath is the inscription: "St. Joseph, patron of the Church, pray for us." On the other gold-coloured segment is represented the papal crown, the tiara, above it the dove as the symbol of the Holy Ghost, and underneath it a cross and the keys of Peter with the inscription: "Spiritus Domini ductor eius" (The Spirit of the Lord is his Guide). The bands are white. This scapular having been approved by the Congregation of Rites on 18 April, 1893, various indulgences were granted for all the faithful who wear it by a Rescript of the Congregation of Indulgences, 8 June, 1893 ("Acta S. Sedis", XXXIV, 317). O. The Scapular of The Most Sacred Heart of Jesus. The constant wearing of a small picture of the Heart of Jesus was already recommended by Blessed Margaret Mary Alacoque, who herself made and distributed them. They were made of a small piece of white woollen cloth, on which was embroidered or sewed in red a picture of the Heart of Jesus. This badge was especially employed during the plague at Marseilles as a protection against the pest. During the terrors of the French Revolution it also served as a safeguard for the pious faithful. Although this badge is often called a scapular, it is not really such; consequently the conditions governing scapulars do not apply to it. It was only in 1872 that an indulgence was granted by Pius IX for the wearing of this badge. A real scapular of the Sacred Heart was first introduced in France in 1876 when it was approved by Decree of the Congregation of Rites and a special formula for blessing and investing with it appointed 4 April, 1900. This scapular consists of two segments of white woollen cloth connected in the usual manner by two strings; one segment bears the usual representation of the Sacred Heart, while the other bears that of the Blessed Virgin under the title of Mother of Mercy. By a Brief of 10 July, Leo XIII granted many indulgences for the pious wearing of this scapular. P. The Scapular of the Sacred Hearts of Jesus and Mary. This is very similar to the Red Scapular of the Passion. Like the Scapulars of the Heart of Jesus, it was approved at the request of the Archbishop of Marseilles, by a Decree of the Congregation of Rites, 4 April, 1900. The two segments of cloth are of white wool, one bears the image of the Heart of Jesus with the well-known emblems and also the Heart of Mary pierced with a sword, underneath being the implements of the Passion; the other segment has a small cross of red material. Indulgences were granted for the wearing of this scapular in 1901, and increased by Pius X in 1906. The scapular owes its origin and spread to the Congregation of the Daughters of the Sacred Heart, founded at Antwerp in 1873 (Acta S. Sedis, XXXII, 633 sq.) Q. The Scapular of St. Dominic. On 23 November, 1903, this scapular was endowed by Pius X with an indulgence of 300 days in favour of all the faithful who wear it, as often as they devoutly kiss it. The scapular is thereby also approved. It is made of white wool, but the bands, as in the case of so many other scapulars may be of another material. No image is prescribed for the scapular, but the scapular given in the house of the Dominican General at Rome has on one side the picture of St. Dominic kneeling before the crucifix and on the other that of B. Reginald receiving the habit from the hands of the Mother of God. The General of the Dominicans communicates to other priests the faculty of blessing and investing with the scapular ("The Booklet of the Faculties", Rome, 1909). R. The Scapular of the Holy Face. This scapular bears on a piece of white cloth the well-known picture connected with St. Veronica. This scapular is worn by the members of the Archconfraternity of the Holy Face. The members can, however, wear the picture on a medal or cross, in place of the scapular. The wearing of this picture is simply one of the pious practices of the archconfraternity, without any special indulgences. JOSEPH HILGERS Giovanni Battista Scaramelli Giovanni Battista Scaramelli Ascetical writer, b. at Rome, 24 Nov., 1687; d. at Macerata, 11 Jan., 1752. He entered the Society of Jesus 21 Sept., 1706. He devoted himself to preaching for fifteen years, and long fulfilled the duties of the sacred ministry. He wrote the following works: 1. "Vita di Suor Maria Crocifissa Satellico Monaca francescana nel monastero di monte Nuovo", Venice, 1750; 5th ed., revised and corrected, Rome, 1819; 2. "Discernimento de' spiriti per il retto regolamento delle azione proprie ed altrui. Operetta utile specialemente ai Direttori delle anime", Venice, 1753; 7th ed., Rome, 1866; Sp. tr., Madrid, 1804; Ger. tr., Mainz, 1861; 3. Direttorio ascetico in cui s' insegna il modo di condurre l'Anime per vie ordinarie della grazia alla perfezione christiana, indirizzato ai direttori della Anime", Naples, 1752, still reprinted; tr. and ed. Eyre, "The Directorium Asceticum", with preface by Cardinal Manning, Dublin and London, 1870-71; now revised ed., London, 1879-81; Lt. tr., Brixen, 1770; Louvain, 1848; Ger. tr., Augsburg, 1778; Sp., Madrid, 1806; Fr., Paris, 1854; still reprinted. In this work the author devotes four treatises to the study of (a) the means and helps necessary to attain Christian perfection; (b) the obstacles which hinder us and the way to surmount them; (c) the virtues to be acquired (cardinal virtues, virtues of religion, those opposed to the capital sins); (d) the theological virtues and especially charity, which is the essence of Christian perfection. His manner of dividing his subject and his method are frankly traditional and intellectualist; his unoriginal, but, as it were classic doctrines are proved by reason and authority, while the study of scruples at the end of the second treatise retains all its value after the researches of modern psychologists. 4. "Il direttorio mistico indrizato a' direttori di quelle anime che Iddio conduce per la via della contemplazione" (Venice, 1754; Lat. tr., Brixen, 1764; Louvain, 1857; Sp., Madria, 1817; Ger., Ratisbon and Mainz, 1855-56; Fr., Paris, 1865; Polish, Warsaw, 1888; Italian abridgement in the form of dialogues by Santoni, Rome, 1776; new abridgement, Rome, 1895). This work completes the method of spiritual direction the first part of which is set forth in the preceding work. Here likewise the doctrine is intellectualist and strongly opposed to the purely sentimental forms of mysticism such as Quietism. 5. "Dottrina di S. Giovanni della Croce compresa quali si contiene la 'Salita del Monte', nel secondo le 'Notti oscue', nel terzo 'l'Esercizio di Amore' e la 'Fiamma di Amor vivo'" (Lucca, 1860) HENRY OLLION Pierfrancesco Scarampi Pierfrancesco Scarampi Oratorian, Papal envoy, b. of a noble and ancient family in the Duchy of Monferrato, Piedmont, 1596; d. at Rome, 14 Oct., 1656. He was destined by his parents for the military career, but during a visit to the Roman Court he felt called to the religious state. After much prayer and with the advice of his confessor, he entered the Roman Oratory of St. Philip Neri on 4 November, 1636. At the request of Fr. Luke Wadding, the agent at Rome for the Irish Confederates, Urban VIII, by Brief dated 18 April, 1643, sent Fr. Scarampi to assist at the Supreme Council of the Confederation. At the same time the pope addressed letters to the archbishops and bishops of Ireland and also to the members of the Supreme Council, telling them that in order to show his great love and admiration for the Irish people he had decided to sent to their aid Fr. Scarampi, a man of noble birth and eminent for his virtues and great administrative abilities. He told them to place full confidence in him as his representative and give him all help in the fulfillment of his duties. He was received by the Irish Catholics as an angel from heaven. Wherever he went he was met by the bishops, clergy, and nobility. He was received with military honours and firing of canon. On his arrival in Kilkenny he immediately saw that the danger that threatened the existence of the Confederation was dissension amongst its members. He made an earnest appeal to the Council to avoid all dissension and to make no compromise with the enemies of their religion and country. Richard Bellings, Secretary of the Council, addressed to Fr. Scarampi a statement of the reasons in favour of a cessation of hostilities. Fr. Scarampi immediately gave a noble answer showing why the war should be continued, and that the English desired the cessation of hostilities solely to relieve their present necessities. The bishops and the Supreme Council thanked the pope for having sent to their aid a person of such exemplary life and excellent abilities of mind, and rejoiced at his presence amongst them. The author of "Contemporary History of Affairs in Ireland" says that Fr. Scarampi was a "verie apt and understandinge man, and was receaved with much honour. This man in a shorte time became soe learned in the petegrees of the respective Irish families of Ireland, that it proved his witt and diligence, and allsoe soe well obsearved that all the proceedings of both ancient and recent Irish, that to an ince, he knewe whoe best and worst beheaved himself in the whole kingdome." The Supreme Council decided to supplicate the pope to raise Fr. Scarampi to the dignity of archbishop and Apostolic numcio, and the bishops of Ireland entreated him to accept the Archbishopric of Tuam, which was vacant at the time. He declined all honours and refused to walk under the canopy prepared for him in Waterford. He was present with the Confederate forces at the siege of Duncannon, and when the fort was taken on the eve of St. Patrick, he ordered a chapel to be immediately erected in honour of the saint and celebrated the first Mass. On 5 May, 1645, he was recalled to Rome by Innocent X. In taking leave of the General Assembly, he thanked all the members for their kindness to him, and again urged them to be firmly united. The President of the Assembly, after referring to all the fatigues that Fr. Scarampi had endured for the Irish cause, said "that as long as the name of the Catholic religion remained in Ireland, so long would the name of Scarampi be affectionately remembered and cherished." After receiving the Apostolic nuncio, Rinunccini, he set out on his journey to Rome. He was followed to the ship by the bishops, clergy, and laity, many comparing his departure to that of St. Paul from Miletus. All were in tears. He was accompanied by five Irish youths destined for the priesthood, whom he wished to educate and support at his own expense at Rome. Among these youths was Oliver Plunket, the martyr Archbishop of Armagh. On his arrival at Rome he was thanked and praised by the pope for the great work he had done in Ireland. When the plague broke out in Rome in 1656, he asked to be allowed to attend the sick in the lazaretto. He caught the sickness and died. By special permission he was buried in the Basilica of SS. Nercus and Achilleus on the Appian Way, the titular church of Cardinal Baronius. In the lazaretto he wrote a most touching letter to Oliver Plunket. Benedict XIV commanded the Master of the Sacred Palace to make known to the Fathers of the Oratory that the title of Venerable was to be given to Fr. Scarampi when writing about him and on his pictures. HARALDUS, Vita L. Waddingi (Rome, 1662); RINUCCINI, Nunziatura in Irlanda (Florence, 1844); ARINGHI, Memorie Storiche della vita del Ven. P. F. Scarampi (Rome, 1744); HAVERTY, Hist. of Ireland (Dublin, 1860); BRENAN, Eccl. Hist. Of Ireland (Dublin, 1864); MEEHAN, Confederation of Kilkenny (Dublin, 1882); Rise and Fall of I. F. Monasteries (Dublin, 1877); MORAN, Spicilegium Ossoriense (Dublin, 1874); GILBERT, Contemporary Hist. Of Affairs in Ireland (Dublin, 1879); BELLINGS, Hist. Of the Irish Confederation (Dublin, 1882); D'ALTON, History of Ireland (London, 1911); GARDINER, History of the Civil War 1642-49 (London, 1910); MS., Life of F. Scarampi and other MSS. In Vallicellana Library, Rome; Barberini MSS. in Vatican Library; MSS. in Franciscan Library, Dublin. GREGORY CLEARY Alessandro Scarlatti Alessandro Scarlatti Born in Sicily, either at Trapani or at Palermo, in 1659; died at Naples 24 Oct., 1725; buried there in the musicians' chapel of the Church of Montesanto. On his tombstone he is called musices instaurator maximus, which title he deserves in that he originated the classical style of the eighteenth century, and gave a high development to concerted instrumental music. the scenes of his activity were alternately Rome and Naples. His first opera (1679), "Gli Equivoci nel Sembiante" was performed at the palace of Queen Christina of Sweden, who lived in Rome after her abdication and conversion to the Catholic Church. Five years later we find him in Naples, where he obtained the position of Maestro di capella to the Viceroy. He remained there for about eighteen years. After a short stay at Florence, he returned to Rome (1702), where he was made assistant maestro and afterwards maestro at S. Maria Maggiore. In 1708 or 1709 he returned to Naples and lived there for ten years. He lived in Rome from 1718 until 1721, thence proceeding to Naples, where he died in 1725. His fertility of production is astonishing. He wrote more than a hundred operas (of which less than half are extant). It is said that he composed two hundred Masses, which is questionable, as but few survived him; he left several Oratorios, the best of which are "Agar ed Ismaele", "La Vergine addolorata", and "S. Filippo Neri"; many motets and innumerable chamber-cantatas and serenatas. Moreover he shows great capacity in his compositions for the organ, the cembalo, and other instruments. Not all his religious music is for liturgical use; but many of his compositions, although in his days the Palestrinian-style was fast declining, are written in severe and noble polyphony. We may quote here his mass for Cardinal Ottoboni (edited by Proske), his "Missa ad usum Cappellae Pontificiae" (recently found by Giulio Bas in the library of the Academy of S. Cecilia at Rome, and published by L. Schwann at Dusseldorf), his famous "Tu es Petrus" performed in Paris by the Roman singers at the coronation of Napoleon I (printed by Ricordi of Milan). His great distinction in the musical world was to have laid the foundation for the new style, afterwards brought to perfection by the most famous composers, not only of the Neapolitan school, which was in great part formed by his influence (Leo, Durante, Pergolesi), but also of Germany (Haydn, Mozart, and Beethoven). Domenico Alessandro's eldest son was born at Naples 26 Oct., 1685 (in the baptismal register he is called Giuseppe Domenico), and died in 1757. The esteem in which Alessandro was held, may be seen from the fact that Domenico's godfather was the Duke of Addaloni, and his godmother the Princess of Colobrano. Domenico made himself famous by his great skill on the harpsichord. Ricordi of Milan has published his works for the clavicembalo, in six volumes, under the supervision of Alessasdro Longo (1906). The manuscripts of these are chiefly in the library of S. Marco at Venice. The compositions are not of equal merit. His genius often seems to forecast the style of the next century. For a few years (1715-1719) he was choirmaster in S. Peter's Rome; during four years (1721-1725), he was engaged at the Court of Lisbon; for twenty-five years he was at Madrid (1729-1754), but spent the last years of his life again in Naples, where he died. Of Francesco, brother of Alessandro, we know that in 1684 he became violinist in the royal chapel at Naples, that fifteen years later his oratorio, "Agnus occisus ab origine mundi", was sung in Rome, and that in 1720 he gave a concert in London, where Domenico was staying at the same time. Giuseppe Scarlatti was either grandson or nephew of Alessandro (nipote can have the two meanings). Born at Naples 1712, he died in Vienna, 1777 where he was considered a distinguished composer. He left several operas. DENT, A. Scarlatti: His Life and Works (London, 1905); GROVE, Dictionary of Music and Musicians (London, 1880); THIBAUT, Die Reinheit der Tonkunst, 123. A. WALTER Paul Scarron Paul Scarron French poet and dramatist, b. in Paris, 4 July, 1610; d. 7 October, 1660. His father was a judge and one of his uncles was Bishop of Grenoble. After graduating from the Sorbonne, he received tonsure at the age of nineteen and soon after became attached to the house of Charles de Beaumanoir, Bishop of Le Mans, whom he accompanied to Rome in 1635. A year later he was made a canon in Saint Julian's Cathedral without being in holy orders, a benefice he resigned in January, 1652, when he married Francoise d'Aubigne, later Madame de Maintenon. He was then a cripple and for the remainder of his life was confined to bed, being nursed by his young wife, whose devotion, piety, and patience were admirable. In a distorted body, he preserved the acuteness of his mind, and pursued his literary career. His comedies "Jodelet, ou le maître valet" (1645); "Les trois Dorothées" (1646); "L'héritier ridicule" (1649); "Don Japhet d'Arménie" (1652); "L'Ecolier de Salamanque" (1654); "Le gardien de soi-même" (1655); "Le marquis ridicule" (1656) contained quite a number of amusing scenes and odd characters that Molière borrowed. He achieved a lasting reputation by his burlesque productions, "Le Typhon (1644), and "Le Virgile travesti" (1648-1652), in which he displayed all the resources of his humour. The "Roman comique" (1649-1657), whose realistic presentation of customs and manners was imitated by later novelists, is not from from being a masterpiece. There is no certainty about the place where Scarron's remains were taken, but it is now believed that he was buried in the church of Saint-Gervais. MORILLOT, Scarron et le genre burlesque (Paris, 1888); IDEM., Scarron, Etude biographique et litteraire (Paris, 1890); CHARDON, Scarron inconnu (Paris, 1904); MAGNE, Scarron et son milieu (Paris, 1905). LOUIS N. DELAMARRE Scepticism Scepticism (Gr. sképsis, speculation, doubt; sképtesthai, to scrutinize or examine carefully) may mean (1) doubt based on rational grounds, or (2) disbelief based on rational grounds (cf. Balfour, "Defence of Phil. Doubt", p. 296), or (3) a denial of the possibility of attaining truth; and in any of these senses it may extend to all spheres of human knowledge (Universal Scepticism), or to some particular spheres of the same (Mitigated Scepticism). The third is the strictly philosophical sense of the term Scepticism, which is taken, unless otherwise specified, to be universal. Scepticism is then a systematic denial of the capacity of the human intellect to know anything whatsoever with certainty. It differs from Agnosticism because the latter denies only the possibility of metaphysics and natural theology; from Positivism in that Positivism denies that we do de facto know anything beyond the laws by which phenomena are related to one another; from Atheism in that the atheist denies only the fact of God's existence, not our capacity for knowing whether He exists. HISTORY OF SCEPTICISM The great religions of the East are for the most part essentially sceptical. They treat life as one vast illusion, destined some time or other to give place to a state of nescience, or to be absorbed in the life of the Absolute. But their Scepticism is a tone of mind rather than a reasoned philosophical doctrine based upon a critical examination of the human mind or upon a study of the history of human speculation. If we wish for the latter we must seek it among the philosophies of ancient Greece. Among the Greeks the earliest form of philosophical speculation was directed towards an explanation of natural phenomena, and the contradictory theories which were soon evolved by the prolific genius of the Greek mind, inevitably led to Scepticism. Heraclitus, Parmenides, Democritus, Empedocles, Anaxagoras, though differing on other points, one and all came to the conclusion that the senses, whence they had derived the data upon which their theories were built, could not be trusted. Accordingly Protagoras and the Sophists distinguish "appearances" from "reality"; but, finding that no two philosophers could agree as to the nature of the latter, they pronounced reality unknowable. The thorough-going Scepticism which resulted is apparent in the three famous propositions of Gorgias: "Nothing exists"; "If anything did exist it could not be known"; "If it was known, the knowledge of it would be incommunicable." The first step towards the refutation of this Scepticism was the Socratic doctrine of the concept. There can be no science of the particular, said Socrates. Hence, before any science at all is possible, we must clear up our general notions of things and come to some agreement in regard to definitions. Plato, adopting this attitude, but still holding to the view that the senses can give only dóxa (opinion) and not epistéme (true knowledge), worked out an intellectual theory of the universe. Aristotle, who followed, rejected Plato's theory, and proposed a very different one in its place, with the result that another epidemic of Scepticism succeeded. But Aristotle did more than this. He propounded the doctrine of intuition or self-evident truth. All things cannot be proved, he said; yet an infinite regress is impossible. Hence there must be somewhere self-evident principles which are no mere assumptions, but which underlie the structure of human knowledge and are presupposed by the very nature of things (Metaph., 1005 b, 1006 a). This doctrine, later on, was to prove one of the chief forces that checked the destructive onslaught of the Sceptics; for, even if Aristotle's dictum cannot be proved, it none the less states a fact which to many is itself self-evident. It was the Stoics who first took "evidence" as the ultimate criterion of truth. Perceptions, they taught, are valid when they are characterized by enárgeia, i.e. when their objects are manifest, clear, or obvious. Similarly conceptions and judgments are valid when we are conscious that in them there is katálepsis an apprehension of reality. Contemporaneously, however, with Zeno, the founder of Stoicism, lived Pyrrho the Sceptic (d. about 270 B.C.), who, though he admitted that we can know "appearance," denied that we can know anything of the reality that underlies it. Oudèn mâllon -- nothing is more one thing than another. Contradictory statements, therefore, may both be true. A scepticism so radical as this, the Stoics argued, is useless for practical life; and this argument bore fruit. Arcesilaus, founder of the Middle Academy (third century B.C.), though rejecting the Stoic criterion and affirming that nothing could be known for certain, nevertheless admitted that some criterion is needed whereby to direct our actions in practice, and with this in view suggested that we should assent to what is reasonable (tò eúlogon). For "the reasonable" Carneades, who founded the Third Academy (second century B.C.), substituted "the probable": propositions which after careful examination manifest no contradiction, external or internal, are pithané (probable) kaà aperístatos (secure) kaì perideuméne (thoroughly tested) (Sextus Empiricus "Adv. Math.", VII, 166). A subsequent attempt to reconcile conflicting doctrines having proved futile, however, the Academy lapsed into Pyrrhonism. Ænesidemus sums up the traditional arguments of the Sceptics under ten heads, which later on (second century A.D.) were reduced by Sextus Empiricus to five: 1. human judgments and human theories are contradictory; 2. all proof involves an infinite regress; 3. perceptual data are relative both to the percipient and to one another; 4. axioms, or self-evident truths, are really assumptions; 5. all syllogistic reasoning involves diállelos (a vicious circle), for the major premise can be proved only by complete induction, and the possibility of complete induction supposes the truth of the conclusion (Sextus Emp., "Hyp. Pyrrh.", I, 164; II, 134; Diogenes Laertius, IX, 88). From Scepticism the neo-Platonists sought refuge in the immediacy of a mystic experience; Augustine and Anselm in faith which in supernatural matters must precede both experience and knowledge (cf. Augustine, "De vera relig.", xxiv, xxv; "De util. cred.", ix; Anselm, "De fid. Trin.", ii); St. Thomas and the Scholastics in a rational, coherent, and systematic theory of the ultimate nature of things, based on self-evident truths but consistent also with the facts of experience, and consistent too with the truth of revelation, which thus serves to confirm what we have already discovered by the light of natural reason. But with the Renaissance, characterized as it was by an indiscriminate enthusiasm for all forms of Greek thought, it was only natural that the Scepticism of the Greeks should be revived. In this movement Montaigne (d. 1592), Charron (d. 1603), Sanchez (d. 1632), Pascal (d. 1662), Sorbière (d. 1670), Le Vayer (d. 1672), Hirnhaym (d. 1679), Foucher (d. 1696), Bayle (d. 1706), Huet (d. 1721), all took part. Its aim was to discredit reason on the old grounds of contradiction and of the impossibility of proving anything. Huet, Bishop of Avranches, and others sought to argue from the bankruptcy of reason to the necessity and sufficiency of faith. But for the most part, faith, understood in the Catholic sense of belief in a system of revealed doctrines capable of intelligent expression and rational interpretation, so far from being exempt from the attacks of the Sceptics, was rather (as it still is) the chief object against which their efforts were directed. Faith, as they understood it, was blind and unreasoning. The diversity of doctrine introduced by Protestantism had rendered all other faith, in their view no less contradictory than philosophy and natural belief. In Hume Scepticism finds a new argument derived from the psychology of Locke. A critical examination of human cognition, it was said, reveals the fact that the data of knowledge consist merely of impressions -- distinct, successive, discreet. These the mind connects in various ways, and these ways of connecting things become habitual. Thus the principle of causality, the propositions of arithmetic, geometry, and algebra, physical laws, etc., in short all forms of synthesis and relations are subjective in origin. They have no objective validity, and their alleged "necessity" is but a psychological feeling arising from the force of habit. We undoubtedly believe in real things and real causes; but this is merely because we have grown accustomed so to group and connect our mental impressions. The arguments of Pyrrho and other Sceptics are unanswerable, their Scepticism reasonable and well-founded; but in practical life it is too much trouble to think otherwise than we do think, and we could not get on if we did. Kant's answer to Hume was embodied in a philosophy as eminently subjective as that of Hume himself. Consequently it failed, and resulted only in further Scepticism, implicit, if not actually professed. And nowadays physical science, which in Kant's time alone held its own against the inroads of Scepticism, is as thoroughly permeated with it as the rest of our beliefs. One instance must suffice -- that of Mr. A. J. Balfour, who in his "Defense of Philosophic Doubt" seeks to uphold religious belief on the equivocal ground that it is no less certain than scientific theory and method. There is, he says, + no satisfactory means of inferring the general from the particular (c. ii), + no empirical proof of the law of causality (c. iii), + no adequate guarantee of the uniformity of nature and the persistence of physical law (cc. iv, v). Again, of the popular philosophic arguments which are "put forward as final and conclusive grounds of belief" p. 138), the argument from general consent is not ultimate; that from success in practice, though it gives us grounds for confidence in the future, cannot be conclusive, since it is empirical in character; whilst the argument from common sense which affirms that the intellect, when working normally, is trustworthy, involves a vicious circle, since normal workings can be distinguished from abnormal only on the ground that they lead to truth (c. vii). Similarly the original "deliverances of consciousness", to which Scottish Intuitionists appeal, are of no avail because it is impossible to determine what deliverances of consciousness are original and what are not. Returning to the question of science, Mr. Balfour finds that it contradicts common sense in that (e.g.) it declares bodies, which appear coloured to our senses, to be made up in reality of uncoloured particles, and, while thus discrediting the trustworthiness of observation, provides no criterion whereby to distinguish observations which are trustworthy from those which are not. Its method, too, is inconclusive, for there may always be other hypotheses which would explain the facts equally well (c. xii). Lastly the evolution of belief tends wholly to discredit its validity, for our beliefs are largely determined by non-rational causes, and, even when evidence is their motive, what we regard as evidence is settled by circumstances altogether beyond our control (c. xiii). CRITICAL EXAMINATION OF SCEPTICISM A reply to the copious arguments of the Sceptic enumerated above, might take the following line: + The Sceptic fails to distinguish between practical moral certainty which excludes all reasonable grounds for doubt, and absolute certainty which excludes all possible grounds for doubt. The latter can be had only when evidence is complete, proof wholly adequate, obvious, and conclusive, and when all difficulties and objections can be completely solved. In mathematics this is sometimes possible, though not always; but in other matters "practical certainty" as a rule is all we can get. And this is sufficient, since "practical certainty" is certainty for reasonable beings. + Axiomatic, or self-evident, truth must be insisted on. The truth of an axiom can never be proved, yet may become manifest, even to those who for the time being doubt it, when its meaning and its application are clearly understood. + Perceptual judgments refer qualities (not sensations) to things, but they do not declare what is the nature of these qualities, and hence do not contradict scientific theory. + Perception is trustworthy in that it reveals to us the general character and behaviour of things -- both of ourselves and of external objects. We do not often mistake a spade for a table-knife or a turkey for a hippopotamus. The senses do not pretend to be accurate in detail (unless assisted by instruments) or in abnormal circumstances. + The "normal" working of our faculties can be determined independently of any question as to the truth of their deliverances. The work of our faculties is "normal", (1) when they are free from the influence of subjective factors, other than those which belong to their proper nature (i.e. free from disease, impediment, the influence of prejudice, expectancy desire, etc.), and (2) when they are exercised upon their own proper objects. In the case of the senses this means upon objects we meet with day by day under ordinary circumstances. If the circumstances are extraordinary, our senses are still trustworthy, however, provided the circumstances be taken into account. + Alleged contradictions inherent in philosophical terms are due to ambiguity, misunderstanding, the lack of precise definition, or the influence of a false philosophy. For instance, the contradictions which Mr. Bradley points out (Appearance and Reality, bk. I) in terms such as time, spacers substance and accident, causality, self, are not to be found in these terms as defined by the Scholastics. + Contradictions between different philosophical theories may be (a) accounted for, and (b) eliminated. (a) They arise from ambiguity, variety of definition, misconception, misinterpretation, careless inference, groundless assumption, unverified hypothesis, and the neglect of relevant facts. Yet (b) all error contains an element of truth, and contradictions suppose a common principle already granted anterior to their divergence; and these underlying principles and elements of truth contained in all theories can be distinguished from the errors in which they are wrapped up. + Beliefs arising from non-rational or from unknown grounds should either be re-established on rational grounds or discarded. All beliefs should be evident either (1) immediately, as in the case (e.g.) of our belief in external reality, or (2) mediately by inference from known truth, or (3) on the ground of adequate testimony. + The Sceptic assumes the capacity of the intellect to criticize the faculty of knowledge, and thus, in so far as he denies its capacity to know anything, implicitly contradicts himself. LESLIE J. WALKER Friedrich Wilhelm Schadow Friedrich Wilhelm Schadow Painter, b. at Berlin, 1789; d. at Düsseldorf, 1862. He was the son of the sculptor, Johann Gottfried Schadow of Berlin. The year after Cornelius left Düsseldorf, Friedrich Wilhelm Schadow took his place as director of the Düsseldorf Academy of Painting. He had been with Cornelius at Rome among those who gathered around Overbeck, and while at Rome had become a Catholic. In 1819 he was appointed professor in the Academy of Berlin. He was a capable and popular teacher, and a large number of pupils followed him to Düsseldorf, where he went in 1826 and where he had great success. He was more in harmony with the artists of the Rhine than his predecessors at Düsseldorf had been. He laid stress on realism, colour, and a sober moderation, all based upon a through technic, whereby his school gained many friends at home and abroad. After the founding of the Art Association in 1829 the graceful, animated pictures of the Düsseldorf school, which appealed either to Christian devotion or everyday taste, and were greatly admired by the friends of the school, found acceptance in all directions. Schadow did not at first take up the ideal fresco, as did the masters at Munich, but devoted himself to oil-painting; nor did he attempt great historical subjects, but the more modest forms of art. In addition to devotional pictures, Schadow and his pupils gave their attention to portraits, landscape, and genre pictures. His principles differed from those of Cornelius, without his advancing, however, to those maintained today. In his opinion, the value of a picture rested upon form, colour, and poetic conception. The pupil must first learn to draw, especially after plaster copies of antiques, and not until after this was he to learn to draw from nature, and to make studies of drapery and colour after old paintings. After the pupil had been thoroughly grounded he was not to neglect drawing from nature or the model, at first under the strict supervision of a teacher, and then later to work independently. Schadow held fast to the principle of the Romantic school, that more weight should be placed upon the conception than the form. He had much skill in arousing interest both is his pupils and the general public. For his own work he chose religious painting and some of his paintings of this kind fully meet the aims of art and of edification; among these are "Ascension of the Virgin", the "Wise and Foolish Virgins". Other good pictures are "Christ on the Mount of Olives", "Christ with the Disciples at Emmaus", the "Pietà", the "Queen of Heaven", the "Blessed Virgin as Intercessor". Among his best creations also are: the "Four Evangelists", and "Paradise", "Purgatory", and "Hell". During his lifetime his portraits, for example those of brother artists, were greatly admired. It should, however, be remarked that Schadow, notwithstanding his study from nature, never fully overcame the weakness of the Romantic school, and although he was three times in Italy, where he studied the masters, he exhibited less original force than a graceful talent. Regularity and logic are natural to him rather than depth of content in the drawing and colour. Immermann, at a later date, when he had abandoned Romanticism, judged harshly the characteristics impressed by Schadow upon the Düsseldorf school. These criticisms, however, generally overlook the fact that Schadow's religious feeling, which remained as an inheritance to the Düsseldorf school, maintained the claims of art while meeting the justified demands of life and popular taste, and, finally, that the self-contained emphasis placed upon realism deserved the undoubted success it obtained. It was natural than in the course of time other elements also made themselves felt in the school, but these were only in part the signs of an advance. Schadow was also an author, although not one of preeminent importance. He laid down his opinions concerning training in art in several treatises and in a novel called "Der moderne Vasari" (Berlin, 1854). He resigned his position of the academy after thirty-three years' service. His pupils were distinguished by the honourable positions they received. His portrait by Bendemann is in the Düsseldorf Academy. HUBNER, Schadow und seine Schuler (Bonn, 1869); RACZYNSKI, Histoire de l'art moderne en Allemagne (Paris, 1836); Ger. tr. HAGER (Berlin, 1836); WIEGEMANN, Die konigliche Akademie in Düsseldorf und die Düsseldorfer Schule (Düsseldorf, 1856). G. GIETMANN Herman Schaepman Herman Schaepman, J.A.M. Orator, poet, and statesman, b. at Tubbergen, Holland, 2 March, 1844; d. at Rome, 21 Jan., 1903. He made his studies in the college of Oldenzaal and the seminaries of Kuilenberg and Ryzenburg, was ordained priest at Utrecht in 1867, and obtained the degree of Doctor of Divinity in 1869 at Rome. In 1870, he was professor of church history at the seminary of Ryzenburg. At the same time he became a collaborator on "De Tyd", and in 1871, in conjunction with Dr. W. J. F. Nuyens, he founded the periodical "De Wachter" (from 1874-83, "Onze Wachter"). Schaepman was a great poet. The appearance of his first poem, "De Paus" (published in 1866), was a literary event. Among his later poems those of especial note are: "De Pers, De eeuw en haar koning, Napoleon" (1873), and his master work "Aya Sofia" (1886). Schaepman ranks equally as prose-writer and poet. By turns lofty, incisive, sarcastic, vigorous, witty, his whole soul finds expression in his prose, the originality of its style being so striking that its authorship is recognized at first glance. His principal prose writings are collected in five volumes under the title "Menschen en Boeken" (Utrecht, 1893-1902). Schaepman was no less distinguished as an orator. For many years he was considered the first orator of the nation. His convincing, powerful, and irresistible manner was first displayed in his famous "Park speech", delivered in Amsterdam (1871), and was evinced in his speech at the Congress of Middelburgh (1872) and in those on Pius IX, Vondel, the Maid of Orléans, De Taal, Daniel O'Connell, Michel Angelo etc. His last oration, delivered in 1902, was in honour of Monseigneur Hamer. Schaepman's eloquence won him great honours in the political arena; he was the first priest to be elected to the States-General, and he ever fought valiently for the emancipation of the Catholics. In 1883 he formulated and presented a programme of action, his motto being "Catholics constitute a political personality which demands liberty." Unfortunately the majority of Catholic politicians had as yet no notion of such a personality, and Schaepmann was either ignored or opposed. But even at that time he entertained the idea of an eventual coalition between Catholics and Protestants, and for that reason supported the project for the revision of the Constitution (1887). The revision of the school-law is mainly due to him. Schaepman developed more and more the qualities of the true statesman. The democratic movement was a fact, the significance of which he fully realized, and, instead of vainly trying to stem it, he endeavoured to secure a hold on it. For this reason he acted independently in regard to the law concerning personal military service (1891-98), the Tak elections law (1894), and the compulsory education law (1900), his Catholic oppononents had, no doubt, good intentions, but they forgot that now they had influence and were able to obtain what was formerly beyond their reacy. Unquestionably Schaepman, in the beginning of his political career, was adverse to paternalism in government and wished to limit its functions to what was absolutely necessary. Later, however, he followed more in the footsteps of von Ketteler. Instead of allowing inevitable events to become detrimental to Catholics, he sought to shape them as far as possible, to Catholic advantage. One of Schaepman's greatest achievements was the coalition which, in conjunction with Dr. Kuyper, he brought about between Catholics and anti-revolutionists, whereby the influence of the Catholics was greatly increased. Since that event, Holland has had three successive ministries animated by distinctively Christian principles. Schaepman's merits were recognized by Leo XIII, who bestowed upon him the rank of domestic prelate and prothonotary Apostolic. Consult biographies by BROM (Haarlem, 1903), HENDRICHS (Leyden, 1903), BINNEWIERTZ (Leyden, 1904); see necrologies in DE TYD (Jan. 22-23, 1903) and Dietsche Warande en Belfort (1909). P. ALBERS Schaftlarn Schäftlarn Formerly a Premonstratensian, now a Benedictine, abbey, situated on the Isar not far from Munich in Upper Bavaria. It was founded in 762 by the priest Waltrich and dedicated to St. Dionysius. Waltrich was the first abbot; later (774-804) he was Bishop of Passau. In 955 the monastery was destroyed by the Hungarians who were then making marauding incursions into Germany. In the eleventh century it was a house of secular canons, of whom there were then many in Bavaria. In 1140 it was refounded by Bishop Otto of Freising as a Premonstratensian monastery under a provost. Little is known of the inner life of the monastery. In 1527 it was destroyed by fire. In 1598 the provostry was raised to an abbey, which continued to exist until 1803, when it was secularized. The church was made a parish church, the monastic buildings were sold and frequently changed hands. In 1845 they were brought by the Congregation of the English Ladies who established here a boarding school for girls. In 1865 Schäftlarn was bought by King Louis I of Bavaria for 92,000 guldens and in 1866 it was given to the Benedictines. At first the monastery was a priory, but it was raised to an abbey, 3 May, 1910. It has now thirteen fathers who conduct an educational institution for boys with a pro-gymnasium. The interior of the monastery church built 1733-64, is one of the best productions of the Munich school of architecture of the eighteenth century; the exterior is unimportant. The buildings, erected during the period 1705-21, are simple. Monumenta Scheftlariensia in Momenta Boica, VIII (Munich, 1767), 357-76; Annales et notae Scheftlarienses, ed. Jaffe in Mon. Germ. hist. Script.; XVII (Hanover, 1861), 334-50); Necrologium Scheftlar., loc. cit.; Necrologia, III (Hanover, 1905), 116-33; SCHEGLMANN, Geschichte der Sakularisation in rechtrheinischen Bayern, III, Pt. II (Ratisbon, 1908), 341-50. KLEMENS LÖFFLER Johann Adam Schall von Bell Johann Adam Schall von Bell An especially prominent figure among the missionaries to China, b. of an important family at Cologne in 1591; d. at Peking, 15 Aug., 1666. He studied at Rome, where he entered the Society of Jesus on 20 Oct., 1611. After his novitiate and some years devoted to philosophy and theology, he asked to be sent on the missions and in April, 1618, he set sail from Lisbon for China. When he reached Macao (1619) the Chinese Christian settlements were still deeply troubled by the war waged against them since 1615 by the high mandarin Kio Shin. Four of the chief missionaries, two of them from Peking, had been expelled and conducted to Macao; the others had only escaped the same fate through the devotion of some Christian mandarins who hid them in their houses. It was only in 1622, when the persecution began to relax, that Schall could penetrate to the interior. He laboured first at Si-ngan-fu in Shen-si. His ministry, which for a long time was difficult and thwarted, had just begun to afford him great consolation when he was summoned to Peking in 1630. He had to replace Father Terrentius (deceased) in the work of reforming the Chinese calendar. The task was far removed from his ordinary duties of the apostolate but it was one on which the future of the mission then depended. In China the establishment of the annual calendar was from time immemorial one of the most important affairs of State. The official astronomers who were entrusted therewith composed the "Board of Mathematics"; there were 200 members in this board, which was divided into several sections, presided over by exalted mandarins. They had to make known in advance the astronomical situation for the whole year, the days of new and full moons, movements of the sun with the dates of its entrance into each of the twenty-eight constellations forming the Chinese zodiac, the times of the solstices and equinoxes, and the beginnings of seasons, the positions and conjunctions of planets, finally, and especially, eclipses of the moon as well as of the sun. For these announcements the Chinese had several empirical rules, inherited from their ancestors, and especially those which the Mohammedan astronomers had brought to China during the Yuen, or Mongol dynasty. These rules were insufficient to prevent errors, which were sometimes very serious, and, having no scientific principle, the Chinese astronomers were incapable of discovering the defects of their methods and calculations, far less correcting them. Here was an opportunity for the missionaries to render a service and thus do much to strengthen their position in China. This had already been well understood by the founder of the mission, Father Matteo Ricci; his direct offer of assistance would have been ill received, but he had discreetly inspired in the most intelligent of the Chinese literati a desire for his aid. A translation of the Catholic liturgical calendar which he had communicated in MS. to his neophytes had very greatly excited this wish. That the mission might be ready for the official appeal which would come sooner or later he repeatedly urged the general of the Society to send a good astronomer, and in 1606 Father Sabbatino de Ursis, a Neapolitan, arrived. Father Ricci had been dead but a few months when because of the mistake of an hour by the Board of Mathematics in the announcement of an eclipse, the Government decided to request the aid of the missionaries for its tangled astronomy. At the beginning of 1611 an imperial decree entrusted the missionaries with the correction of the calendar and requested them to translate books containing the rules of European astronomy. Father de Ursis at once undertook this task, assisted by two Christian doctors, Paul Siu Koang and Leon Li-ngo-tsen, but the work was scarcely begun when it was halted by the intrigues of the native astronomers. Then the persecution of Kio Shin forced Father Sabbatino and his companion, Father Diego Tantoya, to withdraw to Macao, where both ended their days. Nevertheless these same illustrious neophytes, who had saved the mission from total ruin, succeeded not only in securing other missionaries from Peking but in having confided to them anew the duties of official correctors of the calendar. This mandate was renewed by an imperial decree of 27 Sept., 1629. The great Christian mandarin Paul Siu again resumed the high offices of which the persecution had deprived him and received by the same decree the direction of the reform with full power for its execution. The fathers were certain of obtaining through him all the means necessary for the success of the undertaking. The first missionary to resume the work was unable to devote to it his remarkable abilities for any length of time. This was Father John Terrentius, or to call him by his true name, Schreck. Born at Constance on Lake Geneva in 1576, he embraced the religious life in Rome at the age of thirty-five being then in possession of an enviable renown as physician, botanist, and mathematician. The Academia dei Lincei (founded at Rome by Prince Frederico Cesi) had admitted him among its earliest members; here he had as colleague Galilei, whose discoveries he followed with sympathy. In his first letters from China, which he had entered secretly in 1621, we find Father Terrentius endeavouring to obtain from the Florentine astronomer through the mediation of mutual friends, "a calculation of the eclipses, especially solar, according to the new observations", for he says, "this is supremely necessary to us for the correction of the [Chinese] calendar. And if there is any means by which we may escape expulsion from the empire it is this". This learned missionary died prematurely on 13 May, 1630, and Father Schall was summoned to Peking to replace him. Father James Rho, a native of Milan, who had also come from Europe to China in 1618, and who since 1624 had been working in the Christian settlements, was also called to the capital to assist Father Schall in his scientific undertaking. The task imposed on the two missionaries was very difficult; they had not only to convince the Chinese of the errors of their calendar, but also to make them understand the causes of these errors, and to demonstrate to them the reliability of the principles on which they themselves based their corrections. To do this they had to establish at the Board of Mathematics a complete course in astronomy, and they had to begin by compiling in Chinese a whole series of text-books comprising not only astronomy properly so-called but also even the most elementary foundations of the science, such as arithmetic, geometry, and other parts of mathematics. In 1634 they had composed as many as one hundred and thirty-seven of these works, of which they printed a hundred. The foreign reformers were not without opposition from superstitious believers of the traditional methods and especially from the envious. These became particularly violent on the death of Paul Siu (1633, when he was Colao or prime minister). Happily, Emperor Ts'ungcheng, who judged very intelligently of the methods in dispute by the results of the prediction of celestial phenomena, continued to support the fathers in the kindest manner. In 1638 Father Schall lost his deserving fellow-worker, Father Rho, but by that time the reform had already been accomplished in principle; it had become law and needed only to be put into execution. All the provinces of China were soon informed of the important commission of reforming the calendar which had been entrusted to the missionaries. The news created a great sensation which benefited the whole mission. The honour paid to the missionaries of Peking redounded to the credit of all their brethren; many mandarins felt it necessary to offer public congratulations to those working within their territory. Everywhere the preaching of the Gospel was allowed unprecedented liberty. Father Schall profited by this, interrupting from time to time his scientific labours for the apostolate, not only in Peking but also in the neighbouring provinces. Thus he founded a new Christian congregation at Ho-Kien, capital of one of the prefectures of Chi-li. However, his zeal was especially exercised at the court itself. Christianity, which hitherto had won but few souls in the imperial palace, now took an important place there through the conversion of ten eunuchs, among whom were the sovereign's most qualified servants. This class had always been most opposed to the preaching of the missionaries. This happy progress of evangelization was disturbed and for a time stopped by the invasion of the Tatars and the revolution which, by overthrowing the throne of the Ming dynasty, brought about the accession of the Manchu dynasty of the T'sings, which still reigns. In the provinces laid waste by the insurrection prior to the foreign conquest several missionaries were massacred by the rebel leaders. At Peking Father Schall assisted the last of the Ming in his useless resistance by casting cannon for him. Nevertheless the Tatars regarded him favourably. Shun-chi, the first of the Ts'ings to reign at Peking, was only eight or eleven years old when he was proclaimed emperor (1643). The regent who governed in his name for six years confirmed all Schall's power regarding the calendar. The young emperor was still kinder to the missionary; not only did he summon him to familiar interviews in his palace, but, in spite of the most sacred rules of Chinese etiquette, he used unexpectedly to visit him in his house, remaining in his modest room a long time and questioning him on all kinds of subjects. The imperial favour became a source of serious embarrassment to Father Schall and his fellow-workers. Prior to Shun-chi the "new rules" established by the Jesuits for the making of the Chinese calendar became compulsory for the official astronomers, but the correctors themselves had no authority to insure application of them. Shun-chi wished to alter this, impelled no doubt by his affection for Father Schall, but also because he had recognized the inefficiency of the native direction of the Board of Mathematics. He therefore appointed Father Schall president of this Board, at the same time conferring on him high rank as a mandarin to correspond with this important office. The missionary thought he might accept the office, which was more onerous than honourable; the success of the reform, which was theoretically accomplished, required it. But the rank of mandarin accorded ill with religious humility. Schall did all in his power to avoid it; from 1634, when it was conferred on him for the first time, until 1657, he made five appeals to the emperor or to the Supreme Tribunal of Rites, to be relieved of it. In his explanations to his brethren in the mission (16 Dec., 1648) he declared that he had refused it eight times, that he had pleaded on his knees before the Tribunal of Rites to be delivered from it, and that he only finally accepted it at the command of his regular superior and renouncing most of the advantages whether honorary or financial which were connected with the rank. Nevertheless this acceptance, notwithstanding the reservations made, was the occasion of other conscientious scruples concerning which the sentiments of the Jesuits in China were divided for several years. First of all, was not every rank of mandarin as exercised by a missionary a violation of the canon law which forbade priests to hold civil offices? A more serious question arose regarding the contents of the Chinese calendar. The latter, as it was drawn up by the Board of Mathematics and subsequently spread throughout the empire, gave not only astronomical information of a purely scientific nature, but the Chinese likewise sought and found there indications concerning lucky and unlucky days, that is those which should be chosen or avoided for certain actions, and much superstition was mixed with this part. When the calendar was seen to contain the same things after Father Schall became president, uneasiness was felt among the missionaries. Everybody did not know how the publication was made. No one supposed that Father Schall had the slightest share in the superstitions; they were in fact the exclusive work of a section of the Board of Mathematics which worked independently of Father Schall. Furthermore, the definitive and official publication of the calendar was not within the father's province. That was reserved to the Li-pou (Bureau of Rites) to which Father Schall merely transmitted his astronomical calculations. Besides, Father Schall's data were expressly distinguished in the calendar itself by the words, "according to the new rule". Nevertheless, even when they were aware of these explanations, which Father Schall hastened to give, several learned and zealous missionaries considered that his responsibility was too greatly involved, and consequently, since his office did not permit him to suppress the superstitions of the calendar, he was bound in conscience to resign. Five theologians of the Roman College to whom the question was submitted with incomplete information decided in this sense on 3 Aug., 1655. However, fresh explanations given by Father Schall and the approval of other very competent missionaries eventually placed the case in a different light, and a new and better informed commission at Rome concluded (31 Jan., 1664) that there was no valid reason for Father Schall's resignation of the presidency of the Board of Mathematics. The preamble of the decision repeated and adopted the arguments of Father Verbiest: "The father president of the board", it stated, "does not concur positively in the insertion of the superstitious matters which have been noted in the calendar; he does not concur therein, either himself, for he does not sign these additions or set his seal to them, nor through his pupils (in the Board of Mathematics), for the latter only make the insertion, without the father taking any share therein. With regard to the distribution of the calendar, which he makes in virtue of his office, it bears directly only on the notification of astronomical observations. If the calendar also contains things which savour of superstition it may be said that they are published under the head of information and are indifferent in themselves, that is the calendar simply shows the days on which such and such things are done according to the customs of the empire, or that they are the days having the conditions which popular superstition considers favourable for certain acts; and Father Schall is passive under the abuse which is following this distribution, which he was forced to make by serious reasons and even necessity. To remove the last scruples concerning this burning question, Father Oliva, General of the Society of Jesus, appealed to the pope. Alexander VII, after having taken account of the whole affair, declared vivoe vocis oraculo (3 April, 1664) that he authorized the Jesuits of China, "even professed, to exercise the office and dignity of mandarin and imperial mathematician". The decision set at rest not only Father Schall's conscience, but also those of the missionaries who might be called to the same duties. In fact, except for a short interruption caused by the persecution of which we shall speak later, the presidency of the astronomical bureau remained with the mission till the nineteenth century. It was always the best human protection both for liberty of preaching and freedom to practice Christianity throughout the Chinese empire. Even in Father Schall's time this was clearly proved by the rapid increase in the number of neophytes; in 1617 they were only 13,000; in 1650, 150,000, and from 1650 to the end of 1664 they grew to at least 254,980. The missionaries who furnished these statistics at the very period did not hesitate to give the correction of the calender as the indirect cause of the progress of evangelization, although the extraordinary tokens of kindness which Father Schall received from the young emperor contributed a great deal. One of the most valuable of these tokens, especially from the Chinese standpoint, was the diploma, dated 2 April, 1653, by which Shun-chi expressed his lively satisfaction with the services rendered in the revision of the calendar and the direction of the Board of Mathematics, and conferred on Father Schall the title of Tung hiuen kiao shi, "most profound doctor". This diploma, written in Tatar and Chinese, the text being encircled with dragons and other carved ornaments, was delivered to the father engraved on a marble tablet. The tablet, which was recovered at Peking in 1880 by M. Deveria, who presented it to the Jesuit missionaries of southeast Chili, measures eighty-eight by fifty-one inches. Father Schall appreciated still more the gift of a new house and a church for the building of which the emperor gave a thousand crowns. This was the first public church opened in the capital since the coming of the missionaries; it was dedicated in 1650. Some years later Shun-chi gave Father Schall and the mission a still greater gift, an imperial declaration praising not only European learning but also the law of the Lord of Heaven, that is the Christian religion, and permitting it to be preached and adopted everywhere. This declaration, made in 1657, was also engraved in Tatar and Chinese on a large marble plate and placed before the church. All his goodwill towards Christianity and the welcome which the young monarch accorded to the discreet preaching of Father Schall, had inspired the latter with the hope that one day he would request baptism, but Shun-chi died (1662) before giving him this joy, aged at most twenty-four years. The child who was proclaimed his successor became the famous K'ang-hi and favoured the Christians even more than his father, but during his minority the government was in the hands of four regents who were enemies of Christianity. At the denunciation of a Mohammedan self-styled astronomer, Yang-koang-sien, Father Schall and the other missionaries residing at Peking were loaded with chains and thrown into prison in November, 1664. They were accused of high treason but chiefly of the propagation of an evil religion. The principal charge against Father Schall was that he had shown to the deceased emperor images of the Passion of Jesus Christ. Brought before various tribunals the aged missionary, who had just been stricken with paralysis, could only reply to his judges through his companion, Father Verbiest. The first complaint against him was that he had secured the presidency of the Board of Mathematics in order that he might use the authority accruing from this high office for the propagation of the Christian Faith; Father Verbiest replied for him: "John Adam took the presidency of the Board of Mathematics because he was on several occasions urged to do so by the emperor. On a stone tablet, erected before the church, the emperor publicly attested that he raised John Adam, against the latter's wishes, to that dignity." Another complaint of the accuser — that Father Schall had badly determined the day on which a little imperial prince was to be buried — was set aside by the regents themselves for, on investigation, they found that the priest had never meddeled with the determination of lucky or unlucky days. Finally, on 15 April, 1665, sentence of death was passed against Father Schall; he was condemned to be cut in pieces and to be beheaded. Almost immediately afterwards a violent earthquake was felt at Peking, a thick darkness covered the city, a meteor of strange aspect appeared in the heavens, and fire reduced to ashes the part of the imperial palace where the sentence was delivered. The missionaries as well as the Christians could not but see Divine intervention in these events, while the superstitious Tatars and Chinese were terrified. In consequence the death sentence was revoked (2 May) and Father Schall was authorized to return to his church with his fellow missionaries. The venerable old man survived these trials a year, dying at the age of seventy-five, having consecrated forty-five years to the Chinese missions. Peace was not entirely restored to the Christian communities until 1669, when the young emperor assumed the reigns of government. One of K'ang-hi's first acts was to have the sentence against Father Schall declared void and iniquitous by the Tribunal of Rites and to order solemn funeral ceremonies in his honour, the prince himself composing for his tomb an extremely eulogistic epitaph. Father Schall worthily ended as a confessor for the Faith, almost as a martyr, a long life filled not only with great services to religion, but also marked by every virtue. All witnesses testify to this, and we might treat with contempt an infamous accusation directed against his memory nearly a century after his death. In 1758 was published for the first time, and afterwards reissued in several works against the Jesuits, a story according to which Father Schall spent his last years "separated from the other missionaries and removed from obedience to his superiors, in the house given him by the emperor with a woman whom he treated as his wife and who bore him two children; finally, having led a pleasant life with his family for some time he ended his days in obscurity." This is reported by Marcel Angelita, secretary to Mgr de Tournon during his legation in China (1705-1710), who died at Rome in 1749. The narrative gives no inkling of the source of this strange story. Its value may readily be judged by the manner in which it contradicts what has been related of the last days of Father Schall according to contemporaneous witnesses and even official Chinese documents. Prior to Angelita no one ever formulated or insinuated such an accusation against the celebrated missionary. If what it presumes were true it could not have been concealed; Yang-koang-sien and other enemies would have exploited it. In particular Navarrete, author of the "Tratados historicos", in which were collected so many more or less false stories concerning the Jesuit missionaries (including Father Schall), could not have failed to learn of this during his stay at Peking in 1665 and to recount it at length. At any rate such complete disregard of the duties of a priest would not have escaped his fellow-religious (of whom there were always some at Peking), and they would not have continued to honour him, as they did, to the end as one of their most venerable brethren. These reasons and others which could be adduced are so clear that there is not the slightest doubt concerning the falseness of Angelita's story. It may be asked, however, how the latter, whose calling should have prevented him from being a calumniator of the lowest class, could invent and publish such a villainous tale. The fact is that Schall's life might have furnished a foundation on which Angelita's imagination, inflamed against the Jesuits, worked and finally reared this story, but it furnished not a shadow of proof. Several contemporaries of Father Schall, Jesuits and others, including Chinese, mention the name of a Chinese Christian, a servant of Father Schall's, who seems to have made use of the priest's goodness for the benefit of his own ambition. Pountsin-hia (thus he was called) obtained for himself a mandarinship of the fifth rank; for his son John he secured even more, for Father Schall regularly adopted him as his grandson, and the emperor Shun-chi granted many weighty favours to this "adopted grandson" of the missionary whom he loved. Father Gabiani in a relation (written between 1666 and 1667, and published in 1671) states that the "arrogance" of this upstart "slave" prejudiced many persons of rank against his master. Father Schall himself, when at the point of death (21 July, 1665), made a public confession to his brethren of his "excessive indulgence towards this servant, of the scandal he had caused in adopting as his grandson the son of Puon," finally of irregular gifts made to both, contrary to his vow of poverty. The avowal of these human weaknesses, doubtless exaggerated by the humility of the dying missionary, does not lessen our esteem for him. Hence the conclusion may be drawn that the source of Angelita's story was probably this fact of the adoption of the son of Puon by Father Schall. But this fact, doubtless learned by Tournon's secretary during his stay in China, forty years after the death of Father Schall, had perhaps been distorted when it reached him, or rather his prejudice against the Jesuits caused him to regard it as something quite different from what it implied and to add to it false and calumniating circumstances. Finally it should be added that he wrote his relation many years after his return from China, when his mind was perhaps enfeebled by age and under the influence of a more passionately prejudiced man than himself, the ex-Capuchin Norbert. DE BACKER-SOMMERVOGEL, Bibl. des ecrivains de la C. de J., VII, 705-09; CORDIER, Bibl. Sinica, II, 1093; Hist. relatio de ortu et progressu fidei orthodox, in regno Chinensi per missionarios Societatis Jesu ab anno 1581 usque ad annum 1669, novissime collecta ex literis eorumdem Patrum Soc. Jesu, proecipue R. P. Joannis Adami Schall Colorienesis (Ratisbon, 1672); GABIANI, Incrementa Sinicoe Ecclessiae a Tartaris oppugnatoe (Vienna, 1673); KIRCHNER, China illustrata (Amsterdam, 1667), 104-15; BARTOLI, Dell' historia della C. di Giesu. La Cina, III-IV (Rome, 1663), 542, 908, 953, 972, 1094; [SCHALL], reposta as duvidas que o calendarionovo Sinico causou nalgus Padres, Christaos . . . commua aos Padres da missao de Peguin, 16 decemb., 1648 (MS. of the Bibl. Nationale, Paris, Fr. 9773); SCHALL, Rationes quibus adductus mathematici tribunalis curam egit Jo. Adamus, Pechini, 10 novemb., 1663 (MS. Bibl. Nat. Paris, Span., 409, f. 60); Relatio, ex Epistola . . . quam P. Fr. Victorius Ricci, Vicarius Provincialis Sinarum [Fr. Proedic.], . . . transmisit; Binondoc, 15 Maii, 1666, ed. VON MURR in Journal zur Kunstgeschichte, VII (Nuremberg, 1779), 252; Monumenta Sinica cum disquisitionibus criticis pro vera apologia Jesuitarum (s. l., 1700), 221; DUHR, Jesuiten-Fabeln (3rd ed., Freiburg, 1899), 226-30; IDEM in Zeitschr. fur kathol. Theologie (Innsbruck, 1901), 332; BRUCKER in Etudes (5 July, Paris, 1901), 88; HUONDER, Deutsch. Jesuitenmissionare (Freiburg, 1899), 192; private documents, etc. JOSEPH BRUCKER Johann Friedrich Schannat Johann Friedrich Schannat German historian, b. at Luxemburg, 23 July, 1683; d. at Heidleberg, 6 March, 1739. He studied at the University of Louvain and when twenty-two years of age was a lawyer, but before long he turned his attention exclusively to history and became a priest. The Prince-Abbot of Fulda commissioned Schannat to write the history of the abbey and appointed him historiographer and librarian. At a later date he received similar commissions from Franz Georg von Schonborn, Archbishop of Trier and Bishop of Worms. In 1735 the Archbishop of Prague, Count Moriz von Manderscheid, sent Schannat to Italy to collect material for a history of the councils. He made researches with especial success in the Ambrosian Library at Milan and the Vatican Library at Rome. His chief works are: "Vindemiae literariae" (1723-24); "Corpus traditionum Fuldensium" (1724); "Fuldischer Lehnhof" (1726); "Dioecesis Fuldensis" (1727); "Historia Fuldensis" (1729); "Historia episcopatus Wormatiensis" (1734); "Histoire abregee de la maison Palatine" (1740). More important than all these, however, is the "Concilia Germaniae", edited from material left by Schannat and continued by the Jesuit Joseph Hartzheim (11 fol. vols., 1759-90). At a later date the "Eiflia illustrata" (1825-55) was also published. LA BARRE DE BEAUMARCHAIS, Eloge historique de l'abbe Schannat in SCHANNAT, Histoire abregee de la maison Palatine; WILL in Hessenland, V (Cassel, 1891), 92-93, 102-105. KLEMENS LOFFLER Hans Leonhard Schaufelin Hans Leonhard Schäufelin (Known also as Scheuffelin, Schauffelein, and Scheyffelin). A German wood engraver, pupil of Durer, b. at Nuremburg in 1490; d. there in 1540. His best work was executed as an engraver, but he was besides an artist of some repute, and his pictures, to be studied in Nuremberg Munich, Cassel. and Ulm, are worthy of attention and show clearly the Durer influence and the Durer sense of beauty. His drawing of drapery is particularly good. His etchings and engravings are marked with a curious rebus on his name, composed of his initials joined to a shovel. He was the author of the illustrations to the "Theuerdank" of the Emperor Maximilian, and prepared two important engravings for Ulrich Pindter's "Speculum Passionis." A series of his paintings in Munich represent scenes in connexion with Christ and His Mother, and the only fresco which he is said to have produced is in Nördlingen, a city of which he was made a magistrate in 1515 and in which he attained considerable prominence. G.C. WILLIAMSON Schaumburg-Lippe Schaumburg-Lippe A German principality, surrounded by the Prussian province of Westphalia Hanover, and an exclave of the Prussian province of Hesse-Nassau (the Prussian County of Schaumburg). Schaumburg-Lippe has an area of about 131 square miles and (1910) 46,650 inhabitants. As regards population it is the smallest state of the German Confederation; in area it is larger than Reuss-Greitz, Lübeck, and Bremen. In 1905, of 44,992 inhabitants 43,888 were Lutherans, 653 Catholics, and 246 Jews. Thus the Catholics are 1 5 per cent of the population. The principality of Schaumburg-Lippe has sprung from the old County of Schaumburg, in early days also called Schauenburg, which was situated on the middle course of the River Weser, and was given as a fief by the German Emperor Conrad (1024-39) to Adolph of Santersleben. Adolph built the castle of Schaumburg on the Nettelberg, which is on the southern slope of the Weser Mountains, east of Rinteln. The descendants of Adolph of Schaumburg, among other possessions, acquired the County of Holstein and the Duchy of Schleswig also. In the year 1619 the Schaumburg family were made counts of the empire; however, soon after this, in 1640, the male line became extinct by the death of Count Otto V. At the division of the inheritance the County of Schaumburg went to the mother of Otto V, Elizabeth, Countess of Lippe. Elizabeth gave it to her brother Count Philip of Lippe, the younger brother of Count Simon VII, ruler of the County of Lippe. The Margrave of Hesse-Cassel and the Duke of Brunswick-Lüneburg also laid claim to parts of the old County of Schaumburg, and an adjustment was made which was confirmed in the Treaty of Westphalia. On account of this agreement the county was divided, one part going to Hesse-Cassel, another to Brunswick, while what was left, including the Barony of Buckeburg, came to Count Philip who now called himself Count of Lippe-Buckeburg. The first one of his descendants to call himself Count of Schaumburg-Lippe was Count Philip Ernest (d. 1787). Thus the territory of the present principality of Schaumburg-Lippe has never had any constitutional connection with the present principality of Lippe. The two countries have not arisen by partition of another principality. The districts of the old County of Schaumburg that fell to Hesse-Cassel, among which were the castle and the district of Schaumburg, became Prussian territory when the Electorate of Hesse-Cassel was suppressed (1866), and since then these districts, under the name of the government district of Rinteln, have formed an exclave of the Prussian province of Hesse-Nassau. Since 1905 Rinteln has been called the Prussian County of Schaumburg. George William of Schaumburg-Lippe (d. 1860) joined the Confederation of the Rhine in 1806, and received the hereditary title of prince. After the dissolution of the Confederation of the Rhine he joined the German Confederation (1815). At the outbreak of the Prusso-Austrian War (1866) Prince Adolph George (d 1893) at first agreed to the demand of Austria for the mobilizing of the forces of the Confederation against Prussia, but after the Prussian victories he withdrew from the German Confederation and joined Prussia and the North German Confederation. In 1871 the little country became a state of the German Empire, Prince Adolph (b. 1883) succeeded as ruler in 1911, in which year he was still unmarried. At the time of the great religious revolt of the sixteenth century the territory of the old County of Schaumburg belonged, in ecclesiastical matters, to the Diocese of Minden (founded by Charlemagne about 800). The Reformation was introduced into the country between 1560 and 1570, after the death of Adolph III, Archbishop of Cologne (d. 1556) and of his brother Anthony (d. 1558), both of whom belonged to the Schaumburg dynasty. The reigning Count Otto IV, brother of these two, was won over to the new doctrine after his marriage with Elizabeth Ursula, daughter of Duke Ernst of Brunswick-Lüneburg (called the "Confessor" on account of his zealous adherence to and championship of Protestantism). The childless Count Ernst (d. 1622) was succeeded by a Catholic Count, Jobst Hermann, who also died without children (1636). Jobst, indeed, attempted to bring up his probable successor, the later Count Otto V, in the Catholic Faith, but Otto's mother, Elizabeth, had him educated in the Reformed doctrines. Upon the death of Otto V the male heirs of the Schaumburg line were extinct. What remained of the country after the partition, the present principality of Schaumburg-Lippe, came under the House of Lippe, which had also adopted the Reformed teachings, so that since this era the ruler of the country and his family have been Protestants, and the national Church is the Lutheran. However, the ruler of the country has by law supreme ecclesiastical power over the State Church. Parishes of the Reformed Church were formed only in the capital, Buckeburg, and Stadthagen. Catholic services were re-established at Buckeburg about 1720 for a Catholic countess and her servants. Originally the Catholic pastoral care was exercised from Minden by Franciscans of Bielefeld; between 1840 and 1850 the mission parish of Buckeburg was created, to which was added in 1883 the mission parish of Stadthagen. In consequence of the country's entrance into the Confederation of the Rhine the few Catholics received equal civil rights with the Protestants. By a rescript of 3 July, 1809, the Sovereign settled the relations of the principality to the Catholics, and granted Catholics permission to hold public church services. Since 1846 episcopal jurisdiction has been exercised by the Bishop of Osnabrück in his capacity as Pro-vicar of the Northern Mission. The political status of the Catholic Church was revised by the State law of 18 March, 1911. The Catholic parishes are corporations established by law and are composed of the aggregate of all the Catholics residing in the district. Their boundaries are fixed by the bishop with the approval of the ministry after the opinions of the interested parties have been consulted. The ministry exercises the State's right of supreme supervision. The pastor is named by the bishop who must, however, before making the appointment, ascertain that the ministry has no objection to this cleric. If within thirty days no objection be raised against the candidate the acquiescence of the ministry is assumed. Every parish is bound to establish and maintain properly the buildings necessary for worship, etc. To meet these obligations every self-supporting member of the parish who has resided there at least three months is bound to pay the church tax. The State gives nothing for Catholic Church purposes. The necessary expenses are met by the bishop. Orders and congregations are not allowed in the country. The primary schools are all Lutheran. Religious instruction is not given to the Catholic minority in the public primary schools, although this is legally permissible. There are private Catholic primary schools at Buckeburg and Stadthagen; these do not, however, receive any aid from the State or commune. The Catholic school at Buckeburg, founded 1848, numbers (1911) 20 pupils; the one in Stadthagen, founded 1877, numbers (1911) 27 pupils. PIDERIT, Gesch. der Grafschaft Schaumburg (Rinteln, 1831); HEIDEKAMPER, Die Schaumburg-Lippische Kirche (Buckeburg, 1900), Protestant; IDEM, Schaumburg-Lippische Kirchengesch, vom dreissig-jahrigen Krieg bis zur Gegenwart (Buckeburg), 1908), Protestant; DAMANN, Geschichtliche Darstellung der Einfuhrung der Reformation in Schaumburg-Lippe (Buckeburg, 1852); FREISEN, Der kath. u. protestant. Pfarrzwang (Paderborn, 1906), 174 sqq. HERMANN SACHER Constantine, Baron von Schazler Constantine, Baron von Schäzler Theologian, b. at Ratisbon, 7 May, 1827; d. at Interlaken, 9 September, 1880. By birth and training a Protestant, he was a pupil at the Protestant gymnasium St. Anna of Ratisbon; took the philosophical course at the University of Erlangen in 1844-45; then studied law at Munich, 1845-47, and at Heidelberg, 1847-48. After this he decided to enter military life and became a Bavarian officer; in 1850, however, he left the army, received the degree of Doctor of Laws at Erlangen, and took up the practice of law. He entered the Catholic Church at Brussels on 10 October, 1850, and began the study of theology. At Louvain in 1851 he entered the Society of Jesus; after completing the studies he was ordained priest at Liege on 11 September, 1856; in 1857 he left the Society and went on with his studies at Munich where in 1859 he took the degree of Doctor of Theology. In 1861 he became a tutor m the seminary at Osnabruck; in 1862 privatdozent in the history of dogma at Freiburg; in 1866 archiepiscopal councillor. During the Vatican Council (1869-70) he was at Rome as theologian to Bishop Fessler; in 1873 he settled at Rome; in 1874 he was made a domestic prelate and was employed as consultor to various congregations. Shortly before his death he re-entered the Society of Jesus. Schäzler's acuteness and learning made him one of the most prominent representatives of Thomism. He was the author of the following works: "Die Lehre von der Wirksamkeit der Sakramente ex opere operato in ihrer Entwicklung innerhalb der Scholastik und ihrer Bedeutung für die christliche Heilslehre dargestellt" (Munich, 1860); "Natur und Uebernatur. Das Dogma von der Gnade und die theologische Frage der Gegenwart. Eine Kritik der Kuhn'schen Theologie" (Mainz, 1865); "Neue Untersuchungen über das Dogma von der Gnade und das Wesen des christlichen Glaubens" (Mainz, 1867) (these last two works belong to the controversy that Schäzler carried on with Johannes von Kuhn, q. v.); "Das Dogma von der Menschenwerdung Gottes, im Geiste hes hl Thomas dargestellt" (Freiburg, 1870); "Die päpstliche Unfehlbarkeit aus dem Wesen der Kirche bewiesen. Eine Erklärung der ersten dogmatischen Constitution des vaticanischen Conncils über die Kirche Christi" (Freiburg, 1870); "Divus Thomas Doctor angelicus contra Liberalismum invictus veritatis catholicae assertor" (Rome, 1874); "Introductio in s. theologiam dogmaticam ad mentem D. Thomae Aquinatis", a posthumous work ed. by Thomas Esser (Ratisbon, 1882); "Die Bedeutung der Dogmengeschichte vom katholischen Standpunkt aus erortert", ed. Thomas Esser (Ratisbon, 1884). BRUCK, Geschichte der kathol. Kirche in Deutschland im XIX. Jahrhundert, III (Mainz, 1896), 329-31; HURTER, Nomenclator, III (1895), 1226 sq.; Allgemeine deutsche Biographie, XXX, 649-51. FRIEDRICH LAUCHERT Hartmann Schedel Hartmann Schedel German Humanist and historian, b. at Nuremberg, 13 February, 1440; d. there on 28 November, 1514. He matriculated at Leipzig in 1456, received the degree of baccalaureus in 1457, and of magister in 1460. He then chose jurisprudence as his professional study, but at the same time zealously pursued humanistic learning under Pieter Luder, whom he followed to Padua in 1463. He there took up the study of medicine in which he obtained a doctorate in 1466. In 1472 he became a physician at Nordlingen; in 1477, at Amberg; in 1481, at Nuremberg where he lived until his death. He was closely connected with scholars and artists and his large and varied learning exerted a stimulating influence upon other students. His chief work is a chronicle of the world, "Liber chronicarum", which contributed much to the spread of historical knowledge. It was first published in 1493 at Nuremberg, a German translation by Georg Alt appearing in the same year. The division of the work into six ages and the point of view are entirely medieval. The work is a compilation following earlier chronicles closely and generally, even verbally; it depends particularly on the "Supplementum chronicarum" issued at Venice in 1483 by Brother Jacobus Philippus Foresta of Bergamo. The thoughtful, conservative, and rigidly orthodox Schedel does not often express his own opinion. The book owes its popularity in part to the great number of fine wood-cuts executed by the two artists, Michael Wolgemuth and William Pleydenwurff. Schedel's activity in tracing out, collecting, and copying MSS. produced results of much value even to-day. Many an important monument has been preserved only in his copy. Special mention should be made of his collection of inscriptions, the "Liber antiquitatum", completed in 1504. His large and valuable library containing over three hundred MSS. and several hundred printed books came into the possession of John Jacob Fugger in 1552, and was afterwards obtained by Duke Albert V of Bavaria (1550-1579) for the ducal, now royal, library at Munich, where it now is. WILL, Nurnbergisches Gelehrtenlexikon, III (Nuremberg, 1757), 499-501; POTTHAST, Bibl. hist. med. aevi, II (2nd ed., Berlin, 1896), 1001; HAITZ, Schedels Weltchronik (dissertation, Munich, 1899); SPRENGLER, Schedels Weltchronik (dissertation, Munich, 1905); STAUBER, Die Schedelsche Bibliothek (Munich, 1908). KLEMENS LOFFLER Matthias Joseph Scheeben Matthias Joseph Scheeben Theological writer of acknowledged merit, born at Meckenheim near Bonn, 1 March, 1835; died at Cologne, 21 July, 1888. He studied at the Gregorian University at Rome under Passaglia and Perrone (1852-59), was ordained on 18 December, 1858, and taught dogmatic theology at the episcopal seminary of Cologne (1860-1875). Scheeben was a mystic. His mind revelled in speculating on Divine grace, the hypostatic union, the beatific vision, the all-pervading presence of God; he had a firm believer in visions granted to himself and others, and his piety was all-absorbing. Very few minds were attuned to his; his pupils were overawed by the steady flow of his long abstruse sentences which brought scanty light to their intellects; his colleagues and his friends but rarely disturbed the peace of the workroom where his spirit brooded over a chaos of literary matters. The list of Scheeben's works opens with three treatises dealing with grace: (1) "Natur und gnade" (Mainz, 1861); (2) a new edition of "Quid est homo", a book by Ant. Casini, S.J. (d. 1755); (3) "Die Herrlichkeiten der göttlichen gnade" (Freiburg, 1863; eighth ed. by A.M. Weiss, 1908, also translated into English); (4) "Mysterien des Christenthums" (Freiburg, 1865-97); (5-9) five pamphlets in defence of the Vatican Council, directed against Döllinger, Schulte, and other Old Catholics, all of sterling value; (10) "Handbuch der katholischen Dogmatik" (seven parts, Freiburg, 1873-87). The author did not finish this classic work of permanent value; he died whilst working on "Grace". The failing treatises were supplied in German by Dr. Atzberger (Freiburg, 1898), in English, by Wilhelm and Scannel, who whilst strictly adhering to Scheeben's thought, reduced the bulky work to two handy volumes entitled: "A Manual of Catholic Theology based on Scheeben's Dogmatik" (3rd ed., 1906). He founded and edited (1867-88) the Cologne "Pastoralblatt", and edited for thirteen years "Das ökumenische Concil vom Jahre 1869", later (after 1872) entitled, "Periodische Blätter zu wissenschaftlichen Besprechung der grossen religiösen Fragen der Gegenwart". JOSEPH WILHELM John James Scheffmacher John James Scheffmacher Jesuit theologian b. at Kientzheim, Alsace, 27 April, 1668; d. at Strasburg, 18 August, 1733. He was one of the greatest theologians of his time, an orator of power and influence and the author of valuable works on controversy. By his preaching and writing, he labored for many years for the conversion of the Lutherans and brought a great number of them back to the Church. In 1715 while teaching theology in the Catholic University of Strasburg, he was appointed to the chair of Apologetics, founded in the cathedral of that city by Louis XIV; he was rector of the university (1728-31). His best-known writings are in the form of letters, setting forth with clear, solid arguments those points of Catholic doctrine which long experience had taught him presented the greatest difficulties to Protestants. These letters have been collected in two separate volumes and published under the titles: "Lettres d'un Docteur Allemand", 14th ed. (Strasburg, 1789), "Lettres d'un Théologien", 13th ed. (Strasburg, 1750). Another well-known work of the author is "Controverskatechismus (Cologne, 1723) which was later published under the title, "Licht in den Finsternissen". The oldest known French edition of this work entitled "Catéchisme de Controverse" is dated Strasburg, 1751, though it is not certain whether the book was originally published in French or in German. There is an English translation entitled, "A Controversial Catechism" (Baltimore). A new German edition was published at Strasburg in 1892. HURTER, Nomencl. lit., V (Innsbruck, 1895), 3; SOMMERVOGEL, Bibliotheque de la Compagnie de Jesus, V, VII (Paris, 1896), 727. F.X. DELANY Christopher Scheiner Christopher Scheiner German astronomer, b. at Wald, near Mindelheim, in Swabia, 25 July, 1575; d. at Niesse, in Silesia, 18 July, 1650. He entered the Society of Jesus in 1595, and after studying mathematics at Ingoldstadt, became professor in that branch at Dillingen. In 1610 he was recalled to Ingoldstadt, where he taught Hebrew and mathematics with great success and became actively engaged in scientific research. He had already invented his well-known pantograph or copying instrument, and he now constructed a telescope, with which, aided by one of his students, he began to observe the sun. He made use of a helioscope composed of coloured glasses in the beginning, but afterwards conceived the idea of projecting the sun's image on a screen in order to study its surface. Kepler had independently suggested the method, but Scheiner was the first to apply it in practice. It was thus that in March, 1611, he discovered the existence of sun-spots, a phenomenon so contrary to the philosophical notions of the time that his superiors did not wish him to publish it under his own name for fear of ridicule. He therefore communicated the discovery to his friend Welser in Augsburg, who, in 1612, published his letters under an assumed name. In subsequent letters he described the rotation of the spots and the appearance of the faculæ. In the meantime Galileo claimed to have observed the spots before him. This led to further correspondence and a long dispute followed regarding the priority of discovery. It appears, however, that they were first noticed by Fabricius shortly before either, and although Galileo may have observed them before Scheiner, the latter made his discovery quiet independently and also published it before him. Scheiner's special claim, that he was the first to make continuous observations of scientific value, cannot be disputed. Apart from his letters, he continued his systematic study of the sun for nearly sixteen years before beginning the publication of his great work, the "Rosa Ursina" (Bracciani, 1626-30). This is a standard treatise on the subject and besides his numerous observations, contains a detailed account of his methods and apparatus. One of his most valuable results was also his determination of the rotational elements of the sun. In 1616 the Archduke Maximilian of Tyrol, attracted by his growing fame, invited him to Innsbruck, where, besides carrying on his astronomical researches, he made important studies on the eye, showing that the retina is the seat of vision. He likewise devised the optical experiment which bears his name. He became rector of the new college of his order at Neisse in 1623, and later professor of mathematics at Rome. His last years, devoted to study and to the ministry, were spent at Neisse. Scheiner was one of the leading astronomers of his time, and possessed to an uncommon degree the true scientific spirit. Though not endowed with the deep insight into the truths of nature of his great contemporary Galileo, he was nevertheless ingenious in devising methods and a skilled and painstaking observer. He insisted particularly on the need of accurate data as a basis for subsequent theory. He deserves the title of "pioneer" in the study of sun-spots. He wrote "Tres epistulæ de maculis solaribus" (Augsburg, 1612); "De maculis solaribus et stellis circa Jovem errantibus accuratior Disquisitio" (Augsburg, 1612); "Refractiones coelestes" (Ingoldstadt, 1617), in which he first called attention to the elliptical form of the sun when near the horizon and attributed the phenomenon to refraction; "Oculus h. e. Fundamentum opticum" (Innsbruck, 1619); "Pantographice seu ars delineandi" (Rome 1631). BRAUNMÜHL, Christoph Scheiner als Mathematicer physiker u. Astronom. (Bamberg, 1891); SOMMERVOGEL, Biblioth. de la C. de J., VII (Paris, 1869), 734; WOLF, Gesch. d. l'Astronomie (Munich, 1887), 319; DELAMBRE, Hist. de l'Astronomie Moderne, I (Paris, 1821), 681; SCHREIBER, Natur u. Offenbarung, V, XXXXVIII, 1 sqq. H. M. BROCK Johann Nepomuk Schelble Johann Nepomuk Schelble Musician, b. 16 May, 1789, at Huffingen in the Black Forest; d. there 6 Aug., 1837. At the age of 18 he obtained a position as court and opera singer at Stuttgart, and having there begun the study of composition, he wrote an opera ("Graf Adalbert") and other smaller pieces for voices or instruments; there too he was appointed teacher at the musical school of the city. Seven years later (1814), in order to perfect himself in his art, he went to Vienna, where he made the acquaintance of Beethoven. Among other of his compositions during his stay at the capital of Austria, a Missa Solemnis for four voices and orchestra deserves special mention. Upon his arrival in Berlin in 1818, Clemens Brentano, with whom he had formed a friendship, procured him a place as first tenor at Frankfort-on-the-Main. In this city he remained for the rest of his life, and there founded the Society of St. Cecilia, which during the last hundred years has done much for the popularization of classical music among the citizens of this town. He began by giving a weekly musical entertainment in his own house; and so great was the success of these meetings that before long he was able to give them a permanent form under the title Cäcilienverein. Its members steadily increased in numbers: in 1818 he began with 21 members; in a few years there were a hundred. The first concert given was the "Magical Flute" of Mozart; soon followed the best works of Händel, Mozart, Haydn and Beethoven, and after 1828 those of Bach, not neglecting the older masters, such as Palestrina, Pergolesi, etc. In 1836 his health became impaired, and he returned to his native country to recruit; but in vain. The following year he died. During his absence Felix Mendelssohn took his place as director of the society. So deep and sincere was Mendelssohn's affection for him, that at the death of his (Mendelssohn's) father, he wrote to Schelble: "You are the only friend who after such a loss can fill the place of my father". Nor were these the sentiments of Mendelssohn alone, but all those who knew him attest that, in loftiness of character and nobility of temperament, he shone forth as an artist and a man in the ideal sense of the word. WEISMANN, Johann Nepomuk Schelble (Frankfurt, 1838); Festfeier des Cacillien-Vereins zu Frankfurt bei Gelegenheit seines 50 Jahrigen Jubilaums, 1868; Frankfurter Familienblatter, 7 Feb., 1868; Briefe von Felix Mendelssohn-Bartholdy, II, 121-133. A. WALTER Emmanuel Schelstrate Emmanuel Schelstrate Theologian, b. at Antwerp, 1649; d. at Rome, 6 April, 1692. While he was a canon of the cathedral of Antwerp, he was called to Rome by Innocent IX and made an assistant librarian of the Vatican Library. He was a fine scholar in early ecclesiastical history and became the accredited defender of the papal supremacy. For this reason his writings have often been very severely judged. His "Antiquitas illustrata circa concilia generalia et provincialia" (Antwerp, 1678) contains decrees of the popes and various matters of Church history; in it he attacked the errors of Launoy in regard to the primacy of Rome. Schelstrate was only able to issue two volumes of a second edition which he had planned on a large scale (1692 and 1697). He carried on controversies with Arnauld and Louis Maimbourg concerning the authority of the general councils and of the popes; he opposed the declaration of the Gallican clergy in 1682, and wrote a treatise on the origin of the Anglican Church in a controversy with Edward Stillingfleet, Dean of St. Paul's, London. He also published numerous other works. Hurter, Nomenclator, IV (Innsbruck), 1910), 550. R. MAERE Maurus von Schenkl Maurus von Schenkl Benedictine theologian and canonist, b. at Auerbach in Bavaria, 4 January 1749; d. at Amberg, 14 June, 1816. After studying the humanities at the Jesuit college in Amberg (1760-1765), he entered the Benedictine monastery of Prüfening (Priefling) near Ratisbon, took vows on 2 Oct. 1768, and was ordained priest on 27 Sept., 1772. From 1772-7 he held various offices at his monastery; in 1777 he was at first oeconomus at Puch, then pastor at Gelgenbach; from 1778-83 he taught dogmatic, moral and pastoral theology and canon law at the Benedictine monastery of Weltenburg; in 1783 he became librarian at Prüfening where he at the same time taught canon law till 1785, then moral theology till 1790, when with his abbot's consent he accepted a position as professor of canon law, moral, and pastoral theology at the lyceum of Amberg. With his professorial duties was connected the regency of the seminary and, after declining an offer to succeed his confrère, Bede Aschenbrenner, as professor of canon law at the University of Ingolstadt in 1793; he was also appointed rector of the school at Amberg in 1794. Upon his urgent request he was relieved of the rectorship in 1798 and, after refusing another offer as professor of canon law at Aschaffenburg in 1804; he was honored with the title of spiritual councillor of the king. Owing to ill-health he resigned the regency of the seminary and after 1808 he taught only canon law and pastoral theology. He was highly esteemed as a theologian and canonist, and his works were used as texts in many institutions of Germany and Austria. His chief works are (1) "Juris ecclesiastici statu Germaniae maxime et Bavariae adcommodati syntagma" (Ratisbon, 1785). When interpolated editions of this work were published (Cologne, 1787, and Bonn, 1789), he re-edited it under the title "Institutiones juris eccl. etc." (2 vols., Ingolstadt, 1790-1), but it was again reprinted without his consent (Bonn, 1793, and Cologne, 1794). The latest (11th) edition was prepared by Engelmann (Ratisbon, 1853). (2) "Ethica christiana universalis" (3 vols., Ingolstadt 1800-1, 5th ed., Gran, 1830). (3) "Theologiae pastoralis systema" (Ingolstadt, 1815-25). LINDNER, Die Schriftsteller des Benediktiner-Ordens in Bayern, 1750-1780, I, (Ratisbon, 1880), 250-2; HELDMANN, Memoria Mauri de Schenkl (Ratisbon, 1832); FELDER, Gelehrten-Lexikon II, 277-282. MICHAEL OTT Schenute Schenute (SCHENUDI, SCHNUDI, SINUTHIUS). A Coptic abbot. The years 332-33-34 and 350 are mentioned as the date of his birth, and the years 451-52 and 466 as the date of his death, all authors agreeing that he lived about 118 years. He was born at Schenalolet in the district of Akhim, and died in his monastery, which still exists under the name of Deir-el-Abiad (White Monastery), near the ruins of the village of Atripe. In 371, he became a monk at this large double monastery, which was then ruled by his uncle Bgol, whom he succeeded as abbot in 388. St. Cyril of Alexandria, whom he accompanied to the Council of Ephesus in 431, appointed him archimandrite during that council. The Copts honour him as a saint and as the Father of the Coptic Church. The monastic rule of Pachomius underwent various modifications and was made more severe under the abbaey of Bgol and Schenute. Perhaps the most important modification was the introduction of vows into the monastic life. Each monk made a solemn profession in the church, that he would faithfully observe the rule of the monastery. The formula of this vow, as prescribed by Schenute, was published by Leipoldt (loc. cit. below p. 107), and by Leclercq in Dict. d'Archéologie chrét." s. v. Cénobitisme. It is as follows: "I vow [homologein] before God in His holy place as the word of my tongue is my witness: I shall never sully my body in any way; I shall not steal; I shall not take false oaths; I shall not lie; I shall not do evil secretly. If I transgress what I have sworn [homologein] I shall not enter the kingdom of heaven, for I know that God before whom I pronounce the formula of this pledge [diatheke] will thrust me body and soul into hell-fire, for I shall have trangressed the formula of the pledge [diatheke] have pronounced" (op. cit.) It is the first monastic vow of which we have any knowledge. Another modification of the rule of Pachomius was a combination of the cenobitic with the anchoretic life. Schenute was the most influential monastic head and perhaps the most powerful man in Egypt during his time. Besa, his biographer and successor as Abbot of Atripe, states that at one time he ruled over 2200 monks and 1800 nuns. But Schenute was too self-conscious, passionate, and tyrannical, his rule too severe, and his enforcement of it too violent, to make his influence wholesome and lasting. Outside of Egypt he remained unknown; neither Latin nor Greek writers make any mention of him. Philosophy he considered useless, and his whole knowledge of theology consisted in the repetition of the current ecclesiastical formulas. Extremely austere with himself, he required the same austerity of his disciples, and rigidly enforced an absolute submission to his authority. His literary works, written in the Sahidic language, consist chiefly of letters to monks and nuns, spiritual exhortations, and some very forcible sermons. They are being edited with a Latin translation by Leipoldt, in "Corpus Scriptorum Christianorum Orientalium" (Paris, 1906) and, with a French translation, by Amélineau in the same publication (Paris, 1907-.) His life, written in Sahidic by Besa, his disciple and successor, her been transmitted in the Sahidic, Bohairic, Arabic, and Syrian versions, and was edited by LEIPOLDT, loc. cit. ahove. See also LEIPOLDT, Schenute von Atripe und die Entschung des national-aegyptischen Christentums in Texte und Untersuchungen, new series, X, I (Paris, 1903); AMELINEAU, Les moines egyptiens. Vie de Schnoudi (Paris, 1889); LADEUZE, Etude sur le cenobitisme Pakhomien (Louvain, 1898), passim; REVILLOUT, Les origines du schisme egyptien, Senuti le Prophete in Revue de l'histoire des religions, VIII (Paris, 1883), 401 468; 545-581; LECLERCQ in Dict d'Archeologie Chret. (Paris, 1910), s. v. Cenobitisme; Bibliotheca Hagiographica Orientalis (Brussels, 1910), 235-7; BETHUNE-BAKER, The date of the death of Nestorius, Schenute, Zacharias, Evagrius, in Journal of Theological Studies, IX (London, 1908), 601-05. MICHAEL OTT Georg Scherer Georg Scherer Pulpit orator and controversialist, b. at Schwaz, in the Tyrol, 1540, according to Duhr; d. at Linz, 30 Nov., 1605; entered the Society of Jesus in 1559. Even before his ordination he was famed for his preaching powers. For over forty years he labored in the Archduchy of Austria. To Scherer, in part, it owes the retention of the Faith. In 1577 he was Court preacher to the Archduke Matthias; he retained the post until 1600. In 1590 he was appointed Rector of the Jesuit College at Vienna; the sternness of his character scarcely fitted him for the office, and he was transferred (1694) to Linz. He died of apoplexy. The story of his being struck blind in the pulpit, after having exclaimed: "If the Catholic Church is not the True Church, may I become blind," is a pure invention (cf. Guilhermy). Scherer was a man of boundless energy and rugged strength of character, a strenuous controversialist, a genuinely popular orator and writer. He vigorously opposed the Tubingen professors who meditated a union with the Greek Schismatics, refuted Lutheran divines like Osiander and Heerbrand, and roused his countrymen against the Turks. Believing like his contemporaries that the State had the right to put witches to death, he maintained, however, that singe they were possessed, the principal weapons used against them should be spiritual ones, e.g. exorcisms, prayer. Scherer's severe attitude towards witchcraft did not meet the approval of his general, Acquaviva. His eloquence and zeal made many converts, amongst them the future Cardinal Khlesl. His works were collected and published by the Premonstratensians of Bruck, Moravia (1599-1600), and again issued at Munich (1613-1614). Noteworthy are his "29 Predigten von Notis, Merkund Kennzeichen der wahren und falschen Kirchen." SOCHER, Historia Provinciae Austriae S.J. (Vienna, 1740); SCHMIDL, Historia Prorinciae Bohemia, t. II, (Prague, 1747); STOGER, Scriptores Prorinciae Austriae (Vienna, 1856), RAESS, Die Konvertiten, II (Freiburg, 1866); HURTER, Nomenclator Litterarius, III, 3rd ed.; DE GUILHERMY, Menologe de la C. de J., Assistance de Germanie, I ser., 2nd pt. (Paris, 1898); JANSSEN, Geschichte des deutschen Volkes, tr. VII, 160; IX, 119,121, 363, 379; X, 32, 36, 198, 202, 205, 332, 350; XII, 261, 336, 384; XIV, 334, 452, 455, 463, 483, XV, 42, 290, 418; XVI, 281, 463; SOMMERVOGEL, Bibl. de la C. de J., VII, SCHWICKERATH, Severe attitude of the Jesuits in the trials for witchcraft in Am. Cath. Quarterly Review, XXVII (Philadelphia, 1902); DUHR, Geschichte der Jesuiten in den Landern deutscher Zunge im XVI. Jahrhundert (Freiburg im Br., 1907); Stimmen aus Maria-Laach, XXXI, p. 556; XLVIII, p. 153; DUHR in Zeitschrift fur kath. Theol., XII. JOHN C. REVILLE Theodore, Count von Scherer-Boccard Theodore, Count von Scherer-Boccard A Swiss Catholic journalist and politician; b. at Dornach in the canton of Solothurn, 12 May, 1816; d. at Solothurn, 6 Feb., 1885. Theodore Scherer belonged to a distinguished family of the City of Solothurn. He attended the gymnasium of this city, took the philosophical course at the lyceum of the same place, and then studied law at the Athenäum conducted by the Jesuits at Fribourg in Switzerland. After this he returned to Solothurn and devoted himself to journalism, founding the newspaper "Die Schildwache am Jura" (1836-41), in which he defended the freedom of the Church and the rights of the people. In addition to this he established in 1839 a bureau of correspondence with conservative tendencies. From 1838 he was also a member of the great council of the canton. His political activity in this body brought him into conflict with the Government and obliged him in 1841 to live abroad for some time in Alsace and Paris. At the close of 1841 he was called to Lucerne where he founded and edited the "Staatszeitung der katholischen Schweiz", which became the chief organ of the Catholic-Conservative party. In 1843 he returned to Solothurn and served out a term of imprisonment to which he had been condemned on account of the events of 1841. In 1845 he was made secretary to Magistrate Siegwart-Muller of Lucerne, who was the president of the Sonderbund. Scherer himself had a share also in the founding of the Sonderbund. After the unfortunate ending of the war of the Sonderbund he returned to private life at Solothurn, where he devoted himself to labors on behalf of Catholic interests and of social subjects. He did much journalistic work, being a contributor to numerous Catholic journals of Switzerland and Germany. During a visit to Rome in 1852 he was made a Roman count by Pius IX. From 1855 he lived in the small castle of Hunenberg near Lucerne. In 1868 he married Marie Louise von Boccard, and after that used the double name Scherer-Boccard. In 1844 Scherer founded the Academy of St. Charles Borromeo, an association of the Catholic scholars of Switzerland, and edited as the organ of the association a journal called "Katholische Annalen" (Lucerne, 1847); the war of the "Sonderbund" put an end to this periodical and to the academy also. In 1857 he was one of the founders of the Swiss Pius Association (Piusverein), and from the time the society was established until his death he was the president of the central organization; he was also the head of the Society for Home Missions, founded in 1863. He was in touch with the Catholics of Germany and spoke repeatedly at the German-Catholic congresses. Scherer-Boccard issued thirty-five separate publications, large and small, containing apologetic, biographical, or historical matter. The most noteworthy of these are: "Revolution und Restauration der Staatswissenschaft" (Augsburg and Lucerne, 1842, 2nd ed., 1845); "Die fünfzehnjahrige Fehde der Revolution gegen die katholische Schweiz 1830-45" (Lucerne, 1846); "Das Verhältniss zwischen Kirche und Staat" (Ratisbon, 1846, 2nd ed., 1854); "Die Reformbewegung unserer Zeit und das Christenthum" (Augsburg, 1848); "Der heilige Vater. Betrachtungen über die Mission und die Verdienste des Papstthums" (Munich, 1850), French tr., "Le Saint-Père. Considérations sur la mission et les mérites de la Papauté" (Paris, 1853); "Heidenthum und Christenthum betrachtet in den Monumenten des alten und neuen Roms" (Schaffhausen, 1853, 2nd ed., 1880) "Lebensbilder aus der Gesellschaft Jesu. Ein Beitrag zur Geschichte der katholischen Restauration" (Schaffhausen, 1854). He was also one of the editors of the "Archiv für schweizerische Reformationsgeschichte" (3 vols., Fribourg, 1869-75). MAYER, Graf Theodor Scherer-Boccard. Ein Beitrag zur Geschichte der katholischen Bewegung in der Schweiz (Einsiedeln, 1900), with portrait. FRIEDRICH LAUCHERT Matthaeus Schinner Matthæus Schinner Bishop, cardinal, and statesman, b. at Muhlbach in the Canton of Valais, Switzerland, about 1470; d. of the plague at Rome, l October, 1522. He was the son of the lord of Martigny; his uncle Nicholas, later Bishop of Sion (Sitter), gave him his early instruction. He embraced the ecclesiastical career, and eventually became parish priest of Aernen (1496), and canon and dean of the cathedral of Sion. When his uncle resigned, he was made Bishop of Sion (20 September, 1499). Schinner's great diplomatic skill and his influence over the other Swiss cantons allied with Valais made him the right hand of Popes Julius II and Leo X in their efforts to unite Italy and expel the French. In 1511, as a result of an alliance brought about by Schinner, the Swiss made two unsuccessful campaigns against Milan. As a reward for securing this alliance, he was made Bishop of Novara and also cardinal in 1511. In 1512, as papal legate for Italy and Germany, he was appointed commander of a Swiss and Venetian army, drove the French from Milan, and established Maximilian Sforza as duke. However, as Louis XII again captured Milan after the death of Julius II, Schinner one more took the field at the head of the Swiss Confederates, and defeated the French in the battle of Novara (1513). The Duke of Milan rewarded Schinner with the margraviate of Vigevano. When under Francis I the French recrossed the Alps, Schinner led the Swiss troops, part of which had retired, at the unfortunate battle of Marignano (1515). In 1516 he raised another army with the aid of England, but was unable to regain Milan. He now sought to attain his end by an alliance between the pope, the emperor, England, and Spain, for which purpose he went himself in 1516 to London, but the reconciliation of the Swiss Confederation and the emperor with France made the alliance abortive. During his long-absence from home the French party there, under his bitter enemy George Supersax, raised a rebellion and drove him from Sion. He lived for several years at Zurich (1517-19), and thenceforth mostly at the court of the emperor. He supported the election of Charles V as emperor in 1519, for which he was made Bishop of Catania in Sicily (Nov., 1520). In 1521 he led an army of Swiss Confederates in the imperial campaign against Francis I for the possession of Milan. But for his passionate hatred of France, he would have been elected the successor of Leo X; however, Adrian VI called him to Rome as administrator of the States of the Church. He died without having seen his diocese again. His large and widely scattered correspondence is the only literary work he left. The date of his birth has been disputed, as the statements concerning it differ nearly twenty years. The year is unknown, and all direct indications are lacking. We know, however, that he attended the school of Lupulus at Bern, which was not opened until 1493. As Schinner was a priest in 1492, the year of his birth could not be later than 1470. JOLLER, Kardinal Schinner als kathol. Kirchenfurst in Blatter zur Walliser Gesah., I (1895), IDEM, Kardinal Schinners Beziehungen zur Wahl Kaiser Karls V, 1519 ibid.; LAUBER, Kardinal Schinners Bann u. Interdikt uber seine Gegner, ibid., IV (1909); BLOSCH, Der Kardinal Schinner in Sonntagsblatt des Bund (1890), nos. 14, 15; WIRT, Akten uber die diplomatisch. Beziehungen der romisch. Curie in der Schweiz 1512-1552 in Quellen zur Schweiz. gesch., XVI (l895), xiii-xix. ALBERT BUCHI Schism Schism I. GENERAL IDEAS, MORAL CHARACTER, AND PENAL SANCTIONS Schism (from the Greek schisma, rent, division) is, in the language of theology and canon law, the rupture of ecclesiastical union and unity, i. e. either the act by which one of the faithful severs as far as in him lies the ties which bind him to the social organization of the Church and make him a member of the mystical body of Christ, or the state of dissociation or separation which is the result of that act. In this etymological and full meaning the term occurs in the books of the New Testament. By this name St. Paul characterizes and condemns the parties formed in the community of Corinth (I Cor., i, 12): "I beseech you, brethren", he writes, ". . . that there be no schisms among you; but that you be perfect in the same mind, and in the same judgment" (ibid., i, 10). The union of the faithful, he says elsewhere, should manifest itself in mutual understanding and convergent action similar to the harmonious co-operation of our members which God hath tempered "that there might be no schism in the body" (I Cor., xii, 25). Thus understood, schism is a genus which embraces two distinct species: heretical or mixed schism and schism pure and simple. The first has its source in heresy or joined with it, the second, which most theologians designate absolutely as schism, is the rupture of the bond of subordination without an accompanying persistent error, directly opposed to a definite dogma. This distinction was drawn by St. Jerome and St. Augustine. "Between heresy and schism", explains St. Jerome, "there is this difference, that heresy perverts dogma, while schism, by rebellion against the bishop, separates from the Church. Nevertheless there is no schism which does not trump up a heresy to justify its departure from the Church (In Ep. ad Tit., iii, 10). And St. Augustine: "By false doctrines concerning God heretics wound faith, by iniquitous dissensions schismatics deviate from fraternal charity, although they believe what we believe" (De fide et symbolo, ix). But as St. Jerome remarks, practically and historically, heresy and schism nearly always go hand in hand; schism leads almost invariably to denial of the papal primacy. Schism, therefore, is usually mixed, in which case, considered from a moral standpoint, its perversity is chiefly due to the heresy which forms part of it. In its other aspect and as being purely schism it is contrary to charity and obedience; to the former, because it severs the ties of fraternal charity, to the latter, because the schismatic rebels against the Divinely constituted hierarchy. However, not every disobedience is a schism; in order to possess this character it must include besides the transgression of the commands of superiors, denial of their Divine right to command. On the other hand, schism does not necessarily imply adhesion, either public or private, to a dissenting group or a distinct sect, much less the creation of such a group. Anyone becomes a schismatic who, though desiring to remain a Christian, rebels against legitimate authority, without going as far as the rejection of Christianity as a whole, which constitutes the crime of apostasy. Formerly a man was rightly considered a schismatic when he disregarded the authority of his own bishop; hence the words of St. Jerome quoted above. Before him St. Cyprian had said: "It must be understood that the bishop is in the Church and the Church in the bishop and he is not in the Church who is not with the bishop" (Epist., lxvi, 8). Long before, St. Ignatius of Antioch laid down this principle: "Where the bishop is there is the community, even as where Christ is there is the Catholic Church" (Smyrn., viii, 2). Now through the centralizing evolution which emphasizes the preponderant rôle of the sovereign pontiff in the constitution of ecclesiastical unity, the mere fact of rebelling against the bishop of the diocese is often a step toward schism; it is not a schism in him who remains, or claims to remain, subject to the Holy See. In the material sense of the word there is schism, that is rupture of the social body, if there exist two or more claimants of the papacy, each of whom has on his side certain appearances of right and consequently more or less numerous partisans. But under these circumstances good faith may, at least for a time, prevent a formal schism; this begins when the legitimacy of one of the pontiffs becomes so evident as to render adhesion to a rival inexcusable. Schism is regarded by the Church as a most serious fault, and is punished with the penalties inflicted on heresy, because heresy usually accompanies it. These are: excommunication incurred ipso facto and reserved to the sovereign pontiff (cf. "Apostolicæ Sedis", I, 3); this is followed by the loss of all ordinary jurisdiction and incapacity to receive any ecclesiastical benefices or dignities whatsoever. To communicate in sacris with schismatics, e. g., to receive the sacraments at the hands of their ministers, to assist at Divine Offices in their temples, is strictly forbidden to the faithful. Some theologians distinguish "active" from "passive" schism. By the former they understand detaching oneself deliberately from the body of the Church, freely renouncing the right to form a part of it. They call passive schism the condition of those whom the Church herself rejects from her bosom by excommunication, inasmuch as they undergo this separation whether they will or no, having deserved it. Hence, this article will deal directly only with active schism, which is schism properly so-called. It is nevertheless clear that so-called passive schism not only does not exclude the other, but often supposes it in fact and theory. From this point of view it is impossible to understand the attitude of Protestants who claim to hold the Church they abandoned responsible for their separation. It is proved by all the historical monuments and especially by the writings of Luther and Calvin that, prior to the anathema pronounced against them at the Council of Trent, the leaders of the Reformation had proclaimed and repeated that the Roman Church was "the Babylon of the Apocalypse, the synagogue of Satan, the society of Antichrist"; that they must therefore depart from it and that they did so in order to re-enter the way of salvation. And in this they suited the action to the word. Thus the schism was well consummated by them before it was solemnly established by the authority which they rejected and transformed by that authority into a just penal sanction. II. SCHISM IN THE LIGHT OF SCRIPTURE AND TRADITION As schism in its definition and full sense is the practical denial of ecclesiastical unity, the explanation of the former requires a clear definition of the latter, and to prove the necessity of the latter is to establish the intrinsic malice of the former. Indeed the texts of Scripture and Tradition show these aspects of the same truth to be so closely united that passage from one to the other is constant and spontaneous. When Christ built on Peter as on an unshakable foundation the indestructible edifice of His Church He thereby indicated its essential unity and especially the hierarchical unity (Matt xvi 18). He expressed the same thought when He referred to the faithful as a Kingdom and as a flock: "Other sheep I have, that are not of this fold: them also I must bring, and they shall hear my voice, and there shall be one fold and one shepherd" (John, x, 16). Unity of faith and worship is more explicitly indicated by the words outlining the solemn mission of the Apostles: "Going therefore, teach ye all nations; baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost" (Matt., xxviii, 19). These various forms of unity are the object of the prayer after the Last Supper, when Christ prays for His own and asks "that they may be one" as the Father and the Son are one (John, xvii, 21, 22). Those who violate the laws of unity shall become strangers to Christ and his spiritual family: "And if he will not hear the Church, let him be to thee as the heathen and publican" (Matt., xviii, 17). In faithful imitation of his Master's teaching St. Paul often refers to the unity of the Church, describing it as one edifice, one body, a body between whose members exists the same solidarity as between the members of the human body (I Cor., xii; Eph., iv). He enumerates its various aspects and sources: "For in one Spirit were we all baptized into one body, . . . and in one Spirit we have all been made to drink" (I Cor xii, 13); "For we, being many, are one bread, one body, all that partake of one bread" (ibid., x, 17). He sums it up in the following formula: "One body and one Spirit; . . . one Lord, one faith, one baptism" (Eph., iv, 4-5). Finally he arrives at the logical conclusion when he anathematizes doctrinal novelties and the authors of them (Gal., i, 9), likewise when he writes to Titus: "A man that is a heretic, after the first and second admonition, avoid" (Tit., iii, 10); and again when he so energetically condemns the dissensions of the community of Corinth: "There are contentions among you. . . . every one of you saith: I am indeed of Paul; and I am of Apollo; and I of Cephas; and I of Christ. Is Christ divided? Was Paul then crucified for you? Or were you baptized in the name of Paul?" (I Cor., i, 11-13). "Now, I beseech you, brethren, by the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that you all speak the same thing, and that there be no schisms among you; but that you be perfect in the same mind, and in the same judgment" (I Cor., i, 10). St. Luke speaking in praise of the primitive church mentions its unanimity of belief, obedience, and worship: "They were persevering in the doctrine of the apostles, and in the communication of the breaking of bread, and in prayers" (Acts, ii, 42). All the first Epistle of St. John is directed against contemporary innovators and schismatics; and the author regards them as so foreign to the Church that in contrast to its members "the Children of God", he calls them "the children of the devil", (I John, iii, 10); the children "of the world" (iv, 5), even Antichrist (ii, 22; iv, 3). The same doctrine is found in all the evidences of Tradition, beginning with the oldest. Before the end of the first century St. Clement writing to the Church of Corinth in order to restore peace and harmony strongly inculcates the necessity of submission to the "hegoumenos" (I Cor., i, 3), "to the guides of our souls" (lxiii, 1), and to the "presbyters" (xlvii, 6; liv, 2; lvii, 1). It is, says he, a "grave sin" to disregard their authority as the Corinthians are doing (xliv, 3, 4, 6; xlvii, 6); it is a duty to honour them (i, 3; xxi, 6). There must be no division in the body of Christ, xlvi, 6. The fundamental reason of all this is the Divinely instituted hierarchical order. The work of Christ is in fact continued by the Apostles, who are sent by Christ as He was sent by God (xlii, 1, 2). It was they who established the " episcopi and deacons" (xlii, 4) and decided that others should succeed them in their ministry (xliv, 2). He thus explains the gravity of the sin and the severity of the reproaches addressed to the fomenters of the troubles . "Why should there be among you disputes, quarrels, dissensions, schisms, and war? Have we not one and the same God, one and the same Christ? Is it not the same spirit of grace that has been poured out upon us? Have we not a common vocation in Christ? Wherefore, divide and separate the members of Christ, be at war with our own body, be so foolish as to forget that we are members of one another?" (xlvi, 5-7). St. Ignatius insists no less forcibly on the necessity of unity and the danger of schism. He is the first author in whom we find episcopal unity clearly outlined, and he beseeches the faithful to range themselves about the "presbyters" and the deacons and especially through them and with them about the bishop: "It is fitting that you be of one mind with the bishop, as you are, because your venerable presbyterium is attached to the bishop as the strings to the lyre" (Eph., vi, 1); "you must not take advantage of the age of your bishop, but, being mindful of the power of God the Father, you should show him every manner of respect, as do the holy priests" (Magn., iii, 1). The bishop is the centre and pivot of the Church: "Where he is there should the community be" (Smyrn., xi, 1). The duties of the faithful towards the hierarchy are summed up in one: to be united to it in sentiment, faith, and obedience. They must be always submissive to the bishop, the presbyterium, and the deacons ("Eph.", ii, 2; v, 3; xx, 2; "Magn.", ii; iii, 1; vi, 1, 2; xiii, 2; "TraIl.", ii, 1, 2; xiii, 2; "Philad.", vii, 1; "Smyrn.", viii, 1; "Polyc.", vi, 1). Jesus Christ being the word of the Father and the bishop being in the doctrine of Christ (en Iesou christou gnome) it is fitting to adhere to the doctrine of the bishop (Eph., iii, 2; iv, 1); "Those who belong to God and Jesus Christ ally themselves with the bishop. Brethren, be not deceived; whosoever follows a schismatic shall not inherit the Kingdom of Heaven" (Philad, iii, 2, 3). Finally, as the bishop is the doctrinal and disciplinary centre so he is the liturgical centre: "Let that Eucharist be lawful which is consecrated by the bishop or one deputed by him. . . . It is forbidden to baptize or celebrate the agape without the bishop; what he approves is what is pleasing to God, in order that all that is done may be stable and valid" (Smyrn., viii, 1, 2). Towards the end of the second century St. Irenæus lauds in glowing terms the unity of that universal Church "which has but one heart and one soul, whose faith is in keeping" and which seems "as the sole sun illuminating the whole world" (Adv. hæres., i, 10). He condemns all doctrinal division, basing his arguments on the teaching authority of the Church in general and of the Roman Church in particular. The doctrine of salvation, preached by the Apostles, is preserved in the Churches founded by them; but since it would take too long to question all the Apostolic Churches it is sufficient to turn to that of Rome: "For the entire Church, that is all the faithful in the world, should be in agreement with this Roman Church, because of its superior pre-eminence; and in it all the faithful have preserved the Apostolic tradition" (iii, 2, 3). It is therefore of the utmost necessity to adhere to this Church because where the Church is, there is the Spirit of God, and where the Spirit of God is there is the Church, there is all grace and the spirit is truth (iii, 24). But to adhere to this Church is to submit to the hierarchy, its living and infallible magistracy: "The priests of the Church are to be obeyed, those who are the successors of the Apostles and who with the episcopal succession have received an assured charisma of truth. . . . Those who leave the successors of the Apostles and assemble in any separated place must be regarded with suspicion or as heretics, as men of evil doctrines, or as schismatics. Those who rend the unity of the Church receive the Divine chastisement awarded to Jeroboam; they must all be avoided" (iv, 26). At the beginning of the third century Clement of Alexandria describes the Church as the city of the Logos which must be sought because it is the assemblage of all those whom God desires to save ("Strom." iv, 20; vii, v; "Pædag.", i, 6; iii, 12). Origen is more explicit; for him also the Church is the city of God (Contra Cels., iii, 30), and he adds: "Let no one be deceived; outside this abode, that is outside the Church, no one is saved. If anyone leaves it he himself shall be accountable for his death" (In lib. Jesu Nave, Hom., iii, 5). In Africa Tertullian likewise condemns all separation from the existing Church. His "De præscriptionibus" is famous, and the fundamental thesis of the work, inferred by its very title, is summed up in the priority of truth and the relative novelty of error (principalitatem veritatis et posteritatem mendacii), thus implying the prohibition to withdraw from the guidance of the living magisterium: "If the Lord Jesus Christ sent His Apostles to preach we conclude that we must not receive other preachers than those appointed by Him. What they have preached, in other words, what Christ has revealed to them, can only be established by the Churches founded by the Apostles themselves, to which they preached the Gospel by word and writing" (De præscr., xxi). But the great African champion of ecclesiastical unity was St. Cyprian, against the schismatics of Rome as well as those of Carthage. He conceived this unity as reposing on the effective authority of the bishops, their mutual union, and the pre-eminence of the Roman pontiff: "God is one, Christ is one, one is the Church, and one the chair founded on Peter by the word of the Lord" (Epist. lxx); "This unity we bishops who govern in the Church should firmly uphold and defend, in order to show that the episcopate itself is one and undivided" (De ecclesiæ unit., v); "Know that the bishop is in the Church and the Church in the bishop, and that if anyone is not with the bishop he is not in the Church. . . . The Catholic Church is one, formed of the harmonious union of pastors who mutually support one another" (Epist. lxxvi, 5). To unity of faith must be joined liturgical unity: "A second altar and a new priesthood cannot be set up beside the one altar and the one priesthood" (Epist. lii, 24). Cyprian saw no legitimate reason for schism for "what rascal, what traitor, what madman would be so misled by the spirit of discord as to believe that it is permitted to rend, or who would dare rend the Divine unity, the garment of the Lord, the Church of Jesus Christ?" (De eccl., unit., viii); "The spouse of Christ is chaste and incorruptible. Whoever leaves the Church to follow an adulteress renounces the promises of the Church. He that abandons the Church of Christ will not receive the rewards of Christ. He becomes a stranger, an ungodly man, an enemy. God cannot be a Father to him to whom the Church is not a mother. As well might one be saved out of the ark of Noah as out of the Church. . . . He who does not respect its unity will not respect the law of God; he is without faith in the Father and the Son, without life, without salvation" (op. cit., viii). From the fourth century the doctrine of the unity of the Church was so clearly and universally admitted that it is almost superfluous to quote particular testimonies. The lengthy polemics of Optatus of Milevis ("De schism. Don.", P. L., XI) and of St. Augustine (especially in "De unit. eccl.", P. L., XLIII) against the Donatists accuse these sectaries of being separated from the ancient and primitive trunk of Christianity. And to those who represented their group as a portion of the universal Church St. Augustine replied: "If you are in communion with the Christian world send letters to the Apostolic Churches and show us their replies" (Ep., xliv, 3). These letters (litteræ formatæ) then constituted one of the authentic marks and elements of visible unity. Concerning this unity the various forms of which he explains, St. Augustine agrees with St. Cyprian in maintaining that outside of it there is no salvation: "Salus extra ecclesiam non est" (De bapt., iv, 24), and he adds in confirmation of this that outside the Church the means of salvation, baptism, and even martyrdom will avail nothing, the Holy Ghost not being communicated. During the same century Roman supremacy began to be emphasized as a factor of unity. Jesus Christ, says St. Optatus, desired to attach unity to a definite centre; to this end He made "Peter the head of all the Apostles; to him He first gave the episcopal see of Rome, in which sole see unity should be preserved for all; he is therefore a sinner and a schismatic who would erect another see in opposition to it" (De schism. Don., ii, 2); "Solictude for assuring unity caused blessed Peter to be preferred before all the Apostles and to receive alone the keys of the Kingdom of Heaven that he might admit others" (vii, 3). Pacianus of Barcelona also says that Christ gave to Peter alone the power of the keys "to make him alone the foundation and beginning of unity" (ad unum ideo ut unitatem fundaret ex uno Epist., iii, 11). Most contemporary writers in the Latin Church, Hilary, Victorinus, St. Ambrose, the Ambrosiaster, St. Jerome, speak in like manner and quite as explicitly. All regard Peter as the foundation of the Church, the Prince of the Apostles who was made perpetual head in order to cut short any attempt at schism. "Where Peter is," concludes St. Ambrose, "there is the Church; where the Church is there is no death but eternal life" (In Ps., xl, 30). And St. Jerome: "That man is my choice who remains in union with the chair of Peter" (Epist., xvi, 2). Both declare, like St. Optatus, that to be out of the Roman communion is to be out of the Church, but they lay especial emphasis on the jurisdictional and teaching authority of the centre of unity. Their texts are classics: "We must have recourse to your clemency, beseeching you not to let the head of all the Roman world, the Roman Church, and the most holy Apostolic Faith be disturbed; for thence all derive the rights of the Catholic communion" (Ambrose, "Ep.", xi, 4). "I who follow no guide save Christ am in communion with Your Holiness, that is with the chair of Peter. I know that on this rock the Church is built. Whosoever partakes of the Lamb outside this house commits a sacrilege. Whosoever does not gather with you, scatters: in other words whosoever is not with Christ is with Antichrist" (Jerome, "Epist.", xv, 2). The East also saw in Peter and the episcopal see founded by him the keystone of unity. Didymus calls Peter "the corypheus, the head, who was first among the Apostles, through whom the others received the keys" (De Trinit., i, 27, 30; ii, 10, 18). Epiphanius also regards him as "the corypheus of the Apostles, the firm stone on which rests the unshakable faith" ("Anchor.", ix, 34; "Hær.", lix, 7, 8) and St. Chrysostom speaks unceasingly of the privileges conferred on Peter by Christ. Moreover the Greeks recognized in the Roman Church a pre-eminence and consequently an incontestable unifying rôle by acknowledging her right to intervene in the disputes of the particular Churches, as is proved by the cases of Athanasius, Marcellus of Ancyra, and Chrysostom. In this sense St. Gregory Nazianzen calls ancient Rome "the president of the universe, ten proeodron ton olon" (Carmen de vita sua), and it is also the reason why even the Eusebians were willing that the case of Athanasius, after they had passed on it, should be submitted to the pope's judgment (Athan., "Apol. contra Arian", 20). III. ATTEMPTS TO LEGITIMIZE SCHISM The foregoing texts are sufficient to establish the gravity of schism from the standpoint of the economy of salvation and morals. In this connection it may be of interest to quote the appreciation of Bayle, a writer above suspicion of partiality and a tolerant judge: "I know not," he writes, "a more grievous crime than that of tearing the mystical body of Jesus Christ, His church which He purchased with His own blood, that mother which bore us to God, who nourishes us with the milk of understanding, who leads us to eternal life" (Supplement to Philosophical Comment, preface). Various motives have been brought forward in justification of Schism: (1) Some have claimed the introduction into the Church of abuses, dogmatic and liturgical novelties, superstitions, with which they are permitted, even bound, not to ally themselves. Without entering into the foundation for these charges it should be noted that the authors cited above do not mention or admit a single exception. If we accept their statements separation from the Church is necessarily an evil, an injurious and blameworthy act, and abandoning of the true way of salvation, and this independent of all contingent circumstances. Moreover the doctrines of the Fathers exclude a priori any such attempt at justification; to use their words, it is forbidden for individuals or particular or national Churches to constitute themselves judges of the universal Church; the mere fact of having it against one carries its own condemnation. St. Augustine summed up all his controversy with the Donatists in the maxim: "The whole world unhesitatingly declares them wrong who separate themselves from the whole world in whatsoever portion of the whole world" (quapropter securus judicat orbis terrarum bonos non esse qui se dividunt ab orbe terrarum, in quacumque parte orbis terrarum) . Here Bayle may be quoted again: "Protestants bring forward only questionable reasons; they offer nothing convincing, no demonstration: they prove and object, but there are replies to their proofs and objections; they answer and are answered endlessly; is it worth while to make a schism?" (Dict. crit., art. Nihusius). (2) Other schismatics have pleaded the division of the articles of the Creed into fundamental and nonfundamental. Under FUNDAMENTAL ARTICLES it is shown that this distinction, wholly unknown prior to the sixteenth century, and repugnant to the very conception of Divine faith, is condemned by Scripture, and, for want of a clear line of demarcation, authorizes the most monstrous divergences. The indispensable unity of faith extends to all the truths revealed by God and transmitted by the Apostles. Tradition repeats, though in different forms, all that Irenæus wrote: "The Church spread everywhere throughout the world received from the Apostles and their disciples faith in one God" (here follow the words of the Creed), then the writer continues: "Depositary of this preaching and this faith, the Church which multiplies throughout the world, watches them as diligently as though she dwelt in one house. She believes unanimously in these things as though she had but one heart and soul; she preaches them, teaches them, and bears witness to them as though she had but one mouth. Though there are in the world different languages there is but one single and identical current of tradition. Neither the Churches founded in Gaul, nor those among the Iberians, nor those in the countries of the Celts, nor those in the East, nor those of Egypt, nor those of Lybia, nor those in the centre of the world present any differences of faith or preaching; but as the sun created by God, is one and the same throughout the world, so a single light, a single preaching of the truth, illuminates every place and enlightens all men who wish to attain to the knowledge of truth" (Adv. Hær., i, 10). It has been shown above how the Bishop of Lyons declared that the continuators of the Apostolic ministry were the "presbyters of the Church", and that a man was a Christian and a Catholic only on condition of obeying them without reserve. (3) The theory of the happy medium or via media advocated by the Anglicans, especially by the Oxford leaders of the early nineteenth century as a means of escape from the difficulties of the system of fundamental articles, is no more acceptable. Newman demonstrated and extolled it to the best of his talent in his "Via Media", but he soon recognized its weakness, and abandoned and rejected it even before his conversion to Catholicism. According to this theory, in order to safeguard unity and avoid schism it is sufficient to abide by Scripture as interpreted by each individual under the direction or with the assistance of tradition. At any rate the Church should not be regarded as infallible, but only as a trustworthy witness with regard to the true sense of the inspired text when she testifies to an interpretation received from Apostolic times. It seems unnecessary to point out the illusory and almost contradictory character which such a rule ascribes to the living teaching authority; obviously, it does not meet the conditions for unity of belief which requires conformity with Scripture and, no less, with the living authority of the Church, or more exactly, implies absolute obedience to the infallible teaching authority -- both to that which interprets the Scripture and to that which preserves and transmits under any other form the deposit of Revelation. St. Irenæus is most explicit on all these points: according to him faith is proved and its enemies confounded equally by Scripture and tradition (Adv. Hær., iii, 2), but the authentic guardian of both is the Church, i. e. the bishops as successors of the Apostles: "Apostolic tradition is manifested throughout the world, and everywhere in the Church it is within the reach of those who desire to know the truth, for we can enumerate the bishops established by the Apostles, as well as their successors down to our own times" (op. cit., iii). To these guardians and to them alone we should have recourse with confidence: "The truth which it is easy to know through the Church must not be sought elsewhere; in the Church in which as in a rich treasury, the Apostles deposited in its fulness all that concerns the truth: from her whosoever desires it shall receive the draught of life. She herself is the gate of life; all the others are thieves and robbers" (iii, 4). Such is the authority of the living tradition that, in default of Scripture, recourse must be had to tradition alone. "What would have become of us if the Apostles had not left us the Scriptures? Would we not have to rely on that tradition which they confided to those to whom they committed the government of the Churches? This is what is done by many barbarian peoples who believe in Christ and who bear the law of salvation written in their hearts by the Holy Spirit without ink or paper and who faithfully preserve the ancient tradition" (iii, 4). It is plain that with the assistance of the Holy Ghost the teaching authority of the Church is preserved from error: "Where the Church is, there is the Spirit of God; and where the Spirit of God is there is the Church with every grace, and the Spirit is truth" (iii, 24). "That is why obedience must be rendered to the presbyters who are in the Church, and who having succeeded the Apostles, together with the episcopal succession have received by the will of the Father a certain charisma of truth" (iv, 26). This is far removed from the half-way assertions and the restrictions of the Oxford School. The same conclusion may be drawn from Tertullian's declaration of the impossibility of solving a difficulty or terminating a dispute by Scripture alone (De præscript., xix), and from Origen's words: "Since among many who boast of a doctrine in conformity with that of Christ some do not agree with their predecessors, let all adhere to the ecclesiastical doctrine transmitted from the Apostles by way of succession and preserved in the Church till the present time: we have no truth in which to believe but that which does not deviate from the eccelesiastical and Apostolic tradition" (De princip., præf., 2). IV. PRINCIPAL SCHISMS In this world the Church is militant and as such is exposed to conflict and trial. Human conditions being what they are partial or local schisms are bound to occur: "I hear", says St. Paul, "that . . . there are schisms among you; and in part I believe it. For there must be also heresies: that they also, who are approved, may be made manifest among you" (I Cor., xi, 18-19). In the full and primitive sense of the word every serious rupture of unity and consequently every heresy is a schism. This article, however, will pass over the long series of heresies and treat only those defections or religious sects to which historians commonly give the specific name of schisms, because most frequently, and at least in the beginning of each such sectarian division, doctrinal error was only an accessory. They are treated in chronological order and the most important only briefly, these being the subjects of special articles in the ENCYCLOPEDIA. (1) Mention has already been made of the "schisms" of the nascent Church of Corinth, when it was said among its members: "I indeed am of Paul; and I am of Apollo; and I of Cephas; and I of Christ." To them St. Paul's energetic intervention put an end. (2) According to Hegesippus, the most advanced section of the Judaizers or Ebionites at Jerusalem followed the bishop Thebutis as against St. Simeon, and after the death of St. James, a.d. 63, separated from the Church. (3) There were numerous local schisms in the third and fourth centuries. At Rome Pope Callistus (217-22) was opposed by a party who took exception to the mildness with which he applied the penitential discipline. Hippolytus placed himself as bishop at the head of these malcontents and the schism was prolonged under the two successors of Callistus, Urban I (222-30) and Pontianus (230-35). There is no doubt that Hippolytus himself returned to the pale of the Church (cf. d'Alès, "La théol. de s. Hippolyte", Paris, 1906, introduction). (4) In 251 when Cornelius was elected to the See of Rome a minority set up Novatian as an antipope, the pretext again being the pardon which Cornelius promised to those who after apostatizing should repent. Through a spirit of contradiction Novatian went so far as to refuse forgiveness even to the dying and the severity was extended to other categories of grave sins. The Novatians sought to form a Church of saints. In the East they called themselves katharoi, pure. Largely under the influence of this idea they administered a second baptism to those who deserted Catholicism to join their ranks. The sect developed greatly in the Eastern countries, where it subsisted until about the seventh century, being recruited not only by the defection of Catholics, but also by the accession of Montanists. (5) During the same period the Church of Carthage was also a prey to intestinal divisions. St. Cypnan upheld in reasonable measure the traditional principles regarding penance and did not accord to the letters of confessors called libelli pacis the importance desired by some. One of the principal adversaries was the priest Donatus Fortunatus became the bishop of the party, but the schism, which was of short duration took the name of the deacon Felicissimus who played an important part in it. (6) With the dawn of the fourth century Egypt was the scene of the schism of Meletius, Bishop of Lycopolis, in the Thebaid. Its causes are not known with certainty; some ancient authors ascribe it to rigorist tendencies regarding penance while others say it was occasioned by usurpation of power on the part of Meletius, notably the conferring of ordinations outside his diocese. The Council of Nicæa dealt with this schism, but did not succeed in completely eradicating it; there were still vestiges of it in the fifth century. (7) Somewhat later the schism of Antioch, originating in the troubles due to Arianism, presents peculiar complications. When the bishop Eustathius, was deposed in 330 a small section of his flock remained faithful to him, but the majority followed the Arians. The first bishop created by them was succeeded (361) by Meletius of Sebaste in Armenia, who by force of circumstances became the leader of a second orthodox party. In fact Meletius did not fundamentally depart from the Faith of Nicæa, and he was soon rejected by the Arians: on the other hand he was not recognized by the Eustathians, who saw in him the choice of the heretics and also took him to task for some merely terminological differences. The schism lasted until about 415. Paulinus (d. 388) and Evagrius (d. 392), Eustathian bishops, were recognized in the West as the true pastors, while in the East the Meletian bishops were regarded as legitimate. (8) After the banishment of Pope Liberius in 355, the deacon Felix was chosen to replace him and he had adherents even after the return of the legitimate pope. The schism, quenched for a time by the death of Felix, was revived at the death of Libenius and the rivalry brought about bloody encounters. It was several years after the victory of Damasus before peace was completely restored. (9) The same period witnessed the schism of the Luciferians. Lucifer, Bishop of Calaris, or Cagliari, was displeased with Athanasius and his friends who at the Synod of Alexandria (362) had pardoned the repentant Semi-Arians. He himself had been blamed by Eusebius of Vercelli because of his haste in ordaining Paulinus, Bishop of the Eustathians, at Antioch. For these two reasons he separated from the communion of the Catholic bishops. For some time the schism won adherents in Sardinia, where it had originated, and in Spain, where Gregory, Bishop of Elvira, was its chief abettor. (10) But the most important of the fourth-century schisms was that of the Donatists (q. v.). These sectaries were as noted for their obstinacy and fanaticism as for the efforts and the writings rather uselessly multiplied against them by St. Augustine and St. Optatus of Milevis. (11) The schism of Acacius belongs to the end of the fifth century. It is connected with the promulgation by the emperor Zeno of the edict known as the Henoticon. Issued with the intention of putting an end to the Christological disputes, this document did not satisfy either Catholics or Monophysites. Pope Felix II excommunicated its two real authors, Peter Mongus, Bishop of Alexandria, and Acacius of Constantinople. A break between the East and the West followed which lasted thirty-five years. At the instance of the general Vitalian, protector of the orthodox, Zeno's successor Anastasius promised satisfaction to the adherents of the Council of Chalcedon and the convocation of a general council, but he showed so little good will in the matter that union was only restored by Justin I in 519. The reconciliation received official sanction in a profession of Faith to which the Greek bishops subscribed, and which, as it was sent by Pope Hormisdas, is known in history as the Formula of Hormisdas. (12) In the sixth century the schism of Aquilea was caused by the consent of Pope Vigilius to the condemnation of the Three Chapters (553). The ecclesiastical provinces of Milan and Aquilea refused to accept this condemnation as valid and separated for a time from the Apostolic See. The Lombard invasion of Italy (568) favoured the resistance, but from 570 the Milanese returned by degrees to the communion of Rome; the portion of Aquilea subject to the Byzantines returned in 607, after which date the schism had but a few churches. It died out completely under Sergius I, about the end of the eighth century. (13) The ninth century brought the schism of Photius, which, though it was transitory, prepared the way by nourishing a spirit of defiance towards Rome for the final defection of Constantinople. (14) This took place less than two centuries later under Michael Cerularius (q. v.) who at one stroke (1053) closed all the churches of the Latins at Constantinople and confiscated their convents. The deplorable Greek schism (see GREEK CHURCH), which still subsists, and is itself divided into several communions, was thus consummated. The two agreements of reunion concluded at the Second Council of Lyons in 1274, and at that of Florence in 1439, unfortunately had no lasting results; they could not have had them, because on the part of the Greeks at least they were inspired by interested motives. (15) The schism of Anacletus in the twelfth century, like that of Felix V in the fifteenth, was due to the existence of an antipope side by side with the legitimate pontiff. At the death of Honorius II (1130) Innocent II had been regularly elected, but a numerous and powerful faction set up in opposition to him Cardinal Peter of the Pierleoni family. Innocent was compelled to flee, leaving Rome in the hands of his adversaries. He found refuge in France. St. Bernard ardently defended his cause as did also St. Norbert. Within a year nearly all Europe had declared in his favour, only Scotland, Southern Italy, and Sicily constituting the other party. The emperor Lothaire brought Innocent II back to Rome, but, supported by Roger of Sicily the antipope retained possession of the Leonine City, where he died in 1138. His successor Victor IV two months after his election, sought and obtained pardon and reconciliation from the legitimate pontiff. The case of Felix V was more simple. Felix V was the name taken by Amadeus of Savoy, elected by the Council of Basle, when it went into open revolt against Eugenius IV, refused to disband and thus incurred excommunication (1439). The antipope was not accepted save in Savoy and Switzerland. He lasted for a short time with the pseudo-council which had created him. Both submitted in 1449 to Nicholas V, who had succeeded Eugenius IV. (16) The Great Schism of the West is the subject of a special article (SCHISM, WESTERN); see also CONSTANCE, COUNCIL OF; PISA, COUNCIL OF. (17) Everyone knows the shameful origins of the schism of Henry VIII, which was the prelude to the introduction of Protestantism into England. The voluptuous monarch was opposed by the pope in his projects for divorce and remarriage, and he separated from the pope. He succeeded so well that in 1531 the general assembly of the clergy and the Parliament proclaimed him head of the national Church. Warham, Archbishop of Canterbury, had at first caused the adoption of a restrictive clause: "as far as Divine law permits". But this important reservation was not respected, for the rupture with the Roman Court followed almost immediately. In 1534 the Act of Supremacy was voted according to the terms of which the king became the sole head of the Church of England and was to enjoy all the prerogatives which had hitherto belonged to the pope. Refusal to recognize the new organization was punished with death. Various changes followed: suppression of convents, destruction of relics and of numerous pictures and statues. But dogma was not again attacked under Henry VIII, who pursued with equal severity both attachment to the pope and the doctrines of the Reformers. (18) In the article JANSENIUS AND JANSENISM are described the formation and vicissitudes of the schism of Utrecht, the unhappy consequence of Jansenism, but which never spread beyond a handful of fanatics. Subsequent schisms belong to the end of the eighteenth and the nineteenth century. (19) The first was caused in France by the Civil Constitution of the clergy of 1790. By this law the national Constituent Assembly aimed at imposing on the Church a new organization which essentially modified its condition as regulated by public ecclesiastical law. The 134 bishops of the kingdom were reduced to 83, according to the territorial division into departments; the choice of curés fell to electors appointed by members of district assemblies; that of bishops to electors named by the assemblies of departments; and canonical institution devolved upon the metropolitan and the bishops of the province. All benefices without cure of souls were suppressed. A later ordinance made obedience to these articles a condition of admission to any ecclesiastical office. A large number of bishops and priests, in all, according to some sources, about a sixth of the clergy, and according to other documents nearly a third, were weak enough to take the oath. Thenceforth the French clergy was divided into two factions, the jurors and the non-jurors, and the schism was carried to the utmost extreme when intruders under the name of bishops claimed to occupy the departmental sees, during the lifetime and even in defiance of the rights of the real titulars. The condemnation of the Civil Constitution by Pius VI in 1791 opened the eyes of some, but others persisted until their "Constitutional Church" declined shamefully and disappeared irrevocably in the Revolutionary turmoil. (20) A schism of another nature and of less importance was that of the so-called Petite Eglise or the Incommunicants, formed at the beginning of the nineteenth century by groups who were dissatisfied with the Concordat and the concordatory clergy. In the provinces of the west of France the party acquired a certain stability from 1801 to 1815; at the latter date it had become a distinct sect. It languished on till about 1830, and eventually became extinct for lack of priests to perpetuate it. In Belgium some of its members call themselves Stevenists, thus abusing the name of a reputable ecclesiastic, Corneille Stevens, who was capitular vicar-general of the Diocese of Namur until 1802, who afterwards wrote against the Organic Articles, but accepted the Concordat and died in 1828, as he had lived, in submission to the Holy See. (21) In 1831 the Abbé Chatel founded the French Catholic Church, a small group which never acquired importance. The founder, who at first claimed to retain all the dogmas, had himself consecrated bishop by Fabre Palaprat, another self-styled bishop of the "Constitutional" type; he soon rejected the infallibility of the teaching Church, celibacy of priests, and abstinence. He recognized no rule of faith except individual evidence and he officiated in French. The sect was already on the point of being slain by ridicule when its meeting-places were closed by the Government in 1842. (22) About the same time Germany was the scene of a somewhat similar schism. When in 1844 the Holy Coat was exposed at Trier for the veneration of the faithful, a suspended priest, Johannes Ronge, seized the occasion to publish a violent pamphlet against Arnoldi, Bishop of Trier. Some malcontents ranged themselves on his side. Almost simultaneously John Czerski, a dismissed vicar, founded in the Province of Posen, a "Christian Catholic community". He had imitators. In 1845 the "German Catholics", as these schismatics called themselves, held a synod at Leipzig at which they rejected among other things the primacy of the pope, auricular confession, ecclesiastical celibacy, the veneration of the saints, and suppressed the Canon in their Eucharistic Liturgy which they called the "German liturgy". They gained recruits in small numbers until 1848, but after that date they declined, being on bad terms with the Governments which had at first encouraged them but which bore them ill-will because of their political agitations. (23) While this sect was declining another sprang up in antagonism to the Vatican Council. The opponents of the recently-defined doctrine of infallibility, the Old Catholics, at first contented themselves with a simple protest; at the Congress of Munich in 1871 they resolved to constitute a separate Church. Two years later they chose as bishop the Professor Reinkens of Breslau, who was recognized as bishop by Prussia, Baden, and Hesse. Thanks to official assistance the rebels succeeded in gaining possession of a number of Catholic churches and soon, like the German Catholics and schismatics in general, they introduced disciplinary and doctrinal novelties, they successively abandoned the precept of confession (1874), ecclesiastical celibacy (1878), the Roman liturgy, which was replaced (1880) by a German liturgy, etc. In Switzerland also the opposition to the Vatican council resulted in the creation of a separate community, which also enjoyed governmental favour. An Old Catholic faculty was founded at Berne for the teaching of theology, and E. Herzog, a professor of this faculty, was elected bishop of the party in 1876. A congress assembled in 1890, at which most of the dissident groups, Jansenists, Old Catholics, etc., had representatives, resolved to unite all these diverse elements in the foundation of one Church. As a matter of fact, they are all on the road to free-thinking and Rationalism. In England a recent attempt at schism under the leadership of Herbert Beale and Arthur Howarth, two Nottingham priests, and Arnold Mathew, has failed to assume proportions worthy of serious notice. ST. THOMAS, Summa, II-II, (q-xxxix); TANQUEREY, Synopsis theologi, I (Rome, 1908); FUNK, Patres apostolici, I (Tübingen, 1902); TIXERONT, Histoire des dogmes (Paris, 1905-9); FUNK, Lehrb. der Kirchengesch (Paderborn, 1902); ALBERS, Enchirid. hist. eccles. (Nimeguen, 1909-10); DUCHESNE, Hist. ancienne de l'église (Paris, 1907-10); GUYOT, Dict. universel des hérésies (Paris, 1847). J. FORGET Eastern Schism The Eastern Schism From the time of Diotrephes (III John 1:9-10) there have been continual schisms, of which the greater number were in the East. Arianism produced a huge schism; the Nestorian and Monophysite schisms still last. However, the Eastern Schism always means that most deplorable quarrel of which the final result is the separation of the vast majority of Eastern Christians from union with the Catholic Church, the schism that produced the separated, so-called "Orthodox" Church. I. REMOTE PREPARATION OF THE SCHISM The great Eastern Schism must not be conceived as the result of only one definite quarrel. It is not true that after centuries of perfect peace, suddenly on account of one dispute, nearly half of Christendom fell away. Such an event would be unparalleled in history, at any rate, unless there were some great heresy, and in this quarrel there was no heresy at first, nor has there ever been a hopeless disagreement about the Faith. It is a case, perhaps the only prominent case, of a pure schism, of a breach of intercommunion caused by anger and bad feeling, not by a rival theology. It would be inconceivable then that hundreds of bishops should suddenly break away from union with their chief, if all had gone smoothly before. The great schism is rather the result of a very gradual process. Its remote causes must be sought centuries before there was any suspicion of their final effect. There was a series of temporary schisms that loosened the bond and prepared the way. The two great breaches, those of Photius and Michael Caerularius, which are remembered as the origin of the present state of things, were both healed up afterwards. Strictly speaking, the present schism dates from the Eastern repudiation of the Council of Florence (in 1472). So although the names of Photius and Caerularius are justly associated with this disaster, inasmuch as their quarrels are the chief elements in the story, it must not be imagined that they were the sole, the first, or the last authors of the schism. If we group the story around their names we must explain the earlier causes that prepared for them, and note that there were temporary reunions later. The first cause of all was the gradual estrangement of East and West. To a great extent this estrangement was inevitable. The East and West grouped themselves around different centres — at any rate as immediate centres — used different rites and spoke different languages. We must distinguish the position of the pope as visible head of all Christendom from his place as Patriarch of the West. The position, sometimes now advanced by anti-papal controversialists, and that all bishops are equal in jurisdiction, was utterly unknown in the early Church. From the very beginning we find a graduated hierarchy of metropolitans, exarchs, and primates. We find, too, from the beginning the idea that a bishop inherits the dignity of the founder of his see, that, therefore, the successor of an Apostle has special rights and privileges. This graduated hierarchy is important as explaining the pope's position. He was not the one immediate superior of each bishop; he was the chief of an elaborate organization, as it were the apex of a carefully graduated pyramid. The consciousness of the early Christian probably would have been that the heads of Christendom were the patriarchs; then further he knew quite well that the chief patriarch sat at Rome. However, the immediate head of each part of the Church was its patriarch. After Chalcedon (451) we must count five patriarchates: Rome, Constantinople, Alexandria, Antioch, and Jerusalem. The difference between the East and West then was in the first place that the pope in the West was not only supreme pontiff, but also the local patriarch. He represented to Eastern Christians a remote and foreign authority, the last court of appeal, for very serious questions, after their own patriarchs had been found incapable of settling them; but to his own Latins in the West he was the immediate head, the authority immediately over their metropolitans, the first court of appeal to their bishops. So all loyalty in the West went direct to Rome. Rome was the Mother Church in many senses, it was by missioners sent out from Rome that the local Western Churches had been founded. The loyalty of the Eastern Christians on the other hand went first to his own patriarch, so there was here always a danger of divided allegiance — if the patriarch had a quarrel with the pope — such as would have been inconceivable in the West. Indeed, the falling away of so many hundreds of Eastern bishops, of so many millions of simple Christians, is explained sufficiently by the schism of the patriarchs. If the four Eastern patriarchs agreed upon any course it was practically a foregone conclusion that their metropolitans and bishops would follow them and that the priests and people would follow the bishops. So the very organization of the Church in some sort already prepared the ground for a contrast (which might become a rivalry) between the first patriarch in the West with his vast following of Latins on the one side and the Eastern patriarchs with their subjects on the other. Further points that should be noticed are the differences of rite and language. The question of rite follows that of patriarchate; it made the distinction obvious to the simplest Christian. A Syrian, Greek or Egyptian layman would, perhaps, not understand much about canon law as affecting patriarchs; he could not fail to notice that a travelling Latin bishop or priest celebrated the Holy Mysteries in a way that was very strange, and that stamped him as a (perhaps suspicious) foreigner. In the West, the Roman Rite was first affecting, then supplanting, all others, and in the East the Byzantine Rite was gradually obtaining the same position. So we have the germ of two unities, Eastern and Western. Undoubtedly both sides knew that other rites were equally legitimate ways of celebrating the same mysteries, but the difference made it difficult to say prayers together. We see that this point was an important one from the number of accusations against purely ritual matters brought by Caerularius when he looked for grounds of quarrel. Even the detail of language was an element of separation. It is true that the East was never entirely hellenized as the West was latinized. Nevertheless, Greek did become to a great extent the international language in the East. In the Eastern councils all the bishops talk Greek. So again we have the same two unities, this time in language — a practically Greek East and an entirely Latin West. It is difficult to conceive this detail as a cause of estrangement, but it is undoubtedly true that many misunderstandings arose and grew, simply because people could not understand one another. For during the time when these disputes arose, hardly anyone knew a foreign language. It was not till the Renaissance that the age of convenient grammars and dictionaries arose. St. Gregory I (d. 1604) had been apocrisary at Constantinople, but he does not seem to have learned Greek; Pope Vigilius (540-55) spent eight unhappy years there and yet never knew the language. Photius was the profoundest scholar of his age, yet he knew no Latin. When Leo IX (1048-54) wrote in Latin to Peter III of Antioch, Peter had to send the letter to Constantinople to find out what it was about. Such cases occur continually and confuse all the relations between East and West. At councils the papal legates addressed the assembled fathers in Latin and no one understood them; the council deliberated in Greek and the legates wondered what was going on. So there arose suspicion on both sides. Interpreters had to be called in; could their versions be trusted? The Latins especially were profoundly suspicious of Greek craft in this matter. Legates were asked to sign documents they did not understand on the strength of assurances that there was nothing really compromising in them. And so little made so much difference. The famous case, long afterwards, of the Decree of Florence and the forms kath on tropon, quemadmodum, shows how much confusion the use of two languages may cause. These causes then combined to produce two halves of Christendom, an Eastern and a Western half, each distinguished in various ways from the other. They are certainly not sufficient to account for a separation of those halves; only we notice that already there was a consciousness of two entities, the first marking of a line of division, through which rivalry, jealousy, hatred might easily cut a separation. II. CAUSES OF ESTRANGEMENT The rivalry and hatred arose from several causes. Undoubtedly the first, the root of all the quarrel, was the advance of the See of Constantinople. We have seen that four Eastern patriarchates were to some extent contrasted to the one great Western unity. Had there remained four such unities in the East, nothing further need have followed. What accentuated the contrast and made it a rivalry was the gradual assumption of authority over the other three by the patriarch of Constantinople. It was Constantinople that bound together the East into one body, uniting it against the West. It was the persistent attempt of the emperor's patriarch to become a kind of Eastern pope, as nearly as possible equal to his Western prototype, that was the real source of all the trouble. On the one hand, union under Constantinople really made a kind of rival Church that could be opposed to Rome; on the other hand, through all the career of advancement of the Byzantine bishops they found only one real hindrance, the persistent opposition of the popes. The emperor was their friend and chief ally always. It was, indeed, the emperor's policy of centralization that was responsible for the scheme of making the See of Constantinople a centre. The other patriarchs who were displaced were not dangerous opponents. Weakened by the endless Monophysite quarrels, having lost most of their flocks, then reduced to an abject state by the Moslem conquest, the bishops of Alexandria and Antioch could not prevent the growth of Constantinople. Indeed, eventually, they accepted their degradation willingly and came to be idle ornaments of the new patriarch's Court. Jerusalem too was hampered by schisms and Moslems and was itself a new patriarchate, having only the rights of the last see of the five. On the other hand, at every step in the advancement of Constantinople there was always the opposition of Rome. When the new see got its titular honour at the First Council of Constantinople (381, can.3), Rome refused to accept the canon (she was not represented at the council); when Chalcedon in 451 turned this into a real patriarchate (can. 28) the legates and then the pope himself refused to acknowledge what had been done; when, intoxicated by their quick advancement, the successors of the little suffragan bishops who had once obeyed Heraclea assumed the insolent title "oecumenical patriarch", it was again a pope of Old Rome who sternly rebuked their arrogance. We can understand that jealousy and hatred of Rome rankled in the minds of the new patriarchs, that they were willing to throw off altogether an authority which was in their way at every step. That the rest of the East joined them in their rebellion was the natural result of the authority they had succeeded in usurping over the other Eastern bishops. So we arrive at the essential consideration in this question. The Eastern Schism was not a movement arising in all the East; it was not a quarrel between two large bodies; it was essentially the rebellion of one see, Constantinople, which by the emperor's favour had already acquired such influence that it was able unhappily to drag the other patriarchs into schism with it. We have already seen that the suffragans of the patriarchs would naturally follow their chiefs. If then Constantinople had stood alone her schism would have mattered comparatively little. What made the situation so serious was that the rest of the East eventually sided with her. That followed from her all too successful assumption of the place of chief see in the East. So the advance of Constantinople was doubly the cause of the great schism. It brought her into conflict with Rome and made the Byzantine patriarch almost inevitably the enemy of the pope; at the same time it gave him such a position that his enmity meant that of all the East. This being so, we must remember how entirely unwarrantable, novel, and uncanonical the advance of Constantinople was. The see was not Apostolic, had no glorious traditions, no reason whatever for its usurpation of the first place in the East, but an accident of secular politics. The first historical Bishop of Byzantium was Metrophanes (315-25); he was not even a metropolitan, he was the lowest in rank a diocesan bishop could be, a suffragan of Heraclea. That is all his successors ever would have been, they would have had no power to influence anyone, had not Constantine chosen their city for his capital. All through their progress they made no pretense of founding their claims on anything but the fact that they were now bishops of the political capital. It was as the emperor's bishops, as functionaries of the imperial Court, that they rose to the second place in Christendom. The legend of St. Andrew founding their see was a late afterthought; it is now abandoned by all scholars. The claim of Constantinople was always frankly the purely Erastian one that as Caesar could establish his capital where he liked, so could he, the civil governor, give ecclesiastical rank in the hierarchy to any see he liked. The 28th canon of Chalcedon says so in so many words. Constantinople has become the New Rome, therefore its bishop is to have like honour to that of the patriarch of Old Rome and to be second after him. It only needed a shade more insolence to claim that the emperor could transfer all papal rights to the bishop of the city where he held his court. Let it be always remembered that the rise of Constantinople, its jealousy of Rome, its unhappy influence over all the East is a pure piece of Erastianism, a shameless surrender of the things of God to Caesar. And nothing can be less stable than to establish ecclesiastical rights on the basis of secular politics. The Turks in 1453 cut away the foundation of Byzantine ambition. There is now no emperor and no Court to justify the oecumenical patriarch's position. If we were to apply logically the principle on which he rests, he would sink back to the lowest place and the patriarchs of Christendom would reign at Paris, London, New York. Meanwhile the old and really canonical principle of the superiority of Apostolic sees remains untouched by political changes. Apart from the Divine origin of the papacy, the advance of Constantinople was a gross violation of the rights of the Apostolic Sees of Alexandria and Antioch. We need not wonder that the popes, although their first place was not questioned, resented this disturbance of ancient rights by the ambition of the imperial bishops. Long before Photius there had been schisms between Constantinople and Rome, all of them healed up in time, but naturally all tending to weaken the sense of essential unity. From the beginning of the See of Constantinople to the great schism in 867 the list of these temporary breaches of communion is a formidable one. There were fifty-five years of schism (343-98) during the Arian troubles, eleven because of St. John Chrysostom's deposition (404-15), thirty-five years of the Acacian schism (484-519), forty-one years of Monothelite schism (640-81), sixty-one years because of Iconoclasm. So of these 544 years (323-867) no less than 203 were spent by Constantinople in a state of schism. We notice too that in every one of these quarrels Constantinople was on the wrong side; by the consent of the Orthodox, too, Rome in all stood out for right. And already we see that the influence of the emperor (who naturally always supported his court patriarch) in most cases dragged a great number of other Eastern bishops into the same schism. III. PHOTIUS AND CAERULARIUS It was natural that the great schisms, which are immediately responsible for the present state of things, should be local quarrels of Constantinople. Neither was in any sense a general grievance of the East. There was neither time any reason why other bishops should join with Constantinople in the quarrel against Rome, except that already they had learned to look to the imperial city for orders. The quarrel of Photius was a gross defiance of lawful church order. Ignatius was the rightful bishop without any question; he had reigned peaceably for eleven years. Then he refused Communion to a man guilty of open incest (857). But that man was the regent Bardas, so the Government professed to depose Ignatius and intruded Photius into his see. Pope Nicholas I had no quarrel against the Eastern Church; he had no quarrel against the Byzantine see. He stood out for the rights of the lawful bishop. Both Ignatius and Photius had formally appealed to him. It was only when Photius found that he had lost his case that he and the Government preferred schism to submission (867). It is even doubtful how far this time there was any general Eastern schism at all. In the council that restored Ignatius (869) the other patriarchs declared that they had at once accepted the pope's former verdict. But Photius had formed an anti-Roman party which was never afterwards dissolved. The effect of his quarrel, though it was so purely personal, though it was patched up when Ignatius died, and again when Photius fell, was to gather to a head all the old jealousy of Rome at Constantinople. We see this throughout the Photian Schism. The mere question of that usurper's pretended rights does not account for the outburst of enmity against the pope, against everything Western and Latin that we notice in government documents, in Photius's letters, in the Acts of his synod in 879, in all the attitude of his party. It is rather the rancour of centuries bursting out on a poor pretext; this fierce resentment against Roman interference comes from men who know of old that Rome is the one hindrance to their plans and ambitions. Moreover, Photius gave the Byzantines a new and powerful weapon. The cry of heresy was raised often enough at all times; it never failed to arouse popular indignation. But it had not yet occurred to any one to accuse all the West of being steeped in pernicious heresy. Hitherto it had been a question of resenting the use of papal authority in isolated cases. This new idea carried the war into the enemy's camp with a vengeance. Photius's six charges are silly enough, so silly that one wonders that so great a scholar did not think of something cleverer, at least in appearance. But they changed the situation to the Eastern advantage. When Photius calls the Latins "liars, fighters against God, forerunners of Antichrist", it is no longer a question merely of abusing one's ecclesiastical superiors. He now assumes a more effective part; he is the champion of orthodoxy, indignant against heretics. After Photius, John Bekkos says there was "perfect peace" between East and West. But the peace was only on the surface. Photius's cause did not die. It remained latent in the party he left, the party that still hated the West, that was ready to break the union again at the first pretext, that remembered and was ready to revive this charge of heresy against Latins. Certainly from the time of Photius hatred and scorn of Latins was an inheritance of the mass of the Byzantine clergy. How deeply rooted and far-spread it was, is shown by the absolutely gratuitous outburst 150 years later under Michael Caerularius (1043-58). For this time there was not even the shadow of a pretext. No one had disputed Caerularius's right as patriarch; the pope had not interfered with him in any way at all. And suddenly in 1053 he sends off a declaration of war, then shuts up the Latin churches at Constantinople, hurls a string of wild accusations, and shows in every possible way that he wants a schism, apparently for the mere pleasure of not being in communion with the West. He got his wish. After a series of wanton aggressions, unparalleled in church history, after he had begun by striking the pope's name from his diptychs, the Roman legates excommunicated him (16 July, 1054). But still there was no idea of a general excommunication of the Byzantine Church, still less of all the East. The legates carefully provided against that in their Bull. They acknowledged that the emperor (Constantine IX, who was excessively annoyed at the whole quarrel), the Senate, and the majority of the inhabitants of the city were "most pious and orthodox". They excommunicated Caerularius, Leo of Achrida, and their adherents. This quarrel, too, need no more have produced a permanent state of schism than the excommunication of any other contumacious bishop. The real tragedy is that gradually all the other Eastern patriarchs took sides with Caerularius, obeyed him by striking the pope's name from their diptychs, and chose of their own accord to share his schism. At first they do not seem to have wanted to do so. John III of Antioch certainly refused to go into schism at Caerularius's bidding. But, eventually, the habit they had acquired of looking to Constantinople for orders proved too strong. The emperor (not Constantine IX, but his successor) was on the side of his patriarch and they had learned too well to consider the emperor as their over-lord in spiritual matters too. Again, it was the usurped authority of Constantinople, the Erastianism of the East that turned a personal quarrel into a great schism. We see, too, how well Photius's idea of calling Latins heretics had been learned. Caerularius had a list, a longer and even more futile one, of such accusations. His points were different from those of Photius; he had forgotten the Filioque, and had discovered a new heresy in our use of azyme bread. But the actual accusations mattered little at any time, the idea that had been found so useful was that of declaring that we are impossible because we are heretics. It was offensive and it gave the schismatical leaders the chance of assuming a most effective pose, as defenders of the true Faith. IV. AFTER CAERULARIUS In a sense the schism was now complete. What had been from the beginning two portions of the same Church, what had become two entities ready to be divided, were now two rival Churches. Yet, just as there had been schisms before Photius, so there have been reunions after Caerularius. The Second Council of Lyons in 1274 and again the Council of Florence in 1439 both arrived at a reunion that people hoped would close the breach for ever. Unhappily, neither reunion lasted, neither had any solid basis on the Eastern side. The anti-Latin party, foreshadowed long ago, formed and organized by Photius, had under Caerularius become the whole "Orthodox" Church. This process had been a gradual one, but it was now complete. At first the Slav Churches (Russia, Servia, Bulgaria, etc.) saw no reason why they should break communion with the West because a patriarch of Constantinople was angry with a pope. But the habit of looking to the capital of the empire eventually affected them too. They used the Byzantine Rite, were Easterns; so they settled on the Eastern side. Caerularius had managed cleverly to represent his cause as that of the East; it seemed (most unjustifiably) that it was a question of Byzantines versus Latins. At Lyons, and again at Florence, the reunion (on their side) was only a political expedient of the Government. The emperor wanted Latins to fight for him against the Turks. So he was prepared to concede anything — till the danger was over. It is clear that on these occasions the religious motive moved only the Western side. We had nothing to gain; we wanted nothing from them. The Latins had everything to offer, they were prepared to give their help. All they wanted in return was that an end should be made of the lamentable and scandalous spectacle of a divided Christendom. For the religious motive the Byzantines cared nothing; or rather, religion to them meant the continuation of the schism. They had called us heretics so often that they had begun to believe it. Reunion was an unpleasant and humiliating condition in order that a Frank army might come and protect them. The common people had been so well drilled in their hatred of Azymites and creed-tamperers, that their zeal for what they thought Orthodoxy prevailed over their fear of the Turk. "Rather the turban of the Sultan that the tiara of the Pope" expressed their mind exactly. When the bishops who had signed the decrees of reunion came back, each time they were received with a storm of indignation as betrayers of the Orthodox faith. Each time the reunion was broken almost as soon as it was made. The last act of schism was when Dionysius I of Constantinople (1467-72) summoned a synod and formally repudiated the union (1472). Since then there has been no intercommunion; a vast "Orthodox" Church exists, apparently satisfied with being in schism with the bishop whom it still recognizes as the first patriarch of Christendom. V. REASONS OF THE PRESENT SCHISM In this deplorable story we notice the following points. It is easier to understand how a schism continues than how it began. Schisms are easily made; they are enormously difficult to heal. The religious instinct is always conservative; there is always a strong tendency to continue the existing state of things. At first the schismatics were reckless innovators; then with the lapse of centuries their cause seems to be the old one; it is the Faith of the Fathers. Eastern Christians especially have this conservative instinct strongly. They fear that reunion with Rome would mean a betrayal of the old Faith, of the Orthodox Church, to which they have clung so heroically during all these centuries. One may say that the schism continues mainly through force of inertia. In its origin we must distinguish between the schismatical tendency and the actual occasion of its outburst. But the reason of both has gone now. The tendency was mainly jealousy caused by the rise of the See of Constantinople. That progress is over long ago. The last three centuries Constantinople has lost nearly all the broad lands she once acquired. There is nothing the modern Orthodox Christian resents more than any assumption of authority by the oecumenical patriarch outside his diminished patriarchate. The Byzantine see has long been the plaything of the Turk, wares that he sold to the highest bidder. Certainly now this pitiful dignity is no longer a reason for the schism of nearly 100,000,000 Christians. Still less are the immediate causes of the breach active. The question of the respective rights of Ignatius and Photius leaves even the Orthodox cold after eleven centuries; and Caerularius's ambitions and insolence may well be buried with him. Nothing then remains of the original causes. There is not really any question of doctrine involved. It is not a heresy, but a schism. The Decree of Florence made every possible concession to their feelings. There is no real reason why they should not sign that Decree now. They deny papal infallibility and the Immaculate Conception, they quarrel over purgatory, consecration by the words of institution, the procession of the Holy Ghost, in each case misrepresenting the dogma to which they object. It is not difficult to show that on all these points their own Fathers are with those of the Latin Church, which asks them only to return to the old teaching of their own Church. That is the right attitude towards the Orthodox always. They have a horror of being latinized, of betraying the old Faith. One must always insist that there is no idea of latinizing them, that the old Faith is not incompatible with, but rather demands union with the chief see which their Fathers obeyed. In canon law they have nothing to change except such abuses as the sale of bishoprics and the Erastianism that their own better theologians deplore. Celibacy, azyme bread, and so on are Latin customs that no one thinks of forcing on them. They need not add the Filioque to the Creed; they will always keep their venerable rite untouched. Not a bishop need be moved, hardly a feast (except that of St. Photius on 6 Feb.) altered. All that is asked of them is to come back to where their Fathers stood, to treat Rome as Athanasius, Basil, Chrysostom treated her. It is not Latins, it is they who have left the Faith of their Fathers. There is no humiliation in retracing one's steps when one has wandered down a mistaken road because of long-forgotten personal quarrels. They too must see how disastrous to the common cause is the scandal of the division. They too must wish to put an end to so crying an evil. And if they really wish it the way need not be difficult. For, indeed, after nine centuries of schism we may realize on both sides that it is not only the greatest it is also the most superfluous evil in Christendom. For details of the schism see Greek Church; Photius; Michael Caerularius; Florence, Council of; also Fortescue, The Orthodox Eastern Church (London, 1907) and the works there quoted. ADRIAN FORTESCUE Western Schism Western Schism This schism of the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries differs in all points from the Eastern Schism. The latter was a real revolt against the supreme authority of the Church, fomented by the ambition of the patriarchs of Constantinople, favoured by the Greek emperors, supported by the Byzantine clergy and people, and lasting nine centuries. The Western Schism was only a temporary misunderstanding, even though it compelled the Church for forty years to seek its true head; it was fed by politics and passions, and was terminated by the assembling of the councils of Pisa and Constance. This religious division, infinitely less serious than the other, will be examined in its origin, its developments, the means employed to end it, and its ending in 1417 by the election of an undisputed pope. From a legal and apologetic standpoint what did the early doctors think of it? What is the reasoned opinion of modern theologians and canonists? Was the real pope to be found at Avignon or at Rome? (1) Pope Gregory XI had left Avignon to return to Italy and had re-established the pontifical see in the Eternal City, where he died on 27 March, 1378. At once attention was directed to the choice of his successor. The question was most serious. Cardinals, priests, nobles, and the Romans in general were interested in it, because on the election to be made by the conclave depended the residence of the future pope at Avignon or at Rome. Since the beginning of the century the pontiffs had fixed their abode beyond the Alps; the Romans, whose interests and claims had been so long slighted, wanted a Roman or at least an Italian pope. The name of Bartolommeo Prignano, Archbishop of Bari, was mentioned from the first. This prelate had been Vice-Chancellor of the Roman Church, and was regarded as the enemy of vice, simony, and display. His morals were exemplary and his integrity rigid. He was regarded by all as eligible. The sixteen cardinals present at Rome met in conclave on 7 April, and on the following day chose Prignano. During the election disturbance reigned in the city. The people of Rome and the vicinity, turbulent and easily roused, had, under the sway of circumstances, loudly declared their preferences and antipathies, and endeavoured to influence the decision of the cardinals. Were these facts, regrettable in themselves, sufficient to rob the members of the conclave of the necessary freedom of mind and to prevent the election from being valid? This is the question which has been asked since the end of the fourteenth century. On its solution depends our opinion of the legitimacy of the popes of Rome and Avignon. It seems certain that the cardinals then took every means to obviate all possible doubts. On the evening of the same day thirteen of them proceeded to a new election, and again chose the Archbishop of Bari with the formally expressed intention of selecting a legitimate pope. During the following days all the members of the Sacred College offered their respectful homage to the new pope, who had taken the name of Urban VI, and asked of him countless favours. They then enthroned him, first at the Vatican Palace, and later at St. John Lateran; finally on 18 April they solemnly crowned him at St. Peter's. On the very next day the Sacred College gave official notification of Urban's accession to the six French cardinals in Avignon; the latter recognized and congratulated the choice of their colleagues. The Roman cardinals then wrote to the head of the empire and the other Catholic sovereigns. Cardinal Robert of Geneva, the future Clement VII of Avignon, wrote in the same strain to his relative the King of France and to the Count of Flanders. Pedro de Luna of Aragon, the future Benedict XIII, likewise wrote to several bishops of Spain. Thus far, therefore, there was not a single objection to or dissatisfaction with the selection of Bartolommeo Prignano, not a protest, no hesitation, and no fear manifested for the future. Unfortunately Pope Urban did not realize the hopes to which his election had given rise. He showed himself whimsical, haughty, suspicious, and sometimes choleric in his relations with the cardinals who had elected him. Too obvious roughness and blameable extravagances seemed to show that his unexpected election had altered his character. St. Catherine of Siena, with supernatural courage, did not hesitate to make him some very well-founded remarks in this respect, nor did she hesitate when there was question of blaming the cardinals in their revolt against the pope whom they had previously elected. Some historians state that Urban openly attacked the failings, real or supposed, of members of the Sacred College, and that he energetically refused to restore the pontifical see to Avignon. Hence, they add, the growing opposition. However that may be, none of these unpleasant dissensions which arose subsequently to the election could logically weaken the validity of the choice made on 8 April. The cardinals elected Prignano, not because they were swayed by fear, though naturally they were somewhat fearful of the mischances that might grow out of delay. Urban was pope before his errors; he was still pope after his errors. The passions of King Henry IV or the vices of Louis XV did not prevent these monarchs from being and remaining true descendants of St. Louis and lawful kings of France. Unhappily such was not, in 1378, the reasoning of the Roman cardinals. Their dissatisfaction continued to increase. Under pretext of escaping the unhealthy heat of Rome, they withdrew in May to Anagni, and in July to Fondi, under the protection of Queen Joanna of Naples and two hundred Gascon lances of Bernardon de la Salle. They then began a silent campaign against their choice of April, and prepared men's minds for the news of a second election. On 20 September thirteen members of the Sacred College precipitated matters by going into conclave at Fondi and choosing as pope Robert of Geneva, who took the name of Clement VII. Some months later the new pontiff, driven from the Kingdom of Naples, took up his residence at Avignon; the schism was complete. Clement VII was related to or allied with the principal royal families of Europe; he was influential, intellectual, and skilful in politics. Christendom was quickly divided into two almost equal parties. Everywhere the faithful faced the anxious problem: where is the true pope? The saints themselves were divided: St Catherine of Siena, St. Catherine of Sweden, Bl. Peter of Aragon, Bl. Ursulina of Parma, Philippe d'Alencon, and Gerard de Groote were in the camp of Urban; St. Vincent Ferrer, Bl. Peter of Luxemburg, and St. Colette belonged to the party of Clement. The century's most famous doctors of law were consulted and most of them decided for Rome. Theologians were divided. Germans like Henry of Hesse or Langstein (Epistola concilii pacis) and Conrad of Glenhausen (Ep. brevis; Ep. Concordioe) inclined towards Urban; Pierre d'Ailly, his friend Philippe de Maizieres, his pupils Jean Gerson and Nicholas of Clemanges, and with them the whole School of Paris, defended the interests of Clement. The conflict of rival passions and the novelty of the situation rendered understanding difficult and unanimity impossible. As a general thing scholars adopted the opinion of their country. The powers also took sides. The greater number of the Italian and German states, England, and Flanders supported the pope of Rome. On the other hand France, Spain, Scotland, and all the nations in the orbit of France were for the pope of Avignon. Nevertheless Charles V had first suggested officially to the cardinals of Anagni the assembling of a general council, but he was not heard. Unfortunately the rival popes launched excommunication against each other; they created numerous cardinals to make up for the defections and sent them throughout Christendom to defend their cause, spread their influence, and win adherents. While these grave and burning discussions were being spread abroad, Boniface IX had succeeded Urban VI at Rome and Benedict XIII had been elected pope at the death of Clement of Avignon. "There are two masters in the vessel who are fencing with and contradicting each other", said Jean Petit at the Council of Paris (1406). Several ecclesiastical assemblies met in France and elsewhere without definite result. The evil continued without remedy or truce. The King of France and his uncles began to weary of supporting such a pope as Benedict, who acted only according to his humour and who caused the failure of every plan for union. Moreover, his exactions and the fiscal severity of his agents weighed heavily on the bishops, abbots, and lesser clergy of France. Charles VI released his people from obedience to Benedict (1398), and forbade his subjects, under severe penalties, to submit to this pope. Every bull or letter of the pope was to be sent to the king; no account was to be taken of privileges granted by the pope; in future every dispensation was to be asked of the ordinaries. This therefore was a schism within a schism, a law of separation. The Chancellor of France, who was already viceroy during the illness of Charles VI, thereby became even vice-pope. Not without the connivance of the public power, Geoffrey Boucicaut, brother of the illustrious marshal, laid siege to Avignon, and a more or less strict blockade deprived the pontiff of all communication with those who remained faithful to him. When restored to liberty in 1403 Benedict had not become more conciliating, less obstinate or stubborn. Another private synod, which assembled in Paris in 1406, met with only partial success. Innocent VII had already succeeded Boniface of Rome, and, after a reign of two years, was replaced by Gregory XII. The latter, although of temperate character, seems not to have realized the hopes which Christendom, immeasurably wearied of these endless divisions, had placed in him. The council which assembled a Pisa added a third claimant to the papal throne instead of two (1409). After many conferences, projects, discussions (oftentimes violent), interventions of the civil powers, catastrophes of all kinds, the Council of Constance (1414) deposed the suspicious John XXIII, received the abdication of the gentle and timid Gregory XII, and finally dismissed the obstinate Benedict XIII. On 11 November, 1417, the assembly elected Odo Colonna, who took the name of Martin V. Thus ended the great schism of the West. (2) From this brief summary it will be readily concluded that this schism did not at all resemble that of the East, that it was something unique, and that it has remained so in history. It was not a schism properly so called, being in reality a deplorable misunderstanding concerning a question of fact, an historical complication which lasted forty years. In the West there was no revolt against papal authority in general, no scorn of the sovereign power of which St. Peter was the representative. Faith in the necessary unity never wavered a particle; no one wished voluntarily to separate from the head of the Church. Now this intention alone is the characteristic mark of the schismatic spirit (Summa, II-II, Q. xxxix, a. 1). On the contrary everyone desired that unity, materially overshadowed and temporarily compromised, should speedily shine forth with new splendour. The theologians, canonists, princes, and faithful of the fourteenth century felt so intensely and maintained so vigorously that this character of unity was essential to the true Church of Jesus Christ, that at Constance solicitude for unity took precedence of that for reform. The benefit of unity had never been adequately appreciated till it had been lost, till the Church had become bicephalous of tricephalous, and there seemed to be no head precisely because there were too many. Indeed the first mark of the true Church consists above all in unity under one head, the Divinely appointed guardian of the unity of faith and of worship. Now in practice there was then no wilful error regarding the necessity of this character of the true Church, much less was there any culpable revolt against the known head. There was simply ignorance, and among the greater number invincible ignorance regarding the person of the true pope, regarding him who was at that time the visible depositary of the promises of the invisible Head. How indeed was this ignorance to be dispelled? The only witnesses of the facts, the authors of the double election, were the same persons. The cardinals of 1378 held successive opinions. They had in turn testified for Urban, the first pope elected, on 8 April, and for Clement of Avignon on 20 September. Who were to be believed? The members of the Sacred College, choosing and writing in April, or the same cardinals speaking and acting contradictorily in September? Fondi was the starting point of the division; there likewise must be sought the serious errors and formidable responsibilities. Bishops, princes, theologians, and canonists were in a state of perplexity from which they could not emerge in consequence of the conflicting, not disinterested, and perhaps insincere testimony of the cardinals. Thenceforth how were the faithful to dispel uncertainty and form a morally sure opinion? They relied on their natural leaders, and these, not knowing exactly what to hold, followed their interests or passions and attached themselves to probabilities. It was a terrible and distressing problem which lasted forty years and tormented two generations of Christians; a schism in the course of which there was no schismatic intention, unless exception perhaps be made of some exalted persons who should have considered the interests of the Church before all else. Exception should also be made of some doctors of the period whose extraordinary opinions show what was the general disorder of minds during the schism (N. Valois, I, 351; IV, 501). Apart from these exceptions no one had the intention of dividing the seamless robe, no one formally desired schism; those concerned were ignorant or misled, but not culpable. In behalf of the great majority of clergy and people must be pleaded the good faith which excludes all errors and the wellnigh impossibility for the simple faithful to reach the truth. This is the conclusion reached by a study of the facts and contemporary documents. This King Charles V, the Count of Flanders, the Duke of Brittany, and Jean Gerson, the great chancellor of the university, vie with one another in declaring. D'Ailly, then Bishop of Cambrai, in his diocesan synods echoed the same moderate and conciliatory sentiments. In 1409 he said to the Genoese: "I know no schismatics save those who stubbornly refuse to learn the truth, or who after discovering it refuse to submit to it, or who still formally declare that they do not want to follow the movement for union". Schism and heresy as sins and vices, he adds in 1412, can only result from stubborn opposition either to the unity of the Church, or to an article of faith. This is the pure doctrine of the Angelic Doctor (cf. Tshackert, "Peter von Ailli", appendix 32, 33). (3) Most modern doctors uphold the same ideas. It suffices to quote Canon J. Didiot, dean of the faculty of Lille: "If after the election of a pope and before his death or resignation a new election takes place, it is null and schismatic; the one elected is not in the Apostolic Succession. This was seen at the beginning of what is called, somewhat incorrectly, the Great Schism of the West, which was only an apparent schism from a theological standpoint. If two elections take place simultaneously or nearly so, one according to laws previously passed and the other contrary to them, the apostolicity belongs to the pope legally chosen and not to the other, and though there be doubts, discussions, and cruel divisions on this point, as at the time of the so-called Western Schism, it is no less true, no less real that the apostolicity exists objectively in the true pope. What does it matter, in this objective relation, that it is not manifest to all and is not recognized by all till long after? A treasure is bequeathed to me, but I do not know whether it is in the chest A or in the casket B. Am I any less the possessor of this treasure?" After the theologian let us hear the canonist. The following are the words of Bouix, so competent in all these questions. Speaking of the events of this sad period he says: "This dissension was called schism, but incorrectly. No one withdrew from the true Roman pontiff considered as such, but each obeyed the one he regarded as the true pope. They submitted to him, not absolutely, but on condition that he was the true pope. Although there were several obediences, nevertheless there was no schism properly so-called" (De Papa, I, 461). (4) To contemporaries this problem was, as has been sufficiently shown, almost insoluble. Are our lights fuller and more brilliant than theirs? After six centuries we are able to judge more disinterestedly and impartially, and apparently the time is at hand for the formation of a decision, if not definitive, at least better informed and more just. In our opinion the question made rapid strides towards the end of the nineteenth century. Cardinal Hergenrother, Bliemetzrieder, Hefele, Hinschius, Kraus, Bruck, Funk, and the learned Pastor in Germany, Marion, Chenon, de Beaucourt, and Denifle in France, Kirsch in Switzerland, Palma, long after Rinaldi, in Italy, Albers in Holland (to mention only the most competent or illustrious) have openly declared in favour of the popes of Rome. Noel Valois, who assumes authority on the question, at first considered the rival popes as doubtful, and believed "that the solution of this great problem was beyond the judgment of history" (I,8). Six years later he concluded his authoritative study and reviewed the facts related in his four large volumes. The following is his last conclusion, much more explicit and decided than his earlier judgment: "A tradition has been established in favour of the popes of Rome which historical investigation tends to confirm". Does not this book itself (IV, 503), though the author hesitates to decide, bring to the support of the Roman thesis new arguments, which in the opinion of some critics are quite convincing? A final and quite recent argument comes from Rome. In 1904 the "Gerarchia Cattolica", basing its arguments on the date of the Liber Pontificalis, compiled a new and corrected list of sovereign pontiffs. Ten names have disappeared from this list of legitimate popes, neither the popes of Avignon nor those of Pisa being ranked in the true lineage of St. Peter. If this deliberate omission is not proof positive, it is at least a very strong presumption in favour of the legitimacy of the Roman popes Urban VI, Boniface IX, Innocent VII, and Gregory XII. Moreover, the names of the popes of Avignon, Clement VII and Benedict XIII, were again taken by later popes (in the sixteenth and eighteenth centuries) who were legitimate. We have already quoted much, having had to rely on ancient and contemporary testimonies, on those of the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries as on those of the nineteenth and even the twentieth, but we shall transcribe two texts borrowed from writers who with regard to the Church are at opposite poles. The first is Gregorovius, whom no one will suspect of exaggerated respect for the papacy. Concerning the schismatic divisions of the period he writes: "A temporal kingdom would have succumbed thereto; but the organization of the spiritual kingdom was so wonderful, the ideal of the papacy so indestructible, that this, the most serious of schisms, served only to demonstrate its indivisibility" (Gesch. der Stadt Rom im Mittelalter, VI, 620). From a widely different standpoint de Maistre holds the same view: "This scourge of contemporaries is for us an historical treasure. It serves to prove how immovable is the throne of St. Peter. What human organization would have withstood this trial?" (Du Pape, IV, conclusion). LOUIS SALEMBIER Friedrich von Schlegel Friedrich von Schlegel Poet, writer on aesthetics, and literary historian, the "Messias" of the Romantic School, b. at Hanover, 10 March, 1772; d. at Dresden, 12 January, 1829. Of the two brothers Schlegel, who are regarded as the real founders of the Romantic School, Friedrich the younger is the more important. The outward life of the "Messias" of the Romantic School, as Rahel named him, in its variety, is typical of the Romanticists. Destined at first for commercial life, he turned to higher studies in his sixteenth year, proceeded after a rapid preparation to the University of Gottingen, and there studied first jurisprudence and then philology. At Leipzig he devoted himself to the study of art and the history of ancient literature. After a short residence in Dresden, where he visited the art collections, he settled with his brother in Jena, but later moved to Berlin, where he formed a friendship with his later wife, Dorothea Veit (nee Mendelssohn), according to the principles which he had laid down in his notorious "Luzinde" (Berlin, 1799). In 1800 he returned to Jena to qualify as tutor, but in 1802 proceeded to Dresden and thence to Paris, where he delivered lectures on philosophy and edited the journal "Europa". In 1804 he married Dorothea, who had separated from her husband and embraced Protestantism; both became Catholics in 1808 at Cologne, and henceforth begins for the restless and poverty-stricken Schlegel a period of peace. Recommended from Cologne, he secured a position as secretary in the court and state chancellery at Vienna, and in 1809 accompanied Archduke Charles to war, issuing fiery proclamations against Napoleon and editing the army newspaper. In 1811 while at Vienna he began his lectures — on modern history. He was full of bitterness against Napoleon and enthusiastically in favour of the medieval imperial idea. In the following year he delivered his famous lectures on the history of ancient and modern literature. From 1815 to 1818 Schlegel resided at Frankfort as counsellor of the Austrian legation to the federal diet. He then accompanied Metternich to Italy, visiting Rome at the request of his wife. On his return to Vienna, he edited the journal "Concordia" (1820-3), wherein he championed the idea of a Christian state. After preparing the edition of all his works (10 vols., 1822-5), he again delivered lectures on the philosophy of life and the philosophy of history, continuing at Dresden in 1828 on the philosophy of speech and words. Here a stroke of apoplexy brought him to an early death. Schlegel essayed all three branches of poetry, but without much success. In 1805-6 he published a "Poetisches Tagebuch", which in addition to small lyrical pieces contains the epic "Roland". Three years later appeared his "Gedichte" (Berlin, 1809), which are models of metrical art and noble language, but sacrifice freshness to artificiality. The romance "Luzinde" he later condemned. His tragedy "Alarkos" possesses no enduring worth, although Goethe had it produced at Weimar. Schlegel's importance lies in his numerous literary-critical writings, and in his successful efforts to unite similarly minded friends (Tieck, Novalis, Schleiermacher) into an association, the "School of Romanticism" (1798). To establish and spread the principles of the new school, Schlegel founded with his brother August Wilhelm the journal "Athenaum" (1798); this was given up after years, but not until it had attained its object. It proclaimed the programme for the many-sided strivings of Romanticism. Of the works of Schlegel two still maintain their high importance: "Ueber die Sprache und Weisheit der Inder" (Heidelberg, 1808; tr. into French, Paris, 1837), and "Die Geschichte der alten and neuen Literatur" (Vienna, 1815, tr. into French, Parish, 1829). While these two works may be surpassed in many particulars, they yet contain in embryo the modern achievements in both domains. P. Baumgartner, the latest author of a universal literature, thus regarded Friedrich von Schlegel as his guide and master, to whom he believed he owed his chief inspiration. The following works have been translated into English: "Philosophy of History" (London, 1869); "Lectures on modern History" (London, 1849); "Æsthetic and Miscellaneous Works" (London, 1875). HAYM, Die romantische Schule (2nd ed., Berlin, 1906); GODEKE, Grundriss, VI, 17-27, contains the literature until 1898; MINOR, Prosaische Jugendschriften Schlegels (1894); GLAWE, Friedrich von Schlegels Religion (1906); SALZER, Illustrierte Gesch. der deutschen Lit., part XXXVI, pp. 1435-40. N. SCHEID Schleswig Schleswig Formerly a duchy and diocese of northwestern Germany, now a part of the Prussian Province of Schleswig-Holstein. In the early Middle Ages the southern part of the peninsula of Jutland was a bone of contention between the Germans and the Danes. When in the fifth century the greater part of the Germanic population had left the region in order to seek a new home in Britain, the Danes or Jutes pushed their way into the country and the part of the Germanic population that had remained behind amalgamated with the new masters. The Frisians were the only ones to retain their national peculiarities after losing their national independence. About the beginning of the ninth century Charlemagne conquered the southernmost part of the peninsula; he formed the territory on the Eider into a Mark as a protection against the Slavs. As early as his reign Christian missions began to gain a foothold in the region. The first preacher of the Christian faith was the priest Atrebanus, who was a Pupil of Willehad, the first Bishop of Bremen. Atrebanus founded a mission station among the heathen Dithmarschians, but suffered the death of a martyr during the Saxon revolt in 780. During the reign of Louis the Pious, Archbishop Ebo of Reims the emperor's confidential friend, re-established the mission, but without great success. About 850 Ebo's companion, Ansgar the Apostle of the North, erected the first church in the little town of Schleswig; this was soon followed in 860 by the building of the church at Ripen. These successes of the mission of the Carlovingian period were destroyed during the heathen reaction that followed. Under the vigorous administration of the German king, Henry I, the Mark on the Eider was re-established in 934, and soon after this Unni, Archbishop of Hamburg, once more took in hand the bringing of the north to Christianity. Christian communities increased, especially after the Danish King Harold Blue Tooth (d. 986) had accepted Christianity, and the three dioceses of Schleswig, Ripen, and Aarhaus were founded at the request of Archbishop Adaldag of Bremen. These dioceses were made suffragans of Bremen. The first Bishop of Schleswig was Hored, who was present in 948 at the German synod of Ingelheim. The Diocese of Schleswig, though, did not include the whole of the later Duchy of Schleswig, as the north-western part belonged to the Diocese of Ripen, and the Islands of Alsen, Arö and Fehmarn to the Diocese of Funen. During the reign of King Harold Blue Tooth, Christianity became the dominating religion of Denmark and Schleswig. Paganism, however, regained the supremacy when Harold's son Sven with the Forked Beard, who had been a viking, returned home in 985 and overthrew his father. Christians were ill-treated, the Diocese of Aarhaus was suppressed, and the two other bishops were driven away. Yet in the last years of his life Sven with the Forked Beard turned to Christianity, and his son Canute the Great, who by the conquest of England created a great northern empire, established Christianity at last in his territories. In 1035 his son-in-law the German King Conrad II gave him the Mark of Schleswig as compensation for the alliance he had maintained with Germany for many years. The Mark included the territory between the Eider, Schlei, and Treene. The political separation from the German Empire was soon followed by the ecclesiastical. Canute had reorganized the Danish Church and had divided it into nine dioceses. In 1103 or 1104 a separate Danish archdiocese was erected at Lund for all these bishoprics, and, notwithstanding the protests of the Archbishop of Bremen, Schleswig was made a suffragan of Lund. Before long the political union with Denmark was weakened again. From the time that the whole of Schleswig belonged to Denmark it was ruled by royal governors; these governors were generally princes of the royal house who grew steadily more independent of the king. In 1115 Knut Laward was able to gain the viceregency of Schleswig in fief from the Danish King Niels, and was also made duke of this territory. Thus a basis was laid for a more independent position of the province within the Kingdom of Denmark. Under Knut's successors Schleswig was often united with Denmark, as Waldemar I and II, dukes of Schleswig, were also kings of Denmark. These kings, however, sought to keep Schleswig as their personal domain, separate from the administration of Denmark. In 1231 Abel, the youngest son of Waldemar II, was granted the duchy; he founded an independent ducal line that ruled the duchy for over a hundred and fifty years. Both politically and ecclesiastically the two centuries following tire reign of Knut Laward form the most prosperous period of the province. Of the bishops, Alberus (1096-1134), in particular, was very active in his office, and laboured among the Frisians who had been conquered by Knut. The diocese received large grants of land from Waldemar I, possessions that were scattered through all parts, of the duchy; in 1187 the diocese was released from all payment of imposts and taxes to the king. A number of monasteries arose that did much for the intellectual and material development of the country; nearly thirty monasteries can be proved to have existed in the period before the Reformation. The most important of these were the Cistercian abbeys of Lugumkloster, Guldhom, and Schleswig, the convent of St. John for Benedictine nuns at Schleswig, the Franciscan monasteries at Hadersleben, Tondern, and Schleswig, and the Dominican monastery at Schleswig. In the course of time many of these monasteries had obtained large landed possessions, When in 1325 Duke Eric II died and left a minor son Waldemar V, King Christopher II of Denmark wished to become the guardian and thus gain control of the duchy. However, the powerful Count Gerhard III of Holstein of the Schauenburg line, who was an uncle of Waldemar, and also the latter's guardian, opposed the king. Gerhard gained control of the government, and drove Christopher out of his own kingdom. Waldemar V was elected King of Denmark and in return gave the Duchy of Schleswig to his uncle, the Count of Holstein. Thus the duchies Schleswig and Holstein became united at the same time (1326) Waldemar made a law, called the "Constitutio Waldemariana", by which in future the same person could never be the ruler both of Denmark and Schleswig. During the troubles caused by the return of the banished King Christopher the Counts of Holstein were not able to maintain their control of the Duchy of Schleswig. It was not until the era of Gerhard VI, the grandson of Gerhard III (assassinated 1340), that the counts of Holstein regained possession of Schleswig; Gerhard VI was granted the duchy in fief by Queen Margaret of Denmark, and in 1403 gain possession of almost the whole of the duchy of Holstein on account of the extinction of the line of Kiel. Since this time Schleswig has always been united with Holstein which was a state of the German Empire. On the death in 1459 of Adolf VII, son of Gerhard VI, the line of the counts of Schauenburg became extinct, and the estates of Schleswig and of Holstein elected in 1460 as duke and count the Danish King Christian of the Oldenburg dynasty, who was the sob of Adolf's sister. The new duke and count, though, was obliged to swear that both countries should be "forever undivided", and that they should be independent of Denmark in their internal administration and constitution. Thus both territories were united by personal union with Denmark, the Duchy, of Schleswig (which had been a Danish fief), and the Countship of Holstein, which in 1474 was also raised to a duchy by the Emperor Frederick III. In spite of this union with Denmark both territories remained German in character; the language of the courts and official documents was German, the law of the cities was German, the nobility was German, the bishop and chapter of the Diocese of Schleswig were chosen from German families. The close intellectual union with Germany was still further promoted by the Reformation, which in Schleswig as in the whole of Denmark was largely the work of the rulers. The Bishop of Schleswig of that period, Gottschalk of Ahlefeld (1527-41), fearlessly opposed, indeed, the intrusion of the new doctrine, but his efforts had little success. For in the course of the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries, especially during the rule of the counts of Holstein, the bishops had ceased to be independent of the dukes; from vassals of the king they had become vassals of the dukes and had sunk into mere local bishops. In 1536 Lutheranism was declared the religion of the state by Christian III, the exercise of the Catholic faith was forbidden, and the property of the diocese was confiscated. After Gottschalk's death Tileman of Hussen was appointed in 1541 the first Lutheran Bishop of Schleswig. He was followed by four other Lutheran bishops, after which the diocese was suppressed in 1624. While the Catholic Church was entirely suppressed in Schleswig, in Holstein a few Catholic communities were permitted to remain in existence. In the seventeenth century Catholic Church services were allowed to be held again in a few places. In 1667 all these Catholic communities were placed under the care of the newly-established Vicariate Apostolic of the Northern Missions, and shared its vicissitudes. In 1544 the two duchies were divided between the three sons of the king and Duke Frederick I (d. 1533). The basis of the division was this: three equal portions were formed for the three brothers out of the duchies, which portions were named after the castles of Sonderburg, Gottorp, and Hadersleben, while the courts, the system of taxation, the army, and the diets that were held at Flensburg for Schleswig, and at Kiel for Holstein, remained in common. When in 1580 the Hadersleben line became extinct, another division was made, the possessions of the Hadersleben line being divided between King Frederick II and Duke Adolf of Holstein-Gottorp (1581). After this there were two lines: the royal, which was called Schleswig-Holstein-Glückstadt after the seat of administration for the duchies, and from which in the course of time several branches sprang; second, a ducal line called the Gottorp, line which, besides sharing in the two duchies, also owned the former Diocese of Lubeck. Duke Frederick III of Gottorp, who ruled from 1616 to 1659, put an end to the subdivisions of the Gottorp line by introducing primogeniture. During the eighteenth century the two ruling dynasties were generally hostile to each other because the Gottorp line sought alliance with Sweden, the enemy of Denmark. Thus the duchies became involved in the Thirty Years War and the two wars of the North. In the Treaty of Roeskilde that closed the first war of the North, the Gottorp dynasty received, through the intervention of Sweden, full sovereignty by the suppression of Denmark's suzerainty over its share of the duchies. However, in the Treaty of Stockholm that in 1720 closed the second war of the North, which had not been fortunate for Sweden, the Gottorp line was obliged to concede its share of Schleswig to Denmark and only retained its possessions in Holstein. The whole of Schleswig was now obliged to recognize the Danish king as its ruler. In the treaties of 1767 and 1773 the Gottorp dynasty, which had gained the throne of Russia in the person of Peter III, was obliged to renounce its possessions in Holstein also, in return for which it received Oldenburg. In this way Denmark became the sole ruler of Schleswig-Holstein. The union of the two duchies with the German Empire grew continually weaker, especially as after the dissolution of the German Empire in 1806 the duchies had no protection against the policy. of their ruler; this policy, which was to stamp a Danish character upon them, was not affected by the fact that the Congress of Vienna made Holstein a part of the German Empire. The Danes showed plainly more and more their determination to separate the two duchies, which by right should never have been divided, and to gain at least Schleswig as a part of the Danish nation, because the population of Schleswig was largely Danish in speech. The people, however, accepted all the measures of the Danish government very composedly, as the male line of the royal dynasty would soon be extinct and the female line was, by the Salic law of succession, not capable of succeeding in the duchies, although it could in Denmark. The duchies were satisfied even with the constitution granted in 1834, although it was not one in common for both duchies and did not preserve any essential right of the people. King Christian, however, in 1846 published a letter in which he declared the Danish right of succession to be also valid in the duchies, and his successor Frederick VIII (1848-63) was forced by popular assemblies at Copenhagen, soon after he came to the throne, to promise the incorporation of Schleswig into the Danish kingdom. These two events were followed by a revolt of the people of the duchies. On 24 March, 1848, a temporary provincial government was established at Kiel, which declared that it assumed for the time being in the name of the ruler, the Danish king, the maintenance of the rights of both duchies, as the ruler had been forced by mob rule to take a hostile position to the duchies. When, upon this, Denmark sent troops into Schleswig-Holstein, not only did the population of the duchies take up arms, but there was also a great national movement in Germany in favour of their endangered countrymen in the North. Volunteers from all parts of Germany went to the aid of the people of Schleswig-Holstein. King Frederick William IV of Prussia sent an army into the duchies and even the Diet of the German Confederation was carried away by the national enthusiasm. It proclaimed that Schleswig was made a member of the German Confederation and gave to Prussia the direction of the war against Denmark. The Prussian troops and those of the confederation won, it is true, several brilliant victories, especially the carrying of the fortifications of Duppel. However, the lack of a German fleet, and the threatened interference of Russia and Great Britain led Prussia to consent to a truce, which was followed by a treaty in 1850 that was also accepted by the German Confederation. Contrary to the general promise that the rights of the duchies should be respected, they were again given to Denmark. After this the five Great Powers declared at a conference held at London in 1852, that the Danish Kingdom was indivisible in all its parts, that the separate position of the duchies should be maintained within this kingdom, and that should the male line of the Danish dynasty become extinct the succession was to fall to the House of Glücksburg. In this way the right of succession previously valid in the duchies of the Elbe was thrown aside, and the Augustenburg line, that had branched off from the Danish royal house in the sixteenth century, was excluded from the succession to Schleswig Holstein. Consequently the German Confederation and Frederick, Crown prince of Augustenburg, protested against the London protocol, while Prussia and Austria recognized it. After the duchies were handed over to Denmark there was an energetic attempt, especially in Schleswig, to make these provinces entirely Danish in character. All connexion with Holstein was set aside, a custom-house was erected on the Eider, Danish preachers, teachers, and troops were sent into Schleswig, while the German soldiers and officers were brought into Danish garrisons, and lastly Danish was made the language of the Church and schools. When the male line of the Danish royal family became extinct at the death of Frederick VII (15 November, 1863), according to the regulations of the London protocol Christian of Glücksburg succeeded as Christian IX. Immediately after his accession Christian announced a constitution which included the unconditional incorporation of Schleswig into Denmark. The proclamation of this Constitution of November was followed in Germany by unprecendented excitement and manifestations of disapproval, and the demand was made for the complete separation of the duchies from Denmark. Holstein was occupied by the troops of the German Confederation; even Prussia and Austria now took the part of the duchies. These powers called upon Denmark to withdraw the Constitution of November, and when these demands were rejected they sent Prussian and Austrian troops under the command of the Prussian Field Marshal Wrangel into Schleswig in Feb., 1864. After the fortifications of Duppel, the Island of Alsen, and the entire peninsula of Jutland had been gained by the Germans the Danes saw themselves compelled to yield. In the Peace of Vienna (October, 1864) King Christian renounced all rights over Schleswig and Holstein in favour of the Emperor of Austria and the King of Prussia, and recognized in advance whatever disposition the two monarchs should make of these provinces. The possession in common of the duchies only increased the strain of the relations existing between Prussia and Austria. Austria desired to form a new state of the German Confederation under the government of the Duke of Augustenburg, while Prussia, on the contrary, preferred to keep the region for itself and only permit the country to have a ruler of its own if all traffic, all customs, and the army of the new state were under the control of Prussia. The Prince of Augustenburg would not consent to such an arrangement. In the Treaty of Gastein of 14 Aug., 1865, the duchies were divided between the two powers. Austria took in charge the administration of Holstein, Prussia that of Schleswig. It was seen from the start that this solution of the question could not be of long duration. The tension between the two powers for pre-eminence in Germany led in the next year to a war between them. Austria was defeated, was obliged to withdraw from the German Confederation and to renounce all rights to Schleswig and Holstein in favour of Prussia. From 1867 the two duchies have formed the Prussian province of Schleswig-Holstein (see GERMANY, VICARIATE APOSTOLIC OF NORTHERN). See bibliography in FISCHER-BENZON, Katalog, der Landesbibliothek fur Schleswig-Holstein (Schleswig, 1896-98); Quellenaammlung der Gesellschaft fur schleswig-holstein-lauenburgische Geschichte (5 vols., Kiel, 1862-); Schleswig-Holstein-Lauenburgische Regesten und Urkunden (3 vols., Hamburg and Leipzig, 1886-96); Zeitschrift des Vereins fur schleswig-holatein-lauenburgische Geschiche (Kiel, 1870); Archiv fur Staats und Kirchengeschichte der Herzogtumer Schleswig, Holstein und Lauenburg (5 vols., Altons, 1833-43); CHRISTIANI, Geschichte der Herzogtumer Schleswig und Holstein (4 Vols., Flensburg and Leipzig, 1776-79), continued by HEGEWISCH AND KOBBE (3 parts, 17841834); WAITZ, Schleswig-Holsteins Geschichte (2 vols., Gottingen, 1851-52); IDEM Kurze Schteswig-Holsteinische Landesgeschichte (2nd ed., Kiel, 1898); SACH, Das Herzogtum Schleswig in seiner ethnographischen und nationalen Entwicklung (3 parts, Halle, 1896 1907); JENSEN AND MICHELSEN, Schleswig-Holsteinische Kirchengeschichte (4 parts, Kiel, 1873-79); Die Bau- und Kunstdenkmäler der Provinz Schleswig-Holstein, ed. HAUPT (3 vols., Kiel, 1887-89); VON SCHUBERT, Kirchengeschichte Schleswig-Holsteins (Kiel, 1907); Schriften des Vereins fur schieswig-holsteinische Kirchengeschichis (Kiel, 1906). JOSEPH LINS Aloysius Schlor Aloysius Schlör Ascetical writer, b. at Vienna, 17 June, 1805; d. at Graz, 2 Nov., 1852. After completing his studies at Vienna he was ordained priest on 22 Aug., 1828, and placed as chaplain at Altlerchenfeld. In 1831 he was prefect of studies at the seminary of Vienna and at the same time took advanced studies in theology, earning the degree of Doctor in 1832. Two years later he was appointed spiritual director of the Frintaneum and chaplain at the Court and confessor to Emperor Ferdinand. He resigned his position in 1837, labored as chaplain for the Germans at Verona, was then adopted into the Diocese of Seckau and made spiritual director at the priests' seminary in Graz. Here he spent the rest of his days, doing much for the reformation of the clergy in Austria, especially by the reintroduction of spiritual retreats and by his writings. The principal of these are:"'Warum bin ich Katholik?" published between 1834 and 1837; "Jesu mein Verlangen", a much-valued prayerbook (1835, 7th ed., 1902), "Philanthropie des Glaubens, oder das kirchliche Leben in Verona in der neuesten Zeit", 1839; "Geistesübungen des hl. Ignatius" (1840); "Clericus orans et meditans" (1841, 1883); "Der geistliche Wegweiser" (1842), to which is added an instruction showing how a priest can obtain a good library; "Der Kleriker in der Einsamkeit" (1844, 1902); "Betrachtungen für Priester und Kleriker" (3 vols., 1847; 1900). His sermons were published in 1851, and a special edition of his Lenten Sermons was issued in 1905. Hist.-polit. Blatter, V, 590; Linzer Quartalschr. (1883), 886; (1884), 188; (1890), 431; Allgem. deutsche Biogr., s. v. WURZBACH, Biogr. Lex. des Kaisertums Oesterreich, XXX, 132; HURTER, Nomencl., II, 1163. FRANCIS MERSHMAN John Frederick Henry Schlosser John Frederick Henry Schlosser Jurist, b. at Frankfort-on-the-Main, 30 December, 1780; d. there 22 January, 1851. He studied jurisprudence at various universities, among others at Jena, where he entered into familiar relations with Schiller and Goethe. After receiving the degree of Doctor of Jurisprudence (1803), he settled at Frankfort as an advocate, later being appointed, by Primate Prince Dalberg, counsel of the municipal court (1806), counselor for the high schools and studies, and director of the grand-ducal lyceum (1812). On the dissolution of the Grand duchy of Frankfort, Schlosser resigned his office, and in 1814 entered the Catholic Church with his wife Sophie (née Du Fay). He was one of the representatives of his native city at the Congress of Vienna. He was later one of the most determined champions of the rights of the Catholic community in Frankfort, and successfully advocated the civil equality of every Christian denomination. Soon, however, he withdrew from public life, and after 1825 usually spent the winter in Frankfort, passing the summer at his country seat, Neuburg near Heidelberg. As he was charitable, hospitable, and free from all denominational narrowness, and devoted himself whole-heartedly to scientific undertakings (e.g. the Monumenta Germaniae) besides possessing a fine artistic sense, his home soon became a centre for the leading spirits in literature, art, and science. With Goethe he remained ever on terms of familiarity, and was his zealous collaborator in the romance "Aus meinem Leben". On the death of the great writer, Schlosser began a "Goethe Collection", which later passed to the ecclesiastical seminary at Mainz. He wrote: "Die morgenlandische orthodoxe Kirche Russlands" (Heidelberg, 1845); "Die Kirche in ihren Liedern durch alle Jahrhunderte" (2 vols., Freiburg, 1851; 2nd ed., 1863). After his death his wife published from his papers four booklets (1856-9), and Frese published "Goethe-Briefe aus Schlossers Nachlass" (Stuttgart, 1877). Allgem. deutsche Biogr., xxxi (Leipzig, 1890), 541 sq. PATRICIUS SCHLAGER Francis Xavier Schmalzgrueber Francis Xavier Schmalzgrueber Canonist, b. at Griesbach, Bavaria, 9 Oct., 1663; d. at Dillingen 7 Nov., 1735. Entering the Society of Jesus in 1679 he made his studies at Ingolstadt, obtaining the doctorate both in theology and canon law. He taught humanities at Munich, Dillingen, and Neuburg; philosophy at Mindelheim, Augsburg, and Ingolstadt; dogmatic theology at Innsbruck and Lucerne. From 1703 to 1716 (with an interruption of two years when he occupied the chair of moral theology) he was professor of canon law, alternating between Dillingen and Ingolstadt. He was twice chancellor of the University of Dillingen; for two years censor of books for the Jesuits at Rome, and for a like period prefect of studies at Munich. His judgment and clearness in expounding questions in ecclesiastical jurisprudence cause him to be held in great esteem even to-day. His chief work, "Jus Ecclesiasticum Universum", first published at Ingolstadt in 1817, underwent various editions, the last appearing at Rome (1843-5) in twelve quarto volumes. A compendium of this work was styled "Succincta sacrorum canonum doctrina"; another, "Compendium juris ecclesiastici"; both were published at Augsburg in 1747. Grandclaude's work (Paris, 1882-3) is practically a compendium of Schmalzgrueber. Other writings are: "Judicium ecclesiasticum", "Clerus saecularis et regularis", "Sponsalia et matrimonia", "Crimen fori ecclesiastici", "Consilia seu responsa Juris"; all appeared at Augsburg between 1712 and 1722. MEDERER, Annales Ingolstadiensis Academiae, III (Ingolstadt, 1782), 142; DE BACKER, Bibliotheque, ed. SOMMERVOGEL, VII (1896), 795 sq.; Allg. Realencyk. (Ratisbon, 1886). ANDREW B. MEEHAN Christoph von Schmid Christoph von Schmid Writer of children's stories and educator, b. at Dinkelsbuehl, in Bavaria, 15 Aug., 1768; d. at Augsburg in 1854. He studied theology at Dillingen, and, having been ordained priest in 1791, served as assistant in several parishes till 1796, when he was placed at the head of a large school in Thannhausen on the Mindel, where he taught for many years. He soon began writing books for children, of which the earliest was "First Lessons about God for the Little Ones", written in words of one syllable; next, a "Bible History for Children", a work which became very popular far beyond the confines of Bavaria; and, lastly, his famous stories for children. From 1816 to 1826 he was parish priest at Oberstadion in Würtemberg. In the latter year he was appointed canon of the Cathedral of Augsburg, where he died of cholera in his eighty-seventh year. In 1841 he began the publication of a complete edition in twenty-four volumes of his scattered writings. In the introduction he tells his readers how his stories were written. They were not composed for an unknown public, and in a mercenary spirit, but for children, among whom the author daily moved, and were not at first meant for publication. To enforce his lessons in religious instruction, he sought to illustrate them by examples taken from Christian antiquity, from legends, and other sources. Usually a story or a chapter was read to the children after school hours as a reward, on condition that they should write it down at home. He thus became familiar with the range of thought and the speech of children, and was careful to speak their language rather than that of books. He was able to observe with his own eyes what it was that impressed the minds and hearts of children both of tender and of riper years. Their manner of repeating the stories also helped him. He was the pioneer writer of books for children, and his great merits are fully acknowledged by both Catholic and Protestant writers on pedagogics. His stories have been translated into twenty-four languages, and to this day he is regarded in Germany as the prince of story-writers for the young. He is the greatest educator Bavaria produced in the eighteenth century, and ranks, both as to theory and practice, with the most celebrated of modern educators. Canon Schmid was the ideal of a mild, charitable, unselfish man, of childlike simplicity of character, a devout Catholic priest, whose virtues are mirrored in his writings. On 3 September, 1901, Thannhausen unveiled the bronze statue of the celebrated story-writer and educator. Erinnerungen (Memoirs), published by WERFER (Augsburg, 1853-7); Letters and Diaries of Chr. Von Schmid, ed. WERFER (Munich, 1868); Monatsschrift fur katholische Lehreinnen (1905, nn. 1 and 2). B. GULDNER Friedrich von Schmidt Friedrich von Schmidt Born at Frickenhofen, 1825; died at Vienna, 1891, After studying at the technical high school at Stuttgart, he became, in 1845, one of the guild workers employed in building the Cologne cathedral, on which he worked for fifteen years. Most of the working drawings for the towers were made by Schmidt and Statz. In 1848 he attained to the rank of master-workman and in 1856 passed the state examination as architect. After becoming a Catholic in 1858, he went to Milan as professor of architecture and began the restoration of the cathedral of San Ambrogio. On account of the confusion caused by the war of 1859 he went to Vienna, where he was a professor at the academy and cathedral architect from 1862; in 1865 he received the title of chief architect, and in 1888 was ennobled by the emperor. Next to Ferstel he is the most important modern Gothic architect. In this style he built at Vienna the Church of St. Lazarus, the church of the White Tanners, that of the Brigittines. He also built the Classical gymnasium with a Gothic facade and the memorial building erected on the site of the amphitheatre that had been destroyed by fire. The last mentioned building was in Venetian Gothic. A large number of small ecclesiastical and secular buildings in Austria and Germany were designed by him. His last work was the restoration of the cathedral at Funfkirchen in Hungary. His chief fame however he gained by his restoration of the Cathedral of St. Stephen at Vienna. He took down the spire and worked on its rebuilding up to 1872. His design for the town-hall of Vienna was also a very successful one. The projecting middle section has a fine central tower that rises free to a height of 328 ft. and is flanked by four smaller towers. This section harmoniously combines height with broad horizontal members. A large court and six smaller ones are enclosed by the extensive building, the wings of which end in pavilions. Nothing in the building shows the regularity of a set pattern; the architect, rather, made skilful use of individual Renaissance motifs. When he began in Vienna his manner was rather stiff, but he worked his way up to artistic freedom. In building the parish church at Funfhaus he even ventured to set a facade with two towers in front of an octagonal central structure with a high cupola and a corona of chapels. His motto was to unite German force with Italian freedom. He modified the tendency to height in the German Gothic by horizontal members and introduced many modifications into the old standard of the style in order to attain a more agreeable general effect. In this way he always remained unfettered and original in his style and replaced in part what was lacking in decorative details or in the means of producing the same. He was teacher and model to many younger architects. A bronze statue of him has been placed before the town-hall of Vienna. His son Heinrich was overseer at the building of the cathedral of Frankfort and afterwards professor of medieval architecture at Munich. REICHENSPERGER, Zur Charakteristik des Baumeister Fr. von Schmidt (Dusseldorf, 1891); KUHN, Kunstgeschichte, II (New York, 1909). G. GIETMANN Gerard Schneeman Gerard Schneemann Born at Wesel, Lower Rhine, 12 Feb., 1829; d. at Kerkrade, Holland, 20 Nov., 1885. After studying law for three years, he entered the seminary at Munster where he was ordained subdeacon in 1850. He became a member of the Society of Jesus, 24 Nov., 1851, and was ordained priest on 22 Dec., 1856. For some years he taught philosophy at Bonn and Aachen, and subsequently lectured on church history and canon law in the Jesuit scholasticate at Maria Laach. His first notable publication was "Studien über die Honoriusfrage" (Frieburg, 1864) in which he refuted the opinion of Döllinger. Between the years 165 and 1870, he contributed a number of timely and important dissertations to "Die Encyclica Papst Pius IX" and "Das öcumenische Concil", two series of papers that were published at Freiburg under the general title of "Stimmen aus Maria-Laach". In 1871 the "Stimmen" became a regular monthly review and for six years was edited by Father Schneemann. He was moreover the chief promoter in the collaboration and publication of the "Acta et decreta sacrorum conciliorum recentiorum", commonly called "Collection Lacensis", and died while preparing the documents of the Vatican Council for the seventh and last volume. His work "Controfersiarum de divinae gratiae liberique arbitrii concordia initia et progressus" (Freiburg, 1881), was the occasion of a renewed controversy on the nature of grace and free will. Stimmen aus Maria-Laach, XXX (1886), 167 sq.; Collectio Lacensis, VII (Freiburg, 1885), ix; Sommervogel, Bibl. de la Compagnie de Jesus, VII (Paris, 1896), c. 822; Frins, S. Thomae doctrina de cooperatione Dei (Paris, 1892); Dummermuth, Defensio doctrinae S. Thomae de praemotione physica (Paris, 1896). F.X. DELANY Matthias von Schoenberg Matthias von Schoenberg Author, b. at Ehingen, in the Diocese of Constance, 9 Nov., 1732; d. at Munich, 20 Apr., 1792. Of his early life little is known; he entered the Society of Jesus on 15 Sept., 1750. From 1766 to 1772 he was in charge of Eleemosyna Aurea, an institution founded for the purpose of spreading among the faithful instructive books written in a style that should prove attractive and intelligible even to the unlettered. Shortly after the suppression of the Society he was chosen by the elector of Bavaria as his ecclesiastical councilor. An untiring champion of Christian morals and the Catholic religion, Schoenberg, besides compiling prayer-books and editing educational works, wrote several treatises on the fundamental truths of religion, and many devotional and meditative books and brochures designed to quicken the devotion of the people to the Blessed Virgin and the sacred Heart. So successful was he in his apostleship of the press that many of his writings -- Sommervogel mentions nearly forty in all -- ran through five and sic editions. The following are perhaps his best known works: "Die Zierde der Jugend"; "Der höfliche Schüler"; "Die Religionsgründe in ihren ordentlichen Zusammenhange"; "Der Santfmuthige Christ"; "Wahrheitsgründe des katholischen Hauptgrundsatzes für die Unfehlbarkeit der Kirche". Sommervogel, Bibl. de la C. de J., VII, 841; Hurter, Nomenclator, III, 243. JAMES A. CAHILL Peter Schoffer Peter Schöffer Publisher and printer, b. at Gernsheim on the Rine about 1425; d. at Mainz in 1503. As a cleric in minor orders he was in Paris in 1451 working as a manuscript copyist. In 1455 he appeared as a witness at Mainz for Johannes Fust against Gutenberg. Later he married Fust's daughter, Christine, and he was a partner of Fust in the publishing business until 1456, from that date up to 1503 printing independently. Schöffer may have become an experienced printer as an assistant of Fust and perhaps of Gutenberg, but he had no share whatever either in the invention or in the improvement of typography, as has been claimed for him and his descendants; this is certain, notwithstanding the splendid impressions of the Psalters bearing his name and published in 1457 and 1459, the technical preparation of which has been ascribed to Gutenberg. The evident deterioration of books issued at the end of the century proves that Schöffer made no technical improvement in the art of printing. The work of Schöffer's press shows all the technical excellence of his predecessors, but no advance. He did much for the development of the art of printing by establishing commercial relations beyond the borders of Germany. But the management of his press was always conservative, and he published almost exclusively works on civil law, canon law, and theology. He neither made improvements nor did he adopt the improvements of his contemporaries, such as reducing the size of his books, issuing popular books, etc. At the time of Schöffer's death many printers of Germany and Italy had long surpassed both his publications and his press. Schöffer's son John carried on the business, 1503-31. The son was a capable printer and exerted himself to improve the work produced by his press, but was unable to place himself in the front rank of printers of the time. A second son of Schöffer's, Peter the younger, was a capable die-cutter and printer, and engaged in his trade at Mainz, 1509-23; at Worms, 1512-29; at Strasburg, 1530-39; at Venice, 1541-42. His son Ivo took up his quarters at Mainz, 1531-55, and there carried on the printing business of his grandfather. Van der Linde, Gesch. der Erfind. der Buchdruckkunst (Berlin, 1886); Hartwig, Festschrift zum 500 jahr. Geburstage von J. Gutenberg (Mainz, 1900). HEINRICH WILHELM WALLAU Schola Cantorum Schola Cantorum A place for the teaching and practice of ecclesiastical chant, or a body of singers banded together for the purpose of rendering the music in church. In the primitive Church the singing was done by the clergy, but, in order to set them free from this and enable them to give their attention more to what strictly pertained to their office, trained singers for the musical part of the liturgy were introduced. Pope Hilary (d. 438) is sometimes credited with having inaugurated the first schola cantorum, but it was Gregory the Great, as we are told in his life by John the Deacon, who established the school on a firm basis and endowed it. The house in which the schola was lodged was rebuilt in 844 by Pope Sergius II, who had himself been trained in it, as were also the popes Sergius I, Gregory II, Stephen III, and Paul I. This Roman school furnished the choir at most of the papal functions and was governed by an official called prior scholae cantorum or simply cantor. From Cardinal Thomasi's preface to the twelfth-century Vatican antiphonary, we learn that, amongst his other duties, he had "to point out to each individual, the day before, what responsory he was to sing in the night office". From Rome the institution spread to other parts of the Church. Pepin, the father of Charlemagne, first introduced Roman chanters into France, placing them at Lyons. Charlemagne encouraged the work, and through his influence several other schools were established in his empire. That of Metz became one of the most famous; other well-known ones were at Hirschau Corbie, and St. Gall. In England the diffusion of he Roman chant was due chiefly to St. Benet Biscop and St. Wilfrid. Several of the cathedrals (e.g. York, Sarum, Hereford, and Worcester) and many of the abbeys (e.g. Glastonbury and Malmesbury) had important scholae cantorum attached to them. The Protestant Reformation put an end to the English schools, while abroad they seem to have died out when paid singers began to be employed in the churches, though perhaps the maîtrise or cathedral choir-school of to-day may be regarded as their legitimate successor. In monasteries at the present day the name schola cantorum is often applied to certain selected monks whose duty it is to chant the more elaborate portions of the liturgical music, such as the graduals and alleluias at Mass, the rest of the community joining only in the simpler parts. The official in charge of such a schola is usually called the "precentor". In recent times the chief schools of ecclesiastical chant have been at Ratisbon, Mechlin, Einsiedeln, Beuron, and, greatest of all, Solesmes. In these the study of the manuscripts and the work of restoring the traditional chant of the Church have been pursued with much success. The schola of Solesmes was commenced by Dom Gueranger and has been ably carried on by his successors, DD. Pothier and Mocquereau. The latter is precentor at Solesmes (now in the Isle of Wight, England), while the papal commission entrusted with the work of preparing the official Vatican edition of the Chant is presided over by Abbot Pothier. (See GUERANGER, PROSPER LOUIS PASCHAL; SOLESMES). ARMFIELD in Dict. Christ. Antiq. (London, 1880), s.v.; ZIEGELBAUR, Hist. lit. O.S.B. (Augsburg, 1754). G. CYPRIAN ALSTON Scholasticism Scholasticism Scholasticism is a term used to designate both a method and a system. It is applied to theology as well as to philosophy. Scholastic theology is distinguished from Patristic theology on the one hand, and from positive theology on the other. The schoolmen themselves distinguished between theologia speculativa sive scholastica and theologia positiva. Applied to philosophy, the word "Scholastic" is often used also, to designate a chronological division intervening between the end of the Patristic era in the fifth century and the beginning of the modern era, about 1450. It will, therefore, make for clearness and order if we consider: I. The origin of the word "Scholastic"; II. The history of the period called Scholastic in the history of philosophy; III. The Scholastic method in philosophy, with incidental reference to the Scholastic method in theology; and IV. The contents of the Scholastic system. The revival of Scholasticism in recent times has been already treated under the head NEO-SCHOLASTICISM. I. ORIGIN OF THE NAME "SCHOLASTIC" There are in Greek literature a few instances of the use of the word scholastikos to designate a professional philosopher. Historically, however, the word, as now used, is to be traced, not to Greek usage, but to early Christian institutions. In the Christian schools, especially after the beginning of the sixth century, it was customary to call the head of the school magister scholae, capiscola, or scholasticus. As time went on, the last of these appellations was used exclusively. The curriculum of those schools included dialectic among the seven liberal arts, which was at that time the only branch of philosophy studied systematically. The head of the school generally taught dialectic, and out of his teaching grew both the manner of philosophizing and the system of philosophy that prevailed during all the Middle Ages. Consequently, the name "Scholastic" was used and is still used to designate the method and system that grew out of the academic curriculum of the schools or, more definitely, out of the dialectical teaching of the masters of the schools (scholastici). It does not matter that, historically, the Golden Age of Scholastic philosophy, namely, the thirteenth century, falls within a period when the schools, the curriculum of which was the seven liberal arts, including dialectic had given way to another organization of studies, the studia generalia, or universities. The name, once given, continued, as it almost always does, to designate the method and system which had by this time passed into a new phase of development. Academically, the philosophers of the thirteenth century are known as magistri, or masters; historically, however, they are Scholastics, and continue to be so designated until the end of the medieval period. And, even after the close of the Middle Ages, a philosopher or theologian who adopts the method or the system of the medieval Scholastics is said to be a Scholastic. II. THE SCHOLASTIC PERIOD The period extending from the beginning of Christian speculation to the time of St. Augustine, inclusive, is known as the Patristic era in philosophy and theology. In general, that era inclined to Platonism and underestimated the importance of Aristotle. The Fathers strove to construct on Platonic principles a system of Christian philosophy. They brought reason to the aid of Revelation. They leaned, however, towards the doctrine of the mystics, and, in ultimate resort, relied more on spiritual intuition than on dialectical proof for the establishment and explanation of the highest truths of philosophy. Between the end of the Patristic era in the fifth century and the beginning of the Scholastic era in the ninth there intervene a number of intercalary thinkers, as they may be called, like Claudianus Mamertus, Boethius, Cassiodorus, St. Isidore of Seville, Venerable Bede etc., who helped to hand down to the new generation the traditions of the Patristic age and to continue into the Scholastic era the current of Platonism. With the Carolingian revival of learning in the ninth century began a period of educational activity which resulted in a new phase of Christian thought known as Scholasticism. The first masters of the schools in the ninth century Alcuin, Rabanus, etc., were not indeed, more original than Boethius or Cassiodorus; the first original thinker in the Scholastic era was John the Scot (see ERIUGENA, JOHN SCOTUS). Nevertheless they inaugurated the Scholastic movement because they endeavoured to bring the Patristic (principally the Augustinian) tradition into touch with the new life of European Christianity. They did not abandon Platonism. They knew little of Aristotle except as a logician. But by the emphasis they laid on dialectical reasoning, they gave a new direction to Christian tradition in philosophy. In the curriculum of the schools in which they taught, philosophy was represented by dialectic. On the textbooks of dialectic which they used they wrote commentaries and glosses, into which. Little by little, they admitted problems of psychology, metaphysics, cosmology, and ethics. So that the Scholastic movement as a whole may be said to have sprung from the discussions of the dialecticians. Method, contents, and conclusions were influenced by this origin. There resulted a species of Christian Rationalism which more than any other trait characterizes Scholastic philosophy in every successive stage of its development and marks it off very definitely from the Patristic philosophy, which, as has been said, was ultimately intuitional and mystic. With Roscelin, who appeared about the middle of the eleventh century, the note of Rationalism is very distinctly sounded, and the first rumbling is heard of the inevitable reaction, the voice of Christian mysticism uttering its note of warning, and condemning the excess into which Rationalism had fallen. In the eleventh and twelfth centuries, therefore, Scholasticism passed through its period of storm and stress. On the one side were the advocates of reason, Roscelin, Abelard, Peter Lombard; on the other were the champions of mysticism, St. Anselm, St. Peter Damian, St. Bernard, and the Victorines. Like all ardent advocates, the Rationalists went too far at first, and only gradually brought their method within the lines of orthodoxy and harmonized it with Christian reverence for the mysteries of Faith. Like all conservative reactionists, the mystics at first condemned the use as well as the abuse of reason; they did not reach an intelligent compromise with the dialecticians until the end of the twelfth century. In the final outcome of the struggle, it was Rationalism that, having modified its unreasonable claims, triumphed in the Christian schools, without, however driving the mystics from the field. Meantime, Eclectics, like John of Salisbury, and Platonists, like the members of the School of Chartres, gave to the Scholastic movement a broader spirit of toleration, imparted, so to speak, a sort of Humanism to philosophy, so that, when we come to the eve of the thirteenth century, Scholasticism has made two very decided steps in advance. First, the use of reason in the discussion of spiritual truth and the application of dialectic to theology are accepted with. out protest, so long as they are kept within the bounds of moderation. Second, there is a willingness on the part of the Schoolmen to go outside the lines of strict ecclesiastical tradition and learn, not only from Aristotle, who was now beginning to be known as a metaphysician and a psychologist, but also from the Arabians and the Jews, whose works had begun to penetrate in Latin translations into the schools of Christian Europe. The taking of Constantinople in 1204, the introduction of Arabian, Jewish, and Greek works into the Christian schools, the rise of the universities, and the foundation of the mendicant orders -- these are the events which led to the extraordinary intellectual activity of the thirteenth century, which centered in the University of Paris. At first there was considerable confusion, and it seemed as if the battles won in the twelfth century by the dialecticians should be fought over again. The translations of Aristotle made from the Arabian and accompanied by Arabian commentaries were tinged with Pantheism, Fatalism, and other Neoplatonic errors. Even in the Christian schools there were declared Pantheists, like David of Dinant, and outspoken Averroists, like Siger of Brabant, who bade fair to prejudice the cause of Aristoteleanism. These developments were suppressed by the most stringent disciplinary measures during the first few decades of the thirteenth century. While they were still a source of danger, men like William of Auvergne and Alexander of Hales hesitated between the traditional Augustinianism of the Christian schools and the new Aristoteleanism, which came from a suspected source. Besides, Augustinianism and Platonism accorded with piety, while Aristoteleanism was found to lack the element of mysticism. In time, however, the translations made from the Greek revealed an Aristotle free from the errors attributed to him by the Arabians, and, above all, the commanding genius of St. Albertus Magnus and his still more illustrious disciple, St. Thomas Aquinas, who appeared at the critical moment, calmly surveyed the difficulties of the situation, and met them fearlessly, won the victory for the new philosophy and continued successfully the traditions established in the preceding century. Their contemporary, St. Bonaventure, showed that the new learning was not incompatible with mysticism drawn from Christian sources, and Roger Bacon demonstrated by his unsuccessful attempts to develop the natural sciences the possibilities of another kind which were latent in Aristoteleanism. With Duns Scotus, a genius of the first order, but not of the constructive type, begins the critical phase, of Scholasticism. Even before his time, the Franciscan and the Dominican currents had set out in divergent directions. It was his keen and unrelenting search for the weak points in Thomistic philosophy that irritated and wounded susceptibilities among the followers of St. Thomas, and brought about the spirit of partisanship which did so much to dissipate the energy of Scholasticism in the fourteenth century. The recrudescence of Averroism in the schools, the excessive cultivation of formalism and subtlety, the growth of artificial and even barbarous terminology, and the neglect of the study of nature and of history contributed to the same result. Ockham's Nominalism and Durandus's attempt to "simplify" Scholastic philosophy did not have the effect which their authors intended. "The glory and power of scholasticism faded into the warmth and brightness of mysticism," and Gerson, Thomas à Kempis, and Eckhart are more representative of what the Christian Church was actually thinking in the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries than are the Thomists, Scotists, and Ockhamists of that period, who frittered away much valuable time in the discussion of highly technical questions which arose within the schools and possess little interest except for adepts in Scholastic subtlety. After the rise of Humanism, when the Renaissance, which ushered in the modern era, was in full progress, the great Italian, Spanish, and Portuguese commentators inaugurated an age of more healthy Scholasticism, and the great Jesuit teachers, Toletus, Vasquez, and Suarez, seemed to recall the best days of thirteenth century speculation. The triumph of scientific discovery, with which, as a rule, the representatives of Scholasticism in the seats of academic authority had, unfortunately, too little sympathy, led to new ways of philosophizing, and when, finally, Descartes in practice, if not in theory, effected a complete separation of philosophy from theology, the modern era had begun and the age known as that of Scholasticism had come to an end. III. THE SCHOLASTIC METHOD No method in philosophy has been more unjustly condemned than that of the Scholastics. No philosophy has been more grossly misrepresented. And this is true not only of the details, but also of the most essential elements of Scholasticism. Two charges, especially, are made against the Schoolmen: First, that they confounded philosophy with theology; and second, that they made reason subservient to authority. As a matter of fact, the very essence of Scholasticism is, first, its clear delimitation of the respective domains of philosophy and theology, and, second, its advocacy of the use of reason. A. Theology and Philosophy Christian thinkers, from the beginning, were confronted with the question: How are we to reconcile reason with revelation, science with faith, philosophy with theology? The first apologists possessed no philosophy of their own. They had to deal with a pagan world proud of its literature and its philosophy, ready at any moment to flaunt its inheritance of wisdom in the face of ignorant Christians. The apologists met the situation by a theory that was as audacious as it must have been disconcerting to the pagans. They advanced the explanation that all the wisdom of Plato and the other Greeks was due to the inspiration of the Logos; that it was God's truth, and, therefore, could not be in contradiction with the supernatural revelation contained in the Gospels. It was a hypothesis calculated not only to silence a pagan opponent, but also to work constructively. We find it in St. Basil, in Origen, and even in St. Augustine. The belief that the two orders of truth, the natural and the supernatural, must harmonize, is the inspiration of intellectual activity in the Patristic era. But that era did little to define the limits of the two realms of truth. St. Augustine believes that faith aids reason (credo ut intelligam) and that reason aids faith (intelligo ut credam); he is, however, inclined to emphasize the first principle and not the second. He does not develop a definite methodology in dealing with them. The Scholastics, almost from the first, attempted to do so. John Scotus Eriugena, in the ninth century, by his doctrine that all truth is a theophany, or showing forth of God, tried to elevate philosophy to the rank of theology, and identify the two in a species of theosophy. Abelard, in the twelfth century, tried to bring theology down to the level of philosophy, and identify both in a Rationalistic system. The greatest of the Scholastics in the thirteenth century, especially St. Thomas Aquinas, solved the problem for all time, so far as Christian speculation is concerned, by showing that the two are distinct sciences, and yet that they agree. They are distinct, he teaches, because, while philosophy relies on reason alone, theology uses the truths derived from revelation, and also because there are some truths, the mysteries of Faith, which lie completely outside the domain of philosophy and belong to theology. They agree, and must agree, because God is the author of all truth, and it is impossible to think that He would teach in the natural order anything that contradicts what He teaches in the supernatural order. The recognition of these principles is one of the crowning achievements of Scholasticism. It is one of the characteristics that mark it off from the Patristic era, in which the same principles were, so to speak, in solution, and not crystallized in definite expression. lt is the trait which differentiates Scholasticism from Averroism. It is the inspiration of all Scholastic effort. As long as it lasted Scholasticism lasted, and as soon as the opposite conviction became established, the conviction, namely, that what is true in theology may be false in philosophy, Scholasticism ceased to exist. It is, therefore, a matter of constant surprise to those who know Scholasticism to find it misrepresented on this vital point. B. Scholastic Rationalism Scholasticism sprang from the study of dialectic in the schools. The most decisive battle of Scholasticism was that which it waged in the twelfth century against the mystics who condemned the use of dialectic. The distinguishing mark of Scholasticism in the age of its highest development is its use of the dialectical method. It is, therefore, a matter, once more, for surprise, to find Scholasticism accused of undue subservience to authority and of the neglect of reason. Rationalism is a word which has various meanings. It is sometimes used to designate a system which, refusing to acknowledge the authority of revelation, tests all truth by the standard of reason. In this sense, the Scholastics were not Rationalists. The Rationalism of Scholasticism consists in the conviction that reason is to be used in the elucidation of spiritual truth and in defence of the dogmas of Faith. It is opposed to mysticism, which distrusted reason and placed emphasis on intuition and contemplation. In this milder meaning of the term, all the Scholastics were convinced Rationalists, the only difference being that some, like Abelard and Roscelin, were too ardent in their advocacy of the use of reason, and went so far as to maintain that reason can prove even the supernatural mysteries of Faith, while others, like St. Thomas, moderated the claims of reason, set limits to its power of proving spiritual truth, and maintained that the mysteries of faith could not be discovered and cannot be proved by unaided reason. The whole Scholastic movement, therefore, is a Rationalistic movement in the second sense of the term Rationalism. The Scholastics used their reason; they applied dialectic to the study of nature, of human nature and of supernatural truth. Far from depreciating reason, they went as far as man can go -- some modern critics think they went too far -- in the application of reason to the discussion of the dogmas of Faith. They acknowledged the authority of revelation, as all Christian philosophers are obliged to do. They admitted the force of human authority when the conditions of its valid application were verified. But in theology, the authority of revelation did not coerce their reason and in philosophy and in natural science they taught very emphatically that the argument from authority is the weakest of all arguments. They did not subordinate reason to authority in any unworthy sense of that phrase. It was an opponent of the Scholastic movement who styled philosophy "the handmaid of theology", a designation which, however, some of the Schoolmen accepted to mean that to philosophy belongs the honourable task of carrying the light which is to guide the footsteps of theology. One need not go so far as to say, with Barthelemy SaintHilaire, that "Scholasticism, in its general result, is the first revolt of the modern spirit against authority." Nevertheless, one is compelled by the facts of history to admit that there is more truth in that description than in the superficial judgment of the historians who describe Scholasticism as the subordination of reason to authority. C. Details of Scholastic Method The Scholastic manner of treating the problems of philosophy and theology is apparent from a glance at the body of literature which the Schoolmen produced. The immense amount of commentary on Aristotle, on Peter Lombard, on Boethius, on Pseudo-Dionysius, and on the Scriptures indicates the form of academic activity which characterizes the Scholastic period. The use of texts dates from the very beginning of the Scholastic era in philosophy and theology, and was continued down into modern times. The mature teacher, however, very often embodied the results of his own speculation in a Summa, which, in time became a text in the hands of his successors. The Questiones disputatae were special treatises on the more difficult or the more important topics, and as the name implied, followed the method of debate prevalent in the schools, generally called disputation or determination. The Quodlibeta were miscellanies generally in the form of answers to questions which as soon as a teacher had attained a widespread renown, began to come to him, not only from the academic world in which he lived, but from all classes of persons and from every part of Christendom. The division of topics in theology was determined by the arrangement followed in Peter Lombard's "Books of Sentences" (see SUMMA, SIMMULAE), and in philosophy it adhered closely to the order of treatises in Aristotle's works. There is a good deal of divergence among the principal Scholastics in the details of arrangement, as well as in the relative values of the sub-titles, "part", "question", "disputation", "article", etc. All, however, adopt the manner of treatment by which thesis, objections, and solutions of objections stand out distinctly in the discussion of each problem. We find traces of this in Gerbert's little treatise "De rational) et ratione uti" in the tenth century, and it is still more definitely adopted in Abelard's "Sic et non". It had its root in Aristotelean method, but was determined more immediately by the dialectical activity of the early schools, from which, as was said, Scholasticism sprang. Much has been said both in praise and in blame of Scholastic terminology in philosophy and theology. It is rather generally acknowledged that whatever precision there is in the modern languages of Western Europe is due largely to the dialectic disquisitions of the Scholastics. On the other hand, ridicule has been poured on the stiffness, the awkwardness, and the barbarity of the Scholastic style. In an impartial study of the question, it should be remembered that the Scholastics of the thirteenth century-and it was not they but their successors who were guilty of the grossest sins of style-were confronted with a terminological problem unique in the history of thought. They came suddenly into possession of an entirely new literature, the works of Aristotle. They spoke a language, Latin, on which the terminology of Aristotle in metaphysics psychology etc., had made no impression. Consequently, they were obliged to create all at once Latin words and phrases to express the terminology of Aristotle, a terminology remarkable for its extent, its variety, and its technical complexity. They did it honestly and humbly, by translating Aristotle's phrases literally; so that many a strange-sounding Latin phrase in the writings of the Schoolmen would be very good Aristotelean Greek, if rendered word for word into that language. The Latin of the best of the Scholastics may be lacking in elegance and distinction; but no one will deny the merits of its rigorous severity of phrase and its logical soundness of construction. Though wanting the graces of what is called the fine style, graces which have the power of pleasing but do not facilitate the task of the learner in philosophy, the style of the thirteenth-century masters possesses the fundamental qualities, clearness, conciseness, and richness of technical phrase. IV. THE CONTENTS OF THE SCHOLASTIC SYSTEM In logic the Scholastics adopted all the details of the Aristotelean system, which was known to the Latin world from the time of Boethius. Their individual contributions consisted of some minor improvements in the matter of teaching and in the technic of the science. Their underlying theory of knowledge is also Aristotelean. It may be described by saying that it is a system of Moderate Realism and Moderate Intellectualism. The Realism consists in teaching that outside the mind there exist things fundamentally universal which correspond to our universal ideas. The Moderate Intellectualism is summed up in the two principles: + all our knowledge is derived from sense-knowledge; and + intellectual knowledge differs from sense-knowledge, not only in degree but also in kind. In this way, Scholasticism avoids Innatism, according to which all our ideas, or some of our ideas, are born with the soul and have no origin in the world outside us. At the same time, it avoids Sensism, according to which our so-ealled intellectual knowledge is only sense-knowledge of a higher or finer sort. The Scholastics, moreover, took a firm stand against the doctrine of Subjectivism. In their discussion of the value of knowledge they held that there is an external world which is real and independent of our thoughts. In that world are the forms which make things to be what they are. The same forms received into the mind in the process of knowing cause us not to be the object but to know the object. This presence of things in the mind by means of forms is true representation, or rather presentation. For it is the objective thing that we are first aware of, not its representation in us. The Scholastic outlook on the world of nature is Aristotelean. The Schoolmen adopt the doctrine of matter and form, which they apply not only to living things but also to inorganic nature. Since the form, or entelechy is always striving for its own realization or actualization, the view of nature which this doctrine leads to is teleological. Instead, however, of ascribing purpose in a vague, unsatisfactory manner to nature itself, the Scholastics attributed design to the intelligent, provident author of nature. The principle of finality thus acquired a more precise meaning, and at the same time the danger of a Pantheistic interpretation was avoided. On the question of the universality of matter the Schoolmen were divided among themselves, some, like the Franciscan teachers, maintaining that all created beings are material, others, like St. Thomas, holding the existence of "separate forms", such as the angels, in whom there is potency but no matter. Again, on the question of the oneness of substantial forms, there was a lack of agreement. St. Thomas held that in each individual material substance, organic or inorganic, there is but one substantial form, which confers being, substantiality and, in the ease of man, life, sensation, and reason. Others, on the contrary, believed that in one substance, man, for instance, there are simultaneously several forms, one of which confers existence, another substantiality, another life, and another, reason. Finally, there was a divergence of views as to what is the principle of individuation, by which several individuals of the same species are differentiated from one another. St. Thomas taught that the principle of individuation is matter with its determined dimensions, materia signata. In regard to the nature of man, the first Scholastics were Augustinians. Their definition of the soul is what may be called the spiritual, as opposed to the biological, definition. They held that the soul is the principle of thought-activity, and that the exercise of the senses is a process from the soul through the body not a process of the whole organism, that is, of the body animated by the soul. The Scholastics of the thirteenth century frankly adopted the Aristotelean definition of the soul as the principle of life, not of thought merely. Therefore, they maintained, man is a compound of body and soul, each of which is an incomplete substantial principle the union being, consequently, immediate, vital, and substantial. For them there is no need of an intermediary "body of light" such as St. Augustine imagined to exist. All the vital activities of the individual human being are ascribed ultimately to the soul, as to their active principle, although they may have more immediate principles namely the faculties, such as intellect, the senses, the vegetative and muscular powers. But while the soul is in this way concerned with all the vital functions, being, in fact, the source of them, and the body enters as a passive principle into all the activities of the soul, exception must be made in the ease of immaterial thought-activities. They are, like all the other activities, activities of the individual. The soul is the active principle of them. But the body contributes to them, not in the same intrinsic manner in which it contributes to seeing, hearing, digesting etc., but only in an extrinsic manner, by supplying the materials out of which the intellect manufactures ideas. This extrinsic dependence explains the phenomena of fatigue, etc. At the same time it leaves the soul so independent intrinsically that the latter is truly said to be immaterial. From the immateriality of the soul follows its immortality. Setting aside the possibility of annihilation, a possibility to which all creatures, even the angels are subject, the human soul is naturally immortal, and its immortality, St. Thomas believes, can be proved from its immateriality. Duns Scotus, however, whose notion of the strict requirements of a demonstration was influenced by his training in mathematics, denies the conclusive force of the argument from immateriality, and calls attention to Aristotle's hesitation or obscurity on this point. Aristotle, as interpreted by the Arabians, was, undoubtedly, opposed to immortality. It was, however, one of St. Thomas's greatest achievements in philosophy that, especially in his opusculum "De unitate intellectus", he refuted the Arabian interpretation of Aristotle, showed that the active intellect is part of the individual soul, and thus removed the uncertainty which, for the Aristoteleans, hung around the notions of immateriality and immortality. From the immateriality of the soul follows not only that it is immortal, but also that it originated by an act of creation. It was created at the moment in which it was united with the body: creando infunditur, et infundendo creatur is the Scholastic phrase. Scholastic metaphysics added to the Aristotelean system a full discussion of the nature of personality, restated in more definite terms the traditional arguments for the existence of God, and developed the doctrine of the providential government of the universe. The exigencies of theological discussion occasioned also a minute analysis of the nature of accident in general and of quantity in particular. The application of the resulting principles to the explanation of the mystery of the Eucharist, as contained in St. Thomas's works on the subject, is one of the most successful of all the Scholastic attempts to render faith reasonable by means of dialectical discussion. Indeed, it may be said, in general, that the peculiar excellence of the Scholastics as systematic thinkers consisted in their ability to take hold of the profoundest metaphysical distinctions, such as matter and form, potency and actuality, substance and accident, and apply them to every department of thought. They were no mere apriorists, they recognized in principle and in practice that scientific method begins with the observation of facts. Nevertheless, they excelled most of all in the talent which is peculiarly metaphysical, the power to grasp abstract general principles and apply them consistently and systematically. So far as the ethics of Scholasticism is not distinctly Christian, seeking to expound and justify Divine law and the Christian standard of morals, it is Aristotelean. This is clear from the adoption and application of the Aristotelean definition of virtue as the golden mean between two extremes. Fundamentally, the definition is eudemonistic. It rests on the conviction that the supreme good of man is happiness, that happiness is the realization, or complete actualization, of one's nature, and that virtue is an essential means to that end. But what is vague and unsatisfactory in Aristotelean Eudemonism is made definite and safe in the Scholastic system, which determines the meaning of happiness and realization according to the Divine purpose in creation and the dignity to which man is destined as a child of God. In their discussion of the problems of political philosophy the philosophers of the thirteenth century while not discarding the theological views of St. Augustine contained in "The City of God", laid a new foundation for the study of political organizations by introducing Aristotle's scientific definition of the origin and purpose of civil society. Man, says St. Thomas, is naturally a social and political animal. By giving to human beings a nature which requires the co-operation of other human beings for its welfare, God ordained man for society, and thus it is His will that princes should govern with a view to the public welfare. The end for which the state exists is, then, not merely vivere but bene vivere. All that goes to make life better and happier is included the Divine charter from which kings and rulers derive their authority. The Scholastic treatises on this subject and the commentaries on the "Polities" of Aristotle prepared the way for the medieval and modern discussions of political problems. In this department of thought, as in many others, the Schoolmen did at least one service which posterity should appreciate: they strive to express in clear systematic form what was present in the consciousness of Christendom in their day. WILLIAM TURNER Herman Scholliner Herman Scholliner Theologian and historian, b. at Freising in Bavaria, 15 January, 1722; d. at Welchenberg, 16 July, 1795. He entered the Benedictine abbey of Oberaltaich in 1738; studied philosophy and theology at Erfurt and Salzburg; was director of the house of studies of the Bavarian Benedictines from 1752 to 1757; professor of dogmatic theology at Salzburg from 1759 to 1766. He traveled to Vienna in the interests of his monastery in 1770; became prior of his monastery in 1772; taught dogmatic theology at Ingolstadt from 1776 to 1780; and became provost at Welchenberg in 1780. From 1759 he was a member of the Bavarian Academy of Sciences. He is the author of about fifty theological and historical treatises. As member of the Bavarian Academy he wrote "Monumenta Niederaltacensia" and "Monumenta Oberaltacensia Elisabethcellensia et Osterhofensia", which form volumes XI (1-340) and XII of "Monumenta Boica". Other important works of his are: "De magistratuum ecclesiasticorun origine et creatione" (Stadtamhof, 1757); "De disciplinae arcani antiquitate et usu" (Tegernsee, 1755); "Ecclesiae orientalis et occidentalis concordia in transsubstantiatione" (Ratisbon, 1756); "De hierarchia ecclesiae catholicae" (Ratisbon, 1757); "Historia theologiae christianae saeculi primi" (Salzburg, 1761); "Praelectiones theologicae ad usum studii communis congregationis Benedictino-Bavaricae in XII tomos divisae" (Augsburg, 1769), and numerous contributions to the "Abhandlungen der bayr. Akad. der Wissenschaften". LINDNER, Schriftsteller des Benediktiner Ordens in Bayern 1750-1880, I (Ratisbon, 1880), 117-22; WESTENRIEDER, Beitrage zur vaterlandischen Historie, VII, 393-6; SATTLER. Collectaneen-Blatter zur Gesch. der ehemal. Benedikt. Universitat Salzburg (Kempten, 1890), 467-73. MICHAEL OTT Charles Mathieu Schols Charles Mathieu Schols Born of Catholic parents at Maastriche, Holland, 28 March, 1849; died at Delft 17 March, 1897. At the age of eighteen he was sent to the polytechnical school at Delft, where he obtained the degree of civil engineer after a brilliant examination. A few months later he was appointed a teacher at the Royal Military Academy of Breda, where he published a highly-appreciated textbook on surveying—"Leerboek over landmeten en waterpassen" (Breda, 1879). In 1874 he submitted to the Royal Academy of Amsterdam a treatise on the errors in a plane and in space, and shortly afterwards another on the interpolation formula of Tchebychef, both treatises testifying to an uncommon degree of mathematical intuition. As early as 1878 he was offered the professorship of geodesy and surveying at the polytechnical school at Delft. In 1880 he was elected a member of the Royal Academy of Sciences, in the transactions of which he published a series of important investigations, mostly connected with geodesy: on the calculation of distance and azimuth from longitude and latitude—"Berekening van afstand en azimuth uit lengte en breedte"; concerning the connexion of triangular nets of higher and lower order—"Over de aansluiting van een driehoekennet van lagere orde aan 3 punten van een net van hoogere orde"; on cartographical projections—"Studien van kaart-projectieën"; on the use of Mercator's projection in equatorial triangulation, etc. Schols however did not confine his interests to geodesy. In connexion with the theory of probability we possess from his hand three communications on the Law of Errors, while of his works on pure mathematics his researches on a semi-convergent series and on errors in logarithmic tables may be mentioned. His activity in civil engineering is well illustrated by the prominent part he took in the publication of the text-book on hydraulic architecture—"Waterbouwkunde", and a detailed investigation into bending moments and shearing stresses in railway bridges. Important national services were rendered by Schols by a conscientious preparation and supervision of the new geographical survey of Holland, which had been undertaken in 1886 by order of the Government. Schols, who had been secretary of the Royal Surveying and Levelling Committee since 1881, threw himself into the work with characteristic ardour. He devised an elaborate plan of proceeding and conducted the operations without allowing the smallest detail to escape him. At the time of his premature death (1897) the greater part of the primary triangulation had been finished. Unequalled as a teacher he commanded the highest admiration by the masterly way in which he exposed and discussed the most intricate problems, and many scientists of recognized authority were known to take their places on the benches among his pupils. His treatises and calculations recommended themselves by an extreme simplicity, at the same time being classic for their completeness and elegance. In his social intercourse he was amiable and engaging, and in return was universally esteemed and honoured. His energy was remarkable, and the unflinching resolution with which he executed a task, which failing health continually menaced with frustration, cannot be contemplated without admiration. Naturally of a reserved disposition, his habits were simple and his manners unassuming, nor was he ever known to show the slightest vanity or self-esteem on account of the numerous distinctions which were showered upon him; love of truth was his only passion. Three things he always cherished and treasured in the midst of his restless activity: the love of his country, his family, and his religion. He died of consumption at the age of 48. The article has been composed by the writer from personal reminiscences and from the following articles: VAN DE SANDE BAKHUYZEN, In Memoriam, Charles Mathieu Schols. Verslagen Kon. Akad. (27 March, 1897); WILDEBOER, Ter nagedachtenis van Dr. Ch. M. Schols in Tijdschrift voor Kad. en Landmeetkunde, XIII, ii. J. STEIN John Martin Augustine Scholz John Martin Augustine Scholz An erudite German Orientalist and exegete, b. at Kapsdorf, near Breslau, 8 Feb., 1794; d. at Bonn, 20 Oct. 1852. He studied in the Catholic gymnasium and the University of Breslau. In 1817 he took the degree of Doctor of Theology at the University of Freiburg, and then went to Paris, where he studied Persian and Arabic under Silvestre de Sacy, and collated numerous codices (Greek, Latin, Arabic, and Syriac) of the New Testament. From Paris he went to London, and thence passing through France and Switzerland reached Italy, the principal libraries of which he visited in quest of Biblical information. In the autumn of 1821, upon his return from a journey through Egypt, Palestine, and Syria, and having been ordained at Breslau (Oct., 1821), Scholz became professor of exegesis at the University of Bonn, a chair to which he had been appointed in 1820, and which he filled until his death, despite the fact that he was not an interesting lecturer. As he did not share much in the discussions connected with Hermes's theories, he found time to publish several important works. The principal among these are: "Novum Testamentum Graece" (2 vols., Leipzig, 1830, 1836), a critical edition of the original text, full of erudition but marred by a defective classification of authorities and by numerous critical inaccuracies; "De virtutibus et vitiis utriusque Codd. N. T. familiae" (Leipzig, 1845), a sort of supplement to the preceding work; "Einleitung in die Schriften des A. u. N. T." (Cologne and Leipzig, 1845-1848, 3 vols., treating only of the Old Test.); "Handbuch des bibl. Archäologie" (Bonn, 1834). To these works may be added Scholz's own account of his travels: "Reise in die Gegend; etc." (Leipzig, 1822); "Biblisch-kritische Reise, etc." (Leipzig, 1823); his essays on the Holy Sepulchre (Bonn, 1825); on Jerusalem (Bonn, 1835); "Curae criticae", containing a valuable description of Cod. K. "Cyprius" (Heidelberg, 1820); "De fontibus historiae V. Test." (Bonn, 1830); and his discourse on the harmony of Divine revelation with science (Bonn 1845). Scholz was also a contributor to the learned periodicals published at Bonn. SCRIVENER-MILLER, A Plain Introduction to the Criticism of the N.T. (London, 1894); HURTER, Nomenclator Literarius, III (Innsbruck, 1895). FRANCIS E. GIGOT Schonborn Schönborn The name of a German noble family, many members of which were prelates of the Church. (1) Johann Philipp von Schönborn Archbishop of Mainz and Bishop of Würzburg and Worms, b. at Eschbach in the Westerwald, 6 August, 1605; d. at Würzburg, 12 February, 1673. When sixteen years old he became a cleric (an expectant for a canonicate) at the cathedral of Würzburg, and in 1625 at that of Mainz. He became cathedral canon at Würzburg in 1629, and at Worms in 1630. In 1635 he was made provost of Kronberg and of St. Burkard at Würzburg. On 16 August, 1642, he became Bishop of Würzburg (deacon, 1642; priest, 1645); on 18 November, 1647, he was made Archbishop of Mainz, and in 1663 Bishop of Worms. His foreign policy was mainly directed towards the maintenance of peace, but this policy did not always meet with approval and often failed in its object. On the other hand his administration of all domestic affairs was excellent, and as a ruler he was not below the best of his era. His contemporaries gave him the honourable titles of "The Wise", "The German Solomon", and "The Cato of Germany". He succeeded in repairing the injuries inflicted upon his domains by the Thirty Years' War, settled the disputes as to territory with the neighboring rulers, reorganized the higher civil service, and improved the administration of justice. To compensate for the scarcity of priests and to raise the standard of the secular clergy he called to Mainz and Würzburg the Bartholomites, an institute founded by Bartholomew Holzhauser (Institutum clericorum saecularium in communi viventium); in 1654 he transferred to them the administration of the ecclesiastical seminary at Würzburg, and in 1660 also that of the gymnasium founded by him at Munnerstadt. In 1662 he established a seminary for priests at Mainz. Urged by the Jesuit Spee, he suppressed the trial of witches in his domains, and thus contributed, as far as was in his power, to the abolition of this miserable delusion. He was surrounded at his court by a large number of distinguished men, statesmen, diplomats, scholars, and pious ecclesiastics. (2) Lothar Franz von Schönborn Nephew of the above, was Archbishop of Mainz (1695-1729) and Bishop of Bamberg (1693). (3) Damian Hugo Philipp von Schönborn Prince Bishop of Speyer (1719-43) and of Constance (1740), and was also a cardinal. He did much for the Diocese of Speyer, and was conspicuous for his culture, learning, and piety. (4) Franz Georg von Schönborn Archbishop of Trier (1729-56) and Bishop of Worms (1732). Both Frederick the Great and Maria Theresa praised him as an excellent ruler. (5) Johann Philipp Franz von Schönborn Bishop of Würzburg (1719-24). (6) Friedrich Karl von Schönborn Bishop of Bamberg and Würzburg (1729-46). The last three prelates were brothers, and nephews of Lothar Franz. (7) Franz von Schönborn Born at Prague, 24 Jan., 1844; d. 25 June, 1899. He became Bishop of Prague in 1885, and was created cardinal in 1889. WILD, Johann Philipp von Schönborn (Heidelberg, 1896); MENTZ, Johann Philipp von Schönborn, I-II (Jena, 1896-99), HOPF, Histor.-geneal. Atlas, I (Gotha, 1858), 133. KLEMENS LOFFLER Martin Schongauer Martin Schongauer (Also known as SCHON). German painter and engraver, b. at Colmar between 1445 and 1450; d. probably in 1491, it is believed at Breisach. He was the son of Caspar Schongauer a goldsmith, who had come from Bavaria, and settled in Colmar about 1445, and who is known to have lived until about 1481. He had four brothers, Ludwig, a painter, Caspar, Georg, and Paul, goldsmiths. By some authors, Martin is said to have been the youngest son, by others, the eldest of the family. He matriculated at the University of Leipzig in 1465, purchased a house in 1477, and founded a Mass for his parents and himself in 1488. These are almost the only facts we know concerning him, and all other information about him is derived from dates on his drawings or engravings. His masterpiece is known as the "Virgin in the Garden of Roses", and is in the Church of St. Martin at Colmar. He has been described as a pupil of Rogier van der Weyden, on the authority of a letter written to Vasari, but although Rogier van der Weyden's influence is to be recognized in Schongauer's work, it seems very doubtful whether he ever entered that painter's studio. Several of his paintings are dated, but with the exception of the one in Colmar, we have no absolute evidence that any one of them is his work, and no documents have yet been discovered enabling us to verify his paintings. We are very much in the same position with regard to his engravings. They bear the signature of his initials, but there is nothing in the statements of his contemporaries to say with absolute certainty that the engravings signed M. S. are his work. There is, however, very tattle doubt in the matter, and they are always accepted as being his work. He is not to be regarded as a great artist or a perfect draughtsman, but in the actual technic of line engraving he is unsurpassed in his period, and is practically the equal of Dürer. About a hundred plates attributed to him are in existence, and there is an almost perfect collection of his prints in Berlin, a collection almost equal to it existing in London. The standard work upon him is WALTZ, Bibliographie des Ouvrages et Articles concernant Martin Schongauer (Colmar, 1903); HENSLER in Neumann's Archives (1867), 129. GEORGE CHARLES WILLIAMSON Schoningh Schöningh The publishing house of Ferdinand Schöningh at Paderborn was founded by Ferdinand Friedrich Joseph Schöningh, who was born at Meppen in Hanover 16 March, 1815, and died at Paderborn, 18 Aug., 1883. He was the son of Dr. Schöningh, an official of the law courts. Educated at the gymnasium of his native town, he was active in the book trade since 1831. He served an apprenticeship in Münster and Svest, and on 12 May, 1847, he opened under great difficulties a book and art store at Paderborn that soon developed into a prosperous business. Schöningh never lost sight of a higher aim, the establishment of a publishing house; selling his store in 1875 and perceiving the need of Catholic newspapers and periodical literature, he founded in 1848 the weekly "Westfälisches Kirchenblatt", and in 1849 the "Westfälische Volksblatt", which was intended to instruct the people in the political and social questions of the day and to give them the Christian view on these subjects. On 1 April, 1910, a publishing house was formed, the initial publication of which was the first year-book of the Diocese of Paderborn (1849). Schöningh's ability and power for hard work gradually built up his business, especially as regards the publication of scientific works. The reputation of the publishing house was established and maintained in the literary and learned world by the publication of such works as the textbooks and exercise-books of Ferdinand Schultz, which passed through many editions and were translated into numerous languages; the "Bibliothek der altesten deutschen Literatur-Denkmaler" (Heliand, Beowulf, etc.), edited by Moritz Heyne, a university professor; and excellent theological works, as that on dogmatics by Oswald, the explanation of the Catechism by Deharbe, etc. The house remained loyal to these three branches of learning and constantly increased its publications in these directions. Among the periodicals published under its supervision are: "Chrysologus" (from 1860) "Blatter für kirchliche Wissenschaft und Praxis" (from 1867); "Gymnasium" (from 1883). Schöningh also did much to encourage Catholic poetry; among the poets whose works he issued were those of Brill, Luise Hensel, and especially of F. W. Weber. Weber's poems published by Schöningh include: "Dreizehnlinden", "Goliath", "Gedichte". Schöningh died suddenly from apoplexy. His stanch Catholic opinions, sincere and honest character, and joy in what he produced cannot be forgotten in the Catholic intellectual life of Germany. Up to the time of the death of the founder, the house had published 673 works in 935 volumes, embracing the most varied branches of knowledge and literature. The business has been carried on in the same spirit by Schöningh's sons, Ferdinand (b. 7 March, 1856), who since 1885 has had charge of the publishing department, and Joseph (b. 12 June, 1860), who since 1891 has been the business manager. In the course of time four branches were established, namely: in 1885 the Nasse publishing house at Münster; in 1887 one at Osnabruck, combined with a store for learned antiquarian works; in 1891 one at Mainz; and in 1902 one at Wurzburg. The house has ever since its establishment given special attention to works in the three main divisions of learning. In the departments of scientific and practical theology and philosophy the house publishes the following periodicals: "Theologie und Glaube"; "Jahrbuch für Philosophie und spekulative Theologie"; "Forschungen zur christlichen Literatur und Dogmengeschichte"; "Chrysologus". For the entire field of scientific and practical pedagogies the house issued the following periodicals: "Monatschrift für katholische Lehrerinnen" and "Zeitschrift für christliche Erziehungswissenschaft"; it also gives attention to linguistics and to literature, and issued numerous works in all the other departments of learning. Among the more extensive compilations published by the firm should be mentioned the "Wissenschaftliche Handbibliothek"; 41 volumes of this work have already been issued, and of these 34 are theological and philosophical works written by distinguished German scholars, as B. Funk (Church history) Gopfert (moral theology), Heiner (canon law), Pohle (dogmatics), Pruner (pastoral theology), etc. Other publications are those of the Görres Society: "Studien zur Geschichte und Kultur des Altertums" "Quellen und Forschungen zur Geschichte der papstlichen Hof- und Finanzverwaltung", "Publikationen der Sektion für Rechts- und Sozialwissenschaft ". Still other works are: "Sammlung der bedeutendsten padagogischen Schriften aus alter und neuer Zeit", "Sammlung der kommentierten und der Textausgaben deutscher und auslandischer Klassiker für den Schulgebrauch". HERMANN MULLER Schools Schools I. The Christian Church By virtue of her Divine charter, "Going, teach ye all nations", is essentially a teaching organization. Teaching is included in her task of saving souls. Primarily she was instituted to dispense the means of salvation, and to teach the truths which are necessary to salvation. These truths are spiritual and moral, and her catechumenal schools (see CATECHUMEN) were instituted for the purpose of teaching them. Truths which are not of their nature spiritual, truths of science, of history, matters of culture, in a word, profane learning--these do not belong intrinsically to the programme of the Church's teaching. Nevertheless, they enter into her work by force of circumstance, when, namely, the Christian youth cannot attain a knowledge of them without incurring grave danger to faith or morals. They enter also into the Church's task by reason of a pedagogical principle which she has always recognized in practice. Religion being the supreme co-ordinating principle in education, as it is in life, if the so-called secular branches of knowledge are taught without reference to religion, the Church feels that an educational mistake is being made, that the "one thing necessary" is being excluded, to the detriment of education itself. Therefore she assumes the task of teaching the secular branches in such a way that religion is the centralizing, unifying, and vitalizing force in the educational process. Whenever there is positive and immediate danger of loss of faith, the Church cannot allow her children to run the risk of perversion; whenever religion is left out of the curriculum, she tries to supply the defect. In both cases she establishes under her own control schools which are called Catholic and which, in the vicissitudes of historical development or from the particular circumstances of their foundation, scope, or maintenance, are specifically known as catechetical schools, monastic schools, cathedral schools, chantry schools, guild schools, parochial schools, etc. II. Catechetical Schools These flourished about the middle of the second century of the Christian era. They were brought into existence by the conflict of Christianity with pagan philosophy. They were, consequently, academies of higher learning. Out of them grew the first great schools of theological controversy and also the schools for the special training of the clergy, although there were, almost from the beginning, schools attached to the household of the bishops (episcopal schools) where clerics were trained, We have reason to believe that in some instances, as in the catechetical school of Protogenes at Edessa (about 180), not only the higher branches but also the elementary branches were taught in the catechetical schools. Schools of this type became more numerous as time went on. In the Council of Vaison (529) the priests of Gaul are commanded to take boys into their household and teach them to read "the Psalms, and the Holy Scriptures and to instruct them in the Law of God". From these sprang the parochial schools of medieval and modern times. As the conflict between Christianity and pagan philosophy gave rise to the catechetical schools, so the more general struggle between Christian and pagan standards of life gave rise to other provisions on the part of the Church for safeguarding the faith of Christian children. In the first centuries great stress was laid on the importance of home education, and this task was committed in a special manner to Christian mothers. It is sufficient to mention the Christian matrons Macrina, Emmelia, Nonna, Anthusa, Monica, and Paula, mothers of saints and scholars, to show how successfully the home under the direction of the Christian mother was made to counteract the influence of pagan schools. There were also private schools for Christian youth, taught by Christians, for instance the school at Imola, taught by Cassian. III. Monastic Schools Monasticism as an institution was a protest against the corrupt pagan standards of living which had begun to influence not only the public life of Christians but also their private and domestic life. Even in the fourth century, St. John Chrysostom testifies to the decline of fervour in the Christian family, and contends that it is no longer possible for children to obtain proper religious and moral training in their own homes. It was part of the purpose of monasticism to meet this need and to supply not only to the members of the religious orders but also to children committed to the care of the cloister the moral religious, and intellectual culture which could not be obtained elsewhere without lowering the Christian standard of life. At the same time episcopal schools, though instituted primarily for the education of clerical candidates, did not decline to admit secular scholars, especially after the State schools of the empire had fallen into decay. There were parochial schools also, which, while they aimed at fostering vocations to the priesthood, were expressly commanded not to deny their pupils the right to enter the married state as soon as they reached the age of maturity (cum ad œtatem perfectam pervenerint). The explicit enactment of the Council of Vaison (529) in this matter is important because it refers to a similar custom already prevailing in Italy. It remains true, however, that although the episcopal and presbyteral (parochial) schools thus contributed to the education of the laity, the chief portion of the burden of lay education in the early Middle Ages was borne by the monasteries. The earliest monastic legislation does not clearly define the organization of the "internal" and "external" schools. Nevertheless, it recognizes the existence in the monastery of children who were to be educated, not for the cloister, but for the world. In Ireland, as Archbishop Healy says, the monks, "taught the children of the rich and poor alike" ("Ireland's Ancient Schools and Scholars", 102), and to Ireland went not only clerics but laymen from England and the Continent, to receive an education. On the Continent also the education of the laity, "gentle and simple", fell to the lot of the monks. It is difficult to say when the distinction between the "internal" school (schola claustri) and the "external" (schola canonica, s. externa) was first introduced. We find it in St. Gall, Fulda and Reichenau in the ninth and tenth centuries. In the internal school the pupils were novices, future members of the order, some of whom were offered up (oblati) by their parents at a tender age. In the external school were the children of the neighbouring villagers and the sons of the nobility; many of the references to this class of pupils in the monastic code lay stress on the obligation to treat all with equal justice, not taking account of their rank in life. There was a similar custom in regard to the reception of young girls in the convents, as appears from several enactments of Bishop St. Cæsarius of Arles and his successors. At Arles, moreover, according to Muteau (see bibliography) open schools (écoles ouvertes) were held by the nuns for the benefit of the entire neighbourhood. The curriculum of studies in the monastic schools comprised the trivium and quadrivium, that is to say, grammar, rhetoric, dialectic, arithmetic, geometry, astronomy, and the theory of music. Besides, the monks cultivated the science and art of healing; they devoted attention to agriculture, building, and the decorative arts. They took pains to transcribe the Classics as well as the distinctly ecclesiastical works that had come down to them; and in doing this they developed the art of penmanship and that of illumination to a high degree of perfection. They were annalists also, noting down year by year the important events not only in the life of their own community but also in the Church at large and in the political world. Finally, by example and precept they dignified manual labour, which in pagan Rome was despised as fit only for slaves. The head of the monastic school was called magister scholœ, capiscola, proscholus, etc. By the end of the ninth century, however, the usual name for the head of the school was scholasticus. His assistants were called seniores. The method of teaching was influenced largely by the scarcity of books and the need of handing down without diminution the heritage of the past. The master dictated (legere was the word used to signify the act of teaching), and the pupils wrote not only the text but also the master's explanation or commentary. Of the many textbooks in use the most popular was the work by Marcianus Capella (about 420) entitled "Satyricon, seu de Nuptiis Mercurii et Philologiæ". That the instruction given to the laity in the monastic schools was entirely gratuitous is evident from the decree of Bishop Theodulf of Orleans in the eighth century, and from other documents. When, at Tours, the external school was frequented by a number of wealthy pupils, whose voluntary gifts to the monastery put the poorer students in a position of apparent inferiority, the bishop of that see, Amalric, gave a generous donation to the monks to be used in the maintenance of poor students. The Carlovingian revival of education affected not only the internal schools of the monasteries but also the external schools, and, during the reign of Charles's successors bishops and popes by a number of decrees showed their interest in the maintenance not only of schools of sacred science, but also in schools "for the study of letters". The external school had by this time become a recognized institution, which the sons of the farmers in the neighbourhood of the monasteries frequented not by privilege but by a right freely acknowledged. We know that before the end of the ninth century both boys and girls attended the schools attached to the parish churches in the Diocese of Soissons. As time went on the establishment and maintenance of schools by the Church was made a matter of express canonical enactment. No document could be more explicit than the Decree of the Third Council of Lateran (1179): "That every cathedral church have a teacher (magistrum) who is to teach poor scholars and others, and that no one receive a fee for permission to teach" (Mansi, XXII, 234). IV. Cathedral Schools The cathedral schools sprang from the episcopal schools which, as has been said, existed from a very early time for the training of clerics. Chrodegang, Bishop of Metz, 742-66, is said to be the founder of medieval cathedral schools, but only in the sense that he organized the clergy of his cathedral church into a community, and ordained that they undertake the conduct and management of the school attached to their church. The bishop himself was to have control of the school and under him was to be the immediate superior of the school (magister scholœ). In the cities and towns where there was no cathedral, the canons of the local church were organized after the manner of the cathedral clergy, and conducted a "canonicate" school. In both institutions there came to be distinguished; + (1) the elementary school (schola minor) where reading, writing, psalmody, etc. were taught; and + (2) the higher school (schola major) in which the curriculum consisted either of the trivium alone (grammar, rhetoric and dialectic), or of the full programme, namely the seven liberal arts, Scripture, and what we now call pastoral theology. The method employed in the cathedral schools was identical with that of the monastic schools. V. Chantry Schools The chantry schools were similar in character to the cathedral and canonicate schools. Indeed, they may be said to be a specific kind of canonicate schools. The chantry was a foundation with endowment, the proceeds of which went to one or more priests carrying the obligation of singing or saying Mass at stated times, or daily, for the soul of the endower, or for the souls of persons named by him. It was part of the duty of the incumbents of a chantry foundation to "teach gratis the poor who asked it humbly for the love of God". (See "Catholic University Bulletin," IX, 3 sq.). VI. Guild Schools, Hospital Schools, and City Schools The last beginning with the thirteenth century, shared the work of education with the cloister, cathedral, and chantry schools. The guilds and hospitals were ecclesiastical foundations, were guided by clerics, and engaged in the work of education under the direction of the Church. The city schools at first met with opposition from the teachers in the monastic and cathedral foundations, although they also were under the control of ecclesiastics. Kehrein in his "History of Education" (see bibliography) mentions a Decree of Alexander III which prohibits any abbot from preventing any magister or scholasticus from taking charge of a school in the city or suburb "since knowledge is a gift of God and talent is free". Towards the end of the Middle Ages the task of the ecclesiastical teacher became so important that communities of clerics were founded for the express purpose of devoting their lives to the duties of elementary education. The best known of these communities is that of "The Brothers of the Common Life" founded by Gerard Groot (1340-84) at Deventer. It soon extended to Windedheim, Agnetenberg, and other towns in Holland and North Germany. To this community belonged Thomas à Kempis, the author of "The Imitation of Christ". That these various provisions for the education not only of the clergy but also of the laity--monastic schools, cathedral schools, canonicate schools, chantry schools, guild schools, hospital schools, city schools, and special educational institutions--met the educational needs of the times, and were adequate as far as the circumstances of the times would allow, is the verdict of all historians who view without prejudice the educational career of the Catholic Church. Allain (see bibliography) has told the story of primary education in France; Ravelet (see bibliography) has gone over the whole question of primary education in medieval times; Leach has told part of the story (see bibliography) as far as pre-Reformation England is concerned. It is impossible to give more than a summary statement of the facts which these writers have accumulated. Those facts, however, justify the assertion that, far from opposing or neglecting the education of the masses, the Catholic Church in medieval times provided generously for their instruction in the elementary branches, as well as in the department of higher studies, whenever and wherever the political, social, and economic conditions were not so adverse as to thwart her educational efforts. Both the particular and the general councils of the Church, imperial capitularies, and episcopal and papal decrees show that bishops and popes, while concerned primarily for the education of future members of the clerical body in the sacred sciences, were also at pains to encourage and promote the education of the laity. For instance, the Council of Cloveshoe, held by Cuthbert, Archbishop of Canterbury in 749, prescribes that abbesses as well as abbots provide for the education of all their households (familiœ). A Carlovingian capitulary of 802 enjoins "that everyone should send his son to study letters, and that the child should remain at school with all diligence until he became well instructed in learning". Theodulf of Orleans in 797 decrees that gratuitous instruction be given by the priests in every town and village of his diocese, and there cannot be the least doubt that education of the laity is meant. The Council of Châlon-sur-Saône in 813 legislates in a similar spirit that not only "schools of Sacred Scripture" but also "schools of letters" be established. The Council of Rome, held in 853, directs the bishops of the Universal Church to establish "in every episcopal residence [in universis episcopiis] among the populations subject to them, and in all places where there is such need" masters and teachers to teach "literary studies and the seven liberal arts". These and similar documents lay stress on the obligatian which rests on the parents and godparents to see to the education of children committed to their care. By the middle of the ninth century the distinction between external and internal monastic schools being clearly recognized, and parish schools having become a regular diocesan institution, the testimonies in favour of popular education under the auspices of the Church become clearer. In the tenth century, in spite of the disturbed conditions in the political world, learning flourished in the great monasteries, such as that of St. Gall (Switzerland). St. Maximin (Trier), and in the cathedral schools, such as those of Reims and Lyons. The greatest teachers of that time, Bruno of Cologne and Gerbert of Aurillac (Pope Sylvester II), taught not only the sacred but also the profane sciences. In the eleventh century the school of Chartres, that of Ste-Geneviève at Paris, and the numerous schools of rhetoric and dialectic show that even in the higher branches of learning, in spite of the fact that the teachers were invariably clerics, the laymen were welcomed and were not denied education of the secondary kind. That, as historians have pointed out, the references to popular and elementary education in the local councils of the Church have not always been preserved, is explained by the fact that elementary Church schools were now an established fact. Ecclesiastical authority intervened only whenever some abuse called for remedial legislation. Thus, the decree of the Third Council of Lateran already referred to (n. III) aimed at abolishing the custom of exacting fees for instruction in the cathedral schools. There were, naturally, details of arrangement to be determined, such as salary of teachers and supervision or personal instruction on the part of the pastor. These were provided in decrees, such as that of the Diocesan Synod of St. Omer in 1183 and that of Engelbert II, Archbishop of Cologne, in 1270. The history of education in England before the Reformation is the story of the efforts made in monastic, cathedral, chantry, and parish schools for the education of the laity as well as of the clergy. In the narrative of the suppression and confiscation of these foundations Leach (see bibliography) gives abundant documentary evidence to justify his assertion that "Grammar schools, instead of being comparatively modern, post-Reformation inventions, are among our most ancient institutions, some of them far older than the Lord Mayor of London or the House of Commons" (p. 5). He estimates the number of grammar schools before the reign of Edward VI to have been "close on two hundred", and these he considers to be merely "the survivors of a much larger host which have been lost in the storms of the past, and drowned in the seas of destruction" (ibid.). There were, he maintains, not only schools connected with the cathedral churches, monasteries, collegiate churches, hospitals, guilds, and chantries, but also independent schools, in one of which "an old man was paid thirteen shillings and fourpence by the Mayor, to teach young children their A B C" (p. 7). Lincoln, Chichester, and Wells were the principal cathedral schools. Beverley, Chester, Crediton, Ripon, Wimborne, Warwick, Stafford, and Tamworth had important collegiate schools. At Evesham, Cirencester, and Lewes were the principal monastery schools at the eve of the Reformation, while at Oxford, Cambridge, Eton, and elsewhere were thirty-one college schools of grammar before the reign of Edward VI, The number of schools in proportion to the population of the country was relatively very great, and as far as it is possible for us now to judge the attendance, that, too, must have been relatively large. The history of education in Scotland before the reformation is told in the first part of Grant's "History of the Burgh Schools of Scotland". "Our earliest records", says that writer, "prove not only that schools existed, but that they were then invariably found in connection with the Church" (p. 2). He quotes documents for the foundation of schools in 1100, 1120, 1180, 1195, and cites in many instances papal approval and confirmation of educational establishments in the twelfth century. He is convinced that these institutions were intended not merely for clerics but also for young laymen (ibid., p. 12), and he concludes his summary by admitting that "The scattered jottings collected in this chapter show our obligation to the ancient Church for having so diligently promoted our national education--an education placed within the reach of all classes" (ibid., p. 72). The educational institutions founded and supported by the Church in France, Germany, Italy, and other parts of Europe before the Reformation have, in part, been mentioned in the general account of monastic and cathedral schools. Specht (see bibliography) has produced documentary evidence to show the extent to which laywomen were educated in the convent schools of the ninth and the following centuries; he has also shown that daughters of noble families were, as a rule, educated by private teachers who, for the most part, were clergymen. The assertion so frequently made that, during the Middle Ages, learning was considered out of place in a layman, that even elementary knowledge of letters was a prerogative of the clergy, is not sustained by a careful examination of historical records. It is true that there are passages in the popular literature of the Middle Ages in which the ignorant layman, who is well versed in the art of warfare and in the usages of polite society, affects to despise learning and to regard it as a monkish or ecclesiastical accomplishment. But, as Léon Maitre (see bibliography) asserts, "such ignorance was by no means systematic; it arose from the conditions of the times". "Knowledge", says a twelfth-century writer, "is not an exclusive privilege of the clergy, for many laymen are instructed in literature. A prince, whenever he can succeed in escaping from the tumult of public affairs and from [the confusion of] constant warfare, ought to devote himself to the study of books" (P. L., CCIII, col. 149). The number of distinguished laymen and laywomen, emperors, kings, nobles, queens and princesses who, during the medieval era, attained prominence as scholars shows that the advice was not disregarded. The calumny recently reaffirmed that "the Church was not the mother, but rather the stepmother, of learning" is easily asserted, but is not so easily proved. The destruction of this vast and varied system of ecclesiastical legislation is a fact of general history. The schools, as a rule, disappeared with the institutions to which they were attached. The confiscation of the monasteries, the suppression of the benefices on which the chantries were founded, the removal of the guilds from the control of ecclesiastical authority, the suppression of cathedral and canonical chapters and the sequestration of their possessions by the State, were the immediate cause of the cessation of this kind of educational activity on the part of the Church at the time of the Reformation and afterwards. In Protestant countries these events took place in the course of the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries. In Germany, a compromise was reached in some States by the recognition of both Protestant and Catholic "confessional" schools and the division of school funds, an arrangement which lasted until the beginning of the nineteenth century; in France the work of confiscation began with the French Revolution; in Italy, Spain, and Portugal the suppression and spoliation have taken place within the last half-century and are still going on. Apart from the question of elementary justice--the question of violation of a strict right to their own lands and funds, which the ecclesiastical corporations possessed at the time their property was seized and their schools suppressed--there arises now the question of the right to teach, the right of the Church to found and maintain private schools, and the alleged exclusive right of the State to educate. VII. The fundamental principles of canon law Those principles bearing on these questions may be stated as follows: + (1) The Church, being a perfect society, has the right to establish schools, which, although they may be permitted by the civil law merely as private institutions, are, of their nature, public; + (2) By natural law, the obligation lies primarily with the parents of a child to provide for his education, as well as for his physical support. This is part of the purpose and aim of the family as an institution. 1f no provision is made by any other institution, the parents must provide education either by their own effort or that of others whom they employ; + (3) When the parents neglect their duty in the matter of education, the State, in the interests of public welfare, takes up the obligation of teaching. It has, therefore, the right to establish schools, and, consequently, the right to compel attendance, in so far as the principle holds good that public welfare demands a knowledge, at least, of the elementary branches of education. From the interaction and conflict of these fundamental rights arise the following more particular principles: + (1) The Church has the exclusive right to teach religion to Catholic children. Neither the parents nor the State can exercise this right except they do so with the consent (as parents do) and under the supervision and control of the ecclesiastical authorities. + (2) The Church cannot approve schools which exclude religion from the curriculum, both because religion is the most important subject in education, and because she contends that even secular education is not possible in its best form unless religion be made the central, vitalizing, and co-ordinating factor in the life of the child. The Church, sometimes, tolerates schools in which religion is not taught, and permits Catholic children to attend them, when the circumstances are such as to leave no alternative, and when due precautions are taken to supply by other means the religious training which such schools do not give. She reserves the right to judge whether this be the case, and, if her judgment is unfavourable, claims the right to forbid attendance (see Letter of Gregory XVI to Irish Bishops, 16 Jan., 1831). + (3) In all schools, whether established by the Church or the State, or even by a group of families (so long as there are pupils received from different families) the State has the right to see that the laws of public health, public order, and public morality are observed, and if in any school doctrines were taught subversive of public peace or otherwise opposed to the interests of the general public, the State would have the right to intervene "in the name of the good of the general public ". + (4) State monopoly of education has been considered by the Church to be nothing short of a tyrannical usurpation. In principle it overrides the fundamental right of the parents, denies the right of the Church even to open and maintain schools for the teaching of religion alone, and in its natural effect on public opinion tends to place religion below considerations of mere worldly welfare. + (5) The Church does not deny the right of the State to levy taxes for the support of the State schools, although, as we shall see, this leads to injustice in the manner of its application in some countries. The principle is distinct always from the abuse of the principle. Similarly, the Church does not deny the right of the State to decree compulsory education so long as such decrees do not abrogate other and more fundamental rights. It should always be remembered, however, that compulsion on the part of the State is not the exercise of a primary and predominant right, but must be justified by considerations of public good. + (6) Finally, the rights of the Church in the matter of religious teaching extend not only to the subject of religion itself but to such matters as the character of the teacher, the spirit and tone of the teaching in such subjects as history and science, and the contents of the textbooks used. She recognizes that de-Christianized teaching and de-Christianized textbooks have inevitably the effect of lessening in the minds of pupils the esteem which she teaches them to have for religion. In a word her rights are bounded, not by the subject of religion, but by the spiritual interests of the children committed to her care. VIII. The present status of the Church and State in regard to education: A. In Germany After the Reformation in Germany the primary schools in Protestant provinces passed over to the control of the local civil authorities. In Catholic communities the ecclesiastical authorities did not yield so readily to the aggression of the State. All through the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries councils (Cologne, 1536 and 1560; Salzburg, 1569; Breslau, 1592; Augsburg, 1610) withstood the encroachments of civil authority on the parochial schools and, as a rule, a modus vivendi was reached satisfactory to the bishops. By the end of the eighteenth century however, the notion of State jurisdiction in educational matters was firmly established. For the most part the foundation of private schools was the solution. These were recognized by German law as belonging to the jurisdiction of the Church. Early in the nineteenth century the so-called "simultaneous schools" began to be the ordinary solution of the problem. In these there were children of various denominations, each denomination having, in theory, the right to care for the religious instruction of its members. On several occasions the bishops of Germany or of some German state protested (e. g. at Würzburg, 1848; the Bavarian bishops, 1850) against the restrictions of the rights of the Church. At the present time the simultaneous schools are obligatory in a few provinces and optional (facultativ) in others, while in Bavaria, the Rhine Provinces and elsewhere, "confessional", i. e. denominational, schools are the rule, and simultaneous, or mixed, schools, the exception. Throughout the empire the supreme control of all elementary schools is vested in the government, the local ecclesiastical authorities being granted a greater or less amount of supervision and control according to the different circumstances in different localities. The teacher of religion for Catholics is of course always a Catholic, almost always a priest, and is a regularly qualified and salaried teacher, like the instructor in other branches. The attitude of the bishops towards the contemporary educational system in Germany is set forth in the decrees of the Council of Cologne (1860). B. In Austria Until the beginning of the nineteenth century the conditions were similar to those existing in Germany. The legislation of Joseph II had been distinctly hostile to religious influence in the schools. However, the enactments of 1808, 1868, 1885, etc. give a measure of authority and control to the local clergy which make the conditions in Austria to be as a rule more favourable than in the German Empire. The question of language has of course complicated matters in many provinces of Austria, and local conditions, the personality of the government official, etc. have much to do with the actual status of religious teaching in the public schools. The decrees of the Council of Vienna (1858) contain the views of the hierarchy of Austria in regard to the present condition of religious education in that country. The Letter of the Archbishop of Vienna to the Papal Nuncio (22 Oct., 1868) is also an important declaration. See also articles 5-8 of the Concordat of 1855 (AUSTRO-HUNGARIAN MONARCHY, p. 130). C. In France The Napoleonic decree of 1808 established in principle and in fact the most rigorous State monopoly in education. It met at once with a vigorous protest on the part of the Catholic bishops, who demanded freedom of instruction in the name of the parents in whom, they contended, the right to educate is primarily vested. In 1833 and 1850 (La loi Falloux) "free schools" were recognized. No special concession was made to the Church but permission was granted to individuals to open schools. From 1833 to 1850 members of religious orders or priests could teach only in the State schools. After 1850 they were free, as citizens, to open schools of their own, both primary and secondary. In 1886 a blow was struck at free primary education by authorization given to mayors and school inspectors to oppose the opening of any private school on hygienic or moral grounds. In 1888 came another attack in the form of an order of the Council of State, depriving communes and departments of the right to grant appropriations for private schools. Finally in 1904 it was declared that "teaching of every grade and every kind" is forbidden in France to the members of the congregations. This resulted in the closing of 14,404 out of 16,904 "Congregational" schools. Since that time the bishops have tried to reorganize Catholic education by establishing private schools in which the teachers are either laymen and laywomen or secularized members of the congregations. Instruction in religion in the State schools was optional with the parents of the children by a decree of 1881. In 1882 religious instruction in the primary schools of the State was absolutely forbidden, and in 1886 religious and clerics were forbidden to teach in those schools. In place of denominational religion there was introduced first a species of "denominational neutrality" and later, a "scientific religion" (enseignement critique). Within the present decade the tendency of this teaching has been plainly seen in the introduction of textbooks which are both anti-clerical and anti-religious, with the result that bishops are at present under indictment in France for daring to warn the people of their dioceses against the use of such books in the schools supported by the people. D. In Belgium See BELGIUM; also pamphlet by Cardinal Dechamps, "Le Nouveau projet de loi sur l'enseignement primaire" (Mechlin, 1879). E. In England Until the beginning of the nineteenth century there was no government system of primary schools in England, nor were any primary schools in receipt of State aid. It was not until 1833 that government grants were made, and then the schools that benefited by the grants were either schools of the National and British Foreign Society, or, in any case, schools in which the Bible was to be read as part of the regular instruction. The civil disabilities under which Catholics suffered, and the restriction of grants in practice to Bible-reading schools excluded Catholic private schools from State aid until 1848. In 1856 and 1858 the conditions under which grants were given were made more favourable to Catholics. From 1871 to 1903 the basic law of primary education in England was Forster's Elementary Education Act of 1870. This Act, while it did not abolish the voluntary or denominational schools, established the Board-schools. These were to be supported from the rates or taxes, and governed by school boards elected by the people. The Government helped to build the school and, in places where the boards were judged culpably negligent, compelled them to build. In 1876 and 1880 supplementary enactments were passed, called School Attendance Acts, which compel the attendance at either voluntary or Board-schools of all children under ten. The religious difficulty was met at first by leaving the matter of religious instruction to the discretion of the local board. Later the "Conscience" clause and the "Cowper-Temple" clause were added, in order to satisfy the Anglicans and the Nonconformists. These clauses set aside a special hour for religious instruction, attendance at which was to be entirely voluntary, and forbade the use of "any catechism or religious formulary distinctive of any particular denomination". Catholics were able to accept these conditions in some localities. Meantime various enactments, for example in 1891 and 1897, were passed, which lessened the burden of the voluntary schools. The Bill of 1902, which became law in 1903, took the power out of the hands of the school boards, vested it in the town and county councils, and compelled these to take over and maintain the voluntary schools. This brought England in line with Scotland, where a similar law was in force since 1872. The Nonconformists, however, objected because in localities where they were in the minority the religious instruction given in the schools would be denominational, that is Anglican. To meet this objection Mr. Birrell's Bill of 1906 was framed. But, after various vicissitudes, the Bill was finally defeated, and never became law. It would have had the effect of wiping the voluntary schools out of existence and abolishing all denominational instruction, a result which, apparently, would be acceptable to the Nonconformists, but is bitterly opposed by both Catholics and Anglicans. In 1870 the number of Catholic schools in England and Wales was 354, providing for the education of 101,933 children; while in 1906 the number of schools had increased to 1062 and the attendance had reached 284,746. This increase is largely due to the zeal of the Catholic School Committee, now known as the Catholic Education Council. F. In Ireland The primary education of Catholics in Ireland is provided for by; + (1) Schools under the management of the Irish Christian Brothers and other religious communities, which receive no part of the annual grant for primary education, and are free from government supervision and inspection. In 1901 there were 97 of these schools. + (2) Private schools, which are also free, and do not share the annual grant. In 1901 there were 85 of these, but the report does not state how many of these are Catholic. + (3) National Schools, endowed by the State, of which in 1901 there were 8569, with an attendance of 602,209. These were established by the Act of 1831 and are governed by that Act and subsequent statutes, authority being vested in the National Commissioners of Education. The majority of the National Schools are taught by lay teachers. Many of the girls' schools are, however, taught by nuns, and boys' schools by Christian Brothers (of the Congregation of St. John Baptist de La Salle), Presentation, Marist, Patrician, and Franciscan Brothers, The Act of 1831 aimed at separate instruction in religion. In places where it is at all practicable there is a National School for Catholics and one for Protestants in the same locality. Where the attendance is "mixed" there is a separate hour for religious instruction, attendance at which is voluntary. In Catholic sections, or when the majority of children are Catholic, the manager is almost invariably the parish priest. The manager is the local school authority: he appoints the teachers (subject to the approval of the commissioners), removes them, and conducts all the necessary correspondence with the commissioners. His powers and his duties are those of a school board. He is, if a priest, responsible to his bishop. By enactment of the Maynooth Synod of 1900 he may not dismiss a teacher without submitting the case to the bishop of the diocese in which the school is situated. Of the seven training colleges for primary teachers, five are under the management of the Catholic bishops. The number of teachers trained in these colleges is now more than double the number of untrained teachers. Religious instruction in the primary schools is given at a stated hour by the regular teachers of the school: this is supplemented by the local clergy, who have access, within reasonable limits, to the classroom for the purpose of religious instruction. That these conditions are, on the whole, acceptable to the bishops is clear from the pastoral address issued in 1900 from the National Synod of Maynooth. It should be added, however, that it is due to the vigilance and devotedness of the Irish clergy that they have gradually evolved from the original National system which was "thoroughly dangerous", a system which at the present time is "a help rather than a hindrance to the Church". G. In the United States "The greatest religious fact in the United States to-day", writes Archbishop Spalding, "is the Catholic School system, maintained without any aid by the people who love it". The vastness of the system may be gauged by the fact that it comprises over 20,000 teachers, over 1,000,000 pupils, represents $100,000,000 worth of property; and costs over $15,000,000 annually. This system grew up from humble beginnings. Its growth has kept pace with the growth of the Church. The oldest schools in the present territory of the United States are the Catholic schools founded about 1600 in the Spanish colonies. The French colonies, too, had their schools as a regular part of the civil and religious scheme of colonization and civilization. Catholic educational work in the Thirteen Colonies dates from the arrival of the Catholic colony in Maryland. The first regularly established school in Maryland dates from 1640. As the condition changed from that of a missionary country to that of a country regularly provided with a fixed ecclesiastical organization, the schools came to be recognized as a function of organized parish work. In the Spanish and French colonies the school, like the Church, looked to the State for support. In the English colonies there was also State support of denominational education, but whether the Catholics could or could not secure a share of the public funds depended on local conditions. When the States adopted their constitutions, they did not introduce any change in this respect. It was "the gradual rise of dissentient religious bodies in the colonies and States due to the influx of emigrants and other causes, that brought about important changes which led to the establishment of a 'non-sectarian' system of schools" (Burns, "The Catholic School System in the United States", p. 359). We know that in many instances Catholics in the West and even in Massachusetts and New York obtained funds from the State for the support of their schools, as the Episcopalians and Presbyterians did for theirs. The unsuccessful attempt of Father Richard of Detroit in 1808 to obtain for the Catholic schools of that city a share of the public funds, was followed in 1830 by a more successful plan at Lowell, Mass. At that time the population of Lowell included many Irish Catholic immigrants. In 1830 at the annual town meeting a committee was appointed to consider the expediency of "establishing a separate school for the benefit of the Irish population", and the following year the sum of fifty dollars annually was appropriate for that purpose. In 1855 there were two Catholic schools at Lowell; both were recognized as part of the school system of the town, and both were supported out of the public funds. After sixteen years of successful trial the arrangement was discontinued in 1852, owing to the wave of bigotry known as the Knownothing Movement that swept over New England. In New York, as early as 1806, St. Peter's School applied for and received State aid. A similar arrangement was made for St. Patrick's School in 1816. In 1824 this support was withdrawn by the State, owing to the activity of the Public School Society. To this society was committed the entire school fund for distribution, and, as we learn from the protests of New York Catholics, the activity of the society wa directed towards making the public schools not strictly non-sectarian but offensively Protestant. In 1840 the School Controversy in New York was precipitated by the petition of the Catholics to be allowed a share of the public funds for their schools. The petition was rejected by the Common Council; but the fight was not, on that account, discontinued. With remarkable zeal, eloquence, and erudition, Bishop Hughes, supported not only by all his Catholic people, but also by some of the non-Catholic congregations of the city, urged the claims of religious education. He laid stress on the contention that Catholics have a right to "a fair and just proportion of the funds appropriated for the common schools, provided the Catholics will do with it the same thing that is done in the common schools". He claimed no special privilege, but contended for the "constitutional rights" of his people. He was opposed, not only by the Public School Society, but also by representatives of the Methodist, Episcopal, and Presbyterian Churches. The claims of the Catholics went before the legislature; but there also sectarian hatred was injected into the discussion and bigotry gained the day. The controversy, however, had one good result. It showed the imminent danger to faith and morals existing in the public school system as influenced by the so-called non-sectarians of that day, and as a consequence Catholics set to work to build up, at a tremendous cost, a system of parochial schools unsupported by the State. In theory it is still maintained that injustice is being done to Catholics. If the "secular branches" are taught in the parochial schools to the satisfaction of the State authorities, the schools should be compensated for doing that portion of the task which the State has assumed. On the other hand, there are many Catholics who are convinced that if State aid were accepted it could be done only at the cost of independence, that State aid would be the price of admitting State supervision to the extent of partial de-Catholicization. There have, nevertheless, been individual instances in which a compromise has been reached, e. g. Savannah, Georgia; St. Augustine, Florida; Poughkeepsie, New York; and Faribault and Stillwater, Minnesota. The last-mentioned instance gave rise to the celebrated School Controversy of 1891-92. The Faribault plan consisted in setting aside a certain time for religious instruction, to be given gratis by the Catholic teachers, and a time for secular instruction, to be given also by Catholic teachers. The secular instruction was to be paid for by the State, and in respect to that portion of its work the school was to be under State supervision; it was, in fact, to be recognized as a "public school". The question was finally carried to the Congregation of the Propaganda, which rendered its decision on 21 April, 1892, to the effect that "considering the peculiar circumstances and character of the arrangement, and the agreement by which the plan was inaugurated, it may be tolerated". In the discussion of the Faribault plan certain fundamental questions were touched, as for instance in Dr. Bouquillon's "Education, to whom does it belong?" (Baltimore, 1891), "A Rejoinder to the Civiltà Cattolica" (Baltimore, 1892)," A Rejoinder to Critics" (Baltimore, 1892), Hollaind, S.J., "The Parents First" (New York, 1891), Conway, S.J., "The State Last" (New York, 1892), Brandi, S.J., in "Civiltà Cattolica", 2 Jan., 1892, tr. as a pamphlet (New York, 1892). It should be added that, owing to some local difficulty the agreement at Faribault and Stillwater was later discontinued, but a similar agreement is in force to-day in not a few places in Minnesota. The attitude of the hierarchy of the United States towards the problem of elementary education has been consistent from the beginning. At first Bishop Carroll, in the days immediately following the Revolution, entertained the hope that Catholics might unite with their non-Catholic fellow-citizens in building up a system of education that would be mutually satisfactory from the religious point of view. Soon, however, he realized that that hope was futile. After the First Catholic Synod he addressed (1792) a pastoral letter to the Catholics of the country, in which he emphasized the necessity of a "pious and Catholic education of the young to insure their growing up in the faith", and expressed the hope that the graduates of the newly-founded College of Georgetown would, on returning to their homes, be able "to instruct and guide others in local schools". Thus the plan of organizing separate Catholic schools was inaugurated. The First Plenary Council of Baltimore (1829) declares: "We judge it absolutely necessary that schools should be established, in which the young may be taught the principles of faith and morality, while being instructed in letters" ("Decreta", n. 33). The Second Council (1832) renewed this enactment and entered into the details of organization (see "Decreta", n. 38). The Third Plenary Council of Baltimore (1884) devoted very careful consideration to the subject of elementary schools and decreed in explicit terms the obligation of establishing a parochial school in every parish within two years of the promulgation of the decree, except where the bishop, on account of serious difficulties in the way (ob graviores difficultates) judges that a delay may be granted ("Acta et Decreta", 199, no. 1). IX. Parochial Schools and Public Schools The establishment and maintenance of parochial schools does not imply the condemnation of public schools, or opposition of any kind to the purpose for which these are established. At a meeting of the National Educational Association at Nashville, Tennessee in July, 1889, both Cardinal Gibbons, Archbishop of Baltimore, and Archbishop Keane, then rector of the Catholic University of America, stated the case in favour of denominational schools, and made it clear that, so far as citizenship and patriotism are concerned, the Catholic schools are aiming successfully at the same ideals as the public schools. Since that time the calumny has been repeated that parochial schools lead to sectionalism, and are opposed to national patriotism. Catholics can only answer that this is not true, and point to facts to justify their reply. Our schools teach everything that is taught in the public schools, and, in addition, teach religion and religious morality. The exclusion of religion from the public schools is, we think, historically, the result of sectarian division and sectarian prejudice. In recent times theorists have sought to justify the omission on pedagogical grounds, and have suggested various substitutes for religion as a basis of morality. We criticize the theories, and point to the educational results in justification of our contention. 1f the exclusion of religion and the substitution for it of inadequate and futile moral education lead to disastrous results, the Catholics who call attention to those conditions, far from opposing the public school system, are really doing it a service. Meantime they feel that the tendency in the educational policy of the public school system is more and more towards secularization. In the matter of morality they feel that experiments more and more dangerous are being tried in the public schools, and if they protest, they are doing what, after all, they have a right, as taxpayers, to do. Meantime also they are developing their own system of education without giving up the contention that, in justice, they have a right to compensation for the secular education and the education in citizenship which they give in their schools. Conflicts between the educational authority of the State and the Catholic clergy have arisen in a few instances. The clergy have always recognized the right of officials of the Department of Health, etc., to interfere in the matters in which they have competence. Where they have retained full autonomy, and have not yielded for the sake of affiliation or some other form of recognition, they have naturally avoided all friction with State educational authority. By way of exception, we have the celebrated Ohio Compulsory Education case, in which Father Patrick F. Quigley, of Toledo, Ohio, resisted unsuccessfully the enactment of the State of Ohio (1890) compelling all principals and teachers in all schools to make quarterly reports to State officers. The still more famous Wisconsin Bible Case involved the question of the right of the District Board of Edgerton, Wisconsin, to have the King James Version of the Bible read in the public schools which were attended by Catholic pupils. The Supreme Court of Wisconsin decided in favour of the Catholics. X. Principles embodied in the Parochial Schools The sacrifice which Catholics are making in maintaining their system of primary schools is justified, in their estimation, by the following principles: + (1) The spiritual interests of the child, while not exclusive of others, such as learning, health, skill, ability to make a living, etc., are supreme. Where there is danger of wrecking the soul of a Catholic child no consideration of economy has weight. + (2) Next to religion, morality is the most important matter in the life of a child. Catholics maintain that morality is best taught when based on religion. Catholic educational theorists, especially, are convinced that the immature mind of the child cannot grasp principles of morality except they be presented by way of religious authority and religious feeling. + (3) Considering the nature of the child-mind, the whole curriculum of the school is best presented when it is organized and unified, not fragmented and disconnected. Religion, appealing as it does to the heart as well as to the head, offers the best principle of mental and spiritual unification and organization. The exclusion of religion from the schools is a pedagogical mistake. + (4) Although condemned by secularizing educationalists and sectarian enthusiasts as un-American and opposed to our national institutions, our schools seem to us to be second to none in national usefulness and effectiveness. They teach patriotism, and the results show that they teach it successfully. They teach morality, and the lives of the Catholic people of the country show the result. They teach religion, thus constituting, in an age that questions everything, a great institutional force on the side of belief in God, in religious obligation, and in definite moral responsibility. Besides, they strive, with great personal sacrifice on the part of people, teachers, and pupils, to keep up with the public school system in teaching the secular branches. They are as a rule the equals, and often the superiors, of the public schools in the quality of the secular instruction which they give. They have the advantage of discipline, uniformity of ideals, harmony of methods, and, above all, of disinterested devotedness on the part of their teachers. Finally, the fact should not be overlooked that the parochial schools save many millions of dollars annually to the non-Catholic public, who, if the Catholic children were not provided for in parochial schools, would be obliged to increase very considerably the annual cost of education. XI. Organization and Statistics The parochial school system is diocesan in its organization. The supreme educational authority is the bishop, who governs and administers the schools of his diocese through the assistance of a school board and, very often, a diocesan (clerical) inspector of schools. The immediate authority is vested in the pastor, whose task it is to provide building, salaries, etc. The teachers are almost universally religious. The principal of the school is appointed usually by the religious community to which he or she belongs. The great majority of the schools are mixed, that is, schools for boys and girls. The only exceptions, apparently, are those in which the boys are taught by brothers and the girls by sisters. There is no recognized national central authority in Catholic educational matters. However, the parochial school section of the Catholic Educational Association has already done much towards unifying and systematizing our parochial schools. The training of teachers is, as a rule, provided for by the different religious communities engaged in the work of teaching. There are no diocesan institutions for the training of the teachers for the whole diocese. During the summer of 1911 a regular session of the Catholic University of America was held for the benefit of the teaching sisterhoods. Of the three hundred who attended, a large percentage took up professional pedagogical subjects. Similar institutes were held at Chicago, Milwaukee, and elsewhere. In the autumn of the same year the Sisters' College was formally opened at Brookland, D. C., under the auspices of the Catholic University of America, and of the twenty-nine students who attended the first session all took professional courses in education. The number of parochial schools in the United States in 1911 was, according to the "Catholic Directory", 4972, and the number of pupils 1,270,131. These figures do not include orphan asylums, which numbered 285 and took care of 51,938 orphans. Neither do they include the non-parochial academies, convent boarding schools, and day schools, nor the colleges for boys, many of which have a number of primary pupils in attendance. WILLIAM TURNER. IN AUSTRALIA In Australia as in the other parts of the British Empire, the struggle in defence of Catholic education has been a hard, uphill fight. Even in the present age the Catholics of Australia, who have by the most generous and devoted sacrifices created a fine system of education, both primary and secondary, have not the right, which the Catholics of England, Ireland, and Scotland enjoy, to have any share whatever in the large sums of public money expended on the schools, whilst they are compelled to contribute this money in the form of taxes and rates. History From 1788, when Governor Philip first established a colonial settlement at Port Jackson, until 1826, the only schools available for Catholic children in the colony were the officially controlled Anglican schools, on which large grants of money and land were lavished. The devoted Catholic chaplain Father Therry started a small school in 1826, for which he managed to obtain a little Government aid. By 1836 there were thirteen Catholic schools. Through the influence of Governor Bourke, a liberal Irish Protestant, a system of State aid recognizing the various denominations was developed, a Denominational Board for distributing the funds was set up, and a modest allowance was secured by Catholics. But in 1848 a National Secular System was introduced with a Central Board of Education somewhat similar to that existing in Ireland, yet running concomitantly with the existing Denominational Board. Hostility between the two was inevitable, and there were many inconveniences. By the Public School Act of 1866 a Central Council of Education was established and sundry changes were introduced, some being to the detriment of the denominational schools; for the defence of Catholic rights a Catholic Association was formed. But the secular movement supported by anti-Catholic prejudice grew in strength and, by the Public Instruction Act of 1880, a centralized secular system, withdrawing all State aid from the denominational schools, was completely established in New South Wales; this had been done already in some of the other States, and as time went on was done also in the remaining. The effect of the measure was the speedy extinction of the great majority of the other denominational schools, whilst the Catholics, thrown again entirely on their own resources, started to build and support their schools (both primary and secondary), the numbers of which they have since then largely increased. The secular system has thus been in force in the State schools for thirty years, but the situation's not acquiesced in by the Catholics; they continue to demand the right as free citizens to have the money which they pay in taxes for the support of education expended on the only education which they can conscientiously accept. Present Status of Catholic Education The Catholic primary schools are under the authority of the bishop of the diocese. There are no school boards; inspectors appointed by diocesan authority examine and report on the schools. Competitive yearly interprimary school examinations for Catholic secondary school scholarships give an extra stimulus to individual work. In some states Government inspectors are invited to visit the schools, but only in three states does the law enforce Government inspection. These schools are taxed like ordinary institutions; where they come into competition with the State schools, e. g. for civil service appointments, they win more than their share of successes. The Catholic secondary schools and high schools for boys and girls are numerous, and are in charge of the religious congregations. The Jesuit Fathers have four colleges, and the Vincentian and Marist Fathers (N. Z.) one each. The remainder are divided among the Christian, Marist, Patrician, and De La Salle Brothers. Secondary education is largely guided by the university examinations, and here again the Catholic schools amply prove their efficiency. Victoria (Tasmania lately passed a similar law) by Act of Parliament (1906) exacts the registration of all private schools both primary and secondary, and of all teachers. An Educational Council, on which Catholics are represented, has charge of the register, determines the conditions of registration, and adjudicates on individual claims. Vested interests are respected, but evidence of competency is to be required of all future teachers. Catholics are endeavouring to meet the new conditions by the establishment of training colleges, especially for women. In New South Wales, where similar legislation is probable, Cardinal Moran (d. 6 Aug., 1911) in 1911 established a Catholic Council of Education to safeguard Catholic interests. In Australasia, including New Guinea, there are: Catholic primary schools, 1004; superior day schools, 196; boarding schools for girls, 194; colleges for boys, 27; ecclesiastical seminaries, 5; and one college for foreign missions. The estimated total Catholic population is 982,578; scholars, 123,905. The great majority of the Catholic teachers are from among the 6000 nuns and 549 brothers who devote their lives to the service of the Church in the country. Lay teachers are chiefly employed in the country districts. The per capita cost of education in the Catholic primary schools averages between £3 and £4; in the State schools, between £5 and £6. The amount saved to the State by the self-sacrifice of the Catholic body totals annually about three-quarters of a million pounds. The Catholic schools are maintained by the voluntary contributions of the faithful--church collections, concerts, bazaars etc.--and the gratuitous labours of the religious. The classes in the Catholic primary schools are graded in a system somewhat similar to that in the Government schools. In some of the states, notably in New South Wales, the Catholic school authorities have been able to issue special Catholic school readers and periodical school papers. As an offset to the Government scholarships, which unlike those in England are tenable only at the Government high schools, the Catholics have founded scholarships in Catholic secondary schools for their primary school children. Technical instruction is usually included in the curriculum of the larger schools, but is more systematically organized in Catholic institutions for orphans and industrial work. WILFRID RYAN. IN CANADA Canada is a self-governing dominion of the British Empire consisting of nine provinces and some territories not yet erected in provinces. Its population is partly French in origin and language, partly British. It will be necessary, in order to be accurate, to speak of each province separately. A. Province of Ontario The beginnings of Catholic education in Ontario may be said to date back to the year 1615, in which the Recollect Joseph Le Caron, making a journey of exploration in the countries of the Algonquin and Huron tribes, decided on the foundation of missions in their midst. Writing to the Court of France, he said: "We must first make men of these Indians, then Christians." During the years 1622-26, his first efforts were assisted by the arrival of Fathers Guillaume Poulin, Nicholas Viel, and de La Roche d'Aillon, of his order, and the Jesuit Fathers Brébeuf and de La Noue. Their work was facilitated by the aid of interpreters who were good Christians and valiant auxiliaries. By 1638 the Jesuit Fathers, now ten in number, had established two residences on the banks of Georgian Bay. These outposts speedily became centres of Christian and Catholic civilization. Until 1650 the missionaries, with their devoted lay brothers and coadjutors from France, were the only Catholic teachers of Ontario. Their first lessons of catechism, of book-knowledge, and of agriculture, given amidst the greatest privations, and often at the peril of their lives, owed much more to their unlimited zeal than to any generosity on the part of their pupils. In 1649 the Huron and Algonquin neophytes were exterminated by the ferocious Iroquois, who burnt or destroyed seven flourishing missions, which had been directed by no fewer than sixty missionaries and helpers, many of whom perished with their flocks. The surviving heroes of the Gospel found a new field of action among the Outaouais, who inhabited the present County of Bruce, the islands of Georgian Bay, and Great Manitoulin Island. The work that had been done for the Hurons and Algonquins of Eastern Ontario was now renewed on behalf of the Western tribes. Nothing that human zeal could accomplish was spared to make of them civilized people and fervent Catholics. When Antoine de La Mothe Cadillac founded the important post of Detroit (1701), he was accompanied by missionaries, among whom was the Rev. Father Lhalle, who became rector of the pioneers of Essex. The Iroquet tribe, belonging to the large family of the Algonquins, settled in the farthest eastern end of the province in the present Counties of Stormont, Glengarry, and Prescott, received at an early date the joyful tidings of Catholic doctrine and the benefit of Catholic education. After the War of American Independence, a great number of settlers, faithful to the British flag, took refuge in the Province of Ontario. The first immigrants established themselves at Indian Point, in the vicinity of Kingston, in 1784. Later on, other loyalists took up homesteads at Toronto and Niagara. The few French families who had followed de La Mothe Cadillac to Detroit survived to constitute the colony of Essex, and their descendants rapidly invaded both the Counties of Essex and Kent, where the French population now almost forms a majority. In 1786 and 1802 Scotch emigrants settled in large numbers in the Counties of Glengarry and Prescott. From 1816 to 1825 British officers and furloughed soldiers, mostly Irish, colonized the districts of Carleton, Lanark, and Peterborough. The construction of the Rideau Canal caused a large number of workmen to take up their residence in Ontario. An entire colony of Scotch Catholics, expelled from the United States after the War of Independence on account of their attachment to the British Crown, settled in Canada near Niagara, in the Counties of Lincoln and Welland. A vigorous stream of immigration from Germany in 1835 overflowed the western end of the province, in the present Counties of Bruce, Huron, and Perth. Meanwhile French Canadians poured into the Counties of Russell, Prescott, and Glengarry. Raftsmen and French Canadians of various occupations ascended the Ottawa River, exploring the regions now known as New Ontario, Algoma, Nipissing, and Thunder Bay. They are now in a majority in these three counties, and have churches, priests, and schools of their own. This Catholic immigration, so abundant and sudden, incited the ardent zeal of Mgr Plessis, Bishop of Quebec, to send missionaries to Upper Canada. Priests from the seminary of Quebec, others from the foreign missionary organization of Paris, and a small number of priests who had immigrated with their Scotch or Irish countrymen ministered to the spiritual wants of these courageous colonists. They joyfully accepted their share of the great poverty of these pioneers. They thought more of preserving the Faith, of administering the sacraments, and of reforming abuses than of founding schools. Not that they considered schools as of little importance, but because, from lack of resources and teachers, the establishment of schools was an impossibility. From 1830, however, Toronto had its Catholic school; then Kingston, in 1837 and Picton, in 1840, were likewise provided for. The hierarchy of the Catholic Church, ever anxious to foster the education of the people confided to its care, was soon established in the province. This was the signal for the opening of educational establishments at divers points. Ottawa had its Catholic schools in 1844; Brantford in 1850; Goderich and Peterborough in 1852; Hamilton, Oshawa, and Barrie in 1855; Perth and Alexandria in 1856; Orillia in 1857; Berlin, Dundas, and St. Thomas in 1858; Belleville in 1860, and so on. The venerable Bishops A. McDonell, R. Gaulin, Power, Guiges, O.M.I., de Charbonel, Pinsonnault, Jamot, Farrell, and Phelan; Fathers J. Ryan, Proulx, Grand, Maloney, Carayon, Grattan, Bissey, Jeffrey, Bilroy, Lawler, Faure, the Jesuit Fathers du Ranquet, Hanipaux, Chôné, Frémiol, the Oblate Fathers Tilmon, Dandurand, Tabaret, Soulerin, Manroit, and the Basilian Fathers--these were the pioneers and defenders of Catholic education in Ontario. They found very able helpers in the various religious communities of women, and in the Institute of the Brothers of the Christian Schools. Many sincerely Christian persons among the laity also devoted themselves to the cause of Catholic education in the province. Among the earliest and most remarkable may be mentioned, at Toronto, J. Harvey and J. Seyers; at Ottawa, Dr. Riel, Friolle, and Goode; at Dundas, Miss Sweeney; at Brantford, J. d'Astroph; at Oakland, Capt. Fitzgerald. The Catholic schools have become numerous and powerful. Their organization, from the points of view of studies, discipline, and regular attendance of pupils, is better than that of all other institutions of the same class in the province. Many years have already elapsed since in the cities, villages, and other parts of the country, long opened up to colonization, the old square-timber school-houses were replaced by splendid buildings of brick or stone. The architecture of these schools is simple and beautiful; the systems of ventilation, lighting, and heating are excellent; the installation of suitable school furniture and accessories is almost complete. This progress is very evident, even in centres of colonization. The school trustees make it a point of honour to put up school buildings which are beautiful and spacious, and which leave nothing to be desired in ventilation, lighting, and heating. The Catholic schools of Ontario are called separate schools. They do separate, in fact, for school purposes, the Catholic minority from the Protestant majority. They make it possible for Catholics to withdraw their children from the public or common schools, which are by law Protestant. Nevertheless, there are some public schools which are really Catholic; these exist in localities exclusively or almost exclusively Catholic. Such schools are found especially in the Counties of Russell, Prescott, Algoma, Nipissing, Kent, and Essex. Separate schools were granted in 1841, when the Provinces of Upper and Lower Canada were united. Wishing to secure for their co-religionists in Lower Canada exemption from the obligation of sending their children to the Catholic schools (common schools in that province), and of paying taxes for the support of said schools, the Protestants of Ontario and Quebec proposed to establish a system of dissident or separate schools. What they claimed for the Protestants of Lower Canada they had to bind themselves in strict justice to grant to the Catholics of Upper Canada. The principle of separate schools, Catholic in Ontario and Protestant in Quebec, received the royal sanction on 18 September, 1841. This fundamental law had been discussed by a committee of the Legislative Assembly in which Lower Canada was represented by fifteen members and Upper Canada by eight. This law authorized dissidents from the common schools, on giving notice to the clerk of the district council, to pay their school taxes for the support of separate schools, and to receive a share of the government grants for education in proportion to their number. The same law authorized the election by the people of trustees for the administration of separate schools. The governor was authorized to nominate in each city a board of examiners composed of an equal number of Catholics and Protestants. The Catholics of Ontario obtained the privilege of establishing a separate board for the examination of candidates wishing to teach in their schools; a clause in this fundamental law exempted the Brothers of the Christian Schools from submitting to examination by this board. From 1841 to 1863, at almost every session of the Legislature, the Ontario Protestants proposed amendments to the act establishing separate schools. These amendments tended, for the most part, to render the existence of separate schools in Ontario so precarious that they would die out of themselves. The desired privileges for the Protestants of Lower Canada had been obtained; it was well known that these privileges would always be respected by the Catholic majority of Quebec; now, they thought, it would be safe to deliver the attacks of unenlightened fanaticism against the separate schools of Upper Canada. Cost what it might, the cry was raised for a single school system for the whole of Upper Canada--a common, public, or national school system. While constantly professing motives of the purest justice and common interest, the Protestant Province of Upper Canada has continually sullied its reputation for fairness by setting an example of fanaticism, narrow-mindedness, and intolerance towards Catholic schools, whilst Lower Canada, a Catholic province, has been a model of perfect justice and toleration. On 27 February, 1863, a Catholic deputy, R. W. Scott, presented for the fourth time a new law to govern the separate schools. This law was adopted, thanks to the generous aid given by the French Canadian deputies, mostly from Lower Canada. The Upper Canadian majority voted against the bill, but all the members from Quebec and twenty-one members from Upper Canada, among them several Protestants, were in its favour and carried the measure. 1f Ontario now possesses a system of Catholic separate schools, it is largely due to the French Canadians of Lower Canada, whose wishes in the matter were enforced by their representatives, Catholic and Protestant. This law, enacted in 1863, was maintained at the time of the confederation of the provinces in 1867; it still governs to-day the Catholic separate schools of Ontario. Yet it is far from giving to the Catholics of that province liberties equal to those enjoyed by the Protestant minority of Quebec. It recognizes the Catholic separate schools for primary education only. Secondary or superior education in Ontario is Protestant. The Catholics have their academies, convents, colleges, and universities, but these are independent schools, supported by the voluntary contributions of Catholics who have also to contribute, on the same footing as Protestants, to the support of the government high schools, collegiate institutes, and universities. It refuses to separate schools the right to a share of the taxes paid by public-utility companies, such as railway, tramway and telephone companies, banks, etc. It withholds from the trustees of separate schools the right of expropriation in order to secure more fitting localities for their schools. It refuses to the Protestant father of a Catholic family the right to pay his taxes towards the support of Catholic schools. It allows Catholics the option of paying their taxes to support the public schools. As the rate of taxation for separate schools is generally higher than that for public schools, owing to the large number of children in families of the Catholic minority, and to the abstention of large business concerns from contributing the least support to the separate schools, it follows that many Catholics, more or less sincere, avoid the higher rate and pay their taxes towards the support of the public, or Protestant, schools. The separate schools are administered, as by a court of final jurisdiction, by the Education Department at Toronto, in which Catholics are not represented. The law governing the separate schools nevertheless gives to Catholics the following rights: + (1) To pay their taxes for primary schools in which religious instruction is given, and of which the teachers, inspectors and textbooks are Catholic; + (2) To administer these schools by a board of trustees elected by the Catholic proprietors and residents of the different school sections; + (3) To fix the rate of school-taxation; + (4) To have these school-taxes collected by the tax-collector of the city or township; + (5) To negotiate loans for the election of school buildings; + (6) To engage teachers. The board of trustees has likewise the right to impose the teaching in French or German of reading, spelling and literature, as provided for by the regulations of the Education Department, page 9, article 15, year 1907. The French Canadians, availing themselves of this right, have the French language taught in 250 schools, frequented almost entirely by their children. The Government has named three French Canadian inspectors for these schools, called bilingual. The teachers of these schools are trained in two public bilingual training-schools, one at Sturgeon Falls and the other at Ottawa, founded and supported by the Government, and directed by Catholic principals. The certificates issued by these schools give the right to teach in the bilingual schools for five years only. The Government makes a yearly grant to both Catholic and public schools, the amount being calculated upon the value of the schoolhouse, the excellence of its furnishings, the certificates and salaries of the teachers, and the attendance of the children. The statistics for 1909, taken from the Report of the Minister of Education, are as follows: Number of Catholic separate schools 467 Number of pupils in attendance 55,034 Average daily attendance 34, 553 Percentage of attendance 62.78 Percentage of attendance in the public schools 59.81 Number of teachers 1,089 Amount spent for schoolhouses $161,317 Amount spent for teachers' salaries $404,890 Average cost per pupil $14.90 Total expenditures for 1909 for elementary public and separate schools $8,141,423 The Catholic colleges for boys are: in the Diocese of Toronto, that of the Basilian Fathers, founded in 1852, 15 professors, 280 students; in the Diocese of London, Basilian Fathers, founded 1857, 37 professors, 149 students; Diocese of Hamilton, Fathers of the Resurrection, founded 1857, 11 professors, 100 students; Diocese of Kingston, secular clergy, founded 1837, 4 professors, 85 students. The Brothers of the Christian Schools conduct an academy with 14 teachers and 297 pupils. The Ursuline Sisters, 1 college for girls, 202 pupils; Sisters of Mary, 1 academy for girls; Sisters of St. Joseph, 1, 140 pupils; Sisters of Loretto, 4, 78 teachers, 490 pupils; Grey Nuns of the Cross, 2, 35 teachers, 555 pupils; Christian Brothers, 1, 14 teachers, 297 pupils. Other convent schools are those of the Sisters of St. Joseph (seven schools, 74 teachers, 975 pupils); Sisters of Loretto (two schools, 30 teachers, 280 pupils); Grey Nuns of the Cross (one school, 6 teachers, 239 pupils); Sisters of the Holy Names of Jesus and Mary (one school, founded in 1864); Sisters of the Congregation of Notre Dame (one school, 29 teachers, 380 pupils). There are three industrial schools under the care of religious institutes: the Brothers of the Christian Schools (8 teachers, 95 pupils); Daughters of the Immaculate Heart of Mary (10 teachers, 110 pupils); Sisters of St. Joseph (10 teachers, 65 pupils). The nine orphanages under the care of religious are: 2 under the Grey Nuns of the Cross, with 385 orphans; 5 under the Sisters of St. Joseph, with 582 orphans; 1 under the School Sisters of Notre Dame, with 54 orphans; 1 under the Sisters of Providence, with 85 orphans. The appended table of religious institutes engaged in teaching in Ontario at the present time (1911) is necessarily incomplete, reliable figures being unobtainable in many cases. In such cases the figures have been omitted altogether, as approximate figures are liable to be misleading. RELIGIOUS INSTITUTES ENGAGED IN TEACHING IN ONTARIO (1911) Mother-House Diocese Foun- dation Schools Teach- ers Pupils Brothers of the Christian Schools Brothers of the Christian Schools Brothers of the Sacred Heart Sisters of the Congregation of Notre Dame Sisters of the Congregation of Notre Dame Sisters of the Congregation of Notre Dame Sisters of the Assumption Sisters of the Holy Names of Jesus and Mary Sisters of the Presentation Grey Nuns of the Cross Grey Nuns of the Cross Grey Nuns of the Cross Daughters of the Immaculate Heart of Mary Sisters of the Holy Cross and Seven Dolours Sisters of the Holy Cross and Seven Dolours Sisters of Loretto Sisters of Loretto Sisters of Loretto Sisters of St. Joseph Sisters of St. Joseph Sisters of St. Joseph Sisters of St. Joseph Sisters of St. Joseph Sisters of St. Joseph School Sisters of Notre Dame School Sisters of Notre Dame Sisters of La Sagesse Sisters of La Sagesse Sisters of St. Mary Ursuline Sisters Sisters of Providence Sisters of the Sacred Heart Paris Paris Le Puy Montreal Montreal Montreal Nicolet Montreal St. Hyacinthe Ottawa Ottawa Ottawa Buffalo St. Laurent, P.Q. Toronto Toronto Toronto Toronto Toronto Hamilton London Peterboro Peterboro Milwaukee Milwaukee St. Laurent-sur-Sèvre St. Laurent-sur-Sèvre Lockport, N.Y. Chatham Kingston Ottawa Ottawa Toronto Ottawa Kingston Alexandria Ottawa Temiskaming London St. Boniface Ottawa Pembroke Sault Ste. Marie Sault Ste. Marie Alexandria Pembroke Toronto Hamilton London Toronto (City) Toronto Hamilton London Peterboro Sault Ste. Marie Hamilton Alexandria Sault Ste. Marie Ottawa Ottawa London Kingston Ottawa 1864 1851 1911 1841 1883 1868 1910 1864 1903 1845 1863 1896 1862 1856 1886 1857 1851 1874 1871 1904 1891 1887 1860 1860 1910 3 6 1 4 3 2 4 1 27 2 2 5 1 1 6 3 11 10 12 12 3 3 8 3 2 3 2 6 8 1 31 28 4 15 21 8 24 6 124 12 12 15 9 36 50 44 21 32 65 16 21 10 38 44 950 1001 139 511 1266 280 987 150 6410 522 550 490 260 1649 450 3374 1380 2391 2035 725 1160 1506 675 600 505 1686 1455 10 B. Province of Quebec (1) French Rule (1635-1763) (a) Primary Schools With the introduction of Christianity, schools sprang up in the French colony even among the remotest tribes. The Recollects were the first schoolmasters of Canada. In 1616, one of them, Brother Pacifique Duplessis, opened, at Three Rivers, the first school of New France. Shortly afterwards the Jesuit Fathers followed them, teaching the children reading, writing, arithmetic, and catechism. In 1634, a year after the arrival of the pioneer families in Canada, an elementary school was founded in Quebec. As colonists increased, primary schools sprang up. The boys' schools were at St. Foy, the Island of Orleans, Point Levis, Château-Richer, Quebec, Montreal, Three Rivers. Proofs exist that there were in the city and district of Quebec 15 primary schools for boys; in the city and district of Montreal, 10; in the city and district of Three Rivers, 7. Among the organizers were Mgr Laval and his seminary. Mgr de St-Vallier, his successor, encouraged elementary, secondary, and technical schools by every means in his power. In the district of Montreal the Sulpician Fathers founded several schools. M. Souart, superior of Montreal from 1661 to 1668, took pride in styling himself the first schoolmaster of New France; all his brethren shared his zeal. In 1715 Brother Charon opened a school for boys at Pointe-aux Trembles, near Montreal, and took upon himself the charge of recruiting teachers for the country districts. In investigating the history of the schools in pioneer days we invariably find as their founder or benefactor a bishop, a priest, a religious congregation, or a layman, himself a school-teacher or assisted by a teacher who travelled from one district to another. The education of the girls was as carefully attended to as that of the boys. The Ursulines built schools at Quebec and Three Rivers. The religious of the Hôpital Général de Québec erected a boarding school, while the Sisters of the Congregation de Notre Dame, founded by the Venerable Marguerite Bourgeoys, multiplied convents at Montreal, Quebec, Three Rivers, and in the country districts, where the children of the colonists came to be trained in all things essential to the development of a strong Christian character. Charlevoix says: "If to this day, there prevail in Canada so great a gentleness in the manners of all classes of society and so much charm in the intercourse of life, it is owing in great measure to the zeal of Marguerite Bourgeoys". Twelve houses were opened by the Congregation of Notre Dame during the period of French rule. (b) Special Schools Specializing in teaching was not unknown at this epoch when existence itself was a struggle. There were schools of mathematics and hydrography at Montreal at the Jesuits and the Charon Brothers', art and trade schools at the seminary at Quebec, art and trade schools at St. Joachim, art and trade schools at the Charon Brothers. (c) Secondary Schools While defending the colony from the incursions of the Indians and fighting to retain their prior right of possession, the French not only established primary and special schools but founded and endowed secondary schools. The classical college of the Jesuits was established at a time when the population of the entire country was but a few hundred souls, and the Petit Séminaire of Quebec opened its doors on October, 1688. (2) British Rule (1763-1910) In 1763 60,000 French Catholic colonists passed by right of conquest under British Protestant rule. The progress of the Catholic schools was greatly impeded. The Church, through her teaching communities and secular clergy, organized schools in the most important villages; but, unfortunately, a great number of parishes were without pastors. In 1801 the Legislature passed a law entitled "An Act to establish Free Schools", which provided for the establishment of a permanent corporation known as the Royal Institute. Thus the monopoly was given to the Church of England to establish and support English Protestant schools for a population almost entirely made up of French Catholics, Scattered over the country districts, in the midst of a mistrustful people, the schools of the Royal Institute were patronized by the English colonists only. Twenty-four years after its foundation the Royal Institute had only 37 schools with 1048 pupils. On the other hand, parochial schools increased. At Montreal, the Sulpicians and the Ladies of the Congregation of Notre Dame opened free schools. A Catholic educational society was founded at Quebec to teach poor children and train teachers for country districts. Many other societies were formed in different parts of Canada for a similar purpose. The parishes were few that could not boast of fairly good schools. Private or independent schools increased more rapidly than the parish schools. In 1824 the Legislature passed the Parochial School Act authorizing the pastors and church-wardens to appropriate a fourth part of the revenue of the parochial corporation for the support of the schools under their exclusive control. In 1829 there were no less than 14,700 children in these schools which were supported at the cost of much sacrifice by a poor and scattered population. Many other attempts were made to organize Catholic schools until, finally, in 1841, a law was passed wherein were contained the principal provisions of the Educational Act as it exists in the Province of Quebec to-day. This law, considerably augmented by that of 1846, gave a great impetus to public instruction. In 1849 there were 1817 schools and 68,904 pupils. Owing to the influence of Dr. Meilleur, Superintendent of Catholic Schools of Quebec, education made rapid progress. Chaveau, his successor, continued to work with the same zeal. He established three primary denominational normal schools in Lower Canada, two for Catholics, who were in a great majority, the third for Protestants. In Ontario, there was but one normal school, for the Protestant majority, who neglected to do justice to the Catholic minority, while Quebec gave to Protestants, who were in the minority, a separate normal school. The school organization of the Province of Quebec is now under the control of the Department of Public Instruction. The president, who is elected for life, is non-partisan in politics and bears the title of Superintendent of Education. He is assisted by a French and an English secretary, who are charged with the administration of the affairs of their respective nationalities and co-religionists. The Council of Public Instruction is composed of highly esteemed members, chosen from the two religious denominations; they frame laws and rules relating to public instruction which are afterwards submitted to the sanction of the government. The Council of Public Instruction is divided into Catholic and Protestant sections. The Catholic committee includes as ex-officio members the archbishops, bishops or administrators of dioceses and Apostolic vicariates of the Province of Quebec, and a number of Catholic laymen. The Protestant committee is composed of Protestant members equal in number to the laymen of the Catholic committee. Apart from these two committees, there are other members who do not form part of the Council of Public Instruction, but who have, in their respective committees, the same power as the members of the committees. These two committees, which sit independently, unite, under the presidency of the superintendent of education, when there are matters to discuss that interest both religious denominations. All questions relating exclusively to Catholics or to Protestants are decided by their respective religious committees. The Province of Quebec is divided into school municipalities for the support of one or more schools. These municipalities are subdivided into school districts, and are entrusted to the commissioners or trustees elected by the taxpayers. In large cities, like Quebec and Montreal, the commissioners are named by the Government on the suggestion of the superintendent of education, the bishop of the diocese, and the city itself. The commissioners are the local directors and real supervisors of the school; they have charge of the administration; they name the teachers; dispose of school property, purchase ground and build schoolhouses, impose and collect the school taxes and fees. Taxpayers who do not profess the same religious belief as the majority of the inhabitants in the municipality where they reside, have a right to a school commission of their own, composed of three members chosen from among their co-religionists. These members, called school trustees, represent the dissenting minority; they have the same privileges as the commissioners. The administration of public schools is controlled by Catholic school inspectors for Catholic schools, and Protestant for non-Catholic schools. These functionaries are subject to the superintendent of education. There are also two general inspectors charged respectively with Catholic and Protestant normal schools. The first inspectors were named, in 1852. At present (1911) thirty-nine Catholic inspectors, under the supervision of a general inspector, visit the 6000 Catholic schools of the province. The school revenues are obtained from government grants and local taxation, The operation of this law exhibits striking proof of the good faith and fairness of the Catholics, who constitute the great majority: they organize their schools, but never take advantage of their numbers to force Protestants to send their children to Catholic schools. All persons wishing to teach in public schools under the administration of school commissioners and trustees must obtain diplomas from a normal school or from the Central Board of Examiners. Nevertheless, ministers of religion and members of religious communities of both sexes are exempt from these examinations. Members of teaching orders, after completing their course of studies, make a novitiate of two, three, or four years before receiving their "obedience". This period of normal training exempts them from the examinations imposed on lay teachers by the Central Board of Examiners. Primary teaching comprises three degrees: the elementary course (4 years), the intermediate course (2 years), and the superior course (2 years). Schools of the first degree are called primary elementary; those of the second, model, or primary intermediate; those of the third, academic, or primary superior. In the following table of statistics of elementary education in the Province of Quebec for the year 1909-10, those schools which are subject to the provincial or the municipal Government are classed as "State"; the others, as "Independent". COURSE SCHOOLS TEACHERS PUPILS State Independent Lay Religious Elementary Primary Intermediate Primary Superior 4825 462 74 57 149 128 5054 326 157 631 2178 1440 187,120 95,259 47,259 Totals 5361 334 5537 4249 329,638 The teaching congregations direct a large number of schools, independent or under the control of different school commissions. The Christian Brothers have 63 houses in Canada, 51 in the Province of Quebec, 750 brothers and about 23,000 pupils. The following are the other teaching congregations of men: Clerks of St. Viateur, Brothers of Charity, Marist Brothers, Brothers of the Sacred Heart, Brothers of Christian Instruction, Brothers of St. Gabriel, Brothers of the Cross of Jesus (Diocese of Rimouski). Among the teaching congregations of women are: the Ursulines, with houses in the Dioceses of Quebec, Chicoutimi, Sherbrooke, and Rimouski. There are also Ursulines in the Diocese of Three Rivers; this house was founded by Mgr J.-C. de St-Vallier, second Bishop of Quebec. The Congregation of Notre Dame, founded at Montreal, 30 April, 1657, by Venerable Marguerite Bourgeoys (1620-1700), possesses 131 houses in Canada and the United States. It numbers 1510 professed sisters, 240 novices, 45 postulants. The Sisters teach 34,000 pupils in 21 dioceses. The Grey Nuns of Montreal, Ottawa, Quebec, and St. Hyacinthe teach a great number of children. The Sisters of the Holy Names of Jesus and Mary have their mother-house at Montreal and houses both in Canada and in the United States; professed religious, 1257; novices, 110; postulants, 81; establishments, 74; parochial schools, 32; pupils, 24,208. Other congregations are: the Ladies of the Sacred Heart, the Sisters of Providence, Sisters of the Good Shepherd, Sisters of the Immaculate Heart of Mary, Sisters of the Holy Cross and Seven Dolors (544 religious, 14,577 pupils in Canada and the United States), Sisters of St. Anne (63 establishments in the United States and Canada, 19,190 pupils), Sisters of the Assumption of the Blessed Virgin, Nicolet (414 religious, 49 establishments), Sisters of the Presentation of the Blessed Virgin, Religious of Jesus and Mary, Sisters of St. Joseph (St. Hyacinthe), Daughters of Wisdom, Sisters of St. Mary, Franciscans of Mary (Quebec), Sisters of Our Lady of Perpetual Help, Sisters of the Holy Heart of Mary, Sisters of Our Lady of Good Counsel (Chicoutimi), Daughters of Jesus, Sisters of Charity of St. Louis, Religious of St. Francis of Assisi. Many of these congregations have mother-houses in the Province of Quebec; they direct a great number of establishments and send missionaries to the other provinces of the Dominion and to the United States. There are thirteen art and trade schools in the principal centres of the Province of Quebec. During the school year 1909-10 there were 56 professors, 2632 boys. Besides the Agricultural Institute at Oka, affiliated to Laval University, and which is included in the scheme of superior education, there is an agricultural school in connexion with the College of St. Anne de La Pocatière, in the district of Quebec. There is a manual training and agricultural school for girls, under the direction of the Ursulines, at Roberval, Lake St. John district; another at St. Pascal, under the direction of the Sisters of the Congregation of Notre Dame. Normal schools were founded in 1856. There are now ten; two for boys and eight for girls. Three normal schools for girls are soon to be opened, so that each diocese of the Province of Quebec will have its own normal school. The pupils number 660; the professors, 110. There is one Catholic school for the blind (boys and girls), the Nazareth Institute, directed by the Grey Nuns; fifty-five pupils follow the regular course, under the direction of five professors; many excel in music and in other subjects. The Catholic Deaf and Dumb Institute, for boys, is directed by the Clerks of St. Viateur. The total number of pupils is 135, of whom 89 are instructed by the oral method, 46 by the written and manual alphabet. The work of teaching is carried on by 31 professors. The Catholic Deaf and Dumb Institute for girls is directed by the Sisters of Providence; 71 sisters teach 142 pupils. The two methods are in use, but the oral method is employed in instructing almost all the pupils. Former pupils, numbering 115, are engaged in manual labour in these asylums, receiving physical,intellectual,and moral care. The night-schools, numbering 129, have taught 2546 Catholic pupils. There are a certain number of industrial schools. The Brothers of Charity direct a reform school (30 religious, 118 boarders). The Sisters of the Good Shepherd also have two houses, one at Montreal, the other at Park Laval. A great number of congregations are charged with the instruction of orphans; among the institutions may be mentioned the Orphan Asylum of Montfort, 305 children, Huberdeau, 220. The Fathers of the Society of Mary and the Daughters of Wisdom have charge of these orphans. All the principal cities have their kindergarten schools, which are not mentioned in the official reports. They are due to private initiative and are organized by religious communities. There are 21 classical colleges at Quebec, 18 of which are affiliated with Laval University. They were founded by bishops, priests, or zealous laymen who understood the needs of the different phases of the national and religious existence. Therein were fostered vocations to the priesthood and the liberal professions. These classical colleges have given Canada eminent men, both in Church and State, who, in the dark hours of its history, have preserved its faith and nationality; they have flourished and are still flourishing, thanks to the generosity of their founders and former pupils. They receive but $12,643 from the Provincial Legislature. The accompanying table of the Catholic colleges of the Province of Quebec exhibits the dates of their respective foundations as well as the number of pupils and professors in each. INSTITUTION Date of Foundation PUPILS PROFESSORS Classical Commercial Priests Laymen Petit Séminaire de Québec Montreal Nicolet St. Hyacinthe Ste. Thérèse Ste. Anne de La Pocatière L'Assomption Joliette St. Laurent Ste. Marie, Montreal Rigaud Lévis Ste. Marie de Monnoir Three Rivers Rimouski Chicoutimi Sherbrooke Valleyfield Loyola Nominigue St. Jean 1665 1767 1803 1809 1825 1829 1832 1846 1847 1848 1850 1853 1853 1860 1867 1873 1875 1893 1897 1910 1911 629 465 316 353 250 128 227 209 195 375 108 115 39 144 101 70 125 96 190 60 40 .... .... .... .... 50 247 55 113 180 .... 182 490 98 161 106 159 274 161 68 .... 76 47 32 23 32 38 39 30 37 42 25 32 40 18 32 27 41 34 31 11 .... 11 4 1 2 2 2 .... 1 .... .... 3 1 2 1 1 .... 1 2 2 7 .... .... Totals for twenty-one institutions 4235 2420 622 32 English is the mother tongue of only a little more than 9 per cent of all the pupils attending these twenty-one institutions, the language of the remainder being French. The Classical course, including two years of philosophy, covers a period of eight years. It includes the study of Greek and Latin, to which educators, in certain countries, are coming back after having tried to abolish it. The study of the dead languages does not diminish the student's ardour for the two official languages of the country, French and English. Mount St. Louis, directed by the Christian Brothers, has a modern secondary course without Greek or Latin. They prepare young men principally for the polytechnical schools. The classical colleges affiliated with Laval University have the university course of studies and examinations. In 1910 a new school was opened for the hautes études commerciales, and about twenty-six pupils have followed the courses. In 1911 the Legislature organized two technical schools: one at Montreal, the other at Quebec. In 1908 the Sisters of the Congregation of Notre Dame opened a college for young women. It is affiliated with Laval University, and embraces English, French, and commercial sections. The regular course, leading to the degrees of B.L., B.S., B.A., includes two, three, or four years' study according to the anterior preparation of the student. About seventy-five follow the regular course. A large number attend the public lectures. The final examinations of the year are submitted to university professors. The staff of sixteen religious is assisted by professors. C. Province of Nova Scotia Catholicism was introduced in the Province of Nova Scotia by the French with the first settlement of the country; but the first mention which we have of Catholic school education dates only from thirty years later, when the Recollects opened at Port-Royal a seminary for the instruction of French and Indian children. This Catholic teaching was evidently continued, since we find a Capuchin Father writing, in 1652: "Emmanuel Le Borgne, governor of Acadia, has expelled from Port-Royal Madame de Brice d'Auxerre, superioress of the School for the Abenaquis". About 1680 the vicar-general, Petit, says in a letter to his superior, Mgr Vallier, that he has with him a man who teaches the boys of Port-Royal. Mgr Vallier himself first sends a Sister of the Congregation of Notre Dame to teach the Indian and French girls of Port-Royal, and a few years after, in 1686, he sends for Geoffrey, a Sulpician, "to continue the instruction of youth which so far has been so well looked after". In fact Geoffroy improved the school teaching and supervising. He also laid the foundation for the future coming of the Sisters of the Cross, who came in 1701, after the capture of Port-Royal by Phipps and the cession of Acadia to France in 1697. After the final taking of Acadia by the English it seems that Catholic schools were abolished, as we find Father Burke writing: "There is a great desire to establish a Catholic School [in Halifax]. The need is pressing. We would succeed if we could have repealed an infamous law forbidding Catholic Schools". Through the zeal of the Catholic missionaries, however, Catholic education was not altogether neglected. In the western part of Nova Scotia, for example, we find a French priest, the Abbé Sigogne, urging his flock to send their children to school, organizing Sunday schools; thanks to his labours for the cause of education, there were in 1851, in the district of Clare alone, 17 schools attended by 422 pupils. In 1864 the Law of Common Schools was passed in the Provincial Legislature of Nova Scotia. Since then there have been very few separate schools properly so called. Under this law the province is divided into districts called schools sections, which are administered by a board of three trustees elected by the ratepayers of the section. It is the duty of the trustees to engage teachers and to pay them out of the funds derived partly from taxes directly imposed upon the inhabitants of the section and partly from government grants. According to law, the teaching of the Catechism is prohibited during regular school hours; but the trustees may instruct teachers to give lessons in Catholic doctrine during one half-hour after class every day. Inspectors are appointed by the Council of Public Instruction to visit the schools and report upon them to the superintendent of education. Some of these schools are under the direction of religious teaching communities as follows: In the Diocese of Halifax the Sisters of Charity have charge of nine such schools, four in the city of Halifax and five in the Acadian parishes of Meteghan, Church Point, Eal Brook, and West Pubnico, and the English-speaking parish of Prospect. In the Diocese of Antigonish the Sisters of the Congregation of Notre Dame conduct seven of these schools, with 37 religious and 2281 pupils; the Sisters of Charity, 5 schools; the Daughters of Jesus, 2. Besides these schools organized under the law, the Ladies of the Sacred Heart of Jesus have a convent school at Halifax with 48 religious and 500 pupils; the Sisters of Charity, a separate school at Amherst and convents at Rockingham Meteghan, and Church Point; the Sisters of the Congregation, at New Glasgow and Pictou; and the Filles de Jésus at Arichat and Cheticamp. These separate schools are supported by the Catholics of their respective towns. There are also three Catholic colleges for boys in the Province: St. Francis Xavier (English), at Antigonish, with 15 professors and 200 pupils; St. Anne, at Church Point, with 18 professors and 180 pupils (French and English), and St. Mary, at Halifax, with 7 professors and 80 pupils. D. Province of New Brunswick As had been the case in Nova Scotia, the first Catholic schools in New Brunswick were opened by Catholic missionaries; and when the regrettable deportation took place, it could be said that a great number of Acadians were able at least to read their prayers and also the exercises relating to the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass. One can easily understand how these poor exiles returned to their country and more particularly to New Brunswick. Their first care was undoubtedly to assure their very existence, as a great number of those who escaped deportation died of hunger and cold in the forest and on the desert banks of the gulf. Next, they asked for missionaries and for persons capable of teaching reading and writing to their children. For lack of priests they had to be content on Sunday with reading the prayers for Mass, and it was imperative to teach their children the truths of religion as contained in the short catechism. Fifty years and more passed before it became possible for them--such was their extreme poverty, and so precarious the conditions of their existence--to procure the service of any school-teacher. However, at the close of the Napoleonic Wars, adventurers, sailors, deserters, or tourists came from France, who knew how to read and write, and their services were eagerly accepted. The old residents still remember M. Grenet, who taught at Barachois, M. Gabriel Albert, who taught at Grande Digue, M. Jean Leménager, who taught at Memramcook, M. Alexandre Théodore, who taught at Petit-Codiac (Ruisseau du Renard) and in neighbouring parishes. Then came the Abbé Antoine Gagnon, parish priest of Barachois, of Grande Digue, of Shédiac (Gédaique), etc., who founded a college at Grande Digue. This school remained open for two years (1833 to 1835), with three teachers, Messrs. Des Varennes, Braidly, and Gosselin. When the lands and properties of this institution were afterwards sold, the proceeds were placed in the hands of Mgr Sweeney, in trust for the education of young Acadians, in the event of another college being built in the diocese for any other similar purpose. During the first years that followed the return of the Acadians, after their dispersion, teachers boarded with the scholars' parents in turn, and received from $3 to $5 per scholar, which means that only the prosperous centres could procure their services. In those days the Acadians received from the British Protestant authorities the fulness of their political and civil rights without molestation or annoyance in things religious or relating to the French language. The thinly populated country did not as yet complain of the burden of its school laws. The first act to be found in the Statutes of New Brunswick concerning education is dated 1805 and relates to the founding of a public grammar school for the City of Saint John. It is therein enacted that the rector of Trinity Church shall be one of the directors of this school, and at the same time president of the Board of Administration. A somewhat paltry grant was awarded to this establishment. In the same manner, other grammar schools were authorized for different localities in New Brunswick. The first law establishing public parish schools dates from 1833. These schools are placed under the control of three school trustees for each parish. These trustees possess great executive authority. They subdivide the parishes into school districts, engage and dismiss teachers, and give them such certificates as entitle them to their grants from the Government, the maximum of which is $160 for each parish. The justices of the peace are entrusted with the duty of making school reports to the Government. No certificate of competence was exacted beyond the approbation of the parochial syndics, and no examination as to aptitude was held. It was not until many years afterwards (towards 1853) that the Board of Education, with its hierarchy and inspectors, was definitely organized. These latter, until the events of 1871, always showed kindness and liberality towards Catholic teaching and the French tongue. The Catholic teachers received from the board their grant, as did also the Protestant teachers, French and English alike. In 1871 a law was passed by the Provincial Legislature establishing "Neutral Schools", in which the French language was ignored; but it was taught in the French schools and was afterwards recognized officially. The French and the English Catholics protested energetically against this unjust measure. Petitions were signed and sent to Ottawa requesting the repeal of this law, which was injurious to the Catholics who constituted one-third of the population of the Province. Some turbulent and stormy years passed over; certain defenders of the minority were imprisoned, and finally a modus vivendi was adopted to the effect that the school remain neutral from 9 A. M. till 3.30 P. M. The books shall be approved by the Government. The use of the French language was recognized, and a set of books was chosen to that end. After the regular school hours the Catechism was permitted to be taught. Nowadays all the schools of New Brunswick are under the control of the law, even those exclusively attended by Catholic children. The number of Catholic children frequenting the schools is about 23,000; the teachers, male and female, number about 600. About eighteen convents under the direction of various religious congregations are scattered through the principal centres of the province. There are three colleges: one at Chatham (English) founded in 1910, directed by the Basilian Fathers, and containing 90 pupils; one at Caraquet, French and English, founded in 1899 by the Eudist Fathers, and containing 150 pupils; one at Memramcook (l'Université du Collège Saint-Joseph), French and English, founded in 1864, directed by the Fathers of the Holy Cross, and containing 250 pupils. With the exception of a few convents these institutions are not under state control. E. Prince Edward Island The system of public schools in this province is not denominational. There are therefore no primary Catholic schools, except seven convents under the direction of the Sisters of the Congregation of Notre Dame, All the schools have been under the immediate control of the State since 1877 and are strictly neutral, or non-sectarian. Besides the convents, which teach about one thousand girls, there is a Catholic college for boys, which accommodates about one hundred and fifty. Nearly all the pupils of this college are boarders, and their education costs them about $150 each, while, of the thousand girls in the convents, there are barely one hundred boarders, whose education costs each about $60. The Government pays $720 to the Sisters who teach the provincial normal school conformably to the programme of studies prescribed by the Department of Education. The other 900 girls who attend the convent schools receive their education for a nominal payment. The majority pay nothing. Generally speaking, the expense of heating the schools is borne by the respective parishes in which the convents are situated, and, in return the day-scholars living in the vicinity of the convent are educated gratuitously. Until 1850 there were very few schools among the Acadians. In each parish there were two men who taught reading, writing, and arithmetic. F. Manitoba The first French schools in this province were established in 1818 on the arrival of the Rev. Norbert Provencher, afterwards Bishop Provencher, and the Rev. Nicholas Dumoulin. Bishop Provencher opened his first school at St. Boniface, and Father Dumoulin opened his at Pembina. As the population increased, the schools multiplied. In 1835, notwithstanding that the population was very limited, there were already five schools. After many efforts Bishop Provencher succeeded in founding a school at Red River for young girls, and the first teacher was Angélique Nolin (Metis). In 1844 the Gray Nuns of Montreal, at the earnest request of Bishop Provencher, came to the West. Those who arrived first were Sisters Lagrave, Lafrance, Valade, Coutlée. The first convent founded by them was at St. Boniface, and the second at St. François-Xavier. In 1835 Bishop Provencher got an English teacher for his boys' school. This school in time became St. Boniface's College. At Pembina Father Dumoulin was occupied in preparing young men for the priesthood, and in 1821 he had six students in Latin. The primary schools increased rapidly. Every place where a spire indicated a house of worship a school sprang up. Soon, unfortunately, a crisis came, and the Catholics were severely tried. At the present time (1912), in virtue of the British North American Act, each province has the right to adopt the system of education that best suits its particular needs. It must, however, respect the privileges or rights already guaranteed to the divers groups or sections having separate schools. Accordingly, when Manitoba asked, in 1870, to become a unit of the confederation, the Catholic deputies, under the clear-sighted direction of Bishop Taché, demanded a formal law covering the rights already acquired. In 1890, the Catholics were, unfortunately, the victims of a legal persecution which embittered the last years of Bishop Taché. The Protestant majority of that province should have treated the Catholic minority with as much generosity as the Catholic majority, in the Province of Quebec, treated the Protestant minority. Such, however, was not the case. The schools were secularized, and the teaching of French was discontinued. Protestations were made, and the grievances were laid before the British Throne, which recognized the rights of the Catholics. Archbishop Langevin, of St. Boniface, vigorously defended the rights of the Catholics, but no justice was done him. The compromise of 1896 was voted: this act embodied the principle of the "neutral schools" system, and, although diminishing the bad effects of the law, it deserved to be styled, by Leo XIII, a law "defective, imperfect, insufficient" (manca est, non idonea, non apta). It is thus that the Catholics of Winnipeg and of Brandon are obliged to pay double school tax. The public school is a school to which Catholic parents cannot send their children. They are obliged to open Catholic schools at their own expense, while paying their share of taxes to the Protestant schools. Nevertheless, in those places where Catholics are grouped in parishes, in the country or at St. Boniface, in the municipalities having a Catholic majority, they can elect Catholic trustees who protect their co-religionists. In this way they can secure the government grant for the schools attended by Catholic children. Thanks to the vigilance of the valiant Archbishop Langevin of St. Boniface, two Catholic inspectors have been appointed for the Catholic schools. These schools are 190 in number, with an attendance of over 7000 pupils. It is to be remarked, however, that it is with much difficulty that religious teaching is tolerated during class hours. Besides, the schoolbooks are not Catholic, and Catholic interests are not sufficiently safeguarded. There is one Catholic normal (French and English) school at St. Boniface, and another (English and Polish) at Winnipeg. The teaching congregations are numerous. The Institute of Mary, from Paris, has schools at Winnipeg and St. Boniface. The Clerics of St. Viateur have an orphanage for boys at Makinac. The Brothers of the Cross of Jesus, from France, have two schools in the French parishes at St. John Baptist and at St. Pierre Jolys. The Sisters of the Holy Names of Jesus and Mary, of Montreal, have six convents or schools in the French parishes, St. John Baptist, St. Agathe, St. Pierre, St. Boniface. St. Mary's Academy, Winnipeg is for English-speaking girls. The Sisters of the Five Wounds have four convents in the French parishes of Notre Dame de Lourdes, St. Claude, St. Leo, and St. Alphonse. The Benedictine Sisters, from Duluth, Minnesota, have two schools at Winnipeg, one English and German, the other English and Polish. The Franciscan Missionary Sisters of Mary from Rome have two schools among French and English-speaking whites at St. Lawrence and a school for the Indians at Pine Creek. We must not forget to mention the Little Servants of Mary Immaculate of the Ruthenian Rite, the Daughters of the Cross, and the Oblate Missionaries of the Sacred Heart of Mary Immaculate who are entirely consecrated to the education of youth. The Classical College of St. Boniface, founded by Bishop Provencher, was at first directed by secular priests, then by the Brothers of the Christian Schools, afterwards by the Oblate Fathers. In 1885 it was confided to the Jesuit Fathers, who have organized a course of studies to the satisfaction of the two principal nationalities whose children, to the number of 300, attend the college. There are a French section and an English section, with a regular Classical course having Latin and Greek for its basis. Each year its students succeed admirably in competition with those of other colleges in the university examinations. The non-Catholic colleges are St. John's (Anglican), Manitoba College (Presbyterian), and the Wesley College (Methodist). There are 300 pupils attending St. Boniface College. In 1909 Archbishop Langevin founded a petit séminaire which he confided to secular priests. The Rev. Father Joubert was the first director. There are at present 54 candidates preparing for the priesthood. A glance at the numerous nationalities represented at the preparatory seminary suggests some idea of the cosmopolitan character of the vast regions of the great West. At the same time it gives a faint idea of the episcopal solicitude in providing for each nationality missionaries of their own blood and language. In this seminary there are 30 French-speaking, 10 Ruthenians, 6 Irish, and 8 Germans. In 1905 the Holy Family Juniorate was founded by the Oblate Fathers at St. Boniface. G. Saskatchewan and Alberta The work begun by Bishop Provencher has kept pace with the increase of the population. The Gray Nuns became missionaries among the Indians. They founded a convent at Alberta and a school at Crosse Island. Their first attempt in establishing a school was at St. Ann, but in this they were unsuccessful. In 1870 the Federal Parliament voted a law of administration for the Territories. However, it was only in 1875 that they received a rudimentary form of government under the North-west Territories Act. According to that Act the people could establish "such schools as they think fit". The principle of separate schools was therein recognized. It would be too long to give the history of the school legislation of these territories up to the constitution of the two new provinces of Saskatchewan and Alberta in 1905. At all events the new constitution should have safeguarded one essential, giving to Catholics the right to organize everywhere separate schools truly Catholic and the right to their share of the government grant. Unfortunately such was not the case. Notwithstanding the agreement of 1870, and notwithstanding even the British North America Act, which the Parliament of Canada cannot modify, the system of neutral schools was imposed on the Catholics. It is not the half-hour of religious teaching that makes a school really Catholic: it is essential that there should be Catholic books, explained by Catholic teachers, in a Catholic atmosphere. But nothing of all this was granted. However, the government is equitably administered in those districts where the Catholics are in a majority. Thirty-one such districts appear in the last Report of the Minister of Education for the Province of Saskatchewan (page 14). These schools are public schools in which religion may be taught at stated hours. The right, therefore, to organize separate schools for Catholics is limited to the districts where they are in the minority (there are twelve Catholic separate-school districts in the same Province of Saskatchewan). It would be somewhat difficult to determine the number of pupils attending the schools in the Catholic public-school districts or in the Catholic separate-school districts. The Diocese of Prince Albert, which comprises all that part of the Province of Saskatchewan, has 54 academies and schools attended by Catholic children. (These schools are not really Catholic. They are neutral schools attended by Catholic children and endowed with a government grant.) These children number in all about 3000. The southern part of the province is in the new Diocese of Regina. The first Bishop of Regina was consecrated on 5 November, 1911. There are a great number of Catholic schools in that flourishing part which is found in the Archdiocese of St. Boniface. The Sisters of Notre Dame of the Cross of Maurianais, France, have here two schools, one at Forget, and the other at St. Hubert, The Sisters of St. Joseph of St. Hyacinthe have a school for Indians at Lake Croche. The Sisters of Notre Dame of the Missions, from Lyons, direct three convents: a boarding-school for English-speaking girls, at Regina, and two others in the French-speaking centres at Lebret and at Wolseley. The Oblate Missionaries of the Sacred Heart and of Mary Immaculate direct a school for Indians at Fort Pelley. The industrial school at Qu' Appelle has 242 Indians, under the Sisters of Charity. The Diocese of St. Albert comprises all the southern part of the Province of Alberta and a part of the Province of Saskatchewan. It has an industrial school, 14 convents, 8 boarding-schools for Indians. The pupils in the schools of the Catholic school districts number about 3700. We find here again the Sisters whose mother-house is in Quebec: Sisters of the Assumption, Gray Nuns of Montreal, Sisters of Nicolet, Gray Sisters of Nicolet, etc. There are also the Polish Sisters of the Ruthenian Rite. The petit séminaire of St. Albert was founded by Bishop Grandin in 1900. Father Cullerier O.M.I., was its first director, but the Oblate Fathers have now given up the institution and the Missionaries of Chavagnes, or Sons of Mary Immaculate, direct it at present (1911). There are 33 pupils in attendance. The Oblate Fathers have opened a juniorate at Strathcona, where they have 14 pupils. H. British Columbia This province entered the Confederation in 1871. In it there is not one Catholic school in receipt of a government grant. The different dioceses bear the expense of Catholic education. The Archdiocese of Vancouver has eight industrial schools for Indians, with an attendance of 513 pupils; four academies for young girls; seven parochial schools, with a total attendance of 729 girls. New Westminster possesses an excellent institution of learning, Saint Louis College, under the direction of the Oblate Fathers. In the Diocese of Victoria, which comprises Vancouver and the adjacent island, there are two academies for young girls, with an attendance of 342; nine parochial schools, with 450 pupils; two industrial schools, 110 pupils (boarders). The secular priests direct a college of 50 pupils. Among the Catholic educational institutions there are nine directed by the Sisters of St. Anne, whose mother-house is at Lachine, near Montreal, viz.: Institute Religious Pupils 1. New Westminster 6 162 2. Ste. Marie Matsqui 7 76 3. Kamloops 4 85 4. Industrial School 3 63 5. Victoria 27 323 6. Cowichan 5 43 7. Vancouver City 14 390 8. Kuper Island } 7 100 9. Lady Smith I. Territories In the vast regions of the West outside of the provinces regularly constituted, there are large territories where missionaries are engaged in God's work, under the guidance of vicars-Apostolic; and wherever a church is built, a school adjoins it. There are six convents in the Vicariate of Athabaska. The Gray Nuns have a boarding-school for Indiana at Lake Laplonge in the Vicariate of Keewatin. At Cross Lake, 4 Oblate Sisters of Mary Immaculate carry on a boarding-school for Indians, in which there are 20 pupils. In the Vicariate of Mackenzie there are, at Great Slave Lake, 7 Gray Nuns at the head of a school of 45 pupils. At Providence 13 sisters give instruction to 75 pupils. At Yukon there are 9 schools, and at Dawson 3 Sisters of St. Anne from Lachine, near Montreal, teaching 65 pupils. J. Newfoundland Although the Province of Newfoundland does not form a part of the Canadian Confederation, it should be mentioned here. In each parish there is a school under the care of the parochial clergy and supported by a government grant. The principal teaching congregations are Irish Christian Brothers, Sisters of Mercy, and Presentation Nuns. PHILIPPE PERRIER. IN ENGLAND It was the common belief until quite recently that the grammar schools of England, that is the main part of the machinery of English middle-class education, were the offspring of the Reformation, and owed their origin to the reign of Edward VI. This legend is now exploded. A. F. Leach begins his masterly work, "English Schools at the Reformation" (London, 1896), with the sentence: "Never was a great reputation more easily gained and less deserved than that of King Edward VI as a Founder of Schools", The truth is that the few educational foundations made by the Government either of Henry VIII or Edward VI were but re-foundations forming a small salvage from the wreck of educational endowments confiscated with the monasteries and chantries. In fact England was singularly well provided with schools previous to Henry VIII. Among them were the cathedral schools, collegiate grammarschools, monastery schools, guild schools, and perhaps most numerous of all, chantry schools. For the duty of teaching a school was frequently combined with the obligation of singing Mass for the soul of the pious founder. The great majority of these were termed "grammar schools". They usually taught reading, writing, and Latin. Many reached a good standard and included rhetoric and dialectic in their curriculum. There were also song schools of more elementary character. As most of the grammar schools taught gratuitously, a very liberal provision of education was open even to the poorer classes. Indeed education as a whole was on a more democratic basis, and good secondary instruction more widely diffused in England in Catholic times than in the first half the nineteenth century. "The proportion of the population which had access to Grammar Schools, and used them was much larger than now" (Leach, p. 97). Rashdall similarly concludes that "at least in the later Middle Age the smallest towns and even the larger villages possessed Schools where a boy might learn to read and acquire the first rudiments of ecclesiastical Latin: while, except in very remote and thinly populated regions, he would never have had to go very far from home to find a regular Grammar School ("The Universities of Europe in the Middle Ages", II, 602). The Reformation, with the confiscation and plunder of the monasteries and chantries, involved the destruction of much of the educational machinery of the nation. The evil consequences are testified by Ascham, Latimer, Cranmer, and Harrison Watson. However, the old appreciation of the value of education in a short time reasserted itself. The ecclesiastical control of all schools, now in the hands of the Reformers, was strengthened by new legislation. The religious instruction given in the schools was that of the Established Church, and the scholars were required to participate in the prayers and church services. The steady pressure of this machinery on the minds of the young was bound to be fatal to the old religion. During Elizabeth's long reign the great majority of Catholics were practically compelled to send their children to the nearest grammar school, if the children were to receive any education at all. For the better-off families the chaplain or priest maintained in hiding commonly also acted as tutor. But as time went on the situation grew worse. Then, in order in some degree to provide priests and also to furnish some means of Catholic education for at least the children of the nobility and gentry who clung to the old Faith, there were founded the English seminaries and colleges on the Continent. First among these was the English College at Douai, started in 1568 by Allen, afterwards cardinal. Its primary object was the training of priests for the English mission, but it also accepted lay students. Within a few years it contained over 150 pupils. Before the year 1700 it had sent back to England over 300 priests, more than a third of whom suffered death for the Catholic Faith (see DOUAI). It endured till the French Revolution, when, as we shall see, it gave birth to the two Colleges of Ushaw and Old Hall. Irish and Scotch colleges were also established at Douai for a similar purpose. In 1578 was founded the English College at Rome. It was designed to provide places for sixty ecclesiastical students. After a very short time it was entrusted to the Jesuits, who managed it till the suppression of the Society in 1773. There were also founded English colleges at Valladolid in 1589, and at Seville in 1592, by Father Parsons, and at Madrid in 1612 by Father Creswell. The English College at Lisbon was started in 1622 by William Newman, a secular priest. All these latter colleges sent many priests to England especially during their first decades, but as time went on, perhaps through their remoteness and the Anglo-Spanish Wars, they failed to keep up the intimate connexion with England which was always retained between the mother-country and Douai and St. Omer. The three Spanish colleges were merged into the single foundation at Valladolid in 1767. The most important college founded beyond the sea of which the primary object was the education of lay students, was the Jesuit school begun at St. Omer by Father Parsons in 1592. It had an eventful career of 200 years on the continent of Europe, and then coming back to England settled at Stonyhurst, whence it became the progenitor of the great majority of the Jesuit schools scattered throughout the British Empire today. Starting with twenty-three boys, it had by 1603, according to the spies of the English Government, "a hundred and forty gentlemen's sons of great worship". In 1632 there were over 200 pupils, the Sons of the chief noblemen and gentry who remained loyal to the old Faith. Boys going to and returning from the college were more than once captured and imprisoned, and bills of high treason were returned, against the parents of pupils there. It turned out many martyrs and confessors of the Faith, and indeed, during the latter part of the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries, past St. Omer's boys scattered up and down the country formed the main part of the "old guard" of the dwindling body of the lay Catholics in England. Meantime the cruellest part of the penal code was the statutes directed against Catholic education. Thus in the twenty-third year of Elizabeth's reign an Act was passed forbidding the keeping or maintaining of any schoolmaster who had not a licence from the Protestant bishop. The penalty was £10 per month, with a year's imprisonment for the schoolmaster. This statute was strengthened by another in the first year of James I, imposing a fine of forty shillings a day. Later this was made even more stringent by the Act of Uniformity in 13 Charles II, requiring all tutors and schoolmasters, besides obtaining the bishop's licence, to conform to the Established Church, under penalty of three months' imprisonment for each offence. Concomitantly it was forbidden to educate Catholic children abroad. Thus in 27 Elizabeth it was made punishable as a prœmunire to send aid to any foreign seminary or Jesuit college, or to any person in the same. Further in 1 James I it was enacted that the sending of a child or other person to a foreign college should entail a fine of £100 and render the child incapable of inheriting real or personal property. The severity of this law was again increased in 3 Charles I. Finally, in 1699 a clause of a cruel Act under William and Mary offered £100 reward to every informer who would effect the conviction of any Popish priest for keeping a school or educating or boarding a Catholic youth for that purpose, the penalty being made imprisonment for life. Relentless persecution of this kind, carried out with such rigour that the colleges of Douai, St. Omer, and Valladolid, between them, within a century and a half had mustered a grand roll of 250 martyrs, besides numberless confessors, triumphed; and by 1770 the Catholic Church in England was reduced to a scattered remnant of some 60,000 souls (Amherst). Occasionally, during these dark days, in lulls of the storm, or in quiet places, a small Catholic school was started and struggled on with varying fortunes for a shorter or longer time. Thus, under James II (1685-8) two schools were started in the neighbourhood of London, but perished soon afterwards. Another, begun at Twyford, near Winchester, about the same time, had a somewhat better fate and survived till the Stuart rising in 1745. The poet, Alexander Pope, was a pupil at this school, and the distinguished biologist, Father Turberville Needham, was an assistant master here. It had less than thirty pupils when Bishop Challoner visited it in 1741. There was also for a time about this period a small school managed by the Franciscan Fathers at Edgbaston, near Birmingham. Another, known as Dame Alice School, existed for a number of years in Lancashire. But the history of each was usually much the same--a short, timid, and precarious life, some untoward accident, and the feeble institution came to an untimely end. Just, however, when the complete extinction of Catholicism seemed at hand, the revival began. By the middle of the eighteenth century the persecution commenced to abate. The old fear of the Church had waned. Toleration for other forms of dissent had been growing. About 1750 Catholics began to breathe a little more freely. One evidence of this was the starting of a school at Sedgley Park, near Wolverhampton, by Bishop Challoner in 1762. Yet so great was the timidity of the Catholic gentry at the time that a deputation of them waited on the bishop to dissuade him from so daring a measure--fortunately in vain. Within six years the numbers of the school rose to a hundred boarders, and for a century it was the chief centre where the Midland clergy received their early education. Previously to this, another school for small boys had been begun at Standon Lordship. The real revival of Catholic education in England, however, only commenced when the Catholic colleges beyond the seas, broken up by the French Revolution, ventured to return. In 1777 the British Government sorely needed Irish soldiers for the American war, and in 1778 the first English Catholic Relief Bill repealing the most galling of the penal laws was passed. In 1793 the College of Douai was seized by the agents of the French Republic. After temporary imprisonment the professors and students came to England and were allocated at first to Old Hall, Ware, and then in part to Crook Hall, the future Ushaw, near Durham. There were differences of opinion among the English ecclesiastical authorities, some urging the continuance of the Douai community as a single college in the South of England, others advocating the claims of the North. However unpleasant at the time was the disagreement, it proved a solid gain to the Catholic Church in England. For the outcome was the starting of the two large colleges, St. Cuthbert's at Ushaw and St. Edmund's at Ware, both destined to have honourable and fruitful careers and to be sources of much strength to the Faith. Each of them provides to-day for a community of over 300 students complete courses of humanities, philosophy, and theology, and educates lay as well as ecclesiastical pupils. About the same date English Benedictine communities, compelled to return from Lorraine and from Douai, for a time resided at Acton Burnell, but separated later to found Ampleforth College in Yorkshire in 1803, and Downside in 1815, two schools which continue to do increasingly valuable work for English Catholic education. At the same time was begun, largely through the influence of certain laymen of the Cisalpine Club, but acting in co-operation with Bishop Talbot, Oscott College, in the Midlands. After a successful history of three-quarters of a century as a mixed school, it was converted into a purely ecclesiastical college, with courses of philosophy and theology. It trains the Midland clergy as well as a considerable number from other dioceses to-day. In 1794 the Jesuit College, formerly at St. Omer, but subsequently transferred to Bruges in 1762, and thence to Liège in 1773, migrated to Stonyhurst, in Lancashire. In addition to the large educational institution into which it developed at Stonyhurst this college became the parent stock of a prolific family. Starting with twelve boys, its numbers by 1813 had risen to over two hundred and twenty. The first offshoot was Clongowes Wood College, Ireland, in 1814, which speedily rivalled the parent school in point of numbers, and was itself the mother-house from which successful colleges were started at Dublin, Limerick, Galway, and Tullabeg. Later on from this Irish centre were founded several flourishing Jesuit schools in Australia. In Great Britain itself from the Stonyhurst root there originated during the nineteenth century, eight other secondary schools, all designed for the education of Catholic laymen: in 1841 Mount St. Mary's College, a boarding-school in Derbyshire, now numbering over 200 pupils; in the same year St. Francis Xavier's College, a day-school at Liverpool, which has reached a roll of 400; in 1862, Beaumont College, near Windsor, also exceeding 230 pupils; subsequently large day-colleges, at Preston, 1864, at Wimbledon and at Stamford Hill, North London, in the last decade of the nineteenth century. St. Aloysius's day-college, Glasgow, which has exceeded 300 pupils, was founded in 1859; and a Jesuit day-college has been opened at Leeds early in the present century. Meantime at Stonyhurst itself in addition to the school, which now numbers some 350 lay students, there has been erected St. Mary's Hall, which is a house of philosophical studies and training college for the members of the society. It has been approved by the government as a recognized training college for secondary school teachers, and has some 60 Jesuit students. The Jesuit theological College of St. Beuno in North Wales was founded from Stonyhurst in 1848. Other secondary schools of note are St. Bede's, Manchester and St. Cuthbert's, Newcastle-on-Tyne, managed by the secular clergy; the Oratory School, started by Cardinal Newman at Edgbaston; Ratcliffe College, conducted by the Rosminian Fathers; a Benedictine College at Ramsgate, and St. George's College, Weybridge, besides general successful schools managed by the brothers. Exact statistics in regard to secondary schools are impossible, owing to the indefiniteness of this term, which in England includes a wide variety of types and grades, from something just above the elementary school to Eton or Harrow. However, if we take the "Report of the 1910 Annual Conference of English Colleges" for our guide, we find this list includes thirty-three colleges or secondary schools for boys. All these are under the management of priests or religious. There are also in the country some Catholic preparatory schools for small boys and some small private institutions conducted by laymen, but these above indicated form substantially the present machinery of Catholic secondary education of boys. Catholic girls' secondary education is similarly in the hands of religious. Old English foundations returning from abroad after the French Revolution, like the Catholic colleges, or new teaching congregations, opened convent schools for primary as well as for secondary education and have multiplied rapidly. The total number of Catholic girls' schools which may be fairly classed as secondary is, for the same reason very difficult to determine. Over one hundred and forty are advertised in the "Catholic Directory", but many of them are very small institutions. Relations of Catholic Secondary Education with the Government All Catholic secondary schools in England are voluntary institutions. They were founded independently of the Government. Until recent years none of them received any state support, and they were subject to no form of state inspection. Indeed secondary education, as such, did not receive any systematic support from the state in England prior to 1902; but a large number of non-Catholic schools possessed considerable endowments, many going back to Catholic times. During part of the past century, secondary schools, by fulfilling certain conditions, could earn grants from the Government Department of Art and Science; and a few Catholic schools derived some small funds from this source. But in the Act of 1902, the government adopted a completely new attitude towards secondary education. It empowered local authorities, i. e., county councils and urban councils, to build new secondary schools and to take over by voluntary agreement existing secondary schools and to maintain them out of local rates assisted by imperial grants. On the other hand, voluntary schools which fulfil certain regulations are enabled to share in this state aid. This Act is fraught with important consequences, as it is clear from the history of primary education that the state contribution will largely increase, and unless Catholic day-schools can secure their fair share of it they will be unable to sustain the competition. Practically the grants are obtainable only by day-schools. The conditions in regard to efficiency, staff qualifications, and equipment, with liability to inspection, are stringent, but a well-managed school can already secure a good subsidy. One of our most successful Catholic schools in 1910 thus earned between £2000 and £3000. But the upkeep required is correspondingly costly. Eleven Catholic schools for boys, including four Jesuit day-schools, are at present approved by the Board of Education and recognized as grant-earning. Another important point is that intending elementary teachers must in the future spend at least three years in a "recognized" secondary school. The necessity of a sufficiency of such "recognized" Catholic schools is therefore obvious. Unfortunately the government regulations at present seriously hamper the increase of such secondary denominational schools. Of Catholic girls' secondary schools, thirty-four are already "recognized", of which eleven belong to the Sisters of Notre Dame. In 1911 there were two Catholic training colleges for female secondary teachers, recognized and approved by Government. One is in Liverpool, conducted by the Sisters of Notre Dame; another in London, under the Sisters of the Holy Child Jesus. There is so far one Catholic training college for male secondary teachers--that at Stonyhurst. Catholic Primary Education Whilst a tolerable supply of secondary schools existed in England during the eighteenth century, the primary education of the nation was in a most wretched condition. Previous to 1830 Government took no interest in the education of the poor. In addition to the efforts of some of the clergy and a few philanthropic laymen, the chief agencies working for the building and maintenance of schools for the poor in the early part of the nineteenth century were two voluntary societies, one an Anglican, the other a Dissenting organization. The first government help to primary education was given in 1833, a grant of £20,000. To-day it exceeds £16,000,000. As the best available method of distribution, the grant was handed over to the two societies to be spent in building schools and for other educational purposes. It was then made annual and increased from time to time. In 1839 a further allowance was given towards the establishment of training colleges for the preparation of teachers. These colleges soon multiplied. Government inspectors were appointed, but the power of accepting or approving them was conceded to the two voluntary societies. The system was in fact frankly denominational. But down to 1850, although over £600,000 had been distributed, Catholics had not received a penny of this public money. However, during the previous sixty years, in spite of their general poverty and of the penal laws before 1829, the handful of Catholics in the country had striven zealously for the education of their children. As early as 1764 the Catholics of London formed a small "Society for the Instruction of the Children of Catholic indigent Parents", though how much this was able to accomplish we cannot tell. At least ten Catholic primary schools existed in England prior to 1800; and probably not many more. But with the cessation of the persecution and the beginning of the immigration from Ireland, Catholic elementary schools began to multiply. By 1829 these had risen probably to about 60 or 70. Thenceforth progress was more rapid. In 1851, though excluded from the government grant given since 1833, there were in England 311 Catholic schools built for the poor and mainly by the pennies of the poor. From 1851 the Catholic schools received some small share of the public grants, and by 1870 the number had risen to 383. In that year Forster's Act, the first great English education measure, was passed. It was enacted that henceforth schools should be established in every school district throughout the country. These might be either voluntary schools, or Board-schools. The latter were to be provided and managed by local school boards elected for this object. They were to be built out of the local rates, and maintained out of the rates and grants from the imperial exchequer. They were to be undenominational or secular in character and exempt from all religious instruction of any definitely denominational kind. But they might retain Bible lessons and give some Christian religious instruction of an undogmatic or colourless quality (Cowper Temple Clause). Along with these Board-schools, or in place of them, were sanctioned the voluntary schools. These could be built by private bodies at their own expense. Ordinarily such bodies were religious organizations. For the maintenance of these schools the proprietors could obtain in aid of their own contributions the imperial grants, provided they fulfilled certain conditions of educational efficiency and admitted government inspection. Each voluntary school was controlled by a small committee of managers representing the trust or body who owned the school. The school was allowed to retain the religious character of the denomination to which it belonged, to appoint teachers of their creed, and to give religious instruction according to their tenets subject to a "time-table conscience clause" facilitating the absence from the religious lesson of any children whose parents objected to their attending it. As all previous work in elementary education was due to the voluntary or denominational bodies, nearly all existing primary schools were voluntary schools. But in response to the now much increased demand the Catholics, like the Anglicans, disapproving of the secular Board-schools for their children, set themselves to the building and maintenance of additional voluntary schools. By the year 1901 the total number of primary schools had risen to a little over 20,000. Of these, 5878 were Board-schools, and 14,275 were voluntary schools, but as the Board-schools were stronger in the towns and larger in size, of the total attendance of 5,000,000 children nearly half went to the Board-schools. Of the voluntary schools the Catholics now owned 1056, with an attendance of nearly 400,000 children,--a magnificent increase from the 383 schools of 1870. The state contribution to education, which had been £20,000 in 1833, and £914,721 in 1870, had reached £16,000,000 in 1901. But though the supporters of the voluntary schools made heroic efforts, the burden of the struggle was becoming intolerable, especially for a poorer section of the community like the Catholic body. The cost both of building and upkeep kept constantly rising, owing to the higher standard forced by the competition of the Board-schools, which drew unlimitedly from the public rates which the supporters of the voluntary schools were compelled to pay in addition to their voluntary contributions to their own schools. Moreover, by legislation of 1876 and 1880 attendance of children at school was made compulsory. The important statute was enacted: "It shall be the duty of the parent of every child to cause such child to receive efficient elementary instruction". This increased the number of school children and entailed the further statute that elementary education should be provided gratuitously for the indigent, and ultimately resulted in legislation by which primary education was made free or gratuitous for all. The annual cost of education per child in England was: in 1860, 21s. 7d.; in 1870, 25s. 4d.; in 1880, for voluntary schools, 34s. 73¾d., for board schools, 42s.; in 1902, for voluntary schools, 46s. 4d., for board schools, 60s. 9d. Such was the state of things which necessitated the Education Act of 1902. This Act abolished the school boards, transferring their functions to the general local authority--the County Council or Urban Council. It equalized the condition of Board-schools and voluntary schools--henceforward termed provided and non-provided schools--in regard to maintenance by public funds, whether from local rates or imperial grants, both schools being of equally public character in regard to secular instruction. It enacted that the local authority must maintain and control all secular instruction in the public elementary schools of its district; but whereas the local authority must provide the cost of both building and upkeep of the provided schools, in the case of the non-provided (i. e. voluntary) schools the building and equipment is to be at the expense of the denominational body which volunteers to set up the school. The school thus is, and remains, their property. Each school is managed by a committee of six managers who have the appointment and dismissal of the teachers. The local authority has the nomination of all the six managers of the provided schools, but of only two in the case of non-provided schools. The trust body which owns the school has the right of nominating four of the six. It is on this slender clause the main value of the Act from the Catholic standpoint hinges, for it is this clause which retains the efficient control of the school for religious purposes in the hands of the denomination which built it. In the provided school religious instruction is on much the same footing as in the former Board-schools; that is, some Bible lessons and religious instruction of a non-denominational character may be given if the local authority chooses. In the non-provided school religious instruction may be given in accordance with the trust-deeds, that is with the tenets of the proprietors of the school. This is to be under the control of the managers and subject to a time-table conscience clause, and not at the charge of public moneys. For the sake of clearness, then, the present position of the Catholic elementary school in England in 1912 is this: The cost of the school building and its equipment must be found by the Catholic congregation, whilst the State through the local authority provides all working expenses for all secular instruction. Each Catholic school when first built is vested in the hands of Catholic ecclesiastical authorities by carefully drawn-up trust-deeds. The committee of managers usually includes the priest in charge of the mission with three of the chief Catholic laymen of the parish. To these are added the two members appointed by the local authority. The right of opening new schools where needed is also secured by the Act of 1902. On the whole, therefore, the condition of Catholic schools under this Act is fairly satisfactory. The Board of Education may, however, exert unpleasant pressure by exacting regulations under the title of efficiency. Still, though burdensome, if tolerable, the sacrifice in the long run ought to make for the good of the children. More objectionable have been attempts of certain bigoted local authorities to discriminate against the non-provided schools in the scale of salaries and some other matters. However, judicial decisions tend to prevent this injustice. The chief anxiety at present is the precariousness of the situation. Three Education Bills in succession have been before Parliament which sought to transfer the entire control of the school from the managers appointed by the owners of the non-provided schools to the local authority, and under the plea of abolishing religious tests for teachers aimed at rendering all schools liable to accept teachers of any religion or of none. Up to the present, each of these measures has been defeated, and largely by the resoluteness of the Catholic minority. Provision of Catholic Teachers The method of training teachers in England for primary schools during the last century has usually included some years of apprenticeship as monitors or pupil-teachers in the primary school during which the candidate for the teaching profession continued his or her studies, receiving at the same time a small stipend from the State. At the end of this apprenticeship the young man or woman either began with the lowest grade of assistant-teacher and worked up by concomitant private study to pass examinations leading up to a first-class certificate; or the more fortunate candidates obtained scholarships, which secured them two years in a training college approved and assisted by the Government. In recent years, however, the aim of the Board of Education has been to secure that all future teachers of primary schools shall have gone through the last three or four years of their school course in a secondary school, and shall subsequently have the advantage of a two or three years' course at a training college. The preparation of Catholic teachers has followed the same lines as that of other teachers belonging to the voluntary division of the system. At present there are in England five recognized Catholic residential training colleges for female primary teachers. All are managed by religious. The largest, that conducted by the Sisters of Notre Dame at Liverpool, was opened in 1856. In 1909 there were in residence at all the five training colleges 507 women students. There is one residential Catholic primary training college for men under diocesan authorities in London. There were 114 students there in 1909. The State contributes scholarships or burses of £38 per annum for each female student and £53 for each male student at these colleges. Though the ordinary course is two years, it may be prolonged to three or even four years in the case of very promising students. As at present the total number of Catholic elementary teachers is about 8000, to staff near 1100 schools and teach about 400,000 children, and as the insistence on training constantly increases, there is need of increased provision in this respect. One source of anxiety lies in the efforts of the Board of Education in recent years to compel the voluntary training-colleges, if in receipt of any grant, to admit students of all denominations. In the case of residential training colleges, this would obviously be fatal to their Catholic character. The attempt has been therefore vigorously resisted and, so far, successfully. A more serious difficulty in regard to the formation of Catholic elementary teachers for the future, as before hinted, seems to lie in the paucity of recognized Catholic secondary schools which Catholic boys and girls looking forward to a teaching career can attend, as such attendance for three or four years is now to become a permanent regulation of the Board of Education. Moreover the many valuable scholarships open to these and other pupils from primary schools can now be held in Catholic secondary schools, provided these be recognized. Special Classes of Schools The Catholic education of certain other classes of children is also provided for by charitable institutions, which are primarily due to voluntary effort, and conducted by religious congregations or other charitable organizations, but frequently receive considerable state aid, subject to certain conditions. Thus there are in Great Britain: Catholic certified poor-law schools, for boys, 13; for girls, 28; reformatory schools, for boys, 5; for girls, 2; industrial schools, for boys, 14; for girls, 12. The chief organizations for the safeguarding of Catholic educational interests are the diocesan school associations and the central Catholic Education Council of Great Britain. There are sixteen of the former. The bishop or some Catholic layman of position is usually the chairman, and the committee includes some of the most influential Catholic laymen of the diocese. The Catholic Education Council was founded by the bishops of Great Britain in 1905. It took over the functions of the old Catholic School Committee, which originated in 1847, and also those of the Catholic Secondary Education Council, begun in 1904. The Council consists of ninety-five members nominated in certain proportions by the bishops, diocesan school associations, and the Conference of Catholic colleges. The object of this Council is to look after and defend the general interests of Catholic education both primary and secondary, and the Council is recognized by the Government as representing the Catholics of England in matters of Catholic education. In fine, the conclusion presented by the history of Catholic education in Great Britain is that, in a country where the conception of true freedom and the sense of equity prevails throughout the mass of the nation, even a small minority with a clearly just claim, however unpopular at the start, will triumph in the long run, if it insists with resolution and perseverance in its just demands. MICHAEL MAHER. In Ireland The history of Catholic education in Ireland in the period from the Reformation to Catholic Emancipation is to be considered rather the story of an heroic struggle than a record of a school system in any true sense, and it must be gleaned from all sorts of out-of-the-way sources, for the historian of the Catholic schools of that period has not yet arisen. From the Reformation to the Treaty of Limerick (1534-1691) records are very scanty, and though, in spite of the troubled state of the times, many Catholic schools managed to survive and to do good work, there was no such thing as an organized system of schools, nor would anything of the kind have been possible. Throughout the eighteenth century Catholic schools were repressed by the penal laws, one object of which was, according to Lecky, "to reduce the Catholics to a condition of the most extreme and brutal ignorance". The same author says: "The legislation on the subject of Catholic education may be briefly described, for it amounted simply to universal, unqualified and unlimited proscription". Keeping a school, or teaching in any capacity, even as usher or private tutor, was a penal offence, and a reward of £10 was offered for the discovery of a Popish schoolmaster. Notwithstanding the severity of these laws, the managers of the Charter Schools, when seeking aid from Parliament in 1769, found it necessary to complain of the great number of schools "under the tuition of Popish masters" that were to be found in many parts of the country. Proselytizing Schemes The Government and the ascendancy party, while prohibiting Catholic education, made several very ambitious though futile attempts to give a Protestant education to the children of the poor Irish Catholics through the agency of proselytizing schools. These schemes may be mentioned here since they were meant for Catholics, though fortunately little used by them. An Act of Parliament of the reign of Henry VIII (1537) proscribed the erection of schools in every parish, but the Act remained almost a dead letter. In the reign of Elizabeth an Act was passed (1570) for the establishment of diocesan free schools. Some schools were founded, and in the course of time the number was increased, but they never realized the function indicated by their name of free schools; they became in the main ordinary grammar schools for the children of well-to-do Protestants. A scheme of Royal free schools was initiated by James I (1608) in connexion with the plantation of Ulster. Their story differs little from that of the other proselytizing schools, but their endowments have not altogether disappeared and they were divided between Catholics and Protestants under a scheme made by the Educational Endowments Commission of 1887. Passing over other more or less partial schemes, the Charter schools, founded in response to an appeal made by Boulter, the Protestant primate (1730), demand a brief notice. Under the charter granted in 1733, a system of schools was begun which, by means of agreements secured by a combination of fraud and terror, took Catholic children from their parents and homes and deported them to most distant parts of the country. These schools became hotbeds of shameful cruelty without a parallel in the history of public, or probably even in that of private, education in any land. Yet they were powerfully supported and received large grants from the Irish Parliament, but their downfall was brought about by the indignant exposure of their callous inhumanity by John Howard, the philanthropist, who took occasion to investigate their condition while he was engaged in an inquiry into the state of the prisons. All these classes of schools were avowedly proselytizing, and as they were the only schools which could be openly established in the country in the eighteenth century, at any rate till towards its close, the education of Irish Catholics was confined to what could be done by the efforts of priests in their own districts, and by those of the "hedge" school-master, who with great devotion sought to keep alive the lamp of knowledge, though he knew that a price was on his head as on that of the priest. That these efforts were numerous and active is clear from the complaint of the trustees of the Charter schools in 1769, to which reference has already been made. Moreover, in spite of the severe penalties prescribed by law, the practice of sending Irish youths to Continental countries to be educated was very common, and it appears from a return made to Parliament that, at the time of the outbreak of the French Revolution, there were no fewer than 478 Irish ecclesiastical students making their studies on the Continent. Towards the close of the eighteenth century the rigour with which the penal laws had hitherto been enforced was considerably relaxed, and the immediate result was an extraordinary growth of Catholic schools all over the country, but without any organic unity or definite system. By far the most important educational work of that period was the foundation of Maynooth College. Christian Brothers In 1802 Edmund Ignatius Rice, of Waterford, began a work for Catholic education which has been the source of incalculable good. In that year the Irish Christian Brothers were founded, and in 1820 the Holy See extended to them the Brief of Benedict XIII by which the French Brothers were established in 1725. The Christian Schools soon found their way into the chief centres of population in the southern half of the country, and at the present day they number 100 and have 29,840 pupils. All the Royal Commissions which have inquired into the condition of education in Ireland have reported in terms of enthusiastic praise on the splendid educational work done in the schools of the Christian Brothers, and it is unnecessary to say that they have been a tower of strength to the cause of religion. NATIONAL SCHOOLS The National schools, as they are called, were introduced in 1831, by a motion of Mr. Stanley, chief secretary for Ireland, to place at the disposal of the Irish Government a grant for the purpose of providing combined literary and moral and separate religious instruction for Irish children of all denominations. The new system was at once attacked by the Presbyterians and very soon by the Episcopalian Protestants, but at first it was in the main supported by the Catholics, though Dr. McHale, Archbishop of Tuam, was a notable exception. The concessions made by the Commissioners of National Education for the purpose of placating the various Protestant sects had the effect at last of uniting Catholics in opposition to the system. Apparently it was not enough that in a Board of seven commissioners only two were Catholics; one rule after another was made of such a character as to leave no doubt of the very serious danger that these new government schools would prove to be simply another proselytizing agency, as was, indeed, the avowed policy of the Protestant archbishop, Whately. As the outcome of prolonged and bitter Catholic opposition the schools were at length made tolerable, though they retain their fundamental undenominationalism to the present day. Outline of System The National Education system is now governed by a body of twenty commissioners appointed by the Crown, of whom ten, including the resident commissioner, are Catholics. All the other higher offices, even inspectorships, are divided equally between Catholics and Protestants, offices being in some instances duplicated in order to preserve the balance. The form of local control of the schools that has been adopted gives to Catholics such measure of security as they possess. The immediate management is committed to individuals appointed by the Board, and in the large majority of cases these are the local clergy, amongst Catholics usually the parish priests. Of a total of 8401 National Schools, 5819 are under Catholic management, and of these, 5650 are under clerical and 169 under lay managers. These managers have the sole right of appointing and dismissing the teachers, but an arrangement made for Catholic schools, and sanctioned by the Synod of Maynooth, provides that in the exercise of this right the approval of the bishop shall be sought. This arrangement has been accepted by the teachers as an ample protection against the danger of arbitrary dismissal. The managers have, moreover, general authority over the schools and the teachers, but the commissioners themselves, through their inspectors, control the standard and the efficiency of the teaching, and enforce the regulations of their code. The undenominationalism of the system makes itself felt chiefly in two ways: first, in the prohibition of religious emblems even in purely Catholic schools, and, secondly, in the refusal of the commissioners to sanction the use even in Catholic schools of readers or other books containing any matter which might be considered open to objection if the schools had mixed attendance of Catholics and Protestants. Provision of Schools School buildings may be vested in the commissioners, or in trustees, or they may be held by the managers as owners. 1f a school is vested in the commissioners, a course considered objectionable by Catholics, that body provide the entire cost of erection, equipment, and maintenance. If the school is vested in trustees, the commissioners make a grant of two-thirds of the cost of building and equipment, leaving the remaining third, and the entire cost of subsequent maintenance, to be met by local contributions, for the raising of which the manager is responsible. If the unrestricted ownership of the school is retained by the manager, no contribution is made, but loans may be obtained in certain circumstances. Catholic Schools The schools of the Irish Christian Brothers have refused to enter the National system, but it has been accepted by those of other brotherhoods, and by convent schools generally. The number of convent and monastery National schools is 396, and the average number of children on the rolls, 111,508. Of the 8401 National schools 4391 are exclusively Catholic as regards teachers and pupils, 1542 are similarly Protestant, and the attendance is mixed in 2461 schools, in which the Catholic pupils are 69.7 per cent of the whole. The number of pupils in exclusively Catholic schools is 373,613, and the Catholics in the schools in which the attendance is mixed, number 131,657. There are, therefore, altogether 505,270 Catholic pupils in the National schools out of a total roll of 704,528. Finance The whole scheme of National education, with the exceptions stated above in regard to building, equipment and maintenance, is financed by the Government, chiefly by an annual parliamentary vote, which in 1909-10 amounted to £1,621,921. The ascertained expenditure from local sources in 1909 was £141,096. Training of Teachers The supply of trained teachers is maintained by seven training colleges, of which one, for men and women, directly managed by the commissioners, is forbidden to Catholics, another, also for men and women, is Episcopalian Protestant, and two for men and three for women are Catholic. The Catholic training colleges are under the immediate management of the bishops of the dioceses in which they are situated, two under the Archbishop of Dublin, and one each under the Bishops of Down and Connor, Limerick, and Waterford. The students in these colleges, all of which are residential, are known as King's scholars, and the colleges are supported by capitation maintenance grants paid by the commissioners. Technical Instruction Technical instruction is carried on by local committees under the Department of Agriculture and Technical Instruction for Ireland. The Department was established by Act of Parliament in 1899, and has, in addition to the sums voted for special institutions such as the Royal College of Science, an annual income of £197,000, of which £62,000 must be devoted to technical instruction, £10,000 to the development of fisheries, and the balance to agricultural instruction and development. The technical schools established under this system are undenominational, but as they are almost exclusively evening schools and are confined to technical subjects of instruction, or preparatory work connected therewith, they are freely attended by Catholics. SECONDARY SCHOOLS AND COLLEGES Speaking generally, all schools of secondary standard, and colleges under university rank in Ireland, are purely denominational. In the department of secondary education Catholics received no assistance from the State until 1878, when an Act of Parliament established the Commissioners of Intermediate Education to encourage and promote secondary education by distributing grants to schools of all denominations on the basis of an annual general examination in the subjects of secular instruction, and giving exhibitions and prizes to the most successful candidates. A further Act of Parliament, in 1900, widened the powers of the commissioners and enabled them to add inspection to the examination, which, however, must be retained. The system of inspection established under this Act has not yet got beyond the tentative stage, and cannot be really effective as long as the annual examination continues to be the basis of the distribution of grants. Outline of System The commissioners are twelve in number, six Catholics and six Protestants, and as their powers are strictly limited to subjects of secular education, the denominationalism of the schools is in no way impaired. The diocesan colleges, with few exceptions, accept the system and compete for their share of the grants. The great colleges and the smaller schools of the religious orders are all within the system, as are also nearly all the convent secondary schools. The Christian Brothers, though refusing to enter the National system of primary schools, have freely entered the Intermediate system, and have added secondary departments to their schools, in which they accept the programme of the Intermediate Board, and submit to the examinations and inspection. The official statistics published by the Board take no account of the religious denomination of schools or pupils, but they give sufficiently detailed information about each school to make it possible to arrive at fairly exact figures. Of 344 schools, 218 are Catholics: 128 for boys, 84 for girls, and 6 mixed. The school rolls show that Catholics number approximately 8,780 boys out of a total of 12,067 and 4,000 girls out of 6,428. These rolls contain the names only of those pupils who are within the limits of secondary school age and the total number of pupils in the schools is probably 25 per cent greater. Finance The Intermediate Education Act (1878) gave the commissioners, from the funds realized by the disestablishment of the Protestant Church, £1,000,000, the interest of which was at first their sole income. The Local Taxation Act (1890) increased the income of the Board by the addition of the residue of specified excise and customs duties after certain fixed charges had been met. The amount received from this source was subject to fluctuation, but for several years it showed a downward tendency, and in 1911 the Government substituted for it a fixed annual sum of £46,000, which brings the income of the Commissioners up to £80,000 a year. The Government further admitted, in 1911, the claim of Irish Intermediate education to an annual parliamentary vote, and if this is made proportional to the corresponding vote in England it should more than double the income of the Board. Prominent Schools The following list gives the names of the larger and more important Catholic schools in Ireland and of the authorities conducting them. BOYS Diocesan Colleges conducted by the secular clergy, under the immediate control of the bishops: St. Finian's College, Mullingar; St. Mel's College, Longford; St. Macarten's College, Monaghan; St. Columb's College, Derry; St. Malachy's College, Belfast; St. Colman's College, Newry; St. Patrick's College, Cavan; St. Eunan's College, Letterkenny; Holy Cross College, Clonliffe, Dublin; St. Peter's College, Wexford; St. Patrick's College, and St. Mary's Lay College, Carlow; St. Kieran's College, Kilkenny; St. Colman's College, Fermoy; St. Finbarr's Seminary, Cork; St. Patrick's College, Thurles; St. Brendan's College, Killarney; St. Flannan's College, Ennis; St. Munchin's College, Limerick; St. John's College, Waterford; St. Jarlath's College, Tuam; Diocesan College, Ballaghadereen; St. Joseph's College, Ballinasloe; Summerhill College, Sligo; St. Muredach's College, Ballina. Conducted by Religious Orders Cistercians, Mount Melleray Seminary, attached to the Abbey, Cappoquin; St. Joseph's College, attached to the Abbey, Roscrea. Congregation of the Holy Ghost: Blackrock College, Dublin; Rockwell College, Cashel; St. Mary's College, Rathmines, Dublin. Congregation of the Mission (Vincentians): St. Vincent's College, Castleknock, Dublin; St. Patrick's Training College, for National Teachers (men), Drumcondra, Dublin; Dominicans, College of St. Thomas, Newbridge; Society of Jesus, Clongowes Wood College, Sallins; Belvedere College, Dublin; Sacred Heart College, and Mungret College, Limerick; College of St. Ignatius, Galway. Society of Mary (Marists), St. Mary's College, Dundalk; Catholic University School, Dublin; Christian Brothers, O'Connell Schools, North Richmond Street, and several other large schools in Dublin; Christian Brothers' College, and Our Lady's Mount, Cork; Christian Schools in Belfast, Limerick, and many other centres. Presentation Brothers, Presentation Monastery, and Mardyke College, Cork, and several other schools; De La Salle Brothers, Training College for National Teachers (men), Waterford. GIRLS The Dominican College, Eccles Street, and the Loreto College, St. Stephen's Green, Dublin, besides remarkable success in the examinations of the Intermediate Board, won for themselves acknowledged eminence, even in competition with men's colleges in the late Royal University, and have opened halls in connexion with the National University, St. Mary's, Muckross Park; Sion Hill, Blackrock, Dublin; Training College for National Teachers (women), Belfast; Training College for Secondary Teachers, Dublin, and many other schools. Loreto Nuns, Loreto Abbey, Rathfarnham; schools in Balbriggan, Bray, Dalkey, Gorey, Clonmel, Navan, Mullingar, Letterkenny, Kilkenny, Fermoy. Faithful Companions of Jesus: Laurel Hill Convent, Limerick; St. Mary's Convent, Newtownbarry; Sisters of St. Louis, Monaghan, Carrickmacross, and Kiltimagh. Ursulines: Convents of Blackrock, and St. Angela's, Cork; Sligo, Thurles, and Waterford, where, in addition to the school, the Sisters conduct a training college for secondary school teachers. Brigidines: Convents of Tullow, Mountrath, Abbeyleix, and Goresbridge. Sisters of Mercy: in addition to a large number of elementary schools in various parts of Ireland, higher schools in Dundalk, Queenstown, Macroom, and St. Marie's of the Isle, Cork, and in Limerick a Training College for National Teachers (women). Sisters of the Sacred Heart of Mary: Lisburn; Sisters of the Sacred Heart: Mount Anville, Dublin. Schools of handicrafts have been established in connexion with many of the convents. Among the more important of these are, for lace and crochet: Mercy Convents, Dundalk, Ardee, Kilbeggan, Longford, Enniskillen, Queenstown, St. Lelia's School, Limerick, Newcastle West, Roscarbery, Dungarvan, Stradbally, Claremorris, Westport, Castlebar, Sligo, Roscommon, and Boyle; Poor Clares, Ballyjamesduff and Kenmare. Presentation, Thurles, Carrick-on-Suir and Youghal; Sisters of Charity of St. Paul, Kilfinane; Sisters of Charity, Benada Abbey, Co. Mayo, and Foxford. Many of these schools, and some others have also hosiery, shirtmaking, and similar industries, and some, as Foxford, Loughglynn, St. Lelia's, Limerick, Dundrum, and Roscarbery, are centres of much needed industrial life in their several localities. Seminaries The education of students for the secular priesthood is carried on chiefly in Maynooth, which is a national seminary, though many students are sent to the Irish Colleges in Rome and Paris and a large proportion of the students of Dublin, Cashel, Kildare, Ossory, and Waterford receive their whole education in the local seminaries. With these exceptions, however, the local seminaries confine themselves to the secondary school programme, and send their students to Maynooth or the Continent for their studies in philosophy and theology. Each religious order makes its own provision for the training of its subjects, and candidates for the foreign missions are educated in All Hallows College, and in the seminaries situated in Carlow, Kilkenny, Thurles, and Waterford. (See also IRELAND; CHRISTIAN BROTHERS OF IRELAND; ALL HALLOWS COLLEGE: MAYNOOTH COLLEGE.) ANDREW MURPHY. In Scotland Catholic education in Scotland during penal times fared much as in England. By 1670 the Catholic population had dwindled to some 14,000 communicants, of whom about 2000 survived in the Lowlands (Leslie's report to Propaganda). Scotch colleges which sent many missionaries back to suffer for their faith had been founded at Rome, Douai, Paris, and Valladolid. However, in the crushed condition of the country candidates for the priesthood became scarce. Small Catholic schools were occasionally started in remote districts during the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries and struggled on for a while. Thus in 1675 two small schools existed at Glengarry and in the Island of Barra. Early in the eighteenth century a small seminary was begun at Scalan in Glenlivat to be subsequently transferred after sundry vicissitudes to Aquhorties. Others were started at Samalaman and Lismore. The first really important Catholic collegiate foundation in Scotland since the Reformation was that at Blairs, in 1829, when the two surviving "little seminaries" at Aquhorties and Lismore were united to form the new college, destined to have an hononrable and fruitful career as the future Alma Mater of a considerable proportion of the Scottish priesthood. Since Catholic Emancipation there has been a large immigration from Ireland and a rapid growth within the Scottish community, so that the remnant of 1800 has risen to an estimated Catholic population of 518,000 in Scotland in 1910, with 554 priests and 238 missions. The story of the progress of Catholic education during the past century has been much the same in Scotland as in England. As each little Catholic congregation formed, it started a school. In spite of the stronger religious bigotry in the beginning, the increasing demand for liberty and equality for dissenters after the separation of the Free Church in 1843 helped Catholic educational claims. However, it was the Education Act of Scotland of 1872 that has determined the Scotch system down to the present time. That Act, following on the line of the English Act of 1870, established, or rather in Scotland reformed and re-established a dual system of public schools, i. e. Board-schools, and voluntary or denominational schools. Both receive considerable grants from the imperial exchequer, whilst the former enjoy rate aid. The voluntary schools, built and partially maintained by private funds, retain the religious character of the body which owns them. Fortunately in Scotland the voluntary schools did not meet with the same hostility from the supporters of the public or Board-schools as they did in England. The religious differences which have set the English Nonconformists against the Anglican proprietors of the great mass of the voluntary schools did not exist there. As a consequence, the voluntary schools generally, and the Catholic schools in particular, received more liberal treatment and less pressure, and the intolerable burden and acute need for reform which brought about the English Education Act of 1902 did not arise. The present situation of Catholic Education in Scotland, as gathered from the Scotch Education Department Blue Book for 1910-11, may be thus summarized: Catholic Voluntary Day Schools Primary, 207; higher grade, 12. These provide places for 107,740 scholars. The average number on the registers during the past year was 92,594. The average in actual attendance, 81,980 (41,363 boys, 40,617 girls). Teaching staff: certificated teachers, male 167, female 1306; assistant (provisonally certificated) teachers, 475. Average annual salary of Catholic teachers: principal masters, £148; principal mistresses, £94; assistant masters, £94; assistant mistresses, £73. The average salaries for the public schools at the same time were: principal masters, £189; mistresses, £95; assistant masters, £136; mistresses, £81. Catholic teachers thus work at a sacrifice. Total annual income of Catholic primary schools:--voluntary contributions in various forms, £39,100; state contribution under various heads: annual grant, fee grant, grant in aid, grants for drawing, etc., about £170,000. The inclusion of rent (on the basis of assessment) in the approved expenditure is permitted in Scottish voluntary schools. This amounted in 1909 to £36,000, or an average of £164 per school. The total expenditure on Catholic primary schools in 1910 was £208,624, which worked out at a cost per child of £2. 13s. 5d.; while the cost to the State of each child in the public schools amounted to £3. 14s. 1½d. Moreover the public schools drew about twenty-three shillings per child from rates not available to the voluntary schools. Still on the whole, though the Catholic Church is subject to certain financial disadvantages, it has secured freedom, and when worked in a liberal spirit the Scottish system has proved tolerable, indeed with certain further amendments helping to raise Catholic teachers' salaries to those of the public schools it would be even fair. The working conditions of the Catholic primary schools in Scotland are much the same as in England. The chief manager and correspondent of each Catholic school is usually the priest in charge of the mission, but the manager of groups of voluntary schools are united into small Councils or Committees in which they share common control and responsibility for certain purposes--an arrangement possessing some distinct advantages. In regard to secondary education, the better higher grade schools help towards this in Scotland; and there are twelve such Catholic higher grade schools recognized and receiving grants. Owing to the difficulty already alluded to of defining secondary schools, it is not easy to give accurate statistics. One Catholic school for boys, the Jesuit College in Glasgow, is on the list of secondary schools recognized by the Government. The Marist Brothers also conduct a boarding college at Dumfries, St. Mungo's Academy, in Glasgow, and a hostel for the training of male teachers. There are two ecclesiastical colleges, Blairs and St. Peter's, New Kilpatrick; and in addition to those recognized as higher grade schools, there are probably about half a dozen academies and convent boarding schools giving secondary education. There is one large training college for female teachers, managed by the Notre Dame Sisters, in Glasgow. MICHAEL MAHER. In the United Slates Out of a Catholic population of approximately 14,347,027, nearly one-half of the Catholic children attending elementary schools in the United States were being educated under the parish school system in the year 1910. Catholic schools are practically impossible in most country districts, and it has been estimated that from one-fourth to one-third of the number of Catholic children of school age live in country districts. In towns and cities, therefore, where alone it is possible, generally speaking, to build and maintain Catholic schools, it may be said that all but about one-fourth to one-sixth of the Catholic population attending school is being educated in the parish schools. The number of pupils in the parish schools is also steadily increasing. This result has been achieved by a process of gradual growth, the root of it all being the firm determination of the Catholic mind to make religion a vital element in the education of the Catholic child. This determination has characterized the attitude of American Catholics in respect to education from the very beginning, and it has been shared alike by the clergy and the laity. The earliest Catholic colonists implanted the principle of religious training in the virgin Catholic soil, and every decade that has passed since then has added but a new growth or a fresh vigour to the educational mustard seed, A school appears to have been founded by the Jesuits in Maryland not very long after the arrival of the first colonists, though there is some uncertainty as to the exact date and its first location. But even before the coming of the Calverts, Catholic schools existed in New Mexico and Florida. By the year 1629, many schools for the natives of New Mexico had been established by the Franciscans, and this was eight years before the first school in the thirteen eastern colonies. The first schools within the present limits of the United States were thus founded by Catholic missionaries. It is probable that the earliest of these mission schools in New Mexico were inaugurated soon after the effective occupation of the region by Don Juan de Oñate in 1598. In Florida, school work among the natives appears to have been begun about the same time. A classical school existed at St. Augustine as early as 1606. The Jesuits established a series of flourishing schools for the natives of Lower California, early in the eighteenth century; and the Franciscans, during its last quarter, developed the singularly successful mission schools in Upper California. All of these schools for the natives had an industrial character. In New Orleans, a parish school was opened in 1722, four years after the founding of the city; and five years later a band of Ursuline Sisters established a convent and school there for the education of girls. There is evidence also of the existence of Catholic schools at a very early period at St. Louis, Kaskaskia, Mackinaw, Detroit, and Vincennes. A college was opened by the Jesuits in Maryland in 1677, and another in the city of New York, about 1684, under the administration of Governor Dongan; and, when they founded Catholic missions in Pennsylvania, schools were opened in connexion with the more important parishes as a matter of course. The era of religious freedom ushered in by the Revolution resulted in the multiplication of Catholic educational institutions of every kind. Colleges were founded at Georgetown and Mount St. Mary's, and plans were framed for the development of Catholic education on a larger and more systematic scale. Fathers Badin and Nerinckx in Kentucky, and Father Richard at Detroit, were energetic and farseeing educational pioneers. Religious teachers for the schools also began to appear. Alice Lalor opened a school at Georgetown in 1799, which became the mother-house of the Visitation Sisters in the United States. Mother Seton established her community at Emmitsburg in 1809; Father Nerinckx founded the Sisterhood of Loretto in Kentucky two years later, and about the same time Father David organized the Sisters of Charity of Kentucky. From this time until about the year 1840 there was a slow but solid Catholic educational growth throughout the eastern half of the country, with the steady increase of the Catholic population. Bishop Kenrick at Philadelphia, Bishop Dubois at New York, Bishop Benedict Fenwick at Boston, Bishop England at Charleston, Bishop Dubourg in Louisiana, and Bishops Flaget, Rosetti, Edward Fenwick, Résé, and Bruté in the west, were unremitting in their labours in behalf of Catholic education in their respective dioceses. About the year 1840 a new period of school growth began, with the inpouring of the great streams of emigration from Germany and Ireland. During the years 1840-60 twice as many dioceses were organized as the number existing at the beginning of this period, and the heads appointed for these new sees were as profoundly convinced of the necessity of Catholic schools as had been the great bishops of the earlier periods. "The school alongside the church" was everywhere the accepted educational maxim. The laity were of one mind with the clergy in the matter, and the building of schools went everywhere hand in hand with the building of churches. The immigrants were poor, but they gave unstintedly of their limited means for the erection and equipment of both. The first school buildings were often of the most makeshift character, but they were gradually replaced by larger and more commodious structures. The result was that the two hundred parish schools existing in the country in the year 1840 were multiplied several times over before the beginning of the Civil War. The problem of providing teachers for the new schools was generally solved by an appeal to the existing religious communities of Europe. Many of these sent colonies to America, and so rapid was the growth of these colonies that their members, within a few years, outnumbered those of the teaching communities previously established in the country. Most of these new bodies, too, became independent of the parent organizations. The greater number of the teaching communities now in the United States trace their American origin to the little pioneer bands that crossed the ocean to take charge of schools for the children of the Irish and German immigrants. Towards the year 1860 the period of greatest growth in the history of the schools may be said to have ended, and the period of development begun. All through the eastern half of the country, the Catholic school system was by this time solidly established. In the Far Western and South-western States, the work of educational growth and expansion still went on, with the opening of the country there to settlement; and great bishops, like a Blanchet in Oregon, an Alemany in California, a Lamy in New Mexico, and a Macheboeuf in Colorado, were called upon to do heroic pioneer labour in the founding of schools, like that which had been done farther East by the bishops of an earlier period. But, by the close of the immigration period, the main lines of the vast network of schools were clearly laid down. It remained to provide for the internal development and progress of the system, and to adjust more perfectly the relations of its component elements. This has been the chief aim since the Second Plenary Council of Baltimore in 1866. The specific purpose and results of the work that has been accomplished in this direction will be dealt with more in detail in the sections that follow. Legislation At the First Provincial Council of Baltimore in 1829, it was declared by the assembled Fathers to be "absolutely necessary that schools should be established, in which the young may be taught the principles of faith and morality, while being instructed in letters". This was the first authoritative declaration of the Church in the United States on the subject of Catholic schools, and the decrees of subsequent councils have but reiterated, amplified, or given more precise practical effect to, the general law thus laid down. The First Plenary Council of Baitimore, held in 1852, exhorted the bishops "to see that schools be established in connexion with all the churches of their dioceses", and, if necessary, to provide for the support of the school from the revenues of the church to which the school was attached. Several of the bishops of the West urged even stricter legislation, and at the Second Provincial Council of Cincinnati, six years later, these views were embodied in a formal decree. The Second Plenary Council of Baltimore did little more than ratify the decrees of previous councils. In 1875, however, the Congregation of Propaganda issued an "Instruction to the Bishops of the United States concerning the Public Schools", in which it was pointed out that the public schools as conducted involved grave danger to the faith and morals of Catholic children, and that consequently both the natural and the Divine law forbade the attendance of Catholic children at such schools, unless the proximate danger could be removed. At the same time, the Sacred Congregation admitted the possible existence of causes which would excuse Catholic parents in the matter, and it was left to the conscience and judgement of the bishop to decide in each case. This "Instruction" led up to the educational legislation of the Third Plenary Council of Baltimore in 1884. The need was generally felt by Catholics for more precise and specific legislation in reference to the schools, both parochial and public. In some dioceses, it meant exclusion from the sacraments for parents to send their children to the public schools; in others, it appeared to be made a matter of little or no account. The legislation enacted by the Council fully answered the general expectation. It defined the obligations imposed by the moral law upon parents in the matter of the religious education of their children. It provided for the case in which children were practically compelled by circumstances to attend the public schools. At the same time, it sought to give more specific application to its own legislation as well as that of previous Councils by the following decree:-- + (1) "Near each church, a parochial school if it does not yet exist, is to be erected within two years from the promulgation of this Council, and is to be maintained in perpetuum, unless the bishop, on account of grave difficulties, judge that a postponement be allowed." + (2) "A priest who, by his grave negligence, prevents the erection of a school within this time or its maintenance, or who, after repeated admonitions of the bishop, does not attend to the matter, deserves removal from that church." + (3) "A mission or a parish which so neglects to assist a priest in erecting or maintaining a school, that by reason of this supine negligence the school is rendered impossible, should be reprehended by the bishop and, by the most efficacious and prudent means possible, induced to contribute the necessary support." + (4) "All Catholic parents are bound to send their children to the parochial schools, unless either at home or in other Catholic schools they may sufficiently and evidently provide for the Christian education of their children, or unless it be lawful to send them to other schools on account of a sufficient cause, approved by the bishop, and with opportune cautions and remedies. As to what is a Catholic school, it is left to the judgment of the Ordinary to define". Other decrees of the Council dealt with the question of the improvement of the schools. The more important of these will be referred to in the course of this article. Attendance The total number of parish schools in the United States, according to the "Catholic Directory" of 1910, was 4845, with an attendance of 1,237,251. The total number of pupils in Catholic educational institutions of all kinds the same year, including colleges, academies, industrial, reformatory, and eleemosynary schools, was 1,450,488. Teachers On the basis of an average of forty pupils to a teacher, the above figures imply that there are about 31,000 teachers engaged in the parish schools of the United States. Fully nine-tenths of these belong to religious institutes. The proportion of lay teachers to religious varies greatly with locality. In certain districts the lay teachers are very numerous; in most of the dioceses, however, they constitute but a small fraction of the whole number. The number of male teachers is also relatively small, amounting to not more than one-fifteenth of the total. The religious teachers are divided among two hundred and seventy-five distinct teaching bodies, including independent convents as well as congregations or orders. There are eleven teaching brotherhoods. Many of the religious organizations have less than one hundred members, others have several thousand. The largest, the School Sisters of Notre Dame, has nearly four thousand religious. The work of some is limited to a single diocese, while others have schools and branch establishments scattered through a large number of states. As a rule, the teaching orders have extended their work wherever opportunity offered, regardless of state or diocesan boundaries. The result of this has been to make parish school education remarkably homogeneous, as compared with the public school system. Many of these teaching bodies, although at present entirely independent of each other, have sprung from a common parent organization. Thus, there are twenty-four independent establishments of the Benedictine Sisters, twenty of the Dominicans, twenty-two of the Franciscans, twenty-two of the Sisters of St. Joseph, forty-six of the Sisters of Mercy, eighteen of the Ursulines, and twenty of the Visitation Sisters. The mother-houses or central establishments of these communities are generally located in the United States. Religious communities in Canada have responded generously to the demand for teachers in the States, especially in New England, where the French-Canadian immigration has been so large, and eighteen of the Canadian teaching congregations now have branch establishments in this country. Eleven communities look to mother-houses in France. Besides these, seven communities have their mother-houses in Belgium, six in Germany, four in Italy, and one each in Holland, Switzerland, and England. Candidates for admission to the religious life are required to spend at least one year in the novitiate. In the case of the teaching orders, the novitiate may be regarded as a normal school in which pedagogical training goes hand in hand with instruction in the principles of the religious life. Before entrance into the novitiate, the candidate has to pass through a preliminary course of instruction in the secular branches, and this course covers not less than two years. The rules of all the teaching orders thus provide for a normal training lasting for at least three years. Previous to the Third Plenary Council of Baltimore, however, owing to the demand for teachers, the pre-novitiate course was frequently abbreviated, and sometimes even omitted altogether. The consequence was that teachers were often insufficiently trained for their work, and the instruction in the schools suffered accordingly. The legislation of the Third Plenary Council went far towards remedying this evil, by providing that regular normal schools should be established by the communities where they did not already exist, and that candidates should be allowed to remain in these schools until they had satisfactorily completed the prescribed work:-- "In order that there may be always ready a sufficient number of Catholic teachers, each thoroughly equipped for the holy and sublime work of education of youth, we would have the bishops concerned confer with the superiors of congregations dedicated to the work of teaching in the schools, either directly on their own authority or, if need be, invoking the authority of the Sacred Congregation, for the establishment of normal schools where they do not yet exist and there is need for them. These are to be in suitable establishments, in which the young may be trained by skilful and capable teachers, during a sufficient period of time and with a truly religious diligence, in the various studies and sciences, in method and pedagogy, and other branches pertaining to a sound training for teaching". In order to give effect to this legislation, the Council decreed the establishment of school boards in each diocese for the examination of teachers, and made it unlawful to engage a teacher for a school who had not obtained a diploma from the diocesan examiners:-- "Within a year from the promulgation of the Council, the bishops shall name one or more priests who are most conversant with school affairs, to constitute a diocesan board of examination. It shall be the office of this board to examine all teachers, whether they are religious belonging to a diocesan congregation or seculars, who wish to employ themselves in teaching in the parochial schools in the future, and, if they find them worthy, to grant a testimonial or diploma of merit. Without this no priest may lawfully engage any teacher for his school, unless they have taught before the celebration of the Council. The diploma will be valid for five years. After this period, another and final examination will be required of the teachers. "Besides this board for the examination of teachers for the whole diocese, the bishops, in accordance with the diversity of place or language, shall appoint several school boards, composed of one or several priests, to examine the schools in cities or rural districts. The duty of these boards shall be to visit and examine each school in their district once or even twice a year, and to transmit to the president of the diocesan board, for the information and guidance of the bishop, an accurate account of the state of the schools". Only lay teachers and religious belonging to a diocesan community were named as being bound by this legislation, but indirectly it affected all Catholic teachers. Owing to the lack of teachers, it was frequently found difficult to enforce the requirement of a diocesan diploma, to be gained by a formal examination. It may be said, however, that the legislation of the Council had the desired effect. All the religious communities now have well-equipped normal schools, and candidates, unless they come with superior qualifications, are usually required to complete the full curriculum. Summer normal schools are also conducted at the leading mother-houses, the courses lasting for a month or six weeks. In many dioceses, too, summer institutes are held, the religious and lay teachers of the diocese being assembled for the purpose during a week or two at some convenient place. Curriculum The curriculum of the parish school comprises eight elementary grades. There is a class in catechism daily, and Bible history is also taught several times a week. In the singing-class, devotional hymns are used, and the school-sessions are opened and closed by prayers or brief devotional exercises. Outside of these religious instructions and practices, it may be said that the curriculum of the Catholic parish school does not differ much from the curriculum of the corresponding public school, except that there is a stronger tendency in the former to emphasize the importance of those branches that are commonly designated as "the Three R's". Distinctively Catholic textbooks are employed quite generally, especially in the lower grades. Textbooks in common use in the public schools are, however, frequently used in the teaching of the purely secular subjects. In the matter of uniformity, some dioceses have gone much farther than others. In some, a common curriculum, with fixed recitation-periods, is prescribed for the schools, together with an authorized series of textbooks; in others, a common curriculum is prescribed, but the selection of textbooks and the fixing of recitation-periods is left to the pastors and principals; in many others, again, the diocesan authorities have not imposed any official standards of uniformity in these respects, except in the matter of religious instruction. Organization and Administration Three elements of authority are concerned in the conduct of the parish school, the pastor, the superiors of the teachers, and the bishop. The pastor has, besides the financial responsibility, immediate supervision over the school with respect to the faithful and efficient fulfilment of its work, and occupies by right the position of the school principal. Practically, however, he shares the responsibility of this position with the religious superior in charge of the school. The supervision of the work of the school, in most instances, is really left largely to the immediate religious superior. The higher religious superiors, having control of the supply of teachers and of the teachers' training as well as a supervision of the teaching in a large number of schools, enjoy a practical power over their schools that is comparable in some respects with that of the bishop. The bishop, nevertheless, possesses the supreme control over all the schools of his diocese, subject only to the regulations of the Councils and of higher authority. It is chiefly from the bishops that movements looking towards the betterment of the schools have come. And the trend of Catholic school development is strongly towards an increase of the exercise of the episcopal authority over the schools. Bishop Neumann of Philadelphia in 1852 attempted a diocesan organization of Catholic schools, by instituting a "Central Board of Education", to be composed of the pastor and two lay delegates from each of the parishes in Philadelphia, and to be presided over by the bishop. But the project appears to have been in advance of the times. In 1879 Bishop Joseph Dwenger of Fort Wayne, Indiana, organized a school board, consisting of eleven members and a secretary, all being priests. The board was to have control of studies and textbooks in the schools of the diocese, to examine teachers, and to gather statistical information about the schools. The effect was seen to be so wholesome that the Fort Wayne plan was adopted by the Fourth Provincial Council of Cincinnati in 1882, with an additional provision for dependent local school boards in the larger places. When the Third Plenary Council of Baltimore met, two years later, it practically adopted the Cincinnati plan for all the dioceses. Although the Council speaks only of a central "board of examination", and would appear, therefore, to limit the functions of this board to the examination and approval of teachers, it was expected, nevertheless, that more ample powers would be conferred on these boards by the bishops, and this in fact was done. Bishop Gilmour's "Constitution and By-Laws for the Government of the Parochial Schools" of Cleveland, issued in 1887, may be taken as typical of diocesan legislation generally in this regard. According to this "Constitution" the central board was to be made up of seven members, who were to be examiners of teachers as well as inspectors of schools in their respective districts. The board was vested with full control over the parish schools, under the bishop. Local boards were also instituted, to consist of three, five, or seven members, who were to visit and examine each school within their respective localities at least once a year. The board system represented an important advance in the work of Catholic school organization, and had everywhere a quickening effect. It soon became evident, however, that the system was still far from perfect. The men selected to serve on the boards, while devoted to the interests of the schools, were too busily engaged with other duties to give more than a small share of their time to the work. Besides this, few if any of them had had any formal pedagogical training. There was need, it was seen, of an executive officer of the central Board who should be specially qualified for the work of inspection and supervision, and who should devote his entire time to this task. The New York school board took the lead in the matter, and in the year 1888 appointed the Rev. William J. Degnan as inspector of schools. He was succeeded in the office the following year by the Rev. Michael J. Considine, who served in this capacity until the year 1900. The title of inspector was changed to that of superintendent. The Diocese of Omaha adopted the plan in 1891. The Rev. John W. Shanahan, later Bishop of Harrisburg, was appointed superintendent of schools for the Archdiocese of Philadelphia in 1894. Soon he added a new and important feature to the system; this was the appointment, for each teaching order in the diocese, of a community inspector of schools, the idea being that the recommendations of the superintendent in regard to the teachers and teaching would be more easily made as well as more effectively carried out through the co-operation of competent authorized representatives of the respective teaching bodies. The system of diocesan organization, as thus developed, consisted of a central board, with a superintendent of schools, and a board of community inspectors acting in conjunction with the superintendent in the inspection of schools and in the carrying out of the regulations of the board. In this form, the system has heen adopted by other dioceses, and is gradually replacing the older or simple "board" system. Sixteen dioceses have at present introduced the "superintendent" system, while thirty-seven still adhere to the original "board" plan. Financial Support Catholic parish schools are either "free" or "pay" schools. The latter are supported by the tuition fees of the pupils, paid to the head of the school. Free schools are usually supported by the parish treasury, although here and there schools are found whose expenses have been provided for, in whole or in part, by the endowment of some generous individual. The general tendency is towards free schools, and even where tuition fees are relied on, it is usually necessary for the parish to provide for part of the school's expense. Teachers generally receive from $200 to $300 per year if members of a sisterhood, and from $300 to $400 per year if members of a brotherhood. In several dioceses the salaries are higher than this, and within recent years a movement for the increase of teachers' salaries has been gaining ground. Lay teachers employed in the parish schools receive but little more than religious. Generally speaking, Catholic teachers' salaries are less than one-half as much as the salaries of corresponding teachers in the public schools, and the actual cost of schooling under the Catholic system is only about one-third of what it is under the public school system. It has been estimated that the average annual per capita cost of parish school education in the United States is $8. This would mean that the education of the 1,237,251 pupils in the parish schools during the year 1909-10 cost approximately, for that year, $9,898,008. The education of the same pupils in the public schools the same year would, according to the estimate referred to, cost approximately $30,511,010; and if the annual interest on the necessary property investment were added, the total would be upwards of 34,000,000 (American Eccles. Review, XLIV, 530). This is, therefore, about the amount of money that the Catholic school system saves annually to the States. Catholic Schools and the State Catholic schools are thus, in general, entirely supported by the voluntary contributions of Catholics. For a considerable period after the Revolution, however, Catholic schools in many places were, along with the schools of other denominations, supported from the public funds. This was the case in Lowell, Massachusetts, from 1835 to 1852. In the City of New York, it was also the case until the year 1824. The efforts of Bishop Hughes, in 1840 and subsequently, to restore this condition, were without the hoped-for success. Gradually, State after State framed laws forbidding the payment of public funds to denominational schools and many States even embodied such provisions in their constitutions. Several plans for avoiding the legal barriers that were thus raised against the attainment of their rights in the matter of the education of their children have been proposed and put to trial by Catholics, with the co-operation of their fair-minded non-Catholic fellow-citizens. One of the most celebrated of these was the "Poughkeepsie Plan", which was accepted by the public school board of Poughkeepsie, New York, in 1873. Under this plan, the school board rented the Catholic school buildings for a nominal sum, and accepted the two Catholic schools of the place as public schools under the common regulations framed for the public schools, the Catholic teachers, who were nuns, continuing as before and receiving their salaries from the board. The board agreed likewise to keep the school buildings in repair. The plan proved to be mutually satisfactory, and was continued for many years. Substantially the same arrangement was made in several other places in the State of New York. The arrangement was discontinued at Poughkeepsie in 1899, only when the superintendent of public instruction intervened, and rendered a decision adverse to its constitutionality. At Lima, in the same state, a similar decision was rendered by the superintendent in 1902, and the appeal against this to the courts resulted finally in a judgment of the supreme court of the State, which sustained the action of the superintendent. The famous "Faribault Plan" was an arrangement substantially the same as that at Poughkeepsie which Archbishop Ireland effected with the school boards of Faribault and Stillwater, in Minnesota, in 1891. There was considerable opposition on the part of Catholics, however, to such arrangements, one of the chief reasons being that religious instructions, under the agreement, had to be given outside of the regular school hours. An appeal to Rome in the Faribault case resulted in the decision "Tolerari potest", 21 April, 1892, which authorized the continuance of the arrangement under the specific circumstances. The controversy among Catholics had the effect of concentrating public attention upon the matter, and of arousing slumbering anti-Catholic prejudice. The Paribault Plan is still in operation in some places; and in various parts of the country, especially in the west, where Catholic settlements are numerous, there are Catholic schools which derive their support from the public school boards. But such arrangements are purely local. In certain states, recent legal decisions authorize the attendance of pupils from the parish schools at the manual training classes in the public schools. In connexion with these practical plans for the settlement of the "school question" there has been frequent discussion among Catholic educators and apologists as to the rights of the State in respect to education. Dr. Brownson would deny to the State the right to educate, in the strict and proper sense of the term, although he conceded to it the right to establish and maintain public schools. This was the view more generally held by American Catholic educators. In the year 1891 the Rev. Thomas Bouquillon, D.D., professor of moral theology at the Catholic University, Washington, issued a pamphlet in which he maintained that the State has the right to educate, in the sense that it has the right of "establishing schools, appointing teachers, prescribing methods and programmes of study"; and that "education belongs to men taken individually and collectively in legitimate association, to the family, to the state, to the church, to all four together, and not to any one of these four factors separately". These views aroused a storm of controversy which lasted for several years, and engaged the attention not only of Catholics in the United States but of the whole Catholic world. The efforts of Cardinal Satolli to settle the question by means of a series of fourteen propositions which he submitted to the board of archbishops at their meeting in New York, in the autumn of 1892, were futile; and the agitation subsided only when Pope Leo XIII addressed a letter to the American hierarchy through Cardinal Gibbons in May, 1893, in which, while appealing for the cessation of the controversy, he declared that the decrees of the Baltimore Councils were to be steadfastly observed in determining the attitude to be maintained by Catholics in respect both to parish and to public schools. Schools of Foreign Nationalities One of the most difficult problems that has confronted the Church in the United States has been the education of the children of the immigrants arriving from foreign shores and speaking a foreign language. These immigrants were poor, and yet, if their descendants were to be saved to the Faith, it was imperative that Catholic schools and teachers should be provided for them, as well as churches. The missionary priests who came to minister to the immigrants were, as a rule, keenly alive to the importance of the Catholic school, and, acting in conjunction with the American bishops, they have, to a great extent, overcome the difficulties that stood in the way and built up flourishing systems of schools. The chief difficulty, besides poverty of material resources, was that of the securing of competent teachers. Lay teachers were commonly employed at first. Little by little, however, religious were introduced, colonies of religious teachers being brought from abroad for this purpose, and even new religious communities founded here. Some of these communities rew rapidly, and they have furnished a constantly increasing supply of teachers for these schools. The Polish schools have the largest aggregate attendance. They are scattered all over the country, but are especially numerous in the large industrial centres. There were, in 1910, 293 Polish parishes with schools, having an attendance of 98,126 and with 1767 teachers, the great majority of these being religious. Next in number come the French schools, most of which belong to the French-Canadians, and are located in New England. These schools in 1910 numbered 161, with 1480 teachers, and a total attendance of 63,048. The Italians, although they compare in numerical strength with the Poles and French, are far behind them in the matter of provision for Catholic education. There were but 48 Italian schools in 1910, with 271 teachers, and an attendance of 13,838. Bohemian schools, the same year, had an attendance of 8978; Slovak schools, 7419; and Lithuanian schools, 2104, with a corresponding number of teachers of these nationalities. There were formerly many German schools in the United States, but schools in German parishes now generally employ English as the medium of instruction, although German is taught also as one of the regular classes. In the case of the nationalities mentioned above, English is always a part of the curriculum of the schools, and often it is the chief medium of instruction. In Italian schools, very little time is given to the study of Italian, and the same is true in many of the French-Canadian schools. In schools of the Slavic peoples, more time is given, as a rule, to the parental mother-tongue, and it is used conjointly with English as a medium of instruction. In Polish schools, from one-third to one-half of the time is most commonly devoted to the study or the use of the Polish language. Many of the States have attached to their child-labour laws the condition that a child, even though of employment-age, shall have acquired the ability to read and write English. Legislation has had an influence in the steadily growing predominance of the English language in the schools of the foreign nationalities, but the effect is due in the main to the American life and atmosphere. Industrial Schools Catholic industrial schools in the United States number 117, with an attendance of probably 15,000. Many of these schools are reformatory in character, but a large number are high-grade industrial schools in charge of the teaching orders. There are also manual training classes in many schools, especially in schools for girls. Schools for Negroes and Indians There are probably near 150,000 Catholic negroes in the United States, and for these there exist 119 Catholic schools, with an attendance of about 8000. Various religious communities are in charge, conspicuous among which are two congregations of coloured Sisters, the Oblate Sisters of Providence, founded at Baltimore in 1829, and which now has a membership of 146, and the Sisters of the Holy Family, of New Orleans, which was founded in 1842, and has a membership of 112. A collection is taken up annually in all the churches of the United States for the mission work among the Negroes and Indians, and many of the schools derive their support from this source. The number of Catholic Indians is approximately 100,000. There are 63 Catholic Indian schools, with nearly 5000 pupils. About 6000 Catholic Indian pupils are being educated in the government schools. 55 of the Catholic schools are boarding institutions. Many of these are of an industrial character, the policy of Catholics in respect to the education of the Indians having always been to give prominence to training in the manual and industrial arts. The success of this policy has been often testified to by government inspectors of Indian schools as well as by distinguished American statesmen. A limited support is accorded to these schools by the Federal Government. Under the so-called "Peace Policy" inaugurated by President Grant in 1870, about 80,000 Catholic Indians passed from Catholic to Protestant control. Through the efforts of the Bureau of Catholic Indian Missions, established some years later, together with the active efforts of members of the hierarchy, a new policy was inaugurated by the Government, under which it entered into contracts with the Catholic authorities concerned to provide for the support of Catholic Indian schools. Catholic schools multiplied rapidly in consequence until, in 1896, a policy was entered upon which involved the entire discontinuance of appropriations for denominational schools. In the year 1900 appropriations ceased. To keep up the schools, an organization known as the Society for the Preservation of the Faith among Indian Children was founded, and with the contributions from this society, together with the annual collection taken up for the purpose, and the donations of generous benefactors, many of the Catholic schools were kept alive. In 1904, under the administration of President Roosevelt, through the work of the Catholic Indian Bureau, a considerable allowance was made to certain Catholic schools by the Government from the Indian tribal funds, in answer to the petitions made by Catholic Indians. This policy has been continued up to the present, and in 1908 the appropriations made to Catholic schools in this way reached the sum of $111,586.90. Prominent among the agencies which have successfully laboured in behalf of Catholic Indian education has been the community of Sisters of the Blessed Sacrament for Indians and Coloured People, which was founded by Mother Katherine Drexel in 1889. These nuns now number 143. Orphanages The number of Catholic orphanages. in the United States in 1910 was 258: 45,343 children are cared for and educated in these institutions, which are found in every diocese, and which are in charge of religious communities, generally of Sisters. They are usually supported by the parishes or by the voluntary contributions of the faithful. A limited number are endowed. (See also EDUCATION OF THE DEAF AND DUMB; EDUCATION OF THE BLIND.) Secondary Schools There are two classes of Catholic secondary schools in the United States, those which are intended to prepare pupils for a higher education, and those which are closely connected with the parish schools and aim to fit at least the greater number of their pupils for active life. The former are found both in colleges for boys and in academies for girls. The latter are sometimes an integral part of the parish school system, or, again, they may be without direct connexion with the parish schools, although intended to complete and round out their work. A report made to the Catholic Educational Association in 1908 showed the existence of 85 Catholic colleges for boys, having pupils in collegiate as well as secondary courses. The number of students pursuing collegiate courses was 4232, the number in the secondary or high school departments was 10,137, There is a growing sentiment among Catholic college men in favour of at least a wider separation of the high school department from the college proper. In the "Catholic Directory" for 1910, 709 institutions are classed as academies for girls, with an attendance approximating 90,000. The larger number of these institutions have no collegiate departments, and are to be regarded as secondary schools. All the academies have, in fact, high school departments which are generally denominated the "academic course", with the exception of Trinity College, Washington; and nearly all have also elementary schools, divided into the "primary" and "preparatory" departments. Probably over one-half of the above total attendance is in these elementary departments. The greater part of the remaining half is in the academic or high school departments. Many of the larger institutions have developed collegiate departments that compare favourably with those of the best-equipped colleges for boys. The number of these colleges for girls as well as the number of their collegiate students is at present growing rapidly. The curriculum in the larger institutions thus consists of three main divisions, the elementary department, the academic or high school department, and the collegiate department, the latter two covering each four years. The smaller institutions have, as a rule, only the elementary and high school courses, although their high school or "academic" department is sometimes made to include a year or two of collegiate work. Besides these departments, the academies generally have well-graded and thorough courses in art and music, both vocal and instrumental, leading to corresponding honours or diplomas. The ideals of culture represented by these latter features are, in fact, a distinguishing feature of the work of the Catholic academy, and constitute one of its strongest appeals for popular favour and support. Within the past quarter of a century, many Catholic secondary schools or high schools have been developed in close connexion with the parish schools. Most often these high schools are directly attached to single parish schools. In some cases, however, they are "central" high schools, affiliated with a number of inferior schools. Sometimes, too, they stand alone, although receiving their pupils from the upper grades of the parish schools. Some of those which are attached to single parish schools have only one high school grade, but most of them have from two to four grades. The number of schools with four full grades is rapidly increasing, and there is also a notable tendency towards the establishment of central high schools. A committee of the Catholic Educational Association reported, in the year 1911, the existence of 304 Catholic high schools for boys only or for both boys and girls, apart from the academies for girls and the preparatory departments of colleges for boys, with a total attendance of 7902 boys of high school standing and 6160 girls. About one-half of these schools have four full high school grades, and 215 of them have courses in Latin. The total number of high school teachers was 1006: 157 of the schools derive their support from tuition-fees, 164 from parish revenues, and 5 are endowed. The investigations of the committee revealed the existence of a widespread movement for the development of facilities for secondary education in connexion with the parish school system. The movement springs from a popular demand, and is based on the fundamental idea of Catholic education. It is evident that the further progress of this movement is destined to have a highly important influence upon the parish schools as well as the academies and colleges. (See also EDUCATIONAL ASSOCIATION, CATHOLIC.) I. For history of schools (catechetical, monastic, etc.): DRANE. Christian Schools and Scholars (2 vols., London, 1867); BROTHER AZARIAS, Essays Educational (Chicago, 1896); WILLMANN, Didaktik, I (Brunswick, 1894), 211 sq.; KRIEG, Lehrbuch der Pädagogik (Paderborn, 1900), 73 sq.; DENK, Gesch. des Gallo-frankischen Unterrichts- und Bildungswesen (Mainz, 1892); KEHREIN, Ueberblick der Erziehung und des Unterrichts (Paderborn, 1899); MAITRE, Les écoles épiscopales et monast. de l'Occident (Paris, 1866). II. For primary education under ecclesiastical auspices in medieval times: LEACH, English Schools at the Reformation (Westminster, 1896); SPECHT, Gesch. des Unterrichtswesens in Deutschland (Stuttgart, 1885); RAVELET, Blessed J. B. de La Salle (Paris, 1888), chap. ii, Primary Schools of the Middle Ages; ALLAIN, L'instruction primaire en France avant la révolution (Paris, 1881); MAGEVNEY, Christian Education in the Dark Ages (New York, 1892); McCORMICK, series of articles in Catholic Educational Review, beginning Nov., 1911; MUTEAU, Les écoles et collèges en Province (Dijon, 1882). III. For principles of canon law regarding education: WERNZ, Jus decretalium (Rome, 1901), III, 57 sq.; VERING, Kirchenrecht (Freiburg, 1893). IV. For present condition of Catholic schools in England and Ireland, see Catholic University Bulletin, XIV (1908), 12 sq. and 121 sq., also Irish Educ. Review, vol. I, sq., first no., Oct., 1907; HALLINAN, Management of Primary Sch. in Irel (Dublin, 1911). V. For history of parochial schools in the United States: BURNS, Catholic School System in the United Slates (New York, 1908); Acta et decreta concilii Baltim. III (Baltimore, 1886); DESMOND, The Bible in the Public School (Boston, 1890); QUIGLEY, Compulsory Education (the Ohio case) (New York, 1894). AUSTRALIA.--MORAN, History of the Catholic Church in Australasia (Sydney, s. d.); Australian Year Book of the Commonwealth (1911); the Year Books of the various states (1911); Australasian Catholic Directory (1911); BIRT, Benedictine Pioneers in Australia (London, 1911); COGHLAN, Wealth and Progress of New South Wales (Sydney, 1898). CANADA.--MEILLEUR, Mémorial de l'Education au Bas-Canada (Quebec, 1876); CHAUVEAU, Instruction publique au Canada (Quebec, 1876); DESROSIERS, Ecoles Normales primares de la Province de Québec et leurs œuvres complémentaires (Montreal, 1909); GOSSELIN, L'Instruction au Canada sous le Régime Français (Quebec, 1911); DE CAZES, Instruction Publique dans la Province de Québec (Quebec, 1905); BOUCHER DE LA BRUÈRE, Education et Constitution (Montreal, 1904); PÂQUET, L'Eglise et l'Education au Canada (Quebec, 1909); DESROSIERS AND FOURNET, La race française en Amérique (Montreal, 1911); BOURASSA, Les Ecoles du Nord-Ouest (Montreal, 1905); DEROME, Le Canada Ecclésiastique (1911); CHAPAIS, Congrégations enseignantes et Brevet de Capacité (Quebec, 1893); Congrès d'Education des Canadiens-Français (Ottawa, 1910); PIERLOT, Législation scolaire de la Province de Québec (Brussels, 1911); Rapports annuels des Surintendants ou des Ministres de l'Education (1909-10); DIONNE, Vie de C. F. Painchaud, fondateur du Collège de Sainte-Anne de la Pocatière (Quebec, 1894); CHOQUETTE, Histoire du Séminaire de Saint-Hyacinthe (1911); DOUVILLE, Histoire du Séminaire de Nicolet (1903); RICHARD, Histoire du Séminaire des Trois-Rivières (Three Rivers, 1885); DUGAS, Noces de diamant du Séminaire de Joliette (1911); Souvenir des fêtes jubilaires du Collège Sainte-Marie (Montreal, 1898); ROY, L'Université Laval et les fêtes du Cinquantenaire (Quebec, 1903); Les Ursulines des Trois-Rivières (Three Rivers, 1888); Les Ursulines de Québec (Quebec, 1863); FAILLON, Vie de la Mère Bourgeois (Paris, 1853); ALEXIS, La Province ecclésiastique d'Ottawa (1897); SISTERS OF THE CONGREGATION OF NOTRE DAME, Histoire de l'Eglise du Canada (1908); Documentary History of Education in Upper Canada (Toronto); Schools and Colleges of Ontario (1792-1910) (Toronto, 1910); HODGINS, The Legislation and History of Separate Schools in Upper Canada (Toronto, 1897); IDEM, Historical Educational Papers and Documents of Ontario (1792-1853) (Toronto, 1911); BURWASH, Egerton Ryerson (Toronto, 1906); LEX in La Nouvelle-France, (Quebec, Jan., March, April, 1910); LINDSAY, La Nouvelle-France (1903); L'Enseignement Primaire (Quebec); Le Collégien de Saint-Hyacinthe. ENGLAND.--LEACH, English Schools at the Reformation (London, 1896); BURTON, Life and Times of Bishop Challoner (London, 1909); WARD, Dawn of Catholic Revival (London, 1909); AMHERST, History of Catholic Emancipation and Progress, 1771-1820 (London, 1886); LILLY AND WALLIS, Manual of the Law Specially Affecting Catholics (London, 1893); WATSON, The English Grammar Schools to 1660 (Cambridge, 1908); DE MONTMORENCY, State Intervention in English Education (Cambridge, 1902). GRANAM BALFOUR, Educational Systems of Great Britain and Ireland (Oxford, 1903); WALTON, A Retrospect in The Month (March, 1906); London Board of Education Reports; Lists of Public Elementary Schools (1910); Regulations for Training Elementary Teachers (1909); List of Recognized Secondary Schools (1910); Report of Board of Education (1909-1910). Reports of the Annual Conferences of Catholic Colleges (Birmingham, 1907-10); Reports of Conferences of Catholic Young Men's Society (Liverpool, in recent years); articles In The Month and The Dublin Review (1905-1910). IRELAND.-- Reports on Education (IrelanD) Commissions (1791, 1810, 1825, 1854, 1879, 1887); Manual Instruction (Ireland), Report of Commission (1897); Intermediate Education (Ireland), Report of Commission (1899); DALE, Report on Primary Education (1904); DALE AND STEPHENS, Report on Intermediate Education (1905); DOYLE, Essay on Education and the State of Ireland (Dublin, 1880); Intermediate and University Education in Ireland, by a Committee of Irish Catholics (Dublin, 1877); CULLEN, Pastoral Letters and other Writings (Dublin, 1882); WYSE, Notes on Education Reform in Ireland, compiled by his niece, WINIFREDE M. WYSE (Waterford, 1901); GRAHAM BALFOUR, Educational Systems, Great Britain and Ireland (Oxford, 1903); BRERETON, Reports of U. S. Commissioner of Education, vol. 1 for 1910; BARRY O'BRIEN, Fifty Years of Concessions to Ireland, I (London, 1885); GREEN, The Making of Ireland and its Undoing (London, 1909); O'RIORDAN, Reply to Dr. Starkie on School Managers (Dublin, 1903); CURRY, Reply to Dr. Starkie on School Managers (Dublin, 1903). SCOTLAND.--GORDON, The Catholic Church in Scotland from the Suppression of the Hierarchy to the Present Time (Aberdeen, 1875); BELLESHEIM, History of the Catholic Church in Scotland (Edinburgh and London, 1890); Scotch Education Department Reports (Edinburgh and London, 1910-11). UNITED STATES.--BURNS, The Cath. School System in the United States (New York, 1908); Catholic Directory (annual issues); Reports of the Cath. Educational Association (annual); Reports of the Superintendents of Schools, especially of the Dioceses of Philadelphia, New York, Cincinnati, and Pittsburg; Amer. Eccl. Review, III, and passim; Cath. World (New York), passim; Amer. Cath. Quart. Rev., passim; Educational Briefs, published by the Rev. Supt. of Schools, Philadelphia; Amer. Cath. Quarterly Researches, passim; SHEA, Hist. of the Cath. Church in the United States (Akron, Ohio, 1886-93); BENAVIDES, Memorial to the King of Spain (1650); The Cath. Church in the United States of America: I, The Religious Communities (New York, 1908); BROWNSON, Literary, Scientific and Political Views (New York, 1893); Concilii plenarii Baltimorensis tertii, acta et decreta (Baltimore, 1886); Conc. provin. et plen. Baltimorensis decreta (Baltimore, 1853); BOUQUILLON, Education: To Whom Does it Belong? (Baltimore, 1891); HOLAIND, The Parent First (New York, 1891); CONWAY, The State Last (New York, 1892); MAES, The Life of Rev. Charles Nerinckx (Cincinnati, 1880); SADLIER, Elizabeth Seton (New York, 1905); The Story of Father Samuel (Mazzuchelli) and Saint Clara (Chicago, 1904); MANNIX, Memoirs of Sister Louise (Boston, 1907); SISTERS OF MERCY, Rev. Mother M. Xavier Werde, The Story of Her Life (Boston, 1902); ABBELEN, Mother Caroline Friess (St. Louis. 1893); Life and Life-work of Mother Theodore Guerin, by a member of the Congregation of the Sisters of Providence (New York, 1904); A Story of Fifty Years, from the Annals of the Cong. of the Sisters of the Holy Cross (Notre Dame, Indiana, 1905); Gleanings of Fifty Years--The Sisters of the Holy Names im the Northwest (1909); KRUSZKA, Historya Polska w Ameryce (Milwaukee, 1905). J.A. BURNS Apostolic Schools Apostolic Schools Where the Church is normally organized the recruitment of the secular clergy is provided for by means of ecclesiastical seminaries. The little, or junior, seminaries commence the work, the theological seminaries complete it. Missionary countries are dependent for a supply of clergy on foreign missionary colleges and on apostolic schools. The object of apostolic schools is to cultivate vocations for the foreign missions. Apostolic schools, as distinct from junior ecclesiastical seminaries, owe their origin to Father Alberic de Foresta, S.J. (b. 1818; d. 1876). That zealous priest found in existence many works of zeal for the spread of the Gospel -- "The Apostleship of Prayer", "The Society for the Propagation of the Faith", "The Holy Childhood" -- but, excellent as these associations are, Father de Foresta felt that they were doomed to be inefficient unless there could be found a supply of apostolic men to preach the Gospel and to administer the sacraments. Taught by experience in the guidance of souls, he felt convinced that many pious youths, prevented by want of means or other circumstances from entering the ranks of the secular clergy, possessed a true vocation to the ecclesiastical state. He felt a desire to cultivate such vocations, and to utilize them for the advantage of the foreign missions. He knew that the Church in her legislation (Council of Trent, Sess. XXIII, cap. xviii, de Ref.) had expressed a wish that the children of the poor should be admitted to the sacred ministry, and should receive a gratuitous and exclusively ecclesiastical education to prepare them for it. He therefore formed the design of opening a school where youths who gave promise of an ecclesiastical vocation, and who were disposed to go and labour on foreign missions, might be properly trained. With the approval of his superiors, Father de Foresta opened the first apostolic school at Avignon in 1865. The conditions of admission were of two kinds: those which regarded the pupils and those which regarded their parents. As regards the former the conditions were: (a) that the pupil should be at least twelve years of age; (b) possess a sufficient elementary education; (c) have good health; (d) present a certificate of good conduct and piety from his parish priest; (e) have a sincere desire to serve God either as a priest in a missionary country, or as a religious in an order devoted to the foreign missions. As regards parents the conditions were: (a) that they should give their consent to their son's entering the school and a written agreement not to oppose his vocation nor require his return home during the school vacations; (b) that they should engage to receive the pupil back if the superiors of the school judged it advisable for him to devote himself to a secular calling. The course of studies in the apostolic school comprised a through training in the Latin and Greek classics, in modern languages, and in mathematics, so as to prepare the pupil to take up philosophy in an ecclesiastical seminary or to enter the novitiate of a religious order. The residence of the scholars was near one of the colleges of the Society of Jesus. The pupils attended classes along with the students of the college, and thus had the advantage of emulation and competition with others while living under ecclesiastical discipline in their own house. For the material support of the school Father Foresta depended partly on the voluntary fees paid by the parents of the pupils, according to their means, and partly, or rather chiefly, on the charitable contributions of the faithful, who had come to understand that it is a greater work of piety to educate a priest than to build a church. The good work commenced by Alberic de Foresta in 1865 prospered. In 1868 similar apostolic schools were established at Amiens and Turin; in 1869 one was opened at Poitiers, in 1871 at Turnhout in Belgium and at New Orleans, in 1873 at Bordeaux, in 1874 at Tananarive, in 1877 at Dole and at Monaco, and in 1879 at Boulogne-sur-Mer. Pius IX, in a Brief dated 12 April, 1867, blessed the work of the apostolic schools, and in Briefs dated 30 June, 1870, and 15 May, 1877, repeated his approval and bestowed indulgences on them and on those who promoted them. Anticlerical legislation in France since 1880 has been an obstacle to the work. But like the Apostles, who when persecuted in one city fled to another, the superiors of these schools have not abandoned their pious enterprise. The apostolic school of Avignon has been several times transferred from one place to another, and is now located at Eremo Lanzo, in the neighbourhood of Turin, where it has about 72 pupils. The school at Bordeaux has been transferred to Vitoria in Spain, where it carries on its work with fifty pupils. The Amiens apostolic school has been transferred to Littlehampton, in England, and thence to Thieu, in the Diocese of Tournai, Belgium. The school at Poitiers still exists. In 1881 the number of students in the schools founded by Father de Foresta amounted to between four hundred and five hundred, and they had already given about five hundred missioners to the Church. When the schools of Avignon, Amiens, Turnhout, Poitiers, and Bordeaux had been only about thirty years in existence they had already educated about one thousand missionaries. The Bordeaux school alone has up to 1911 produced two hundred and fifty priests, secular and regular. Besides the apostolic schools on the Continent, the Jesuit Fathers possess a flourishing apostolic school at Mungret, near Limerick, in Ireland. The Mungret apostolic school owes its origin to the Rev. William Ronan, S.J. In the course of his missionary work throughout Ireland Father Ronan had met many boys who gave signs of an ecclesiastical vocation, but who, from lack of means or other causes, were unable to attain the object of their aspirations. Father Ronan was eventually appointed rector of the Jesuit college at Limerick, and he then conceived the idea of opening an apostolic school in connection with that establishment. On 24 September, 1880, a commencement was made with eight pupils. Two years later the Jesuit Fathers acquired possession of the government agricultural college, built on the site of the famous monastic school of Mungret, which dated from the days of St. Patrick and had been confiscated at the Reformation. There, under the title of Mungret College, the apostolic school was established, and a new department opened for lay students. Father Ronan, its first rector, visited the United States in 1884 and had an opportunity of explaining to several members of the American hierarchy the object of his apostolic school. He obtained permission to appeal to the faithful for means to enlarge the school buildings and to found burses. His appeals met with a liberal response. On his return to Ireland he enlarged the buildings of Mungret College and founded several burses for the education of students. In 1911 the number of apostolic scholars in the college was seventy-three. The course of studies extends over a period of about seven years, and on leaving the school the scholars are qualified to enter a theological seminary, or the novitiate of a religious order. The scholars attend the classes of the Jesuit college at Mungret. The efficiency of the teaching is attested by the success which the pupils have obtained in the Intermediate examinations, and in those of the (late) Royal University of Ireland. In a list of one hundred and sixty-three former pupils given in the "Mungret Apostolic Record", 1910, there are to be found one M.A., sixty B.A.'s, and nine who in their higher theological studies obtained the degree of Doctor of Theology. In 1910 the number of pupils who left the school to go on to higher ecclesiastical studies was twelve. The average yearly number since 1886 has been eight. The Mungret students are permitted vacations at their homes and are at full liberty to study for the secular mission in a foreign missionary country, or to enter a religious order having charge of foreign missions. The list of past pupils above referred to shows how this liberty is exercised: out of one hundred and sixty three pupils, forty-nine entered the Society of Jesus, seven became Redemptorists, 4 Vincentians, 2 Passionists, 2 Dominicans, 1 a Discalced Carmelite; all the others, 98 in number, entered the ranks of the secular clergy. The Mungret apostolic scholars are to be found in China, India, the Philippine Islands, Africa, Australia, and America. In the United States a Union of Mungret Apostolic Alumni was formed in 1910. Means for the support of the school are derived partly from payments made by the parents of the pupils, and partly from endowments and subscriptions made by pious benefactors. Benefactors who make a donation of X700 ($3500), a sum sufficient to found a burse in perpetuity, are styled founders. Those who give £180 ($900), a sum sufficient for the support of a student for six years, are called protectors, while those who give £1 ($5) annually are called subscribers. All share in the indulgences granted by the Holy See to those who promote apostolic schools; and in the weekly Masses and prayers offered for benefactors, as well as in the monthly Mass which all graduates of the school who become priests are pledged to celebrate during life for their benefactors. The example set by Father de Foresta has found many imitators. Most religious orders and congregations have established apostolic schools for the recruitment of their own ranks or for the foreign missions. Amongst them may be mentioned the Vincentians, the Salesians, the Fathers of the Holy Ghost, the Missionaries of St. Joseph's, Mill Hill, the White Fathers, the African Missionaries of Lyons, the Missionaries of the Sacred Heart, the Missionaries of Mont-St-Michel, the Dominicans, Franciscans, and Redemptorists. The Fathers of the Congregation of the Mission have several flourishing apostolic schools: at Dax in France, with 112 pupils; Wernhoutsburg in Holland, 150; Ingelmunster in Belgium, transferred in 1904 from Loos near Lille with 60 pupils; Vienna, 50 pupils; Perryville, Missouri, 48 pupils; Germantown, Pennsylvania, with 70 pupils. Of these the schools at Dax and at Wernhoutsburg may be taken as types. In 1864 there was founded at the birthplace of St. Vincent de Paul an establishment representing the various charitable works instituted by the saint. Out of that establishment there sprang a technical and a secondary school. Some of the boys manifested a desire to enter the ecclesiastical state, and in 1871 an apostolic school was commenced with nine pupils. In a few years the number increased to 40, and in 1911 it amounted to 112, consisting of boys from various departments of France, together with two Spaniards, nine Portuguese, two Greeks, and two Algerians. The pupils present themselves of their own accord with the consent of their parents. An essential condition of admission is the desire to prepare for the ecclesiastical state. The pupils are free to choose to study for the foreign missions, or to return to their own dioceses. At the close of each year those who give no solid promise of an ecclesiastical vocation are dismissed. In the higher classes only those are retained who manifest a vocation for the Congregation of the Mission. About one in three of the pupils enters the congregation. The others become priests in their native dioceses, or enter religious communities, or return to secular life. The course of studies, comprising the classics, modern languages, and mathematics, is similar to that followed in the Catholic secondary schools of France, and ends with rhetoric, after which the pupils who have remained up to the highest class enter the novitiate of the Congregation of the Mission. The resources of the school are derived to some extent from payments made by the parents of the pupils, but chiefly from allocations granted by the superior general of the Congregation of the Mission. The past pupils of the school are to be found at present in the vicariates entrusted to the Congregation in China, Persia, Abyssinia, and Madagascar. The school at Wernhoutsburg was founded in 1882, and in object and organization resembles that at the Berceau de St-Vincent near Dax. The number of students in 1911 was 150. Besides instruction in the Classics and mathematics there are classes in French, Dutch, German, and English. From twelve to fifteen students annually enter the novitiates of the Congregation. The pension payable by the students is 300 francs (about $60) a year. Those who have no vocation for the Congregation of the Mission, but desire to complete their studies in the school, pay a pension of 500 francs ($100). The Salesian Fathers, founded by Ven. Giovanni Melchior Bosco, possess several flourishing apostolic schools, such as those at Tournai in Belgium, at Nyon in Switzerland, at Le Catel in Guernsey. The object of the Salesian apostolic schools is to foster the ecclesiastical vocations of boys who on account of poverty are unable to enter the diocesan seminaries. The conditions of admission are good conduct and a desire and aptitude for the priesthood. The course of studies prepares them to enter a diocesan seminary, a foreign missionary college, or a religious order, in the choice of which they are left full liberty. The most important of the Salesian schools is that at 63 Boulevard Leopold, Tournai, Belgium, founded in 1895. The number of pupils in 1911 is 170, of whom 60 entered in 1910. The establishment has received encouragment from the cardinals of Mechlin, Cologne, Ravenna, from the cardinals in France, and from more than fifty archbishops and bishops. The Salesian school in Guernsey has seventy pupils. There is also a preparatory Salesian school at Surrey House, Surrey Lane, Battersea, London. The Fathers of the Holy Ghost have an apostolic school at Grange-over-Sands in the Diocese of Liverpool and an apostolic college with 60 students at Cornwells, Archdiocese of Philadelphia, United States. The Fathers of St. Joseph's Missionary College, Mill Hill, London, have an apostolic school (St. Peter's) at Freshfield, Liverpool, founded in 1884, where youths between the ages of fifteen and twenty are admitted to study the humanities in preparation for entrance at St. Joseph's College. The present number of students is forty-seven. The chief conditions of admission are, a sound English education, recommendation from a priest, and a small nominal pension. The work of the Mill Hill Missionary Fathers in Uganda, Madras, Punjab, and the Philippine Islands is the fruit of the education begun at the Freshfield school. Other congregations have similar apostolic schools. The Petits Cleres de Saint Joseph have one at Suse in the North of Italy. The number of pupils in 1910 was eighty, and the establishment has already given more than three hundred missionaries, including priests and brothers, to the Church. The Missionaries of the Sacred Heart have established, for the recruitment of their own order, an organization called "La petite oeuvre du Sacre Coeur pour l'encouragement des vocations sacerdotales et apostoliques". The number of pupils in its various establishments, one of which is at Fribourg in Switzerland, is about six hundred. This institute has already produced more than three hundred priests and two bishops. The congregation of the White Fathers (Peres Blancs) have one hundred and sixty students in their various apostolic schools preparing for missionary work in North Africa. The Lyons Society of African Missions have a preparatory school at Cork in Ireland, and in their various schools they have a total of three hundred students. The Company of Mary have an apostolic school at Romsey, Hants, whither it was recently transferred from Belgium, while the Fathers of St-Edme-de-Pontigny have an apostolic school at Hitchin, recently transferred from Mont-Saint-Michel in Normandy. The Franciscans, the Dominicans, the Passionists, the Oblates of Mary Immaculate, and the Redemptorists also have apostolic schools for the recruitment of their own orders. It has been impossible to obtain complete statistics of all existing apostolic schools. The following figures give the status of the chief apostolic schools in 1911: Jesuit, Eremo di Lanzo (transferred from Avignon), 72 pupils; Vitoria (transferred from Bordeaux), 50 pupils; Turnhout, Belgium; Poitiers; Thieu, 82 pupils; Mungret, Ireland, 73 pupils; Vincentian, Dax, 112 pupils; Wernhoutsburg, 150 pupils; Ingelmunster, 60 pupils; Vienna, 50 pupils; Perryville, Missouri, 48 pupils; Germantown, Pennsylvania, 70 pupils; Salesian, Tournai, 170 pupils; Guernsey, 70 pupils; St. Joseph's, Mill Hill, St. Peter's, Freshfield, 47 pupils; Petits Clercs de Saint-Joseph, Suse, Italy, 80 pupils; Fathers of the Holy Ghost, Cornwells, Pennsylvania, 60 pupils; Missionaries of the Sacred Heart, in various schools and colleges, 600 pupils; White Fathers, in various schools and colleges, 160 pupils; Society of the Africa Missions, in various schools and colleges, 300 pupils. This account of the apostolic schools shows how the Holy Spirit is at work in the church, calling and preparing vessels of election to preach the name of God to Gentiles. The work of apostolic schools is, according to the words of Pius IX, "salutary and useful" (salutare et utile). "It is", wrote Monseigneur de Ségur, "one of the most beautiful flowers which the garden of the Church presents at the present day to the eyes of God and men". The graduates of those schools are apostles, and those who contribute to their education have a share in the work and are partakesrs in the reward of apostles. DE CHAZOURNE, Alberic de Foresta, S. J., fondateur des Ecoles Apostoliques, sa vie, et son oeurre (Paris, 1881); DELBREL, Pour repeupler nos seminaires (Paris, 1907); L'Ecole apostolique de Bordeaux, transfere a Vitoria, Espagne, Compte rendu annuel 1909-1910 (Bordeaux); L'Ecole apostolique d'Avignon et de Dole transfere a N. D. des Anges, Eremo di Lanzo Hxx ItalieAnnees 1909-1910 (Turin, 1911); Le recrutement sacerdotal in Revue Trimestrielle, no. 38 (Paris, June, 1910); Manuel des Oeuvres. Institutions Religieuses et charitables de Paris (Paris, 1911); Annales de la Congregation de la Mission (July, 1911); The Apostolic Record: Mungret College, I (Limerick, September, 1910); St Joseph's Foreign Missionary Advocate. A quarterly illustrated record, VI (Mill Hill, London, Spring quarter, 1909); no. 11; CAHILL, Mungret, A Brochure; The Mungret Annual, (1898-11). Besides the books and pamphlets above mentioned the writer of this article has derived much information from letters received from the superiors of the apostolic schools at Eremo di Lanzo, Vitoria, Dax, Wernhoutsburg, Tournai, Thieu and St. Joseph's Missionary College, Mill Hill. PATRICK BOYLE Clerks Regular of the Pious Schools Clerks Regular of the Pious Schools Called also Piarists, Scolopli, Escolapios, Poor Clerks of the Mother of God, and the Pauline Congregation, a religious order founded in Rome in 1597 by St. Joseph Calasanctius. As a member of the Confraternity of Christian Doctrine he went about the country instructing the people, and his experience convinced him of the necessity of providing the children of the poor with religious instruction at an early age. Antonio Brendoni, pastor of Santa Dorotea in Trastevere, placed two rooms at his disposal and assisted him in the work, in which they were afterwards joined by two other priests. It was not long before the reputation of the school increased the attendance to such an extent that Calasanctius removed it to a building within the city, where he took up his residence with his companions. When two years later the school was again removed, this time to the Vestri Palace in the vicinity of Sant' Andrea della Valle, community life was inaugurated among the associates, and Clement VIII showed his approval of the work by ordering the payment of a yearly allowance of 200 scudi for rent of the house. Criticism ensued which led to an inspection of the schools by Cardinals Antoniani and Baronius, which resulted satisfactorily, the approval of Paul V was even more pronounced than that of his predecessor. In 1612 the growth of the schools necessitated the purchase of the Torres Palace, and on 25 March, 1617 Calasanctius and his companions received the religious habit, the saint changing his name to Joseph of the Mother of God, thus inaugurating the practice of dropping the family name on entering the religious life. The most noted of his early companions were Gaspare Dragonette, who joined the saint at the age of 95 and died a saintly death in 1628 at the age of 120; Bernardino Pannicola, later Bishop of Ravello; Juan Garcia, afterwards general of the order; the learned Gellio Ghellini; Tomasso Vittoria; Viviandi de Colle; Melchiore Albacchi, etc. The congregation was made a religious order 18 Nov., 1621 by a Brief of Gregory XV, under the name of "Congregatio Paulina Clericorum regularium pauperum Matris Dei scholarum piarum". The Constitutions were approved 31 Jan., 1622, when the new order was given the privileges of the mendicant orders and Calasanctius was named general, his four assistants being Pietro Casani, Viviano Vivani, Francesco Castelli, and Paolo Ottonelli. On 7 May of the same year the novitiate of St. Onofrio was opened. In 1656 Alexander VII rescinded the privilege of solemn vows granted by Gregory XV, and added to the simple vows an oath of perseverance in the congregation. This was again altered by Clement IX in 1669, who restored the Piarists to the condition of regulars. But petitions from members who hesitated to bind themselves by solemn vows led Clement X in 1670 to issue a Brief which empowered the general of the Piarists to dispense from solemn vows laymen or clerics in minor orders, while ordained clerics in possession of a sufficient patrimony or a benefice were restored to the jurisdiction of their bishops. The Piarists are exempt from episcopal jurisdiction and subject only to the general, who is elected every six years and has four assistants. In virtue of a Brief of Alexander VIII (1690) they ceased to be discalced. Their habit is closed in front with three leathern buttons, and they wear a short mantle. The order spread rapidly even during the founder's lifetime and at present it has nine provinces (Italy, Austria, Bohemia, Moravia, Hungary, Poland, Spain, Chile, and Central America), 121 houses with 2100 members and about 40,000 pupils. The Piarists have won distinction in the sphere of education. Their first care is to provide free education for poor children, but they also receive pupils from the middle classes and the nobility, and since 1700 they have taught besides the elementary branches the liberal arts and sciences. At the time of their foundation in Poland and Lithuania, Clement XII formally commissioned them to teach the higher studies. The course consists of nine classes, the plan of studies is uniform, as are also the textbooks, which to a great extent are compiled by members of the order. Like the Jesuits they devote special attention to the acting of Latin dramas by the students. A member of the order, Francis Hermann Czech (d. 1847), was very successful in his work of teaching the deaf and dumb. Among the writers and learned men of the order are the general Pietro Francesco of the Immaculate Conception, author of the "Polygraphia sacra seu Eleucidarium biblicum hist.-myst". (Augsburg, 1724); Philip of St. James, who edited the chief Sentences of the "Maxima Sanctorum Patrum Bibliotheca" (Lyons, 1719); Arn. Zeglicki, whose "Bibliotheca gnomico hist.-symb.-politica" was published at Warsaw in 1742; Alexis a S. Andrea Alexi (d. 1761); moral theologian; Antonius a Santo Justo, author of "Schola pia Aristotelico-Thomistica" (Saragossa, 1745); Gottfrid a S. Elisabetha Uhlich (d. 1794), professor of heraldry and numismatics; Augustine Odobrina, who was actively associated with Leibniz; Adrian Rauch, historian; Josef Fengler (d. 1802), Bishop of Raab; Remigius Döttler, professor of physics at the University of Vienna; Franz Lang, rector of the same university; the general Giovanni Inghirami (d. 1851), astronomer; Johann N. Ehrlich (d. 1864), professor of theology at the University of Prague; A. Leonetti, author of a biography of Alexander VI (Bologna, 1880); Filippo Cecchi; Karl Feyerfeil, mathematician; and Franz Kraus, philologian. Many members of the order led lives of eminent sanctity. In his Life of St. Joseph Calasanctius, Tosetti gives a list of 54 who between 1615 and 1756 died edifying deaths, among them Petrus Casani (d. 1647), the first novice master of the order; the fourth superior general, Cosimo Chiara (d. 1688); Petrus Andreas Taccioni (d. 1672); the lay-brother Philip Bosio (d. 1662); Antonio Muscia (d. 1665); and Eusebius Amoretti (d. 1685). CASSANOVAS Y SANZ, Jose de Calasanz y su Instituto (Saragossa, 1904); HELYOT, Hist. des ordres religieux (Paris, 1792), IV, 281 sqq.; BRENDLER, Das wirken der PP. Piaristen, etc. (Vienna, 1896); SEYFERT, Ordens-Regeln der Piaristen (Halle, 1783): SCHALLER, Kurze Lebensbeschreibungen gelehrter Manner aus dem Orden der frommen Schulen (Prague, 1799); F. LOS HORANYI, Scriptores piarum scholarum (Buda, l809); SCHALLER, Gedanken uber die Ordensrerfassung der Piaristen u. ihr Lehrart (Prague, l805); HEIMBUCHER, Orden u. Kongregationen, III (Paderborn, l908). BLANCHE M. KELLY Burghard Freiherr von Schorlemer-Alst Burghard Freiherr von Schorlemer-Alst Social reformer, b. at Heringhausen, Westphalia, 21 Oct., 1825; d. at Alst, 17 March, 1895. He received his early education at home from the domestic chaplain and then studied as a cadet at the Royal Saxon Military College at Dresden. After this he was a Prussian officer in an Uhlan regiment, and in 1849 took part in the campaign in Baden. In 1852 he left the army, married the Countess Droste zu Vischering, whose maiden name was Baroness von Imbsen, and obtained possession of the manorial estate of Alst in the circle of Burgsteinfurt. In 1862 he published his celebrated pamphlet "Die Lage des Bauernstandes in Westfalen und was ihm not thut" (The condition of the peasant class in Westphalia and what it needs). In this pamphlet he proposed the founding of an independent peasant union. In the same year the first two societies were formed, and, following the example of these, peasant unions were formed in nearly all the districts of Westphalia, so that by the end of the sixties there were nearly 10,000 members. Schorlemer worked both by speech and in writing for the development of this great undertaking. In 1863 he was made a member of the Prussian agricultural board; in 1865 he was the temporary president of the central agricultural union, and in 1867 he was made the manager of the same. As such he founded the agricultural schools at Ludinghausen and Herford. In 1870 he was also the manager of the provincial agricultural union of Westphalia. His parliamentary career began in 1870. In the years 1870-89 Schorlemer was a member of the lower house of the Prussian Diet; in 1870-89 and 1890 a member of the imperial Reichstag. He belonged to the Centre party, and during the Kulturkampf was an indefatigable champion of the Church. He was considered one of the best speakers and debaters in each of these parliaments; possessing both acuteness and racy humor, "ruthless but honorable", as Bismarck said; he fought unweariedly the opponents of the Church in the Kulturkampf. In 1893 he came into conflict with the Centre because he demanded a better presentation of agricultural interests. His permanent reputation, however, rests upon his organization of the peasants. In 1871 the various peasant unions were dissolved, and on 30 Nov., 1871 one peasant union, the Westphalian Peasant Union, as it exists at present, was founded. Its purpose is the moral, intellectual, and economic improvement of the peasant class, on a foundation of Christian principles. In 1890 the union had 20,500 members, in 1895 25,000, and now has over 30,000. The activities of the association extend in all directions; among its branches are: loan and savings banks, testing stations for agricultural machinery and implements, department of building, department of forestry, insurance against liability, association for the purchase and sale of articles necessary in agriculture, boards of arbitration and amicable adjustment of difficulties, legal bureau, etc. The association is not only a blessing to Westphalia, but also for the whole of Germany, for it has been the model for the formation of a number of other peasant associations. Many honors were conferred upon the founder of this organization. Among other marks of distinction he was made in 1884 a member of the council of state, and in 1891 a member for life of the upper house of the Prussian Diet. The Emperor William II had a very high regard for him. The pope appointed him privy chamberlain and commander of the orders of Gregory and Sylvester. In 1902 the peasant union of Westphalia erected a monument to him in front of the parliament building of the provincial diet at Munster. Schorlemer, as even non-Catholic newspapers admitted, was a nobleman in the true sense of the word, a harmonious and thorough man; one who successfully combined an ideal conception of life with practical aims; his motto was "Love and justice". SCHORLEMER-ALST Reden gehalten 1872-79 (Osnabruck, 1880); BUER Dr. Burghard Freiherr von Schorlemer-Alst (Munster 1902). KLEMENS LÖFFLER Gaspar Schott Gaspar Schott German physicist, b. 5 Feb., 1608, at Königshofen; d. 12 or 22 May, 1666, at Augsburg. He entered the Society of Jesus 20 Oct., 1627, and on account of the disturbed political condition of Germany was sent to Sicily to complete his studies. While there he taught moral theology and mathematics in the college of his order at Palermo, He also studied for a time at Rome under the well-known P. Kircher. He finally returned to his native land after an absence of some thirty years, and spent the remainder of his life at Augsburg engaged in the teaching of science and in literary work. Both as professor and as author he did much to awaken an interest in scientific studies in Germany. He was a laborious student and was considered one of the most learned men of his time, while his simple life and deep piety made him an object of veneration to the Protestants as well as to the Catholics of Augsburg. Schott also carried on an extensive correspondence with the leading scientific men of his time, notably with Otto von Guericke, the inventor of the air-pump, of whom he was an ardent admirer. He was the author of a number of works on mathematics, physics, and magic. They are a mine of curious facts and observations and were formerly much read. His most interesting work is the "Magia universalis naturæ et artis", 4 vols., Würtzburg, 1657-1659, which contains a collection of mathematical problems and a large number of physical experiments, notably in optics and acoustics. His "Mechanicahydraulica-pneumatica" (Würtzburg, 1657) contains the first description of von Guericke's air-pump. He also published "Pantometricum Kircherianum" (Würtzburg, 1660); "Physica curiosa" (Würtzburg, 1662), a supplement to the "Magia universalis"; "Anatomia physico-hydrostatica fontium et fluminum" (Würtzburg, 1663), and a "Cursus mathematicus" which passed through several editions. He also edited the "Itinerarium extacticum" of Kircher and the "Amussis Ferdidindea" of Curtz. HELLER, Geschichte der Physik, II (Stuttgart, 1882), 144; SOMMERVOGEL, Biblioth. de la Comp. de Jésus, VII (Paris, 1896), 903; ST. LÉGER, Notice des ouvrages de G. Schott (Paris, 1765). H. M. BROCK Schottenkloster Schottenklöster (Scotch Monasteries). A name applied to the monastic foundations of Irish and Scotch missionaries on the European continent, particularly to the Scotch Benedictine monasteries in Germany, which in the beginning of the thirteenth century were combined into one congregation whose abbot-general was the Abbot of the monastery of St. James at Ratisbon. The first Schottenklöster of which we have any knowledge was Säckingen in Baden, founded by the Irish missionary, St. Fridolin, towards the end of the fifth century. The same missionary is said to have founded a Schottenklöster at Constance. A century later St. Columbanus arrived on the continent with twelve companions and founded Annegray, Luxeuil, and Fontaines in France, Bobbio in Italy. During the seventh century the disciples of Columbanus and other Irish and Scotch missionaries founded a long list of monasteries in what is now France, Germany, Belgium, and Switzerland. The best known are: St. Gall in Switzerland, Disibodenberg in the Rhine Palatinate, St. Paul's at Besancon, Lure and Cusance in the Diocese of Besancon, Beze in the Diocese of Langres, Remiremont and Moyenmoutier in the Diocese of Toul, Fosses in the Diocese of Liege, Mont-St-Michel at Peronne, Ebersmunster in Lower Alsace, St. Martin at Cologne. The rule of St. Columbanus, which was originally followed in most of these monasteries, was soon superseded by that of St. Benedict. Later Irish missionaries founded Honau in Baden (about 721), Murbach in Upper Alsace (about 727), Altomunster in Upper Bavaria (about 749), while other Irish and Scotch monks restored St-Michel in Thiérache (940), Walsort near Namur (945), and, at Cologne, the Monasteries of St. Clement (about 953), St. Martin (about 980), St. Symphorian (about 990), and St. Pantaléon (1042). Towards the end of the eleventh and in the twelfth century, a number of Schottenklöster, intended for Scotch and Irish monks exclusively, sprang up in Germany. About 1072, three Scotch monks, Marian, John, and Candidus, took up their abode at the little Church of Weih-St-Peter at Ratisbon. Their number soon increased and a larger monastery was built for them (about 1090) by Burgrave Otto of Ratisbon and his brother Henry. This became the famous Scotch Monastery of St. Jacob at Ratisbon, the mother-house of a series of other Schottenklöster. It founded the Abbeys of St. Jacob at Würzburg (about 1134), St. Aegidius at Nuremberg (1140), St. Jacob at Constance (1142), Our Blessed Lady at Vienna (1158), St. Nicolas at Memmingen (1168), Holy Cross at Eichstätt (1194), and the Priory of Kelheim (1231). These, together with the Abbey of St. Jacob at Erfurt (1036), and the Priory of Weih-St-Peter at Ratisbon formed the famous congregation of the German Schottenklöster which was erected by Innocent III in 1215, with the Abbot of St. Jacob at Ratisbon as abbot-general. In the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries most of these monasteries were on the decline, partly for want of Scotch or Irish monks, partly on account of great laxity of discipline and financial difficulties. In consequence, the abbeys of Nuremberg and Vienna were withdrawn from the Scotch congregation and repeopled by German monks in 1418. The Abbey of St. Jacob Würzburg was left without any monks after the death of Abbot Philip in 1497. It was then repeopled by German monks and in 1506 joined the congregation of Bursfeld. In 1595, however, it was restored to the Scotch congregation and continued to be occupied by Scotch monks until its suppression in 1803. The abbey of Constance began to decline in the first half of the fifteenth century and was suppressed in 1530. That of Memmingen also disappeared during the early period of the Protestant Reformation. The Abbey of Holy Cross at Eichstatt seems to have ceased early in the fourteenth century. In consequence of the Protestant Reformation in Scotland many Scotch Benedictines left their country and took refuge in the Schottenklöster of Germany during the sixteenth century. The Scotch monasteries in Ratisbon, Erfurt, and Würzburg again began to flourish temporarily, but all endeavors to regain the monasteries of Nuremberg, Vienna, and Constance for monks of Scotch nationality were useless. In 1692 Abbot Placidus Flemming of Ratisbon reorganized the Scotch congregation which now comprised the monasteries of Ratisbon, Erfurt, and Würzburg, the only remaining Schottenklöster in Germany. He also erected a seminary in connection with the monastery at Ratisbon. But the forced secularization of monasteries in 1803 put an end to the Scotch abbeys of Erfurt and Würzburg, leaving St. Jacob's at Ratisbon as the only surviving Schottenklöster in Germany. Though since 1827 this monastery was again permitted to accept novices, the number of its monks dwindled down to two capitulars in 1862. There being no hope of any increase, Pius IX suppressed this last Schottenklöster in his brief of 2 September, 1862. Its revenues were distributed between the diocesan seminary of Ratisbon and the Scotch College at Rome. RENZ, Beitrage sur Gesch. der Schottenabtei St. Jacob u. des Priorats Weih St. Peter in Regensburg in Studien und Mitteilungen aus dem Ben. und Cist. Orden, XVI-XVIII (Brunn, 1895-7); JANNER, Die Schotten in Regensburg und ihre Kirche zu St. Jacob (Ratisbon, 1885); WALDERDORF, S. Mercherdach, S. Marian und die Anfange der Schottenklöster in Regensburg in Verhandlungen des hist. Vereins von Oberpfalz, XXXIV (Ratisbon, 1879), 187-232; WATTENBACH in Zeitschrift fur christliche Archaologie und Kunst (1856), 21-30, 49-58; HOGAN, Irish Monasteries in Germany in Irish Eccl. Record. XVI (Dublin, 1895), 865-S74; DUNN, Irish Monks on the Continent in Cath. University Bulletin, X (1904), 307-328; LINDNER, Monasticon Metropolis Salzburgensis antiquae (Salzburg, 1908), 417 422; GOUGAUD, (Euvre des Scotti dans l'Europe Continental in Rev. d'Hist. Eccl., IX (Lourain, 1908), 21-37, 257-277. MICHAEL OTT Clement Schrader Clement Schrader Jesuit theologian, b. at Itzum, in Hanover, Nov., 1820; d. at Poitiers 23 Feb., 1875. He studied at the German College at Rome (1840-48) and entered the Society of Jesus on 17 May, 1848. For a time he filled the post of prefect of studies in the German College; subsequently he lectured in the Roman College on dogmatic theology, and later on joined the theological faculty of Vienna. In 1867 he became a member of the theological commission appointed to prepare the preliminaries for the Vatican Council. On his refusal to take the oath of fidelity to the Constitution of 1867 he was, not long after the council had been prorogued, deprived of his professorship by the Austrian Government. The remainder of his life was devoted to the teaching of theology in the Catholic University of Poitiers where he succumbed to an attack of pneumonia. Schrader's thorough grasp of scholastic theology is evidenced by the many works that bear his name. Chief among these are: "De Deo Creante", "De triplici Ordine"; eight series of these, dealing with various theological questions, e.g. predestination, actual grace, faith, human society; "De unitate Romana" (according to Hurter, by far his ablest work). He assisted Passaglia in several of his works, notably in the latter's monumental treatise on the Immaculate Conception. He was also actively engaged in the conduct of a periodical published at Vienna (1864-67), and entitled "Der Papst und die modernen Ideen". The Syllabus of Pius IX is given in a German translation and a number of counter propositions added with a view to bringing out in clearer light the exact significance of the errors condemned in the Syllabus. HURTER, Nomenclator, III, 1245; SOMMERVOGEL, Bibl. de la C. de J., 912. J.A. CAHILL Dominic Schram Dominic Schram (SCHRAMM). A Benedictine theologian and canonist, b. at Bamberg, 24 October 1722; d. in the monastery of Banz near Bamberg, 21 September, 1797. He took vows at Banz, 13 November, 1743, and, after being ordained priest, 18 August, 1748, taught at his monastery: at first, mathematics (1757), then canon law (1760), then philosophy (1762) and, soon after, theology. In 1782 he reluctantly accepted the position of prior in the monastery of Michelsberg at Bamberg, whence he returned to Banz in 1787. His chief works are: "Compendium theologiae dogmaticae, scholasticae, et moralis, methodo scientifica propositum", 3 vols. (Augsburg, 1768; 3d edition, Turin, 1837-9); "Institutiones theologiae mysticae", 2 vols. (Ausburg, 1774; 3d edition, Paris, 1868), his best work; Analysis operum SS. Patrum et scriptorum ecclesiasticorum", 18 vols., reaching as far as St. Damasus (Augsburg 1780 96); "Institutiones juris ecclesiastici publici et privati", 3 vols. (Augsburg, 1774-5; 2d ed., 1782); "Epitome canonum ecclesiasticorum ex conciliis Germaniae collecta" (Augsburg, 1774); and a newly-arranged edition of the "Summa Conciliorum" of Carranza continued up to Pius VI, 4 vols. (Augsburg, 1778). LINDNER, Die Schriftsteller des Benediktiner-Ordens in Bayern 1750-1880 (Ratisbon, 1880) II, 213 4; HURTER, Nomenclator Literarius, III, 340-1. MICHAEL OTT Franz Paula von Schrank Franz Paula von Schrank Naturalist, b. at Varnbach near Schärding on the Inn, 21 August, 1747; d. at Munich, 22 December, 1835. At the age of nine he commenced his studies at the Jesuit College at Passau, and at fifteen entered the Society of Jesus. The first year of his novitiate was spent at Vienna, and the second at the college in Oedenburg, Hungary, where Father Sluha, a former missionary in Brazil, interested him in the study of nature. His higher studies were made successively at Raab, Tyrnau, and Vienna. His strength having been impaired by excessive exertion during his botanical expedition, he was, in 1769, appointed instructor at the college at Linz. After the suppression of his order, he moved to Vienna where he was ordained priest in December, 1774, and gained his doctorate of theology in 1776. Having returned to his native place, he published his first studies in natural history; "Beiträge zur Naturgeschichte" (1776). In the same year he was called to the chair of mathematics and physics at the lyceum at Amberg and afterwards to that of rhetoric at Burghausen. Here he found an opportunity of studying agriculture. In 1784 he became professor of agriculture, mining, forestry, botany and zoology at the University of Ingolstadt (later removed to Landshut). In 1809 the Munich Academy of Sciences elected him a member on the condition of his undertaking the direction of the newly-established botanical garden. To this task he devoted the rest of his life. Possessed of comprehensive knowledge and keen judgment, he was highly esteemed and received many public marks of honour and distinction. Acting several times as rector during the years of his professorship at Ingolstadt and Landshut, he had on many occasions to defend the interests of the university during the French and Austrian occupations. Schrank's activity as a writer is really astonishing. We know of more than forty original works and about two hundred dissertations and shorter studies from his pen. His excellent descriptions of flora are distinguished by originality,clear presentation, and logical classification. The following works are especially worthy of note: "Bayerische Flora" (Munich, 1789); "Primitiæ floræ salisburgensis" (Frankfort, 1792); and above all, "Flora monacensis" (Munich, 1811-1820), with four hundred coloured plates by Joh. Nepomucene Mayrhofer. Not less valuable are the fruits of his scientific travels partly undertaken under the auspices and at the expense of the Munich Academy of Sciences. Among these are to be mentioned: Fr. von Paula Schrank and R. C. Moll, "Naturhistorische Briefe über Oesterreich, Salsburg, Passau, und Bergtesgaden" (Salzburg, 1785), and "Reise nach den südlichen Gebirgen von Bayern, etc., im Jahr 1788" (Munich, 1793). In these expeditions Schrank took Linnæus's travels for the study of natural history as his model. Among his physiological works must be mentioned his study: "Von den Nebengefässen der Pflanzen und ihrem Nutzen" (Halle, 1794), in which he attributes to the hairs of plants the function of absorbing moisture; and some essays in the "Münchener Denkschriften" for 1809-1810 on the movement of infusoria, and on "Priestley's green matter", etc. His extensive correspondence, as director of the botanical garden, with all countries of Europe and the East and West Indies redounded to the benefit of this institution, which under his administration became one of the richest in Germany. To this botanical garden he dedicated a work in two folio volumes with 100 coloured plates: "Plantæ rariores horti academici Monacensis descriptæ et iconibus illustratæ" (1819). His numerous detached studies on questions of natural history may be found in "Müchener Denkschriften", "Zeitschrift der Regensburger botanischen Gesellschaft", "Hoppe's botanisches Taschenbuch", etc. In the last days of his life the indefatigable veteran wrote two Scriptural works: XXX, a physico-theological explanation of the six days of creation (Augsburg, 1829, 16 pp., 8°) and a voluminous "Commentarius literalis in Genesim" (Salzbach, 1835, 796 pp. 8°). The list of von Schrank's works fills nine columns in the "Biblothèque des écrivains de la compagnie de Jésus" (1859). MARTINS, Akad. Denkreden (1866); DE BACKER, Bibl. des écrivains de la compagnie de Jésus, Ve série (Liège, 1859), s. v. J. STEIN Schraudolph, Johann Johann Schraudolph Historical painter, b. at Obersdorf in the Allgau, 1808; d. 31 May, 1879. As pupil and assistant of Heinrich Hess he painted five scenes from the life of St. Boniface in the basilica at Munich: St. Boniface preaching; his consecration as bishop; the cutting down of Thor's oak; the anointing of Pepin; and the burial of St. Boniface. In these frescoes Schraudolph justified the confidence placed in him by his master who had already tested his work in the Church of All Saints where Schraudolph had painted scenes from the history of Moses, figures of David, Saul, etc. Some of his devotional pictures became very popular: the Virgin with the Child Jesus; St. Agnes; Christ as the Friend of children; a eucharistic service, etc.; His carefully executed sketches for the life of St. Boniface were greatly admired by fellow artists. On the recommendation of Hess he received an important commission from Louis I, namely the painting of the frescoes for the cathedral of Speyer. Although he had already traveled once through Italy under the guidance of J. Ant. Forster and had made numerous copies of the old masters, yet he considered it necessary to make a new journey to Rome and Overbeck for the sake of this, the great work of his life. Unfortunately in his studies he laid more stress on grace and tenderness than upon force and depth. Consequently the lack of the two last mentioned qualities is perceptible in his frescoes for the austere and stately imperial cathedral, while correctness, harmony, and a devout spirit are unmistakably present in the large compositions. He made sure of the unity of the series by keeping his assistants (his brother Claudius, Hellweger, Andr. Mayer, etc.) in strict subordination to himself, by retaining for himself the designing of all the compositions for the cupola, the three choirs, and most of those for the nave, by drawing the most important cartoons and painting the most difficult pictures himself. The unifying conception of all the frescoes is: the Divine plan of salvation with special reference to the Blessed Virgin and the other patron saints of the cathedral, the deacon Stephen, Pope St. Stephen, and St. Bernard. After the completion of this undertaking Schraudolph enjoyed the unchanging favour of the king, who frequently inspected the numerous oil-paintings produced in Schraudolph's studio, and at times bought them for himself or the Pinakothek. Forster, Gesch. der deutschen Kunst, V (Leipzig, 1860); Idem, on the frescoes in the cathedral of Speyer in the Deutsches Kunstablatt, no. 15 (Leipzig, 1883); Stubenvoll, Beschreibung der Munchener Basilika (Munich, 1875); Pecht, Gesch. der Munchner Kunst (Munich, 1888). G. Gietmann Franz Schubert Franz Schubert Composer, b. at Vienna, 31 January, 1797; d. there 19 November, 1829. He studied under his father, and subsequently under Holzer and Salieri, and in 1807, was first boy soprano in the Lichtenthal choir. In October, 1808, he entered the Imperial Choristers School, and soon gave evidence of extraordinary musical genius as a composer, his first effort being a pianoforte duet, early in 1810. During 1811 and 1812 he produced many instrumental pieces, also a "Salve Regina" and a "Kyrie". He left the Choir School in November, 1812, and took up work as a schoolmaster in order to avoid conscription. His "First Mass in F" was finished on 22 July, 1814, and performed by the Lichtenthal choir under the direction of Holzer. Competent critics have pronounced this mass as perhaps the most wonderful first work by any composer save the case of Beethoven's "Mass in C". Schubert conducted the second performance at the Augustinian church on 26 October, his brother, Ferdinand, presiding at the organ. During the same year he produced a symphony and a "Salve Regina";, as well as some songs and instrumental pieces. His famous "Erl King", dates from November, 1815, as does his "Mass in G" -- wonderful for a boy of eighteen. His compositions for 1816 include a "Salve Regina", a "Stabat Mater", a "Tantum Ergo", and a "Magnificat", as also two symphonies, and some delightful songs including the "Wanderer". He conducted the music at high Mass at the Alterehenfelder church on Easter Sunday, 1820, and in the same year produced an Easter cantata and an opera. His productivity from 1821 to 1824 was enormous, "Rosamunde" and his "Mass in A flat" being of permanent value. His glorious "Ave Maria" dates from 1825, apropos of which he writes that at the time he was filled with overpowering devotion to the Blessed Virgin. The three Shakespearean songs of 1826 are still of interest. In 1827 he was gratified with a eulogy from the dying Beethoven, whom he visited in his last illness, and whose remains he followed to the grave. He subsequently wrote an opera, a number of songs, and the second part of the "Winterrreise". Early in June, 1827, he was elected a member of the musical society of Vienna, and in 1828, produced his marvelous "Symphony in C", his "Mass in E flat", an oratorio, a hymn to the Holy Ghost, a string quartet, a "Tantum Ergo" in E flat, and a lovely "Benedictus". His last appearance in public was on 3 November, 1828, when he went to hear his brother's new "Requiem": he died a fortnight later, and his obsequies were celebrated in the little Chapel of St. Joseph in Margarethen. On 21 November, the body was interred at Wahring, close to the grave of Beethoven, and on 23 December his solemn month's mind was celebrated in the Augustinian Church, when a "Requiem" by Huttenbrenner was performed. The corpse was re-interred in the central cemetery, Vienna, on 23 September 1888. Schubert produced a phenomenal amount of music, his songs alone numbering about six hundred and three. His compositions came into prominen ce owing to their advocacy by Liszt, Schumann, and Mendelssohn, but he was in advance of his time and it was not until thirty years after his death that his wonderful genius was fully appreciated. Essaying all forms of composition, he was successful in all, and he may be regarded as second only to Beethoven. In particular, his unfinished symphony, his "Rosamunde" Entr'acte, his "Mass in E flat", and about a dozen of his songs are immortal masterpieces. Von Hellborn, Franz Schubert (Vienna, 1865); Frost, Schubert (London, 1881); Grove, Dict. of Music and Musicians, IV (London, 1909). W.H. GRATTAN-FLOOD Joseph Schwane Joseph Schwane A theological writer, b. at Dorsten in Westphalia, 2 Aril, 1824; d. at Münster, 6 June, 1892. After receiving his early education at Dorsten and Recklinghause, he studied philosophy and theology at Münster (184307), and upon his ordination to the priesthood, 29 May, 18477, continued his studies for two years at the universities of Bonn and Tübingen. Hereupon he became director of Count von Galen's institute at Münster, was privat-docent in church history, moral theology, and history of dogmatics at the University of Münster (1853-9), and assistant professor-in -ordinary of moral theology, history of dogmatics, and symbolism, at the same time lecturing on dogmatic theology along with the aged Berlage, whom he succeeded as professor of dogmatic theology in 1881. Leo XIII honoured him with the title of domestic prelate in 1890. His chief work is "Dogmengeschicte", the pioneer Catholic work of its kind, covering the entire history of dogmatics (4 vols., I, Münster, 1862; 2nd ed., Frieburg, 1892; II, Münster, 1869; 2nd ed., Freiburg, 1895; III, Freiburg, 1882; IV Freiburg, 1890). His larger works in the field of moral theology are: "Die theologische Lehre uber die Verträge mit Berückschtigung der Civilgesetze, besonders der preussischen, allgemein deutschen und französischen" (Münster, 1871; 2nd ed., 1872); "Die Gerechtigkeit und die damit verwandten sittlichen Tugenden und Pflichten des gesellschaftlichen Lebens" (Freiburg, 1873); "Spezielle Moraltheologie" (Freiburg, 1878-1885). Smaller works are: "Dasgöttliche Vorherwissen und seine neuesten Gegner" (Münster, 1855); "De controversia, quae de volore baptismi haereticorum inter S. Stephanum Papam et S. Cyprianum agitata sit, commentatio historico -dogmatica" (Münster, 1860); "De operibus supererogatoriis et consiliis evangelicis in genere" (Münster, 1868); "Die eucharistiche Opferhandlung" (Freiburg, 1889); "Uber die scientia media und ihre Verwendung fur die Lehre von der Gnade und Freiheit" in "Tübinger theol. Quartalschrift", XXXII (1850), 394-459, and numerous other contributions to theological maga zines. Chronik der Akademie zu Münster, VII (1892-3), 4 sq.; Lauchert in Allgem. deutsch Biogr., LIV (Leipzig, 1908), 268-9. MICHAEL OTT Theodor Schwann Theodor Schwann German physiologist and founder of the theory of the cellular structure of animal organisms; b. at Neuss, 7 December, 1810; d. Cologne, 11 January, 1882. He studied medicine at Bonn, where one of his teachers was the celebrated physiologist John Müller, and also at Würtzburg, and at Berlin where he obtained his degree in 1834. His dissertation for the doctorate on the breathing of the embryo of the hen in the egg, "De necessitate æris atmosphærici ad evolutionem pulli in ovo incubato" attracted the attention of the medical world. After graduation he acted as assistant in the anatomical museum at Berlin; in 1839 he became professor of anatomy at the Catholic University of Louvain; in 1848 professor of physiology and comparative anatomy at Liège and in 1880 retired from teaching. Schwann proved that animal cells are in morphological and physiological accordance with those of plants, and that all animal tissues proceed partly from cells and are partly composed of them. He established this theory in his chief work: "Mikroskopische Untersuchungen über die Übereinstimmung in der Struktur und dem Wachstum der Tiere und Pflanzen" (Berlin, 1839). Before this John Purkinje (1787-1869) had pointed out the analogy between the nuclei of the animal cell and of the plant cell, still Schwann deserves the credit of having developed and established this theory. Kölliker's cellular physiology and Virchow's cellular pathology are based on Schwann's theory. Schwann also discovered the cells of the nails and feathers, what are called the Tomes fibres of the teeth, the nuclei of the smooth and striped muscle-fibres, and the envelope of the nerve-fibres (Schwann's envelope). Moreover, in 1836 he discovered that pepsin was the substance that produced albuminous digestion in the stomach; in 1844 he produced the first artificial gastric fistula, and called attention to the importance of the gall in digestion. He discovered the organic nature of yeast at the same time as Cagniard Latour, although independently of the latter, and proved that the yeast-cells take the material necessary for reproduction and development from the substance capable of fermentation. In a separate treatise he proved the weakness of the theory of spontaneous generation. Besides the works already mentioned Schwann wrote a number of papers for medical journals and for the reports of the Belgian Academy. Biographisches Lexikon der hervorragenden Aerzte, V, 315; Berliner klinische Wochenschrift (1882), 63, necrology. LEOPOLD SENFELDER Ludwig von Schwanthaler Ludwig von Schwanthaler Founder of the modern Romantic school of sculpture, b. at Munich in 180 2; d there, 1848. He received a thorough classical education but even as a boy was fond of modelling in wax; then, led by patrtotism, he took to the painting of battle scenes and with Pocei he drew up the scheme of a procession of romantic knights proceeding to a tournament. King Maximilian I commissioned him to design mythological reliefs for an epergne, which was never wholly carried out and was later melted down. A few wax models that have been preserved are very fine. Schwanthaler made a great many reliefs, taken from the stories of the Greek gods and heroes, for the salons of the Glyptothek at Munich. Before they were actually executed he visited Thorwaldsen at Rome. At a later date he spent a considerable length of time at Rome, where he was honored by a large number of commissions from King Louis I of Bavaria. He prepared the models of the twenty-five statues of artists of the Pinakothek and made the drawings for the Greek poets intended for the new palace. He modelled a "Triumphal Procession of Bacchus" on a frieze 143 feet long for the palace of Duke Maximilian. This was followed by the large reliefs at Ratisbon for the princes of Thurn and Taxis. He carried out in a free manner one of Rauch's designs, the victorious "Germania", on one of the pediments of the Walhalla near Ratisbon. A design of his own, the "Battle of Arminius," is executed on the other pediment. Entirely his own composition also is the "Bavaria" as protectress of the arts on the pediment of the exhibition hall. The colossal statue of Bavaria, 62 feet high, above the Hall of Fame at Munich greatly added to his reputation. He constantly received commissions both from near and far for monuments in honor of rulers, generals, and artists. The impatience of those who gave him commissions, especially the insistence on haste of King Louis and of the architect Klenze, led Schwanthaler into the error of overproduction and perfunctoriness. On the other hand he exhibited an astonishing inventive faculty which seemed never to repeat itself, which showed freshness and animation in the presentation, and a grasp of monumental size and classic beauty in the general conception of works that usually were arranged in cycles. It must be acknowledged that the execution of the details was frequently faulty. He exhibited great skill in the treatment of medieval and modern dress. Contrary to his natural inclination he was constantly obliged to treat antique subjects, but he brought to his task a classically-trained mind and taste. LUBKE, Gesch. der Plastik (Leipzig, 1871) II, a carefully-considered judgment; PECHT, Gesch. der Munchener Kunst (Munich, 1888); VON REBER, Gesch der neueren Kunst, II (1864). G. GIETMANN Berthold Schwarz Berthold Schwarz (Schwartz). A German friar, reputed the inventor of gunpowder and firearms. There has been much difference of opinion regarding the bearer of this name and his share in the discovery attributed to him. He was a Franciscan, and is said to have been born in Freiburg in the first half of the thirteenth century. He took the name of Berthold in religion, to which was appended the adjective Schwarz (black), either on account of the colour of his habit or because he was looked on as being addicted to the black art. It was in the course of his studies in alchemy that he discovered the explosive properties of gunpowder which he applied to firearms. A monument was erected to him in his birthplace in 1853. The history of the invention of gunpowder is wrapped in obscurity. The Chinese and Arabs are said to have been familiar with burning mixtures, and as early as A.D. 660 Greek fire was brought to Constantinople. Roger Bacon (1246-94) mentions the explosive properties of saltpetre mixtures in his "De secretis operibus artis et naturæ", c. 6, though he does not lay claim to the discovery. The first to attribute it and its subsequent application to the friar of Freiburg seems to have been Felix Hemmelin (1389-1464) of Zurich in his "De nobilitate et rusticitate dialogus" (c. 1450). He states somewhat vaguely that the discovery was made within 200 years of the time of his writing. This would apparently make Berthold a contemporary of Bacon. Many later writers, however, place him in the fourteenth century, and while some give 1354, the date inscribed upon his monument, as the time of his discovery, others simply give him credit for the invention of firearms and notably of brass cannon. For a critical study of the question cf. Hansjacob, who concludes that Berthold lived in the thirteenth century, and suggests the possibility of Bacon having learned the discovery from him. While it is perhaps impossible to determine with certainty whether he was the first to make the discovery of gunpowder, it is commonly admitted that the invention of firearms is due to him. HANSJACOB, Der Schwarze Berthold, Der Erfinder des Schiespulvers u. der Feuerwaffen (Freiburg, 1891). HENRY M. BROCK Friedrich, Prince of Schwarzenberg Friedrich, Prince of Schwarzenberg Cardinal and Prince-Archbishop of Prague, b. at Vienna, 6 April, 1809; d. there, 27 March, 1885. Son of Prince Joseph John Schwarzenberg and his spouse Pauline (née Princess Arenberg), he was baptized in his father's palace in Vienna. When Napoleon advanced upon Vienna, the mother fled with her one-month-old child to Krummau in Bohemia. In the summer of the following year she accompanied her husband and eldest daughter to Paris to be present at the marriage festivities of Napoleon and Archduchess Marie-Louise. During the celebration she and her daughter were burned to death; a golden necklace, on which were engraved the names of her ten children (including that of Friedrich), alone made it possible to identify the charred mass as her remains. Her sister-in-law Eleanora henceforth acted as mother to the children and was always called by Fritz his "Engelstante". When he was five years old, Fritz was placed under the care of the learned and able Father Lorenz Greif. Having completed the secondary school course in the Schotten gymnasium, he applied himself to juridical studies with great success. Reluctantly he now revealed to his father his desire to consecrate his life to the service of God in the priesthood, as this was for him the surest way to heaven. The father gave his consent with some hesitation. Fritz began his theological studies at Salzburg, as his numerous relatives in Vienna would prove too great a distraction. Archbishop Gruber was his spiritual father, and one cannot peruse their correspondence without emotion. Able professors, among whom Joseph Othmar von Rauscher was conspicuous, fanned the enthusiasm of the young student. Fritz was to make his last year's theology at Vienna, where he was to reside in the clerical seminary. The rector, Franz Zenner, a strict disciplinarian, acted almost harshly towards Schwarzenberg. Besides the university lectures he received private instruction in philosophy from Günther, who later exercised a constant guiding influence over his pupil. On entering the clerical state, Friedrich had promised his father to accept none of the higher orders before his twenty-fourth year. On the completion of his theological studies, the question arose of how the remaining two years were to be passed. Friedrich was seized with a desire to travel, which his father was anxious to gratify. However, Bishop Gruber insisted that he must study for the doctorate, while Zenner demanded that the candidate for the doctorship must continue to reside in the seminary. Schwarzenberg's refusal to comply was followed by a breach which the young man, however, endeavoured to remedy. He successfully passed the examinations for the doctorate. Finally, in 1833, he was ordained by Gruber. The young priest was appointed curate in the cathedral parish; he derived great satisfaction from the performance of his pastoral duties. But clouds now threatened him; he had to hurry to his dying father, to whom he administered the last sacraments. In June, 1835, the fatherly archbishop died in Friedrich's arms, after receiving extreme unction from him. On 23 September, 1835, the metropolitan chapter requested that Schwarzenberg be made archbishop, though he was not yet thirty years old, and thus needed a papal dispensation. Anxious and sad of heart, he accepted the staff of St. Rupert with courage and determination. In the archdiocese the Protestant people of the Zillertal were the chief cause of trouble; they remained there, notwithstanding every effort to induce them to withdraw and in spite of the patent of emigration of Archbishop Firmian (1731). An imperial resolution of 1837 ordered their return to the national Church or their emigration. Archbishop Schwarzenberg was greatly pained to see hundreds of those Zillertaler leave their native land, and left nothing untried to induce them by affectionate persuasion at least to leave their children behind, promising to educate and support them; but in vain. Among the institutions founded or favoured by Schwarzenberg may be mentioned: the Mozarteum, the Cathedral Musical Society, the Art Society, the boys' seminary (Borromäum), the convent of the Sisters of Mercy of St. Vincent de Paul at Schwarzach for the nursing of the sick and the education of the young. The foundation at Schwarzach bore magnificent fruit, but impoverished him. It was only fitting that a marble monument of him was erected there in 1910. On 29 March, 1848, he issued an exhortation to the clergy, urging them to correct the mistaken views and unfounded anxieties of their flock, to keep the pulpit free from political declamations and allusions, and to cultivate good feelings with the secular authorities. Schwarzenberg was no friend of politics, even church politics. However, for more than forty years he was the leading churchman in Austria, and during those years arose a host of new institutions, tendencies, and conditions, profoundly affecting Church and State in the Hapsburg empire. These conditions entailed a huge amount of work for him. Although the Council of Trent had commanded provincial councils to be held every three years, the custom had fallen into disuse. In Salzburg the last provincial synod had been held in 1573. Schwarzenberg, after so long an intermission, convened a synod which sat from 31 August to 12 September, 1848. In the address to the imperial parliament, the synod laid down what the Catholic Church must needs demand from the civil power in order to secure the liberty and independence which rightfully belonged to her, and which could not be denied her without inconsistency and injustice in view of the free development of civil rights. The bishops at this synod also issued a pastoral, subjecting Sommaruga's fundamental principles of state education to severe criticism. Of fundamental importance for the Church in Austria was the meeting of bishops at Vienna in 1849. The Reichstag which sat at Kremsier in February debated the relations of Church and State in a very unfriendly spirit. However, the cardinal's brother, Felix, was already prime minister, and by the appointment of Rauscher, the archbishop's teacher, as Bishop of Sekkau, Schwarzenberg greatly strengthened the influence of the bishops. The cardinal succeeded without much difficulty in convening the bishops of Austria; the bishops of Hungary and the Lombardo-Venetian territory, in which peace had not yet been restored, were not invited. On 29 April twenty-nine bishops and four episcopal proxies met in the palace of the prince-archbishop, and between this date and 20 June held sixty sessions. The cardinal conducted the sessions with the greatest tact. Among the theologians were Kutschker and Fessler. The assembly laid the results of their deliberations before the Government in seven memorials: on marriage; on the religious, school, and educational funds; on benefices and church property; on education; on ecclesiastical administration and offices and religious services; on monasticism; on ecclesiastical jurisdiction. In the decrees, which include 207 paragraphs, the bishops lay down "a common line of action for their future aims and action". This first assembly of the bishops of Austria lay the foundation for the revival of the Church in Austria; it marks the beginning of an Austrian episcopate, whereas before there had been only individual bishops. To urge the carrying out of the memorials, and to represent the bishops permanently, a standing committee of five was appointed under the presidency of the cardinal. It existed until the sixties. About this time also the cardinal was named Archbishop of Prague. In spite of his earnest protests both at Rome and at Vienna, the appointment was confirmed, and the cardinal made his solemn entry into Prague on 15 August, 1850. He had not yet familiarized himself with his new duties when Pius IX ordered him and the Primate of Gran to undertake the visitation of all monasteries in Austria which were not subject to the superior-general of an order; these monasteries were 380 in number. He had no share in the settling of the concordat, but did his utmost to carry it out. For this object a meeting of the bishops was held at Vienna under his presidency from 6 April to 17 June, 1856. Sixty-six prelates — German, Hungarian, Italian, and Slav — were present, representing the Latin, Greek, and Armenian Rites. Memorials were again addressed to the Government concerning the schools, marriage, ecclesiastical property, the filling of vacant benefices, monasteries, and the right of patronage. The Primate of Prague thereupon organized an ecclesiastical matrimonial court, held a provincial and two diocesan councils, and promoted the sciences, the growth of the orders, the societies, and the arts. That the concordat was carelessly executed is false. As his adviser in questions of canon law the cardinal chose Professor Friedrich von Schulte, likewise appointing him, although he was a layman, counsel of the spiritual matrimonial court in all three instances and titular consistorial counsel. Schwarzenberg showed himself a zealous friend of his teacher, Günther, and sought by repeated intercession at Rome to prevent the condemnation of his writings. The first serious delay in the execution of the provisions of the concordat occurred when the administration of church property, benefices, and foundations were to be turned over to church officials. The cardinal thought that the questions of the manner of transfer had been agreed upon, and furnished printed instructions on the administration of property to the church officials and to the patrons. The minister of state, Schmerling, stopped the transfer of the ecclesiastical property in Prague. In union with his three suffragans, Schwarzenberg protested to the emperor, the minister of state, and the governor (19 March, 1862). However, the only effect of this protest was the assertion of principle. The year 1866, so unfortunate in the history of Austria, was especially unfortunate for Schwarzenberg. On 25 May, while on his tour of visitation, he fell ill of smallpox. The German war seemed already unavoidable, and, when the manifesto of 15 June announced its outbreak, the cardinal, who regarded it as his duty to remain at Prague, ordered public prayers and intercessory processions. One of the consequences of the misfortune of the Bohemian fields of battle was the change in the relations between Church and State. On 25 May, 1858, the decrees of the Reichstag concerning marriage, schools, and interconfessional relations were confirmed by the emperor. On 22 June Pius IX condemned the decrees; the bishops had on 3 June issued a common instruction to the clergy, and on 24 June issued a collective pastoral. Both these last-mentioned decrees were condemned by the imperial courts as breaches of the public peace and confiscated. It was to be expected that the legal proceedings pending against Bishop Rudiger of Linz would be extended to the bishops of Bohemia. In February, 1869, Schwarzenberg received the following instruction from the Holy See: "If the bishops or ecclesiastics are summoned before lay judges, let them in every possible case plead their causes through an attorney, and never appear personally and of their own accord before such judges". The cardinal regretted this, since he had hoped that his ill-treatment might awaken many slumbering Catholics. The conflict about the concordat was not yet over, and a new conflict was threatening which in the name of freedom endangered the liberties of the Church, when Pius IX convened the Council of the Vatican (8 December, 1869-18 July, 1870). On the question of the infallibility of the pope, Schwarzenberg supported the minority. The void left by the annulment of the concordat, Stremayr in 1874 sought to fill up by four new inter-confessional laws, dealing with the regulation of the external legal relations of the Catholic Church, the taxes providing for the so-called Religionsfond, the legal relations of the monasteries, and the recognition of new religious corporations. During the deliberations of the House of Peers Schwarzenberg vigourously opposed the proposed laws and condemned them in a carefully prepared speech. However, it was impossible to defeat them entirely. Of Stremayr's four new laws, that on the legal status of religious communities, authorizing the minister of public worship to suppress any monastery and to confiscate its property, had not yet passed. As soon as Schwarzenberg heard that the monastery law was to be discussed in the House of Peers in the middle of January, 1876, he convened a meeting of the bishops of the House of Peers; the eight bishops assembled in the Schwarzenberg palace. To the deliberations were also admitted Abbot Helferstorfer, Leo Thun, and His Excellency Falkenhayn. The result of the meeting was the "Declaration" signed by all the Austrian bishops that entertain the certain hope that a law of such content and so harmful in its effects shall never be enacted. Should, however, they find themselves disappointed in this confident expectation, they must declare that so harmful a law should not be enacted and protest against the imputation that the Church could ever tolerate and ratify a religious order whose vocation and activity would merit the mistrustful and suspicious regulations expressed in the draft of the law. The bill was passed, but did not receive the sanction of the emperor. In 1882 the division of the University of Karl Ferdinand into a German and a Czechish was effected, but Cardinal Schwarzenberg would not agree to the division of the theological faculty, holding that it was the vocation of the priest to work for the reconciliation and union of the various races in Bohemia. After his death this separation could not be prevented. Among the many institutions, etc., introduced by Schwarzenberg we may mention: the priestly exercises, pastoral conferences, provincial synods (two), diocesan synods, the heritage of St. Adalbert for the support of poor priests, diocesan relief funds; establishments of the Jesuits, Redemptorists, Notre-Dame, Grey Sisters, Sisters of St. Borromäus, and Sisters of St. Vincent; popular missions; the Forty Hours' Adoration; the canonization of St. Agnes of Bohemia; the jubilee of Methodius; the jubilee of the Diocese of Prague; the papal jubilees; the Katholikenverein; the Bonifaciusverein; the Confraternity of St. Michael; the Prokopius fund for the publication of good books; perpetual adoration; vestment societies; the cathedral building society. At the first episcopal meeting in Austria and at all the succeeding conferences, Schwarzenberg had always presided. At the meeting of 1885 he accepted his election as president, but reserved the right of joining in the debate. At the eighth session the cardinal was unable to appear on account of ill-health; on the next day Schwarzenberg again presided, although very feverish, but hurried from this session to what was destined to be his death-bed. His remains lie in the cathedral at Prague. NOSTITZ-RIENECK, Kardinal Schwarzenberg: Ein Gedenkbild in Ungetrübter Glanz (Vienna, 1888), 1-44; WOLFSGRUBER, Friedrich Kardinal Schwarzenberg, I, Jugend u. Salzburgerzeit (Vienna, 1906). C. WOLFSGRUBER Schwenckfeldians Schwenckfeldians The name of a Protestant sect founded by the nobleman Caspar von Schwenckfeld (b. at Ossig in Silesia in 1489 or 1490; d. at Ulm 10 December, 1561). After studying at Cologne and Frankfort-on-the-Oder Schwenckfeld served at the courts of several Silesian dukes. In 1521 he became a public adherent of the new doctrine preached by the so-called reformers, and was subsequently instrumental in spreading it throughout Silesia. Irreconcilable differences having revealed themselves between his views and the opinions of Luther, he removed in 1529 from Silesia to Strasburg. With his banishment from this city in 1533 opens that period of forced changes of residence which marked the later part of his life. His wanderings were due to persecution exercised against him, mainly by Lutheran preachers who condemned his writings in a meeting held at Schmalkalden in 540. The followers of Schwenckfeld never became very numerous and were organized into congregations only after his death. But they had even then to maintain a secret existence owing to persecution. Toleration was extended to them in Silesia in 1742 by Frederick II. Some members of the sect emigrated in 1734 to America and settled in Pennsylvania. While they have disappeared elsewhere the Schwenckfeldians number at present in the State just mentioned, 850 communicants with 8 churches and 6 ministers (Statistics of Dr. H.K. Carroll in the "Christian Advocate", New York 26 January, 1911). Their church government is congregational and the ministers are chosen by lot. In the Schwenckfeldian teaching such stress is laid on the inner, spiritual, element in religion that it results in an utter depreciation of external worship. The sacraments are retained merely in a symbolical sense. The administration of baptism to infants is discarded as useless; it is considered legitimate for adults, but unnecessary. The presence of Jesus Christ in the Eucharist is denied. The sacramental words "This is My Body; this is My Blood" mean "My Body is this (bread); My Blood is this (wine)", i. e., as bread and wine nourish and strengthen the body, so the Body and Blood of Christ are spiritual food and drink for the soul. Two distinct natures are indeed admitted in the incarnate Christ; but the human element in Him is said to be essentially different from the nature of an ordinary man. It was derived from the very beginning from the Divine substance and was deified by the sufferings, death, and Resurrection of the Saviour. The numerous works of Schwenckfeld have only incompletely been published. A critical edition is in course of publication under the direction of HARTRANFT, SCHLUTTER, and JOHNSON: Corpus Schwenckfeldianorum, I (Leipzig, 1907); KADELBACH, Ausfuhrliche Gesch. Schwenckfelds u. der Schwenckfelder (Lauban, 1861); KRIEBEL, The Schwenckfelders in Pennslylvania (Lancaster, 1904); LOETSCHER, Schwenckfeld's Participation in the Eucharistic Controversy of the 16th Century (Philadelphia, 1906). N.A. WEBER Moritz von Schwind Moritz von Schwind Born at Vienna, 1804; died at Munich, 1871. A painter possessing an inexhaustible wealth of ideas, specially gifted for incisive individualization, and perfectly familiar with the entire range of tones and the power of expression by mien, movement, pose, and costume, he was one of the ornaments of the Munich school of art. He was above all a draughtsman and painter of small details, understanding how to make small pictures harmonious both in colour and composition. He was by nature inclined to the Romantic school of thought and feeling and this tendency, much developed in the studio of Ludwig Schnorr von Caroldfeld, was still more so by his Catholic education. After a journey to Rome, the painting of frescoes at Carlsruhe, and a short stay at Frankfort, he came in 1847 to Munich where Cornelius gained great influence over him. The spirit of his art is that of the minnesingers, of Eichendorff, and of Bretano. The material upon which he worked was nature and life, especially child-life, lyrically and poetically conceived, drawing and painting in water-colours being the mediums in which he best expressed his thoughts. Among his fellow artists Richter and Steinle stand probably in the closest relation to him. He set a high value on religious painting, and though he thought it less suited to his talents, he did not neglect it altogether. In the castle on the Wartburg he painted fine frescoes of the works of mercy and the life of St. Elizabeth, which recall the early Renaissance; he also painted there the history of the Thuringian rulers and the Sängerkrieg. The work for the altar of the Church of Our Lady at Munich is splendid in tone and the coloured cartoons for painted windows which were executed at Oxford and London are also greatly esteemed. At Carlsruhe he adorned the academy of art with entertaining frescoes characterizing art. The easel-picture "Ritter Kurts's Search for a Wife" had gained the commission for him, for the delightful humor of his popular creations is not spoiled by flippancy. Other excellent easel pictures are in the Schack gallery at Munich. In his oil-paintings, however, the harmonious combination of the parts with the whole and of the colour with the drawing are often lacking. In the frescoes the professional water-colour painter is evident. As a water-colour painter he attained his greatest triumphs in the cyclus of the Seven Ravens, and in that of the legend of Melusine. WEIGMANN, Klassiker der Kunst (1906); Schwindalbum (Munich, 1880); Schwindmappe zum Kunstwart (1902-04); SCHWIND, Lukas von Fuhrich (Leipzig, 1871); HAACK, Moritz von Schwind (Leipzig, 1898); MUTHER, Geschichte der Malerei im XIX. Jahrh., I (Munich, 1893). G. GIETMANN Science and the Church Science and the Church The words "science" and "Church" are here understood in the following sense: Science is not taken in the restricted meaning of natural sciences, but in the general one given to the word by Aristotle and St. Thomas Aquinas. Aristotle defines science as a sure and evident knowledge obtained from demonstrations. This is identical with St. Thomas's definition of science as the knowledge of things from their causes. In this sense science comprises the entire curriculum of university studies. Church, in connexion with science, theoretically means any Church that claims authority in matters of doctrine and teaching; practically, however, only the Catholic Church is in question, on account of her universality and her claim of power to exercise this authority. The relation between the two is here treated under the two heads SCIENCE and CHURCH. Synopsis: A. SCIENCE I. Points of Contact Between Science and Faith: (1) Philosophy; (2) History; (3) Law; (4) Medicine; (5) Sciences. II. Legitimate Freedom: (1) Research and teaching; (2) Limitations (logical, physical, ethical). III. Unlimited Freedom: (1) Does not exist; (2) Licence; (3) Consequences (Atheism, Subjectivism, Anarchism). B. CHURCH I. Opposite Views: (1) Leo XIII; (2) Virchow; (3) History. II. The teaching body and the ecclesia discens: (1) Distinction; (2) Premises of faith; (3) Contents of faith; (4) Dangers against faith. III. The holders of the teaching office: (1) Infallible magisterium; (2) Other tribunals; (3) Galilei. IV. Science of Faith: (1) Parallel case; (2) Theology; (3) Progress; (4) Objections (mysteries, methodical doubt). V. Conflicts: (1) Faith no obstacle; (2) Dignity of science; (3) Historical testimony; (4) Vatican Council. A. SCIENCE Science is considered from three points of view: contact with faith, legitimate freedom, unlimited freedom. I. Points of Contact between Science and Faith These are mainly confined to philosophical and historical sciences. They do not occur in theology, as it is the very science of faith itself. The points of contact of the various sciences with faith may be grouped as follows: (1) In the philosophical sciences: -- the existence of God and His qualities: -- unity, personality, eternity infinity; God, the final end of man and of all created things; freedom of the human will, the natural law. (2) In the historical and linguistic sciences: the historical unity of the human race and of the original language; the history of the Patriarchs, of the Israelites, and of their Messianic belief; the history of Christ and His Church; the authenticity of the Sacred Books; the history of dogmas, of schisms, of heresies; hagiography. (3) In the science of ethics and law: -- the origin of right and duty (the realistic Positivism of Comte and the subjective Positivism of John Stuart Mill); the authority of civil governments (Rousseau's "Contrat social" and Kant's "Critique of Pure Reason"); the matrimonial contract, its unity and permanency; the natural rights and duties of parents and children; personal property; freedom of religion (separation of religion and state, toleration). (4) The medical and biological sciences have occasioned serious discussion concerning the existence of the human soul, its spirituality and immortality, its difference from the vital principle in animals; the physiological unity of mankind; the justification of prevention and extinction of human life. In reality, however, all these questions lie outside the domain of medicine. (5) In natural sciences, especially natural philosophy, the points of contact are: -- the creation of the world and of man (materialistic doctrines, eternity of matter, absolute necessity of natural laws, impossibility of miracles, Darwinian origin of man); the Deluge, its existence and ethnographical universality. The mathematical and experimental sciences, also known as exact sciences, have no contact whatever with faith, although at one time, it was erroneously believed that the geocentric system was contained in the Bible. The celestial phenomena mentioned in the Scripture, like the star of the magi, the solar eclipse during the Paschal full moon, the stars falling from heaven as forerunners of the Last Judgment, are all of the miraculous kind and beyond the laws of nature. II. Legitimate Freedom Legitimate freedom is needed for science as well as for any human development. The only questions arc these: what is legitimate freedom, and what are its limitations? (1) Science comprises two functions: research and teaching. (a) The object of scientific research is practically indefinite in extent and can never be exhausted by the human mind. In this field there is more freedom than has ever been claimed. Compared to its field, the progress of science appears small, so much so, that the greatest progress seems to consist in the knowledge of how little we know. This was the conclusion arrived at by Socrates, Newton, Humboldt, and so many others. The very instruments teach this lesson: the deeper the microscope descends into the secrets of nature and the higher the telescopic power reaches into the heavens, the vaster appears the ocean of undiscovered truths. This ought to be kept in mind, when the progress of science is loudly proclaimed. There has never been a general progress of all sciences; it was always progress in some branches, often at the cost of others. In our own days natural, medical, and historical sciences advance rapidly in comparison with past ages; at the same time the philosophical sciences fall just as rapidly behind the early ages. The science of law owes its foundation to the ancient world. Some of the theological sciences reached their height in the early part of the Middle Ages, others towards the beginning of the seventeenth century. (b) By teaching is here understood every diffusion of knowledge, by word or print, in school or museum, in public or private. Progress and the freedom necessary for it are as much to be desired in teaching as in research. There is a doctrinal freedom, a pedagogical freedom, and a professional freedom. Doctrinal freedom regards the doctrine itself which is taught; pedagogical freedom, the manner in which science is diffused among scholars or the general public; professional freedom, the persons who do the teaching. Science claims freedom of teaching in all these respects. (2) It has to be seen whether there are limitations to research and teaching and what these limitations are. All things in this world may be considered from a triple point of view: from the logical, the physical, and the ethical. Applied to science we discover limitations in all three. (a) Logically science is limited by truth, which belongs to its very essence. Knowledge of things cannot be had from their causes, unless the knowledge be true. False knowledge cannot be derived from the causes of things; it has its origin in some spurious source. Should science ever have to choose between truth and freedom (a choice not at all imaginary), it must under all circumstances decide for truth, under penalty of self-annihilation. As long as the case is thus put theoretically, there is no difference of opinion. Yet in practice, it is almost hopeless to reconcile conflicting sentiments. When, in 1901, a vacant chair at the University of Strasburg was to be filled by a Catholic historian, Mommsen published a protest, in which he exclaimed: "A sense of degradation is pervading German university circles". On that occasion he coined the shibboleth "voraussetzungslos", and claimed that scientific research must be "without presuppositions". The same cry was raised by Harnack (1908) when he demanded "unbounded freedom for research and knowledge". The demand was formulated a little more precisely by the congress of academicians in Jena (1908). Their claim for science was "freedom from every view foreign to scientific methods". In the latter formula the claim has a legitimate meaning, viz., that unscientific views should not influence the results of science. In the meaning of Mommsen and Harnack, however, the claim is illogical in a double sense. First, there can be no "science without presuppositions". Every scientist must accept certain truths dictated by sound reason, among others, the truth of his own existence and of a world outside of himself; next, that he can recognize the external world through the senses, that a reasoning power is given to him for understanding the impressions received, and a will power free from physical constraint. As a philosopher, he reflects upon these truths and explains them on scientific methods, but will never prove all of them without involving himself in vicious circles. Whatever science he chooses he has to build it upon the natural or philosophical presuppositions on which his life as man rests. The fact is that every positive science borrows from philosophy a number of established principles. So much for the general premises. They alone would show how illogical is the claim for "science without presuppositions". But this is not all. Each science has its own particular presuppositions or axioms, distinct from its own conclusions, just as every building has its foundation, distinct from its walls and roof. Nay, the various branches of any special science have all their own proper presuppositions. Euclid's geometry is built upon three kinds of presuppositions. He calls them definitions, postulates, and common notions. The latter were called axioms by Proclus. To show the difference between hypothesis and result no better example could be chosen than Euclid's fifth postulate of the first book. The postulate says: "When two straight lines are intersected by a third so as to make the inner adjacent angles on one side less than two right angles, the two lines, indefinitely prolonged, will intersect on the side of those lesser angles." By a mistake of Proclus (fifth century) the postulate was changed into a proposition. Innumerable attempts at proving the supposed proposition were made, until the error was recognized, only a century ago. The fifth postulate, or axiom of parallels as it is often called, proved to be a real hypothesis, distinct from all the other presuppositions. Non-euclidian geometries have been constructed by a simple change of the fifth postulate. All this shows that there is no geometry without presuppositions. And similarly, there is no algebra without presuppositions. Law starts from the existence of families and from their natural tendency towards association for common welfare. Medicine takes the human body as a living organism, subject to derangement, and the existence of remedies, before it constructs its science. History supposes human testimony to be, under certain conditions, a reliable source of knowledge, before it begins its researches. Linguistic sciences, likewise, take it or granted that human languages are not constructed arbitrarily but evolved logically from a variety of circumstances. Theology takes from philosophy a number of truths, such as the existence of God, the possibility of miracles, and others. In fact, one science borrows its presuppositions from the results of other sciences, a division of labour which is necessitated by the limitations of everything human. Hence, the cry for "science without presuppositions" is doubly illogical, unless by presupposition is meant an hypothesis that can be proved to be false or foreign to the particular science in question. The freedom of science therefore has its limitations from the point of view of logic. (b) From the physical point of view science requires material means. Buildings, endowments, and libraries are necessary to all branches of science, in research as well as in teaching. Medical and natural sciences require extraordinary means, such as laboratories, museums, and instruments. Material requirements have always imposed limitations upon scientific research and teaching. On the other hand, the appeals of science for freedom from the burden have been generously answered. Between the twelfth and the fourteenth centuries about forty universities were founded in Europe, partly by private initiative, partly by princes or popes, in most cases by the combined efforts of both together with the members of the university. Among the self-originating universities may be mentioned Bologna, Paris, Oxford, and Cambridge. With the help of princes, universities were erected at Palencia, Naples, Salamanca, Seville, and Siena. Of the universities founded by popes we mention only Rome, Pisa, Ferrara, Toulouse, Valladolid, Heidelberg, Cologne, and Erfurt. Most of the old universities, like Coimbra, florence, Prague, Vienna, Cracow, Alcalá, Upsala, Louvain, Leipzig, Rostock, Tübingen, and many others, owe their origin to the combined efforts of princes and popes. The foundations consisted mainly of charters giving civil rights and authorizing scientific degrees, in most cases also of material contributions and endowments. To many of the professors' chairs, ecclesiastical benefices were applied by the popes without other obligation than that of teaching science. Naturally the founders retained a certain authority and influence over the schools. On the whole, the old universities enjoyed everywhere the same freedom which they have in England up to this day. After the Reformation the governments of continental Europe made the universities of their own territories State institutions, paying the professors as Government employees, sometimes prescribing textbooks, methods of teaching, and even doctrines. Although in the nineteenth century, governments were obliged to relax their supervision, they still keep the monopoly of establishing universities and of appointing the professors. Their influence on the progress of science is unmistakable; how far this may benefit science, need not be decided in this place. With the growing influence of the State that of the Church has been diminished, in most universities to total extinction. In the few European universities in which the faculty of Catholic theology is still allowed to exist, the supervision of the Church over her own science is almost reduced to a mere veto. The necessity of exempting the professors from the oath against the Modernistic heresy is an illustration of the case. Owing to the freedom of teaching in the United States of America there are, besides the public universities of the different states, a number of institutions founded by private endowment. In the face of the strong aid which anti-Christian and atheistic tendencies receive through the influence of universities, private endowments of schools that maintain the truth of Revelation cannot be too much recommended. (c) The limitations of science from the ethical point of view are twofold. The direct action of science on ethics is readily understood; the reaction of ethics upon science is just as certain. And both action and reaction create limitations for science. The activity of man is guided by two spiritual faculties, understanding and will. From the understanding it derives light, from the will firmness. Naturally the understanding precedes the will and hence the influence of science upon ethics. This influence becomes an important factor in the welfare of the human race for the reason that it is not confined to the scientist in his own researches, but reaches the masses through the various forms of teaching by word and writing. If one is to judge aright in this matter, two general principles must be kept in view. First, ethics is more important for mankind than science. Those who believe in revelation, know that the Commandments are the criteria by which men will be judged (Matt., xxv, 35-46); and those who see only as far as the light of natural reason enables them to see, know from history that the happiness of peoples and nations consists rather in moral rectitude than in scientific progress. The conclusion is that if there should ever be a conflict between science and ethics, ethics should prevail. Now, there can be no such conflict except in two cases: when scientific research leads into error, and when the teaching of science, even if true, is applied against sound educational maxims. To see that these exceptions are not imaginary, one need only glance at the points of contact between science and faith, under A. All of them indicate actual conflicts. Unpedagogical teaching is sadly illustrated by the recent movement in Germany towards premature and even public instruction on sexual relations, which provoked a reaction on the part of the civil authorities. So much about the direct action of science on ethics. The case ought not to be reversible, in other words, ethics should not influence science, except in the way of stimulating research and teaching. However, not only individuals but whole schools of scientists have been subject to that human frailty expressed in the adage: Stat pro rations voluntas. As Cicero expresses it: "Man judges much more frequently influenced by hatred or love or cupidity . . or some mental agitation, than by the truth, or a command, or the law" (De oratore, II, xlii). If Cicero is correct, then the freedom of knowledge, so highly praised and so loudly demanded, is perverted by men in a double sense. First, they carry the freedom of the will into the judgment. Love, hatred, desires, are passions or acts of the will, while judgments are formed by the understanding, a faculty entirely devoid of free choice. Secondly, they deprive the understanding of the necessary indifference and equilibrium, and force it to one side, whether the side of truth or that of falsehood. If the men of science, who clamour for freedom, belong to the class described by Cicero, then their idea of freedom is entirely confused and perverted. It may be answered that Cicero's statement applied to daily affairs rather than to the pursuits of science. This is perfectly true as far as exact sciences are concerned, and it is probably true also in regard to the formal object of every science. Yet when we consider the very first postulates that the sciences take from philosophy, we come very near to daily life. Men of science hear of Christ and know of the magna carta of His kingdom, proclaimed on the mountain (Luke, vi). It cuts very sharply into daily life. It could be discarded, if that same Christ had not claimed all power in heaven and on earth, and if He had not prophesied His second coming, to judge the living and the dead. Here it is that Cicero's love and hatred come in. It is quite safe to say: there is no place in the civilized world where Christ is not loved and hated. Those who are willing to take the steep and narrow path towards His kingdom accept the testimonies to His Divine mission with impartiality; others who prefer an easier and broader way of life try to persuade themselves that the claims of Christ are unfounded. For, besides those who either reject His claims through inherited or acquired prejudices, or treat them with indifference, a large number of men try to strengthen their anti-Christian position by scientific forms. Knowing that Christ's Divinity can be proved from the miracles to which He appealed as testimonies of His Father, they formulate the axiom: "Miracles are impossible". Seeing, however, the inconsistency of the formula as long as there is a Maker of the world, they are driven to the next postulate: "There is no Creator". Seeing again, that the existence of the Creator can be proved from the existence of the world, and convincingly so by a number of arguments, they require new axioms. First they treat the origin of matter as too remote for its cause to be ascertained, and plead that: "Matter is eternal". For a similar reason the origin of life is explained by the arbitrary postulate of "spontaneous generation" . Then the wisdom and order displayed in the starry heavens and in the flora and fauna of the earth must be disposed of. To say in plain words "All order in the world is casual" would be offensive to common sense. The axiom is then vested in more scientific language, thus: "From eternity the world has passed through an infinite number of forms, and only the fittest was able to survive". The substructure of anti-Christian science has still one weak point: the human soul is not from eternity and its spiritual faculties point to a spiritual maker. The fabrication of axioms, once begun, has to be concluded: "The human soul is not essentially different from the vital principle of the animal". This conclusion recommends itself as especially strong against what the will dreads: the animal is not immortal, and hence neither is the human soul; consequently whatever judgment may follow, it will have no effect. The end of the fabrication is bitter. Man is a highly developed orang-outang. There is still one stumbling-block in the Sacred Scriptures, old and new. The Old Testament narrates the creation of man, his fall, the promise of a Redeemer; it contains prophecies of a Messias which seem to be fulfilled in Christ and His Church. The New Testament proves the fulfilment of the promises, and presents a superhuman Being, who offered His life for the expiation of sin and attested His Divinity by His own Resurrection; it gives the constitution and early history of His Church, and promises her existence to the consummation of the world. This could not be allowed to stand in the face of anti-Christian science. A few postulates more or less will do no harm to science as it stands. The Hebrew literature is put on a par with that of Persia or China, the history of Paradise is relegated to the realm of legends, the authenticity of the books is denied, contradictions in the contents are pointed out, and the obvious sense is distorted. The axioms used for the annihilation of the Sacred Scriptures have the advantage of plausibility over those used against the Creator. They are draped in a mass of erudition taken from the linguistic and the historical sciences. But we have not seen all of them yet. The greatest obstacle to anti-Christian science is the Church, which claims Divine origin, authority to teach infallible truth, maintains the inspiration of Scripture, and is confident of her own existence to the end of the world. With her, science cannot play as With philosophy or literature. She is a living institution wielding her sceptre over all the peoples of the world. She has all the weapons of science at her disposal, and members devoted to her, heart and soul. To grant to her equal rights on scientific grounds would be disastrous to the "science without presuppositions". The mere creating of new axioms would not seem to be efficient against a living organization. The axioms have to be proclaimed loudly, and kept alive, and finally enforced by organized opposition, even in some cases by government power. Books and journals and lecture halls announce the one text, sung in every key, the great axiom: that the Church is essentially unscientific as resting on unwarranted presuppositions, and that her scientists can never be true men of science. Mommsen's cry of degradation on the appointment of a Catholic historian in Strasburg (1901) re-echoed loudly from most German universities. And yet, there was question of only a fifth Catholic among seventy-two professors; and this at a university in Alsace-Lorraine, a territory almost entirely Catholic. Similar proportions prevail in most universities. All the axioms of anti-Christian science mentioned above are entirely arbitrary and false. Not one of them can be supported by solid reasons; on the contrary, every one of them has been proved to be false. Thus anti-Christian science has surrounded itself by a number of boundary stakes driven into scientific ground, and has thus limited its own freedom of progress; the "science without presuppositions" is entangled in its own axioms, for no other reason than its aversion to Christ. On the other hand, the scientist who accepts the teaching of Christ need not fall back on a single arbitrary postulate. If he is a philosopher, he starts from the premises dictated by reason. In the world around him he recognizes the natural revelation of a Creator, and by logical deductions concludes from the contingency of things created to the Being Un-created. The same reasoning makes him understand the spirituality and immortality of the soul. From both results combined he concludes further to moral obligations and the existence of a natural law. Thus prepared he can start into any scientific research without the necessity of erecting boundary stakes for the purpose of justifying his prejudices. If he wants to go further and put his faith upon a scientific basis, he may take the books, called the Sacred Scriptures, as a starting-point, apply methodical criticism to their authenticity, and find them just as reliable as any other historical record. Their contents, prophecies, and miracles convince him of the Divinity of Christ, and from the testimony of Christ he accepts the entire supernatural Revelation. He has constructed the science of his faith without any other than scientific premises. Thus the science of the Christian is the only one that gives freedom of research and progress; its boundaries are none but the pale of truth. Anti-Christian science, on the contrary, is the slave of its own preconceived ethics. III. Unlimited Freedom The demand for unlimited freedom in science is unreasonable and unjust, because it leads to licence and rebellion. (1) There is no unlimited freedom in the world, and liberty over-stepping its boundaries always leads to evil. Man himself is neither absolutely free, nor would he desire unbounded freedom. Freedom is not the greatest boon nor the final end of man; it is given to him as a means to reach his end. Within his own mind, man feels bound to truth. Around himself, he sees all nature bound to laws and even dreads disturbances in their regular course. In all his activity he gets along best by remaining within the laws set for him. Those judgments are the best which are formed in accordance with the rules of logic. Those machines and instruments are the finest which are allowed the smallest amount of freedom. Social intercourse is easiest within the rules of propriety. Widening these boundaries does not lead to higher perfection. Opinions are free only where certainty cannot be reached; scientific theories are free as long as they rest on probabilities. The freest of all in their thinking are the ignorant. In short, the more freedom of opinion, the less science. Similarly, a railway train with freedom in more than one line is disastrous, a ship not under the control of the helm is doomed. A nation that depreciates its code of law, that relaxes the administration of justice, that sets aside the strict rules of propriety, that does not protect its own industry, that gives no guarantee for personal and public property and safety is on the decline. Unlimited freedom leads to barbarism, and its nearest approach is found in the wilds of Australia. (2) The cry of anti-Christian science is for license. The boundaries enumerated in the preceding paragraph circumscribe the logical, the physical, and the ethical realm of man. Whenever he steps outside, he falls into error, into misfortune, into licence. Now, to which realm does science belong? Aristotle's definition fixes it in the logical realm. And what becomes of the freedom of science? Within man, the logical realm is the intellectual faculty, and without, it is the realm of truth. Yet neither is free. Man's freedom is in the will not in the understanding. Truth is eternal and absolute. It follows that the cry for unbounded freedom of science has no place in the logical realm; evidently, it is not meant for the physical; so it must belong to the ethical realm; it is not a cry for truth, it is a cry with a purpose. What the purpose is can be inferred from what has been said under II. It may be summed up in the statement that it is rebellion against both supernatural and natural revelation. The former position is the primary but could not consistently be held without the latter. Rebellion is not too strong a word. If God pleases to reveal Himself in any way whatever, man is obliged to accept the revelation, and no arbitrary axiom will dispense him from the duty. Against natural revelation Paulsen and Wundt appeal to the postulate of "closed natural causality", meaning by "closed" the exclusion of the Creator. Supernatural revelation was styled by Kant "a dogmatic constraint", which, he says, may have an educational value for minors by filling them with pious fears. Wundt follows him by calling Catholicism the religion of constraint, and Paulsen praises Kant as "the redeemer from unbearable stress". All these expressions rest on the supposition that in science there is no place for a Creator, no place for a Redeemer. Many attempts have been made to put the axiom on a scientific basis; but it remains an assumed premise, an "unwavering conviction", as Harnack calls it. (3) That the expressions "license" and "rebellion" are just is clear from the consequences of anti-Christian science. (a) Anti-Christian science leads to Atheism. When science repudiates the claim of Christ as Son of God, it necessarily repudiates the Father who sent Him, and the Holy Ghost who proceeds from both. The logical inference does not find favour with the partisans of that science. When in 1892 the school laws were being discussed in the German Reichstag, Chancellor Caprivi had the courage to say: "The point in question is Christianity or Atheism . . . the essential in man is his relation to God." The outcry on the "liberal" side of the House showed that the chancellor had touched a sore point. Since the repudiation of the Creator is clearly an abuse of freedom and an infringement of the natural law, science has, by all means, to save appearances by scientifically sounding words. First it calls the two great divisions of spirits Monism and Dualism. German scientists have even formed the "Monists' Union" claiming that there is no real distinction between the world and God. When their system emphasizes the world it is Materialism; when it accentuates the Divinity it is Pantheism. Monism is only a gentler name for both. The plain word "atheism" seems to be too offensive. English Naturalists replaced it long ago by better-sounding words, like Deism and Agnosticism. Toland, Tindal, Bolingbroke, Shaftesbury, of the eighteenth century, took satisfaction in removing the Deity so far away from the world that he could have no influence on it. Yet "Deity" still had too religious an odour and implied a gross inconsistency. To Huxley and other scientists of the nineteenth century the well-sounding name "agnosticism" appeared more dignified. In the face of natural law, however, which binds man to know and to serve his Creator, pleading ignorance of God is as much a rebellion against Him as shutting Him out of the world. All these and other tactful terms and phases cover the same crude Atheism and stand, without exception, confessedly; on a collection of arbitrary postulates. Dualism, on the contrary, has no need of postulates, except those dictated by common sense. Sound reason beholds in creation, as in a mirror, its Maker, and is thus able to refer natural phenomena to their ultimate cause. While science requires the knowledge of intermediate causes only, the knowledge of things by their ultimate cause raises science to its highest degree, or wisdom, as St. Thomas Aquinas calls it. This is why logical coherence and consistency are always and exclusively found in the dualistic doctrine. It is vain to hope that the abyss between the logical philosophy of Dualists and the "unwavering convictions" of Monists may be bridged over by discussions. This was well illustrated when Father Wasmann lectured in Berlin (1907) on the theory of Evolution and was opposed by Plate and ten other speakers. The result of the discussion was that each, Plate and Wasmann, put his respective views in print, the one his axioms and the other his philosophy, and that, moreover, Plate denied that Wasmann was entitled to be considered a scientist on account of what he called Wasmann's Christian presuppositions. (b) After the exclusion of God, there is need of an idol; the necessity lies in human nature. All the nations of old had their idols, even the Israelites, when at times they rebelled against the Prophets. The shape of the idols varies with progress. The savages made them of wood, the civilized pagans of silver and gold, and our own reading age makes them of philosophical systems. Kant did not draw the last consequences from his "autonomy of reason"; it was done by Fichte, Schelling, and Hegel. This Idealism developed into Subjectivism in the widest sense of the word, viz., into the complete emancipation of the human mind and will from God. The idol is the human Ego. The consequences are that truth and justice lose their eternal character and become relative concepts; man changes with the ages, and with him his own creations; what he calls true and right in one century, may become false and wrong in another. In regard to truth we have the explicit statement of Paulsen, that "there is no philosophy eternally valid". Relative to justice, Hartmann defines Kant's autonomy in the following words: "It means neither more nor less than this, that in moral matters I am the highest tribunal without appeal." Religion, which forms the principal part of justice, becomes likewise a matter of subjective inclination. Harnack calls submission to the doctrine of others treason against personal religion; and Nietzsche defends his idol by calling Christianity the immortal shame of mankind. The axiom is pronounced in more dignified form by Pfleiderer (1907). "In the science of history", he says, "the appearance on earth of a superhuman being cannot be considered". Perhaps in the most general way it is formulated by Paulsen (1908): "Switching off the supernatural from the natural and historical world". Yet, all these subjective axioms are only more or less scientific forms of the plain Straussian postulate (1835): "We are no longer Christians". (c) Here we are confronted by two facts that need earnest consideration. On the one hand, the Government universities of nearly all countries in Europe and many American universities exclude all relation to God and practically favour the atheistic postulate just mentioned; and on the other hand, these are the very postulates summed up by Pius X under the name of "modernism". Hence the general outcry of the State universities against the Encyclical "Pascendi" of 1907. To begin with the first, the licence of subjective truth is the very hotbed of anarchistic theories and the rebellion against the teaching of Christ will end with the moral conditions of Greek and Roman paganism. As we are not concerned here with the relation between science and the State, it must suffice to show how the alarm is beginning to sound. It seems to be a matter of course, and yet it sounds unusual, when Count Apponyi as minister of education and worship in Hungary, on the occasion of an academic promotion, recommends to teachers of science a moral and earnest conscientiousness. More remarkable is the warning of Virchow at the meeting of scientists at Munich (1877) against teaching personal views and speculations as established truths, and in particular, against replacing the dogmas of the Church by a religion of evolution. The moral state of a youth growing up under such teaching could be anticipated in general from the history of paganism. It was reserved to our anti-Christian age, however, to justify immorality with an appearance of science. The assertion has been made and circulated in journals and meetings, that a pure and moral life is detrimental from the point of view of medicine. The medical faculty of the University of Christiania found it necessary to declare the assertion entirely false, and to state positively that "we know of no harm or weakness owing to chastity". The same protest was expressed by Dr. Raoult in the words: "There is no such thing as pathology of continency"; and by Dr. Vidal (see below) in the statement, that the commandments of God are legitimate from the standpoint of medicine, and that their observance is not only possible but advantageous. Warnings like these may be called forth by anticipated effects; but we hear others that prove the effects already existing. Such was the unanimous vote of the International Conference for the protection of Health and Morals held at Brussels (September, 1902): "Young men have to be taught that the virtues of chastity and continency are not only not hurtful but most commendable from a purely medical and hygienic point of view". The effects in educational institutions must have been appalling before scientific authorities dared to lift the veil by public warnings. They were given by Dr. Fleury (1899) in regard to French colleges, and were repeated by Dr. Fournier (1905) and Dr. Francotte (1907). Even louder are the warnings of Paulsen, Förster, and especially Obermedicinalrat Dr. Gruber regarding the German gymnasia and universities. Dr. Desplats (see bibliography) insists that in order to stay the current which is carrying the French along towards irremediable decadence, it is necessary to react against the doctrinal and practical neo-paganism. No wonder that the licentious doctrines have found their way from books into journals and passed from the educated to the illiterate. Sosnosky, a literary authority, compares the present moral epidemic to that of pagan Rome and of the French Revolution, and protests, from a merely natural point of view, against the hypocrisy of covering crude animalism with the cloak of art and science (see Allgemeine Zeitung, No. 3, 21 January, 1911). What the State either will not or dare not do, the Church does always, by keeping men mindful of the object or end of their existence and this last end is not science. The catechism points it out under three heads: the knowledge of God; the observance of His commandments; and the use of His grace. Knowledge of nature is intended by God as a subordinate means to this end. And for that very reason there can never be a conflict between science and our final destiny. The Church does not teach natural sciences, but she helps to make their principles tributary to wisdom, first by warning against error and then by pointing to the ultimate cause of all things. When science raises the cry against the guiding office of the Church, it is comparable to a system of navigation without any directions outside the ship itself and the surrounding waves. The formal object of each particular science is certainly different from faith just as the steering of a vessel is different from the knowledge of the stars; but the exclusion of all guiding lights beyond the billows of scientific opinions and hypotheses is entirely arbitrary, unwise, and disastrous. B. THE CHURCH The Church in her relation to science may be better understood by a division of the subject into the following parts: Opposite views; distinction between the teaching body and the ecclesia discens; the holders of the teaching office; science of faith; pretended conflicts. I. Opposite views On the relation of the Church to science there are two irreconcilable views: (1) Leo XIII in his Apostolic Letter of 22 January, 1899, calls attention to the dangers imminent at the present time to the minds of Catholics, and specifies them as a confusion between licence and freedom, as a passion for saying and reviling whatever one pleases, as a habit of thinking or printing without restraint. The shadows cast by these dangers on men's minds, he says, are so deep as to make the exercise of the teaching office of the Apostolic See more necessary now than ever. The pope strengthens his words by the authority of the Vatican Council, which claims Divine faith for all things proposed by the Church, whether in solemn decision or by the ordinary universal magisterium. (2) Not so those outside the Church. To them spiritual restriction of thinking, speaking, writing is a remnant of the times when science was in fetters, a relic of the Dark Ages. Virchow, in discussing the appointment of professors of Protestant theology at Bonn and Marburg by the Prussian Government, made the following declaration in the Chamber (6 March, 1896): "If it is considered incumbent upon the theological faculties to preserve and to interpret a certain deposit of so-called Divine and revealed truths, then they do not fit into the framework of universities, they are in opposition to the scientific machinery prevailing there. The Reformers of the sixteenth century", he continued," are to-day replaced by free scientific criticism; consistently, instead of halting before the theological faculties, they should have abolished them, and the troubles ever arising from a certain class of men who claim to be holders of Divine truth, would have vanished" (reported by Hertling, see below, p. 49 sqq.). Such is the general voice of those who stand outside of any creed. There are others who wish to adhere to certain articles of faith established either by a congress of Reformers, or by a sovereign, or by Parliament. Although widely differing among themselves as to the inspired Books, the Divinity of Christ, and even the existence of Revelation, they all agree in considering the papacy a usurpation, and Catholic obedience in matters of faith and morals spiritual darkness and slavery. (3) These conflicting views have existed from the very cradle of Christianity, and will last to the end of the world. St. Ambrose (397) speaking of the wise of the world (sapientes mundi) says: "Deviating from faith, they are implicated in the darkness of perpetual blindness, although they have the day of Christ and the light of the Church before them; while seeing nothing, they open their mouth as if they knew everything, keen for vain things and dull for things eternal (Hexaemeron, V, xxiv, 86, in P. L., XIV, 240). Those who accept the teaching of Christ have always formed the smaller portion of mankind, and the mass of the small flock is not composed of the rich or the mighty or the wise of the world. They maintain that the Church is a Divine institution, endowed with the triple power of priesthood, teaching, and government; hence their submission, firmness, and union in matters of faith all over the world. Those who stand aloof and see in the Church nothing but a human institution, like the old Roman Empire for instance, may be consistent in condemning the Catholic position; at the same time they cannot help seeing even greater consistency in the Catholic point of view. To submit one's understanding to a doctrine supposed to be Divine and guaranteed to be infallible is undoubtedly more consistent than to accept prevailing postulates of science, or national doctrines, or a passing public opinion. Catholics must be permitted to interpret in their own favour what the Scripture says about the light of faith, the darkness of error, and the liberty of truth. II. The Teaching Body and the Ecclesia Discens The teaching and hearing bodies of Christ's Church are technically called "ecclesia docens" and "ecclesia discens". (1) The distinction between the teaching body of the Church and the body of hearers was made by its Founder in the command: "Going therefore, teach ye all nations" (Matt., xxviii, 19); "he that heareth you, heareth me" (Luke, x, 16). The same division is illustrated by St. Paul in the comparison between the human body and the mystical body of Christ: "If the whole body were the eye, where would be the hearing?" (I Cor., xii, 17). The office of teaching was communicated to the Church together with the dignity of priesthood and the authority of government. The triple power rests in St. Peter and the Apostles and their legal successors. The Divine office of teaching is not to impart scientific conviction, it is to give authoritative declaration, and the response to it, on the part of the hearers, is not science but faith. The Church may even use her ruling power to support her teaching. All this is exemplified in the early Christian centuries. The Twelve Apostles were not conversant with the schools of Athens, of Alexandria, or of Rome. St. Paul, who was called later, was probably the only scholar among them; and even he professes that his preaching was not in the persuasive words of human wisdom (I Cor., ii, 4). He used his power against Hymeneus and Alexander, who had made shipwreck concerning the faith (I Tim., i, 20), and exhorted Timothy to use the same authority against those who would not endure sound doctrine (II Tim., iv, 3). The Apostle St. John blamed several bishops of Minor Asia for not removing false teachers (Apoc., ii, 14-20). (2) The partition of the Church in two bodies, one teaching and one hearing, does not exclude science from the latter, any more than it necessarily includes it in the former. The assent of faith is a rational act; before it can be made, it must be known for certain that there is a God, that God has spoken, and what He has spoken. The Apostles, the early Fathers, councils, and popes bear witness to it (Pesch, see below, pp. 18-22). St. Peter wants the faithful to be ready always to satisfy every one that asketh a reason of that hope which is in them (I Pet., iii, 15). St. Augustine asks: "Who does not see that knowledge precedes faith? Nobody believes unless he knows what to believe". The following is the declaration of the Vatican Council (Sess. III, de fide, cap. 3): "To render the service of our faith reasonable, God has joined to the interior actions of the Holy Ghost exterior proofs of His revelation: Divine facts, miracles especially and prophecies, which are speaking witnesses of His infinite power and wisdom, unfailing testimonies of Divine revelation and adapted to the understanding of every one". Innocent XI explicitly condemned the opinion that mere probability in the knowledge of revelation is sufficient for the supernatural assent of faith. Pius IX demands that human reason should inquire conscientiously into the facts of Divine revelation, to make sure that God has spoken, in order to render Him, according to the Apostle, a reasonable service. In the knowledge of the premises of faith, man has to progress with age and education. The child cannot give supernatural assent of faith to what parents or teachers say, until its mind is sufficiently developed to be sure of the existence and contents of Divine revelation. Again, the knowledge that may suffice for a child will not do for a man. He must apply his mental faculties and interest himself in the foundations of his faith. The prudence of his mind should equal the simplicity of his will. Prof. Heis used to have the catechism on his desk beside the scientific books. Progress of knowledge is especially commendable in parents, teachers, students, above all in professors of theological science and in ecclesiastical dignitaries. Under their scientific methods the premises of faith have become a special branch of theology, called apologetics. (3) The contents of faith should be penetrated as far as mental faculties and Divine grace allow. Revelation points out the eternal destiny, shows the way, and gives the means; it warns against eternal loss, helps in temptation, and shields from evil. Without knowledge there is no interest, and the consequence is forgetfulness of the main purpose of life. Hence the duty of all men to listen to God, to meditate on His words, and to understand them in a way. The highest acts of mercy and charity are teaching the ignorant and correcting the erring. The study of revealed truth and the propagation by word and writing of the knowledge thus acquired was practised in the Church at all times and by all classes. Owing to this study the Divine deposit of faith has grown into a scientific system which, in clearness and firmness of structure, is not equalled by other branches of knowledge. From the frame of that system stand out in bold relief the deep mysteries, beyond human comprehension, indeed, but well defined in meaning and safe against objections. It must be remembered. though, that divines and doctors, as such, do not constitute the teaching body of the Church; they all belong to the "Ecclesia discens". Theology as a scientific system, with propositions, arguments, and objections, is not the direct object of the "Ecclesia docens". She leaves it to specialists, with all manner of encouragement and direction. (4) The dangers against faith. -- Since faith, as the foundation of eternal life, is a supernatural virtue, it is exposed to temptation like all other virtues. Some difficulties are inherent in the deposit of faith, others arise from outside. A revealed truth may appear contrary to the mind as unintelligible, like the mysteries, or repugnant to the will as entailing unwelcome precepts. Temptations from outside may be the constant hostility of the world towards the Church, discrimination against Catholics, falsification of history, anti-Christian and infidel literature, scandals within, and defections from, the Church. From her positive and exclusive right to teach all nations whatsoever Christ has commanded the Apostles (Matt., xxviii, 19-20), the Church necessarily derives also the right of defence. To protect her flock against dangers of faith she calls in the full authority of her ruling power with its subdivisions of legislation, judiciary, and administration. By this power she regulates the appointment and removal of religious teachers, the admission or prohibition of religious doctrines, and even methods of teaching, in word or writing. III. The Holders of the Teaching Office These are the pope and the bishops, as successors to St. Peter and the Apostles. The promise of Divine assistance was given together with the command of teaching; it rests, therefore, in the same subjects, but is restricted to official, to the exclusion of private, acts regarding the deposit of faith. (1) The official activity of teaching may be exercised either in the ordinary, or daily, magisterium, or by occasional solemn decisions. The former goes on uninterruptedly; the latter are called forth in times of great danger, especially of growing heresies. The promise of Divine assistance provides for the integrity of doctrine "all days, even to the consummation of the world" (Matt., xxviii, 20). From the nature of the case it follows that individual bishops may fall into error, because ample provision is made when the entire teaching body of the Church and the supreme pastor in particular are protected by Providence. The "Ecclesia docens", as a whole, can never fall into error in matters of faith or morals, whether her teaching be the ordinary or the solemn; nor can the pope proclaim false doctrines in his capacity of supreme pastor of the universal Church. Without this prerogative, which is known by the name of Infallibility, the Divine promise of assistance would be a fallacy. To the right of teaching on the part of the "Ecclesia docens" naturally corresponds the obligation of hearing on the part of the "Ecclesia discens". Hearing is meant in the sense of submitting the understanding, and it is of a double nature, according as the teaching is, or is not, done under the guarantee of infallibility. The former submission is called assent of faith, the latter assent of religious obedience. (2) Submission of the understanding to other than Divine authority may appear objectionable, but is practised, in science as well as in daily life, in hundreds of ways. With regard to the Church submission of the understanding is especially appropriate, no matter whether she speaks with infallible or with administrative authority, in other words whether the submission is one of faith or one of obedience. Even from a human point of view her authority is exceptionally high and impartial. To the teaching that rests directly on the ruling authority only, without the prerogative of infallibility, belong the pastoral letters of bishops, particular diocesan catechisms, decrees of provincial synods, the decisions of Roman Congregations, and many official acts of the pope, even such as are obligatory on the universal Church. In each diocese the official authority in matters of faith and morals is the bishop. Without his (or higher) consent no professor of theology, no catechist, no preacher can exercise his official function, and no publication that touches upon matters of faith and morals is permitted within the diocese. The approbation of teachers is known as canonical mission, while the approval or refusal of books is called censorship (q.v.). Above the diocesan tribunals stand the Roman Congregations (q.v.) to which certain matters are reserved and to which appeal can be made. Science, in particular, may come in contact with the Congregation of Rites, which examines miracles proposed in support of beatifications and canonizations. More frequently it is the Congregation of the Index, which officially examines and decides upon the danger, to faith and morals, of books (not persons) denounced or under suspicion, and the Holy Office of the Inquisition, which decides questions of orthodoxy, with the pope himself as prefect. All the ecclesiastical authorities, mentioned in this paragraph, participate, either officially or by delegation, in the legislative, judicial, and executive powers of the Church, in support of their functions. It goes without saying that their decisions become endowed with the prerogative of infallibility, when the pope approves them, not in an ordinary manner as, for instance, when he acts as prefect of a Congregation, but solemnly, or ex cathedra, with the obligation of acceptance by the whole Church. (3) To men of science the Roman tribunals of the Index and the Inquisition are best known in connexion with the name of Galilei. Here seems to be the place to speak about the attitude of non-Catholic scientists towards the case. It can be shown that it is not always in keeping with the principles of science, from a triple point of view. (a) The error involved in the condemnation of Galilei is used as an argument against the right of the tribunals to exist. This is illogical and partial. The error was purely accidental, just as the miscarriages of justice in criminal courts is often the unfortunate result of similar accidental errors. If the argument does not hold in the latter case, it holds much less in the former. The error was a universal opinion tenaciously defended by the Reformers of the sixteenth century. Besides, it is about the only seriously erroneous decision of its kind among the hundreds that issued from the Roman tribunals in the course of centuries. (b) What is objected to in the Galilei case is not so much the historical fact of the blunder, as the permanent claim of the Church to be, by Divine right, the guardian of the Scripture; it is the principle by which she adheres to the literal sense of Holy Writ, as long as either the context or the nature of the case does not suggest a metaphorical interpretation. Granted that the evidences, which convinced Copernicus, Kepler, and Galilei, should also have convinced the theologians of the time, the latter committed a blunder. It cannot be this, however, that is continually held up against the Church. Official blunders of the highest tribunals are easily and constantly pardoned, when they are committed in the exercise of an acknowledged right. Nobody condemns the administration of justice when a disputed case, in its course of appeals, is reversed two or three times, although each reversal puts a juridical blunder on record. Hence, what is condemned in the case of Galilei, must be the right itself, viz., the claim and the principle before mentioned. Evidently, however, they are in no way peculiar to the case of Galilei; they are as old as the Church; they have been applied in our own days, e. g. in the Syllabus of Pius IX (1864), in the Vatican Council (1870) and recently in the Encyclical "Pascendi" of Pius X (1907); and they will be applied in all the future. To attack the claim of the Church as guardian of the Scripture, there is no apparent need for going back again and again to the old Galilei incident. Nor is the legal procedure against Galilei in any way peculiar to his case. The historian judges it by the established laws of the seventeenth century and finds it unusually mild. What is it then that prevents the Galilei controversy from resting? It is hard to see any other motive in the agitation but the reluctance to admit the Church's claim to be the interpreter of the Scriptures. (c) The vast Galilei literature shows a remarkable difference in the opposite points of view. Among Catholics little importance is attached to the case, simply because Catholics knew before and after, that the Roman Congregations are liable to error, and only wonder that not more mistakes are recorded in history. Among the others the sympathy shown for Galilei is not easily intelligible from a scientific point of view. The whole process was an entirely internal affair of the Church: Galilei appeared before his own legal superiors; for a time he was disobedient, but in the end submitted to his condemnation. The character which he displayed in the affair does not seem to call for the admiration paid to him. What then makes outsiders so sympathetic towards Galilei, if not his disobedience to the command of 1616? It would seem so, judging from the praises given to his "immortal" dialogues. IV. The Science of Faith Although faith is not science, yet there is a science of faith. The knowledge acquired by faith, on the one hand, rests upon science, and on the other lends itself to scientific methods. (1) Faith is in many ways a parallel case to history. Although historical knowledge is not directly scientific, yet there is a science of history. Scientific inquiries precede historical knowledge, and the results of historical research are treated on scientific methods. All we know from history we know upon the authority of testimony. It belongs to the science of history to search into the existence and trustworthiness of the sources and into the unfalsified transmission of their testimony to us. Nor is that all. The science of history will arrange the chain of discovered facts, not chronologically only, but with a view of causality. It will explain the why and the how in the rise and the downfall of men, of cities, of nations. (2) The science of faith is theology. -- Human testimony is here replaced by Divine authority. The premises of faith have been elaborated into a scientific system called apologetics. The Divinely revealed truths have been studied on historical, philosophical, and linguistic lines; they have been analyzed, defined, and classified; theoretical consequences have been drawn and applications to church discipline made; boundary lines between faith and science have been drawn and points of contact established; methodical objections and solutions have been applied; and attacks from outside logically refuted. The results of all these studies are embodied in a number of scientific branches, like the Biblical sciences, with their subdivisions of historical criticism, theoretical hermeneutics, and practical exegesis; then dogmatic and moral theology, with their consequences in canon law and sub-branches of pastoral theology, homiletics, liturgies; again church history and its branches, -- patrology, history of dogmas, archæology, art-history. The men who represent these sciences are the Greek and Latin Fathers and the Doctors of the Church, among them the founders of Scholastic theology, not to mention more recent celebrities among the regular and secular clergy. A vast literature may be found in Migne's edition of the Fathers and in Hurter's "Nomenclator". The widest field is here open for research eminently scientific. If science is knowledge of things from their causes, theology is the highest grade of science, since it traces its knowledge to the ultimate cause of all things. Science of this kind is what St. Thomas defines as wisdom. (3) Let it not be said that there is no progress in the science of faith. Dogmatic theology may appear as the most rigid of its branches, and even there we find, with time, deeper understanding, preciser definitions, stronger proofs, better classifications, profounder knowledge of dogmas in their mutual relation and history. Canon law has not only kept abreast with, but has gone ahead of, civil law, above all in its scientific foundations. Progress in the Biblical, historical, and pastoral disciplines is so apparent as to need only a passing mention. The answer to the question, whether there should be no progress of religion in the Church of Christ, goes as far back as the fifth century and was given by St. Vincent of Lerins in the following words: "Certainly let there be progress, and as much as may be . . . but so that it be really progress in the faith, not an alteration of it. "About alterations he gives the following explanation: "It is the peculiarity of progress for a thing to be developed in itself; and the peculiarity of change, for a thing to be altered from what it was into something else" (Commonitorium, 1,23; see P. L., L). The same difference between evolution and change was established by the Vatican Council: "If any one shall say that it is possible that, with the progress of science, a sense may ever be given to the doctrines proposed by the Church, other than that which the Church has understood and understands, let him be anathema" (Sess. III, can. iv, de fide et ratione, 1, can. 3). Science that is changed is not developed but abandoned, and so it is with faith. True development is shown in the parable of the mustard seed which grows into a tree, without destroying the organic connexion between the root and the smallest branches. (4) The scientific character of theology has been called in question on the following grounds: (a) Mysteries are said to be foreign to human science, for a double reason: they rest exclusively on Divine revelation, a source foreign to science; and then, they cannot be subjected to scientific methods. The objection has some appearance in its favour. Mysteries, properly so called, are truths which are essentially beyond the natural powers of any created intellect, and could never be known except by supernatural revelation. Yet the objection is only apparent. As far as the source of knowledge is concerned, science should be so eager for truth as to welcome it, no matter where it comes from. It should esteem the source of knowledge the higher the more certainty it gives. Science is bound to accept Divine Creation as its source; why should Divine Revelation be excluded from its domain? Natural sciences may confine themselves to the former, but the latter is in no way foreign to the historical and philosophical sciences, least of all to theology. The assertion that mysteries are beyond scientifico research is too general. First, their existence can be proved scientifically; secondly, they can be analysed and compared with other scientific concepts; finally, they yield scientific consequences not otherwise accessible. If the objection had any real force, it would apply similarly to mysteries improperly so called, i. e., to natural truths that we shall never know in this life. Every science is full of them, and they are the very reason why the most learned scientists consider themselves the most ignorant. The sources of their knowledge seem to be closed forever, and scientific methods fail to open them. If this be an objection to the scientific character of a branch, then let history, law, medicine, physics, and chemistry be cancelled from the list of sciences. (b) Scientific research is said to be impossible, when a proposition cannot be called in question, being bound up by the consensus of the Fathers and Doctors and the vigilant authority of the Church. A simple distinction between interior and methodical doubt will remove the difficulty. Methodical doubt is so much applied in theology that it may be said to be essential to Scholastic methods. And it is quite sufficient for impartial research. This is proved to evidence by the notorious fact that all the scientific proofs we now have for the Copernican system, without exception, have been furnished by men who could never entertain any interior doubt of its truth. The Catholic divine sees in the traditional doctrine of the Church a guiding light that leads him with great security through the fundamental questions of his science, where human reason alone is apt to lose itself in a labyrinth of inventions, surmises, hypotheses. Other difficulties touching upon science in general are mentioned in the next section. V. Conflicts The conflicts between science and the Church are not real. They all rest on assertions like these: Faith is an obstacle to research; faith is contrary to the dignity of science; faith is discredited by history. Basing the answers on the principles explained above, we can dispel the phantoms in the following manner. (1) A believer, it is stated, can never be a scientist; his mind is bound by authority, and in case of a conflict he has to contradict science. (a) The assertion is consistent on the supposition, that faith is a human invention. The believer, however, bases faith on Divine Revelation, and science on Creation. Both have their common source in God, the Eternal Truth. The principal points of contact between the two are enumerated above in section A (I), and only there can there be question of conflicts. It is shown in the same place (II) that every one of the pretended conflicts, without exception, rests on arbitrary axioms. As far as scientific facts are concerned, the believer rests assured that, so far, none of them has ever been in contradiction with an infallible definition. In case of an apparent difference between faith and science, he takes the following logical position: When a religious view is contradicted by a well-established scientific fact, then the sources of revelation have to be re-examined, and they will be found to leave the question open. When a clearly-defined dogma contradicts a scientific assertion, the latter has to be revised, and it will be found premature. When both contradicting assertions, the religious and the scientific, are nothing more than prevailing theories, research will be stimulated in both directions, until one of the theories appears unfounded. The conflict about the heliocentric system belonged, theoretically speaking, to the first case, and Darwinism, in its gross form, to the second; practically, however, disputed questions generally turn up in the third case, and so it was actually with the heliocentric system at the time of Copernicus, Kepler, and Galilei. (b) It is true, the believer is less free in his knowledge than the unbeliever, but only because he knows more. The unbeliever has one source of knowledge, the believer has two. Instead of barring his mind against the supernatural stream of knowledge by arbitrary postulates, man ought to be grateful to his Creator for every bit of knowledge, and, panting for truth, drink from both streams that pour down from heaven. Hence it is, that a well-instructed Christian child knows more of the important truths than did Kant, Herbert Spencer, or Huxley. Believing scientists do not wish to be free-thinkers just as respectable people do not want to be vagabonds. (2) Blind acceptance of dogmas and submission to non-scientific authority is said to be contrary to the dignity of science; hence the conflict between the Church and science. The answer is as follows: (a) The dignity of science consists in searching for and finding truth. What injures the dignity of science is error, sham theories, arbitrary postulates. None of these qualifications is found in faith. Infallible truth is guaranteed, and the assent is based on premises which are not blindly accepted but proved by reason, on the most scientific methods if desired. Unworthy of science are premises like the following: "Error can be removed only by science and scientific truth" (Lipps, 1908); or "The only authority is science" (Masaryk). Unworthy of science, again, is the inconsistency in not yielding to premises once reasonably established. No scientist hesitates to accept results furnished by branches other than his own or even from scientists within his own special line. Yet, many shrink from accepting faith, though the existence of revelation is as reasonably established as any historical fact. (b) When it comes to authority outside of science, the believing scientist knows that the authority to which he gives the assent of faith is Divine. The motive of his faith is not the Church, it is God. In God he sees the highest logical truth (infinite Wisdom), the highest ontological truth (the infinite Being), the highest moral truth (infinite Veracity). Bowing to such authority, infinitely beyond human science, is so much in harmony with sound reason, that science ought to be the first to say: "Ecce ancilla Domini". The dignity of science is indeed overshadowed by the dignity of faith, yet by no means degraded. (c) More difficulty is perhaps found in the assent of religious obedience than in the assent of faith. Here it is not an infallible authority which science is asked to respect, but one that may err, like any human tribunal, even the highest. The phrase "dignity of science" means practically the dignity of man in his qualification as a scientist. Now, we put before him an alternative: If he is a member of the Catholic Church, submission to lawful authority, which he knows is established by Christ, is not only not undignified but honourable to him in all cases, because he considers obedience a higher boon than science. His case is parallel to that of the law-abiding citizen in regard to the supreme court of justice. The citizen may appeal from lower tribunals to the highest, but should not revolt against the latter. If convinced that injustice has been done him, he will prefer the common good of peaceful order to private interests, and feel the more dignified for it as a citizen. But if the scientist stands outside the Catholic Church, he most probably feels quite unconcerned about her authority in regard to himself. He might then as well let the Church take care of her own internal affairs. In general, all scientists may consider the remark made by the bishops of the Province of Westminster in their joint pastoral letter of 1901 (see below): "It has been a fashion to decry the Roman Congregations by persons who have little or no knowledge of their careful and elaborate methods, of their system of sifting and testing evidence, and of the pains taken by the Holy See to summon experts, even from distant parts of the Church, to take part in their proceedings". As regards the Congregation of the Index in particular, its purpose is to shield the community from intellectual and moral poison. The prohibition of erroneous and dangerous publications is imposed by natural law upon the authorities of the family, of civil and religious communities; and science ought to be the first in the rank of co-operators. Only then would its real dignity shine forth. The Catholic scientist sees furthermore a positive law in the exercise of this power, as derived from the Divine office of teaching all nations. And he sees this right made use of from the very beginning of the Church, although the Congregation of the Index was not founded until 1570, and the first Roman Index had appeared only in 1559. Before the art of printing was invented, it sufficed to burn a few manuscript copies to prevent the spreading of a doctrine. So it was done at Ephesus in presence of St. Paul (Acts, xix, 19). It is known that the other Apostles, the Fathers of the Church, and the Council of Nice (325) exercised the same authority. The enumeration of the various censures, prohibitions, and indexes issued by cities, universities, bishops, provincial councils, and popes, through the Christian centuries, may be seen in Hilgers, "Der Index der Verbotenen Bücher" (Freiburg, 1904), 3-15. The necessity of restricting the licence of all manner of publications may be illustrated by the following facts. As regards heretical books one might suppose men like St. Francis of Sales and Balmes proof against all danger. Yet, the former thanked God for having preserved him from reading infidel books and from losing his faith. The latter confessed that he could not read a forbidden book without feeling the necessity of regaining the proper tune of mind by recurring to the Scripture, the "Imitation of Christ", and Louis of Granada. As to immoral productions of literature, the flood has now become so enormous and the criminal results are so alarming, that leagues for public morality are being formed, composed of men and women, comprising all the conservative elements and all religious denominations. Political and social dangers are not less to be feared than moral infection. For that reason there is hardly any country in the world where some censorship has not been exercised. The measures taken in England, in the Netherlands, Scandinavia, France, Switzerland, and Germany may be found in Hilgers, op. cit., 206-389. To say that all these measures of self-defence on the part of parents, of the State, and of the Church are against the dignity of science would be a very bold assertion. (3) Those who maintain that faith is discredited by history are the very ones that discredit history by falsifications. It must suffice in this place to allude to some principal points. (a) If a believer cannot be a scientist, as is maintained, then all the great scientists must be unbelievers. In spite of its boldness the assertion is made, in order to save the appearance of consistency. The fact is, however, that up to the French Revolution, when Voltaire and Rousseau drew the last consequences from Atheism, the great scientists, almost to a man, speak with great reverence of God and of His wonderful Creation. Is it necessary to mention Copernicus, Kepler, Galilei, Tycho Brahe, Newton, Huyghens, Boyle, Haller, Mariotte, the Bernoullis, Euler, Linné, and many others? Since it is often the advocates of the glorious principles of 1789 that never tire of recounting the tragedy of Galilei, we beg to remind them of the great chemist Lavoisier, who died faithful to his Church under the guillotine, while the free-thinkers raised the cry: "Nous n'avous plus besoin de chimistes" [see "Etudes", cxxiii (Paris, 1910), 834 sqq.]. For the time after the French Revolution we find in Kneller's volume (see below) the names of a glorious array of believing scientists, taken only from the branch of natural sciences. According to Donat ("Die Freiheit der Wissenschaft", Innsbruck, 1910, p. 251) among the 8847 scientists enumerated in Poggendorff's "Biographisch-Literarisches Handwörterbuch" (Leipzig, 1863) there are no less than 862 Catholic clergymen, or nearly ten per cent of the number. (b) The lack of true arguments for the theses "that faith is discredited by history" is supplied by falsification. Among the fables invented for the purpose may be mentioned the condemnation of the doctrine about the Antipodes. Its (probable) representative, Virgilius, was accused in Rome (747) but not condemned (Hefele, "Konziliengeschichte", III, 557). He became Bishop of Salzburg, and was afterwards canonized by Gregory IX. Another story is the alleged prohibition by Boniface VIII of the anatomy of the human body. Columbus is reported as excommunicated by the "Council" of Salamanca. The recent re-appearance of Halley's comet has revived the story of a papal Bull issued against the comet by Calixtus III (1456). The fable was started by Laplace, who invented the "conjuration", though he tried to tone for his untruthfulness by omitting the phrase in the fourth edition of his "Essai philosophique" (see LAPLACE). The atheist Arago changed the conjuration into excommunication. Vice-Admiral Smyth added the exorcism, Robert Grant the anathema, Flammarion the "maléfice", and finally John Draper the malediction. Here the vocabulary came to an end. Poetry, gross and fine, sarcasm, and even astronomical errors were resorted to, to illustrate the conflict between science and the Church. Babinet describes the Friar Minors, during the Battle of Belgrade, crucifix in hand, exorcising a comet which was not there; Halley's comet had disappeared more than a week before. Chambers (1861) honoured Callistus III with the title "the silly pope" for commemorating annually the victory of Belgrade. Daru lets the pope stand at the foot of the altar, with tears in his eyes and his forehead covered with ashes, and bids him look up and see how the comet continues its course unconcerned about conjurations. John Draper lets the pope scare the comet away by noisy bells after the fashion of savages. Dr. Dickson White composes a papal litany: "From the Turk and the comet, good Lord, deliver us", which was supplemented by another writer: "Lord save us from the Devil, the Turk and the Comet". In "Popular Astronomy" (1908) the comet is left more than a week too long on the visible sky and in the "Rivista di Astronomia" (1909) even a full month too long; in "The Scientific American" (1909) it appears fully three years too soon. Such fictions and falsifications are needed to prove conflicts between Science and the Church (see quotations and rectifications in Stein, "Calixte III et la comète de Halley", Rome, 1909; PLATINA, BARTOLOMEO). (c) As a specimen of the anti-Catholic literature on this subject we may take the "History of the Conflicts between Religion and Science" of John W. Draper (see below), which deserves special mention, not for the difficulty it presents, but for its wide circulation in various languages. The author placed himself exclusively on philosophical and historical grounds. Neither of them formed the field of his special studies, and the many blunders in his work might be pardoned, if it were not for the boldness of style and the shallowness of its contents. As the book is on the Index, a short specimen may be welcome to those who are not allowed to read it. In connexion with the subject of the preceding paragraph, Draper writes: "When Halley's comet came in 1456, so tremendous was its apparition that it was necessary for the pope himself to interfere. He exorcised and expelled it from the skies. It shrank away into the abysses of space, terror-stricken by the maledictions of Callixtus III, and did not venture back for seventy-five years! . . . By order of the pope, all the church bells in Europe were rung to scare it away, the faithful were commanded to add each day another prayer; and as their prayers had often in so marked a manner been answered in eclipses and droughts and rains, so on this occasion it was declared that a victory over the comet had been vouchsafed to the Pope". Except the first half sentence, that the "comet came in 1456", all his statements, without exception, are historical falsifications. The scurrility of language, however, makes one think that the author did not expect to be taken seriously. The same manner of treatment is given to other historical points, like Giordano Bruno, de Dominis, the Library of Alexandria. How the Spanish Inquisition comes into the book is easily understood from its purpose; but how it comes under the title, "Conflicts between Religion and Science", remains a logical problem. The domination of the Church in the Middle Ages and its influence upon the progress of science is a subject that required a different mind from that of a chemist or physicist. It was taken up by one of the Bollandists, Ch. de Smedt, in answer to Draper. It was an easy but, at the same time, disgusting task for him to correct Draper in this, as in all other historical points (de Smedt, see below). Draper's philosophical reasonings on the scientific freedom of believing scientists, on the right of the Church in proclaiming dogmas and demanding assent, on the possibility of miracles, betray complete ignorance or confusion of the principles explained in the preceding paragraphs. (4) A fitting conclusion to the chapter of "Conflicts between Science and the Church" may be found in the declaration of the Vatican Council (Sess. III, de fide, c. 4): "Faith and reason are of mutual help to each other: by reason, well applied, the foundations of faith are established, and, in the light of faith, the science of Divinity is built up. Faith, on the other hand frees and preserves reason from error and enriches it with knowledge. The Church, therefore, far from hindering the pursuit of arts and sciences, fosters and promotes them in many ways. . . . Nor does she prevent sciences, each in its sphere, from making use of their own principles and methods. Yet, while acknowledging the freedom due to them, she tries to preserve them from falling into errors contrary to Divine doctrine, and from overstepping their own boundaries and throwing into confusion matters that belong to the domain of faith. The doctrine of faith which God has revealed is not placed before the human mind for further elaboration, like a philosophical system; it is a Divine deposit, handed over to the Spouse of Christ, to be faithfully guarded and infallibly declared. Hence, the meaning once given to a sacred dogma by holy mother Church is to be maintained forever and not to be departed from under pretext of more profound understanding. Let knowledge, science and wisdom grow with the course of times and centuries, in individuals as well as in the community, in each man as in the whole Church, but in the proper manner, i.e., in the same dogma, in the same meaning, in the same understanding". What was pronounced in the Decree of the Vatican Council was represented by a master's hand on a wall of the Vatican, three centuries ago. In his fresco (wrongly) called "Disputa", Raphael has assigned to arts and sciences their proper place in the kingdom of God. They are grouped around the altar, accept the Gospel from angels' hands, raise their eyes to the Redeemer, and from Him to the Father and the Spirit, surrounded by the Church triumphant, their own ultimate end. SOURCES: -- ST. THOMAS AQUINAS, De veritate fidei catholic contra gentiles; HURTER, Uber die Rechte der Vernunft und des Glaubens (Innsbruck, 1863); KLEUTGRN, Theologie der Vorzeit (Münster, 1867-74); HETTINGER, Apologia, t. V, Lectures 21-22 (English tr.); Concilium Vaticanum, Const. Dei Filius, cap. 4, with explanations in Collectio Lacensis, VII, 535-7; HILGERS, Der Index der verbotenen Bücher (Freiburg, 1904); DONAT, Die Freiheit der Wissenschaft (Innsbruck, 1910). Reference literature: -- DRAPER, Hist. of the Conflicte between Religion and Science (New York, 1873), a work put on the Index on 4 September, 1876; the following three publications appeared against Draper's tirade: DE SMEDT, L'eglise et la science in Rev. des quest. scient., I (Brussels, 1877); ORTI Y LARA, La ciencia y la divina revelación (Madrid, 1881); MIR, Harmonia entre la ciencia y la Fe (Madrid, 1885); these two Spanish essays were crowned with the second prize (together with two others of RUBIO Y ORS and ABDÓN DE PAZ) by the Royal Academy of Moral and Political Sciences of Madrid. The same matter is also treated in the Civiltà cattolica, ser. X, vols. I, II, III (1876) and vol. XI (1878), and by MENÉNDEZ Y PELAYO, Hist. de los heterodoxos españoles (Madrid, 1880, 1888-91); ZÖCKLER, Gesch. der Beziehungen zwischen Theologie und Naturwissenschaften, II (Frankfurt, 1877-8), 595; BRAUN, Uber Kosmogonie vom Standpunkte christlicher Wissenschaft (Münster, 1887, 1895, 1905); ZAHM, Catholic Science and Catholic Scientists (Philadelphia, 1893); BROWNSON, Faith and Science (Detroit, 1895); HERTLING, Das Princip des Katholicismus und die Wissenschaft (Freiburg, 1899); PESCH, Das kirchliche Lehramt und die Freiheit der theologischen Wissenschaft in Stimmen, supplementary no. LXXVI (Freiburg, 1900); joint pastoral letter by the cardinal archbishop and the bishops of the Province of Westminster in The Tablet, LXV (London, 1901), 8, 50; CATHREIN, Glauben und Wissen (Freiburg, 1903); KNELLER, Das Christentum und die Vertreter der neueren Naturwissenschaft (Freiburg, 1904), tr. KETTLE, Christianity and Modern Science (St. Louis, 1911); GERARD, The Old Riddle and the Newest Answer (London, 1907); FONK, Die naturwissenschaftlichen Schwierigkeiten in der Bibel in Zeit. für kath. Theol., XXXI (1907), 401-32; with a supplement by the writer, 750-5; PETERS, Klerikale Weltauffassung und Freie Forschung, Ein offenes Wort an Prof. Dr. K. Menger (Vienna, 1908); LEAHY, Astronomical Essays (Boston, 1910); VIDAL, Religion et médecine (Paris, 1910), -- in connexion with this book may be consulted the lectures of DESPLATS and FRANCOTTE, delivered in the Section de medicine de la société scientifique de Bruxelles (séances of 1908 and 1907 respectively); SCHIAPARELLI, Astronomy of the Old Testament (Oxford, 1905); MAUNDER, The Astronomy of the Bible (New York, 1908); COHAUSZ, Das moderne Denken (Cologne, 1911). J.G. HAGEN Scillium (Titular See) Scillium A titular see in Africa Proconsularis, suffragan of Carthage. Perhaps the name should be written Scilium: the real name was possibly Scilli, or better, Scili. On 17 July, 180, six martyrs suffered for the Faith at Scillium; later, a basilica in which St. Augustine preached (Victor Vit., Persecut. Vandal. I, 3, 9; August, Serm. 155, ed. Migne) was dedicated to them (near Douar esh-Shott, west of the town). The Greek version of their Acts, in an addition which is later, says they were natives of "Ischle, Ischle, in Numidia". This name is a Greek transcription of Scillium. The tradition is already recorded in the primitive calendar of Carthage: XVI K. Aug. ss. Scilitanorum (see Martyrolog. Hieronym.", ed. Duchesne and de Rossi, pp. lxx and 92). The Greek compiler intended possibly to speak not of the Province of Numidia, but of the Numidian country and so would have placed Scillium in Proconsular Numidia. In an epitaph of Simitthu, now Chemtou, we read Iscilitana; Simitthu was certainly in Proconsular Numidia, but was Scillium near it? A definitive answer is impossible, and the exact location of Scillium is unknown. Two of its bishops are mentioned: Squillacius, present at the Conference of Carthage, 411; and Pariator, who signed the letter addressed in 646 by the council of the proconsulate to the Patriarch Paul of Constantinople against the Monothelites. The town is mentioned in the seventh century by Georgius Cyprius ("Descriptio orbis romani", 662, ed. Gelzer, Leipzig, 1890, pp. 34, 106) under the name of Schele. Scillium was the native place of St. Cucuphas, martyred at Barcelona (feast on 25 July; cf. Acta SS., July VI, 149), and of St. Felix, martyred at Gerona (feast on 1 August; cf. Acta SS., August, I, 22). Scillium must not be confounded with Silli, or Sililli, in Numidia, the situation of which is unknown nor, as Battandier does ("Annuaire pontifical catholique", Paris, 1910), identified with Kasrin, which is Cillium, a see of Byzantium. TOULOTTE, Géog. de l'Afrique chrétienne. Proconsulaire (Rennes and Paris, 1892), 235; MONCEAUX, Hist. de l'Afrique chrétienne, I (Paris, 1901), 61 seq. S. PÉTRIDÈS Martyrs of Scillium Martyrs of Scillium In the year 180 six Christians were condemned to death by the sword, in the town of Scillium, by Vigellius Saturninus, Proconsul of Africa. The Acts of their martyrdom are of special interest, as being the most ancient Acts we possess for the Roman Province of Africa. Their trial is also notable among the trials of early martyrs inasmuch as the accused were not subjected to torture. The dialogue between the Proconsul and the martyrs shows that the former entertained no prejudices against the Christians. He exhorts them to comply with the law, and when they decline he suggests that they take time to think on the subject. The Christians quietly assure him that their minds are made up, whereupon he pronounces sentence: "Whereas Speratus, Nartallus, Cittimus, Donata, Vestia, Secunda have affirmed that they live after the fashion of the Christians, and when offered a remand to return to the manner of life of the Romans, persisted in their contumacy, we sentence them to perish by the sword". LECLERQ, Les Martyrs, I (Paris, 1906); ALLARD, Ten Lectures on the Martyrs (New York, 1907). MAURICE M. HASSETT. Scopia Scopia (SCUPI; SCOPIENSIS). Archdiocese, ancient residence of the early Servian rulers is the modern Uscub (Uskub, Ushkup, or Skoplje), a city of 25,000 inhabitants, situated on the left bank of the Vardar in Macedonia. The first known bishop is Perigorius, present at the Council of Sardica (343). Scopia was probably a metropolitan see about the middle of the fifth century. After 553 we have no notice of bishops of Scopia till 882. The Bulgarian wars in the tenth century caused a temporary suppression of the see, but when the Bulgarians were converted a century later it again became a metropolitan see. Scopia has also long been a Greek schismatic archiepiscopal see, subject to the Servian Patriarch of Ipek (or Pec); in 1717 it became, as it is now, a suffragan of Constantinople (Jirecek, "Geschichte der Bulgaren", p. 102). In 1346, Greek schismatic bishops held a national council under the patronage of the Servian ruler Dusan (1331-55), (Markovic, "Gli Slavi", ed. i, Papi II, 371). Catholic bishops continued to govern the See of Scopia during the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries. After 1340 Scopia had only titular bishops until 1656 when it became again a residential see. Since 1700 the bishops of Scopia bear the title of Apostolic administrators or of archbishops immediately dependent on the Roman See. Until 1860 the Catholic archbishops had an uncertain residence in the mountains of Macedonia or Albania, owing to the hostility of the Turks. They now reside in Uskup. Scopia was the birthplace of the famous sixteenth century Minorite, John Bandilovic, a Croatian theologian and writer whose "Pistoloje i Evanglelja" (Epistles and Gospels) was printed at Venice in 1613, and often reprinted. Worthy of mention among the archbishops of Scopia are the Franciscan, Urbanus Bogdanovic (d. 1864), and Darius Bucciarelli (d. 1878). The archbishopric extends over parts of Rumelia, Albania, and Old Servia, and numbers 11 parishes with a Catholic population of 19,473. Its ecclesiastical candidates are educated at the central seminary of Scutari. The school at Prizren and the archbishops of Scopia are subsidized by the Austrian emperor as well as by the Propaganda. GAMS, Series episcoporum, p. 417; LE QUIEN, Oriens christianus, II, 309. sqq., III, 1138; WERNER, Orb. terr. Cath., 124. ANTHONY LAWRENCE OGANCEVIC Scotism and Scotists Scotism and Scotists I. SCOTISM This is the name given to the philosophical and theological system or school named after John Duns Scotus (q.v.). It developed out of the Old Franciscan School, to which Haymo of Faversham (d. 1244), Alexander of Hales (d. 1245), John of Rupella (d. 1245), William of Melitora (d. 1260), St. Bonaventure (d. 1274), Cardinal Matthew of Aquasparta (d. 1289), John Pecham (d. 1292), Archbishop of Canterbury, Richard of Middletown (d. about 1300), etc. belonged. This school had at first but few peculiarities; it followed Augustinism (Platonism), which then ruled theology, and which was adopted not only by the Parisian professors belonging to the secular clergy (William of Auvergne, Henry of Ghent, etc.), but also by prominent teachers of the Dominican Order (Roland of Cremona, Robert Fitzacker, Robert of Kilwardby, etc.). These theologians knew and utilized freely all the writings of Aristotle, but employed the new Peripatetic ideas only in part or in an uncritical fashion, and intermingled with Platonic elements. Albertus Magnus and especially St. Thomas (d. 1274) introduced Aristoteleanism more widely into Scholasticism. The procedure of St. Thomas was regarded as an innovation, and called forth criticism, not only from the Franciscans, but also from the secular doctors and even many Dominicans. At this time appeared Scotus, the Doctor Subtilis, and found the ground already cleared for the conflict with the followers of Aquinas. He made indeed very free use of Aristoteleanism, much freer than his predecessors, but in its employment exercised sharp criticism, and in important points adhered to the teaching of the Older Franciscan School -- especially with regard to the plurality of forms or of souls, the spiritual matter of the angels and of souls, etc., wherein and in other points he combatted energetically St. Thomas. The Scotism beginning with him, or what is known as the Later Franciscan School, is thus only a continuation or further development of the older school, with a much wider, although not exclusive acceptance of Peripatetic ideas, or with the express and strict challenge of the same (e.g. the view that matter is the principium individuationis). Concerning the relation of these schools to each other, or the relation of Scotus to Alexander of Hales and St. Bonaventure, consult the work of the Flemish Recollect, M. Hauzeur. Concerning the character and teaching of Scotus we have already spoken in the special article, where it was stated that he has been unjustly charged with Indeterminism, excessive Realism, Pantheism, Nestorianism, etc. What has been there said holds good of Scotism in general, the most important doctrines of which were substantially developed by Scotus himself. Little new has been added by the Scotists to the teaching of their master; for the most part, they have merely, in accordance with the different tendencies of the day, restated its fundamental position and defended it. It will be sufficient here to mention two works in which the most important peculiarities of the Scotist theology are briefly set forth and defended -- Johannes de Rada, "Controversiae theol. inter S. Thom. et Scotum" (1598-); Kilian Kazen berger, "Assertiones centum ad mentem . . . Scoti" (new ed., Quaracehi, 1906). Reference may, however, be made to the influence which Scotism exercised on the teaching of the Church (i.e. on theology). It is especially noteworthy that none of the propositions peculiar to Scotus or Scotism has been censured by ecclesiastical authority, while the doctrine of the Immaculate Conception was soon accepted by all schools, orders, and theologians outside the Dominican Order, and was raised to a dogma by Pius IX. The definition of the Council of Vienne of 1311 that all were to be regarded as heretics who declared " quod anima rationalis . . . non sit forma corporis humani per se et essentialiter" (the rational soul is not per se and essentially the form of the human body), was directed, not against the Scotist doctrine of the forma corporeitatis, but only against the erroneous view of Olivius; it is even more probable that the Scotists of the day suggested the passing of the Decree and formulated it (see B. Jansen, loc. cit., 289 sqq., 471 sqq.). Nominalism is older than Scotus, but its revival in Occamism may be traced to the one-sided exaggeration of some propositions of Scotus. The Scotist Formalism is the direct opposite of Nominalism, and the Scotists were at one with the Thomists in combatting the latter; Occam himself (d. about 1347) was a bitter opponent of Scotus. The Council of Trent defined as dogma a series of doctrines especially emphasized by the Scotists (e.g. freedom of the will, free co-operation with grace, meritoriousness of good works, the causality of the sacraments ex opere operato, the effect of absolution). In other points the canons were intentionally so framed that they do not affect Scotism (e.g. that the first man was constitutus in holiness and justice). This was also done at the Vatican Council. In the Thomistic-Molinistic controversy concerning the foreknowledge of God, predestination, the relation of grace to free will, the Scotists took little part. They either supported one of the parties, or took up a middle position, rejecting both the predetermination of the Thomists and the scientia media of the Molinists. God recognizes the free future acts in His essence, and provides a free decree of His will, which does not predetermine our free will, but only accompanies it. Jesuit philosophers and theologians adopted a series of the Scotist propositions. Later authorities reject in part many of these propositions and partly accept them, or at least do not directly oppose them. This refers mostly to doctrines touching the deepest philosophical and theologieal questions, on which a completely certain judgment is difficult to obtain. The following are generally rejected: formalism with the distinctio formalis, the spiritual matter of angels and of the soul, the view that the metaphysical essence of God consists in radical infinity, that the relationes trinitariae are not a perfection simpliciter simplex; that the Holy Ghost would be a distinct Person from the Son, even though He proceeded from the Father alone; that the angels can naturaliter know the secreta cordium (secret thoughts); that the soul of Christ is formally holy and impeccable, not by the very fact of the hypostatic union, but through another gratia creata (the visio beatifica); that the merits of Christ are not simpliciter et intrinsece, but only extrinsece and secundum quid, infinite; that there are indifferent acts in individuo; that the gratia sanctificans and the charitas habitualis are the same habitus; that circumcision is a sacrament in the strict sense; that transubstantiation makes the Body of Christ present per modum adductionis, etc. Another series of propositions was misunderstood even by Catholie theologians, and then in this false sense rightly rejected -- e.g. the doctrine of the univocatio entis, of the acceptation of the merits of Christ and man, etc. Of the propositions which have been accepted or at least favourably treated by a large number of scholars, we may mention: the Scotist view of the relation between essentia and existentia; that between ens and nihil the distance is not infinite but only as great as the reality that the particular ens possesses; that the accidens as such also possesses a separate existence (e.g. the accidentia of bread and wine in the Eucharist); that not only God, but also man can produce an esse simpliciter (e.g. man by generation); haecceitas as the principium individuationis. Also many propositions from psychology: e.g. that the powers of the soul are not merely accidents even natural and necessary of the soul, that they are not really distinct from the substance of the soul or from one another; that sense perception is not purely passive; that the intellect can recognize the singular directly, not merely indirectly; that the soul separated from the body forms its knowledge from things themselves, not merely from the ideas which it has acquired through life or which God infuses into it; that the soul is not united with the body for the purpose of acquiring knowledge through the senses but for the purpose of forming with it a new species, i.e. human nature; that the moral virtues are not necessarily inter se connexae, etc. Also many propositions concerning the doctrine of the angels: e.g. that the angels can be numerically distinct from one another, and therefore several angels can belong to the same species; that it is not merely through their activity or the application of their powers that angels can be in a given place; that they cannot go from place to place without having to traverse the intermediate space; that they do not acquire all natural knowledge from infused ideas only, but also through contemplation of things themselves; that their will must not necessarily will good or evil, according as it has once decided. Furthermore, that Adam in the state of innocence could sin venially; that mortal sin, as an offence against God, is not intrinsically and simpliciter, but only extrinsically infinite; that Christ would have become man, even if Adam had not sinned; that the human nature of Christ had its proper created existence; that in Christ there were two filiationes, or sonships, a human and a Divine; that the sacraments have only moral causality; that, formally and in the last analysis, heavenly bappiness consists not in the visio Dei, but in the fruitio; that in hell venial sin is not punished with everlasting punishment; etc. Scotism thus exercised also positively a wholesome influence on the development of philosophy and theology; its importance is not, as is often asserted, purely negative -- that is, it does not consist only in the fact that it exercised a wholesome criticism on St. Thomas and his school, and thus preserved science from stagnation. A comparison of the Scotist teaching with that of St. Thomas has been often attempted -- for example, in the abovementioned work of Hauzeur at the end of the first volume; by Sarnano, "Conciliatio omnium controversiarum etc." (1589-). It may be admitted that in many cases the difference is rather in the terminology, or that a reconciliation is possible, if one emphasize certain parts of Scotus or St. Thomas, and pass over or tone down others. However, in not a few points the contradiction still remains. Generally speaking, Scotism found its supporters within the Franciscan Order; certainly, opposition to the Dominicans, i.e. to St. Thomas, made many members of the order disciples of Scotus. However, this does not mean that the foundation and development of Scotism is to be referred to the rivalry existing between the two orders. Even Aquinas found at first not a few opponents in his order, nor did all his fellow-Dominicans follow him in every particular (e.g. Durandus of St. Pourçain, d. 1332). The Scotist doctrines were also supported by many Minorites, of whose purity of purpose there can be no doubt, and of whom many have been included in the catalogue of saints and beati (e.g. Sts. Bernardine, John Capistran, Jacob of the March, Angelus of Chiavasso, etc.). Furthermore, Scotism found not a few supporters among secular professors and in other religious orders (e.g. the Augustinians, Servites, etc.), especially in England, Ireland, and Spain. On the other hand, not all the Minorites were Scotists. Many attached themselves to St. Bonaventure, or favoured an eclecticism from Scotus, St. Thomas, St. Bonaventure, etc. The Conventuals seem to have adhered most faithfully to Scotus, particularly at the University of Padua, where many highly esteemed teachers lectured. Scotism found least support among the Capuchins, who preferred St. Bonaventure. Besides Scotus, the order had other highly-prized teachers, such as Alexander of Hales, Richard of Middleton, and especially St. Bonaventure (proclaimed Doctor ecclesia by Sixtus V in 1587), the ascetico-mystical trend of whose theology was more suited to wide circles in the order than the critical, dispassionate, and often abstruse teaching of the Subtle Doctor. In Spain the martyred tertiary, Blessed Raymund Lullus (d. 1315), also had many friends. It may be said that the whole order as such never had a uniform and special school of Scotists; the teachers, preachers, etc. were never compelled to espouse Scotism. His disciples did indeed call Scotus " Doctor noster", " Doctor (vel Magister) Ordinis", but even among these many partly followed their own course (e.g. Petrus Aureolus), while Walter Burleigh (Burlaeus, d. about 1340) and still more so Occam were opponents of Scotus. It is only at the end of the fifteenth or the beginning of the sixteenth century that a special Scotist School can be spoken of. The works of the master were then collected, brought out in many editions, commentated, etc. Since 1501 we also find numerous regulations of general chapters recommending or directly prescribing Scotism as the teaching of the order, although St. Bonaventure's writings were also to a great extent admitted (ef. Marian Fernández Garcia, "Lexicon scholasticum etc.", Quaracchi, 1910; "B. Joan. Duns Scoti: De rerum principio etc. ", Quaracchi, 1910, preface article 3, nn. 46 sqq., where many regulations of 1501-1907 are given). Scotism appears to have attained its greatest popularity at the beginning of the seventeenth century; during the sixteenth and the seventeenth centuries we even find special Scotist chairs, e.g. at Paris, Rome, Coimbra, Salamanca, Alcalá, Padua, and Pavia. In the eighteenth century it had still an important following, but in the nineteenth it suffered a great decline. One of the reasons for this was the repeated suppressions of the order in almost every country, while the recommendation of the teaching of St. Thomas by several popes could not be favourable to Scotism. It has even been asserted that it is now merely tolerated; but this statement is a priori improbable in regard to a school of which not a single proposition has been censured, and to which so many highly venerated men (bishops, cardinals, popes, and saints) have belonged; and it is still less probable in view of the approval of the various general statutes (repeated so often down to the present day), in which Scotism is at least recommended. In their Decrees Leo XIII and Pius X have recommended not alone St. Thomas, but also Scholasticism in general, and this includes also the Scotist School. In 1897 Leo XIII approved the "Constitutiones Generales Fratrum Minorum", of which article 245 prescribes for the members of the order: "In doctrinis philosophicis et theologicis antiqae scholae Franciscanae inhaerere studeant, quin tamen ceteros scholasticos negligant" (In philosophical and theological doctrine they shall take care to follow the ancient Franciscan School, without, however, neglecting the other Schoolmen.) On 11 April, 1904, in a letter to the Minister General, Father Dionysius Schuler, Pius X expressed his pleasure at the revival of studies in the order in connexion with the Franciscan schools of the Middle Ages, and on 19 June, 1908, in a letter to the abovementioned Father Marian, praised his book, "Mentis in Deum quotidiana elevatio duce B. Joanne Duns Scoto etc." (Quaracehi, 1907. See Marian, op. cit., n. 66.) II. Scotists Most Scotists are both philosophers and theologians. Fourteenth Century Pupils of Scotus: Francis Mayron (d. 1327), a very fruitful writer, who introduced the actus sorbonicus into the University of Paris, i.e. the uninterrupted disputation lasting the whole day. Petrus Aureolus (d. about 1322), Archbishop of Aix. William de Rubione (about 1333). Jerome de Atharia, Order of the Blessed Trinity (about 1323). Antonius Andreae (d. about 1320) from Aragon, a true disciple of Scotus, who is said to have written several treatises attributed to the master. John de Bassolis (d. about 1347). Alvarus Pelagius (d. about 1350). Bishop Petrus de Aquila (d. 1371), called Scotellus from his faithful adherence to Scotus, of whose teaching he issued a compendium (new ed., Levanti, 1907-). Landulf Caraccioli (d. 1351), Archbishop of Amalfi. Nicolaus Bonet (Bovet), who went to Peking and died as Bishop of Malta in 1360; John Bacon, Carmelite (d. 1346). Fifteenth Century William Butler (d. 1410). Petrus de Candia (d. 1410 as Pope Alexander V). Nicolaus de Orbellis (d. about 1465), who wrote a commentary on the Sentences (many editions) William Vorilong (Vorlion etc., d. 1464), a celebrated theologian, who wrote a frequently quoted "Comm. super Sentent.", but who also followed St. Bonaventure. Angelus Serpetri, General of the Order (d. 1454). William Gorris (about 1480), not a Franciscan, who composed the "Scotus pauperum". Blessed Angelus of Chivasso (d. 1495), whose "Summa" (called Angelica) is extant in about thirty editions and contains a great deal of Scotist doctrine; it was publicly burned by Luther with the "Corpus juris canonici" in 1520. Antonius Sirretus (Sirectus, d. about 1490), famous for his "Formalitates", to whieb several later Scotists wrote commentaries. Tartaretus (about 1495), rector of the University of Paris, and not a Franciscan; Elector Frederick III of Saxony had his philosophical commentaries introduced into the University of Wittenberg at his expense. Thomas Pencket, Augustinian (d. 1487), knew Scotus almost by heart, and edited his works. Francis Sampson, General of the Order (d. 1491), was called by Pope Sixtus IV, before whom he held a disputation, the most learned of all. Francis de Rovere (d. 1484 as Sixtus IV), who defended in a disputation before Pius II and also in his writings the doctrine that the blood shed by Christ on the Cross was released from the hypostatic union. Stephen Brulefer (d. about 1499), renowned professor in Paris and later a Franciscan, who wrote "Comm. in Bonavent. et Scotum" (often edited). Sixteenth Century This period is very rich in names. The following may be mentioned: Paul Scriptoris (d. 1505), professor at the University of Tübingen, who had as students all the other professors and many other members of religious orders. Nicholas de Nüsse (d. 1509). Mauritius a Portu (d. 1513 as Archbishop of Tuam, Ireland), who wrote a commentary on many works of Scotus. Francis Lichetus, General of the Order (d. 1520). Anthony Trombetta, Archbishop of Athens (d. 1518), who wrote and edited able Scotist works. Philip Varagius (about 1510). Johannes de Monte (about 1510). Gometius of Lisbon (d. 1513), re-edited the often issued fourteenth-century "Summa Astesana". Frizzoli (d. 1520). James Almainus (about 1520), Parisian magister and not a Franciscan, favoured Gallicanism. Antonius de Fantes, physician, composed in 1530 a Scotus lexicon. Jerome Cadius (d. 1529). Le Bret (about 1527), wrote "Parvus Scotus". Paduanus Barletta (about 1545). James Bargius (about 1560). Johannes Dovetus, who wrote in 1579 "Monotesseron formalitatum Scoti, Sieretti, Trombettae et Bruliferi". Joseph Angles, bishop and celebrated moralist (d. 1587), wrote the often edited "Flores theol. ". Damian Giner issued the "Opus Oxoniense Scoti" in a more convenient form (1598). Cardinal Sarnanus (d. 1595), a highly distinguished scholar, wrote a commentary on some philosophical works of Scotus, and edited the works of many Scotists. Salvator Bartolucci (about 1586), also a zealous editor. Felix Perettus (d. 1590 as Sixtus V). Seventeenth Century Of very many names we may mention: Gothutius (about 1605). Guido Bartholucci (about 1610). Petrus Bonaventura (about 1607). Ruitz (about 1613) Smissing (d. 1626). Philip Faber (d. 1630). Albergonius, bishop (d. 1636). Centini, bishop (d. 1640). Matthaus de Sousa (about 1629). Merinero, bishop (about 1663). Francis Felix (about 1642). Vulpes (d. 1647) wrote "Summa" and "Commen. theologiae Scoti" in twelve folio volumes. Blondus, bishop (d. 1644) - Gavatius, archbishop (d. 1658). Wadding (d. 1657), a well-known annalist, edited with other Irishmen in the College of S. Isidore at Rome the complete works of Scotus (12 vols., Lyons, 1639), with the commentaries of Pitigianus of Arezzo (d. 1616), Poncius (d. 1660), Mauritius a Portu (Mac Caughwell), Archbishop of Armagh and Primate of Ireland (d. 1626), and Anthony Illckey (d. 1641); reprinted Paris, 1891-95. Bricemo, named on account of his keenness of intellect the Second Scotus, Bishop of Venezuela (d. 1667). Belluti (d. 1676), edited with Mastrius a highly prized "Philosophia ad mentem Scoti" (many editions). Mastrius himself (d. 1673) wrote a celebrated "Disputationes theol." (many editions) and "Theologia ad mentem Scoti" (1671, etc.). Ferchius (d. 1666) wrote "Vita et apologia Scoti, etc." Bruodinus (d. 1664). Herinckx (d. 1678), Bishop of Ypres. Stümel (d. 1681 at Fulda). Boivin, highly esteemed philosopher and theologian (several editions of works, 1678, etc.) Sannig (about 1690). Lambrecht (about 1696), named the Viennese Scotus. Bishop Gennari (d. 1684). Cardinal Brar `catius (d. 1693), held in high favour by several popes. Hernandez (d. 1695).-Macedo (d. 1681), a Portuguese, professor at Padua is said to have composed over one hundred writings and was renowned for his public disputations. Eighteenth Century Frassen (d. 1711) was for thirty years a celebrated professor at the Sorbonne and wrote "Scotus academicus seu universa theo Scoti" (many editions, 1672, etc.; last ed., Rome 1900-), a very profound and lucid work. Du randus (d. 1720) wrote the great "Clypeus scotisticus (many editions). Dupasquier, "Summa phil." an "Summa theol." (about 1720; many editions). Hieronymus a Montefortino "Duns Scoti Summ. theol. ex universis opp. eius . . . juxta ordiner Summae Angelici Doctoris" (6 vols., 1728-34; new ed., Rome, 1900-03), a very able work. Panger (d 1732 at Augsburg), Scotist moralist. Kikh (d. 1769 at Munich), Scotist dogmatic theologian. Pérez López (d. 1724). Krisper (d. 1749). Hermann, Abbot of St. Trudbert, "Theologia sec. Scoti principia" (1720). Melgaco (1747). Bishop Sarmentero (d. 1775). Nineteenth and Twentieth Centuries In the nineteenth century, although Scotism was retained in the schools of the Franciscan Order in accordance with the statutes, we meet but few tractates secundum mentem Scoti, in any case no celebrated ones. The twentieth century appears to promise better. Father Fernández, a Spaniard, is a zealous Scotist. Beside the abovementioned writings, he has written a large "Scotus Lexicon", and is at present (1911) issuing new edition of Scotus's "Comment. in Sentent.' Another zealous worker is Father Deodat-Marie de Basley; his fortnightly journal, "La bonne parole" (now entitled "Revue Duns Scot."), contains much Scotistica. He is also engaged on the "Capitali opera B. Joan. Duns Scoti" (Le Havre, 1908) of which the "Praeparatio philosophica" and "Synthesis theologica credendorum" have already appeared. Father Parthenius Minges has explained and defended much of the Scotist doctrine in his "Compend. theolog. dogmat. specialis et generalis" (Munich, 1901-02), and in a number of other works. PARTHENIUS MINGES Scotland Scotland The term as at present used includes the whole northern portion of the Island of Great Britain, which is divided from England by the Cheviot Hills, the River Tweed, and certain smaller streams. Its total area is about 20,000,000 acres, or something over 30,000 square miles; its greatest length is 292 miles, and greatest breadth, 155 miles. The chief physical feature of the country is its mountainous character, there being no extensive areas of level ground, as in England; and only about a quarter of the total acreage is cultivated. The principal chain of mountains is the Grampian range, and the highest individual hill Ben Nevis (4406 feet). Valuable coalfields extend almost uninterruptedly from east to west, on both banks of the Rivers Forth and Clyde. The climate is considerably colder and (except on parts of the east coast) wetter than that of England. The part of Scotland lying beyond the Firths of Forth and Clyde was known to the Romans as Caledonia. The Caledonians came later to be called Picts, and the country, after them, Pictland. The name of Scotland came into use in the eleventh century, when the race of Scots, originally an Irish colony which settled in the western Highlands, attained to supreme power in the country. Scotland was an independent kingdom until James VI succeeded to the English Crown in 1603; and it continued constitutionally separate from England until the conclusion of the treaty of union a century later. It still retains its own Church and its own form of legal procedure; and the character of its people remains in many respects quite distinct from that of the English. Formerly the three prevailing nationalities of the country were the Anglo-Saxon in the south, the Celtic in the north and west, and the Scandinavian in the north-east; and these distinctions can still be traced both in the characteristics of the inhabitants and in the proper names of places. The total population, according to the census Of 1911 is 4,759,521, being an increase of 287,418 in the past decade. The increase is almost entirely in the large cities and towns, the rural population of almost every county, except in the mining districts, having sensibly diminished, owing to emigration and other causes, since 1901. The history of Scotland is dealt with in the present article chiefly in its ecclesiastical aspect, and as such it naturally falls into three great divisions: I. The conversion of the country and the prevalence of the Celtic monastic church; II. The gradual introduction and, consolidation of the diocesan system, and the history of Scottish Catholicism down to the religious revolution of the sixteenth century; III. The post-Reformation history of the country, particularly in connection with the persecuted remnant of Catholics, and finally the religious revival of the nineteenth century. Under these three several heads, therefore, the subject will be treated. I. FIRST PERIOD: FOURTH TO ELEVENTH CENTURY Nothing certain is known as to the introduction of Christianity into Scotland prior to the fourth century. Tertullian, writing at the end of the second, speaks of portions of Britain which the Romans had never reached being; by that time "subject to Christ"; and early Scots historians relate that Pope Victor, about A.D. 203, sent missionaries to Scotland. This pope's name is singled out for special veneration in a very, early Scottish (Culdee) litany, which gives some probability to the legend; but the earliest indubitable evidence of the religious connection of Scotland with Rome is afforded by the history of Ninian, who, born in the south-west of Scotland about 360, went to study at Rome, was consecrated bishop by Pope Siricius, returned to his native country about 402, and built at Candida Casa, now Whithorn, the first stone church in Scotland. He also founded there a famous monastery, whence saints and missionaries went out to preach; not only through the whole south of Scotland, but also in Ireland. Ninian died probably in 432; and current ecclesiastical tradition points to St. Palladius as having been his successor in the work of evangelizing Scotland. Pope Leo XIII cited this tradition in his Bull restoring the Scottish hierarchy in 1878; but there are many anachronisms and other difficulties in the long-accepted story of St. Palladius and his immediate followers, and it is even uncertain whether he ever set foot in Scotland at all. If, however, his mission was to the Scoti, who at this period inhabited Ireland, he was at least indirectly connected with the conversion of Scotland also; for the earliest extant chronicles of the Picts show us how close was the connection between the Church of the southern Picts and that of Ireland founded by St. Patrick. In the sixth century three Irish brother-chieftains crossed over from Ireland and founded the little Kingdom of Dalriada, in the present County of Argyll, which was ultimately to develop into the Kingdom of Scotland. They were already Christians, and with them came Irish missionaries, who spread the Faith throughout the western parts of the country. The north was still pagan, and even in the partly Christianized districts there were many relapses and apostasies which called for a stricter system of organization and discipline among the missionaries. It was thus that, drawing her inspiration from the great monasteries of Ireland, the early Scottish Church entered upon the monastic period of her history, of which the first and the greatest light was Columba, Apostle of the northern Picts. The monastery of Iona, where Columba settled in 563, and whence he carried on his work of evangelizing the mainland of Scotland for thirty-four years, was, under him and his successors in the abbatial dignity, considered the mother-house of all monasteries founded by him in Scotland and in Ireland. Bede mentions that Iona long held pre-eminence over all the monasteries of the Picts, and it continued in fact, all during the monastic period of the Scottish Church, to be the centre of the Columban jurisdiction. It is unnecessary to argue the point, which has been proved over and over again against the views put forward both by Anglicans and Presbyterians, that the Columban church was no isolated fragment of Christendom, but was united in faith and worship and spiritual life with the universal Catholic Church (see as to this, Edmonds, "The Early Scottish Church, its Doctrine and Discipline", Edinburgh, 1906). Whilst Columba was labouring among the northern Picts, another apostle was raised up in the person of St. Kentigern, to work among the British inhabitants of the Kingdom of Strathclyde, extending southward from the Clyde to Cumberland. Kentigern may be called the founder of the Church of Cumbria, and became the first bishop of what is now Glasgow; while in the east of Scotland Lothian honours as its first apostle the great St. Cuthbert, who entered the monastery of Melrose in 650, and became bishop, with his see at Lindisfarne, in 684. He died three years later; and less than thirty years afterwards the monastic period of the Scottish Church came to an end, the monks throughout Pictland, most of whom had resisted the adoption of the Roman observance of Easter, being expelled by the Pictish king. This was in 717, and almost simultaneously with the disappearance of the Columban monks we see the advent to Scotland of the Deicolae, Colidei or Culdees, the anchorite-clerics sprung from those ascetics who had devoted themselves to the service of God in the solitude of separate cells, and had in the course of time formed themselves into communities of anchorites or hermits. They had thirteen monasteries in Scotland, and together with the secular clergy who were now introduced into the country they carried on the work of evangelization which had been done by the Columban communities which they succeeded. From the beginning of the eighth to the middle of the ninth century the political history of Scotland, as we dimly see it today, consists of continual fighting between the rival races of Angles, Picts, and Scots, varied by invasions of Danes and Norsemen, and culminating at last in the union of the Scots of Dalriada and the Pictish peoples into one kingdom under Kenneth Mac Alpine in 844. Ecclesiastically speaking, the most important result of this union was elevation by Kenneth of the church of Dunkeld to be the primatial see of his new kingdom. Soon, however, the primacy was transferred to Abernethy, and some forty years after Kenneth's accession we find the first definite mention of the "Scottish Church", which King Grig raised from a position of servitude to honourable independence. Grig's successors were styled no longer Kings of the Picts, but Kings of Alban, the name now given to the whole country between forth and the Spey; and under Constantine, second King of Alban, was held in 908 the memorable assembly at Scone, in which the king and Cellach, Bishop of St. Andrews, recognized by this time as primate of the kingdom, and styled Epscop Alban, solemnly swore to protect the discipline of the Faith and the right of the churches and the Gospel. In the reign of Malcolm I, Constantine's successor, the district of Cumberland was ceded to the Scottish Crown by Edmund of England; and among the very scanty notices of ecclesiastical affairs during this period we find the foundation of the church of Brechin of which the ancient round tower, built after the Irish model, still remains. This was in the reign of Kenneth II (971-995), who added yet another province to the Scottish Kingdom, Lothian being made over to him by King Edmund of England. Iona had meanwhile, in consequence of the occupation of the Western Isles by the Norsemen, been practically cut off from Scotland, and had become ecclesiastically dependent on Ireland. It suffered much from repeated Danish raids, and on Christmas Eve, 986, the abbey was devastated, and the abbot with most of his monks put to death. Not many years later the Norwegian power in Scotland received a fatal blow by the death of Sigurd, Earl of I Orkney, the Norwegian provinces on the mainland passing into the possession of the Scottish Crown. Malcolm II was now on the throne, and it was during his thirty years' reign that the Kingdom of Alban became first known as Scotia, from the dominant race to which its people belonged. With Malcolm's death in 1034 the male line of Kenneth Mac Alpine was extinguished, and he was succeeded by his daughter's son, Duncan, who after a short and inglorious reign was murdered by his kinsman and principal general, Macbeth. Macbeth wore his usurped crown for seventeen years, and was himself slain in 1057 by Malcolm, Duncan's son, who ascended the throne as Malcolm III. It is worth noting that Duncan's father (who married the daughter of Malcolm II) was Crinan, lay Abbot of Dunkeld; for this fact illustrates one of the great evils under which the Scottish Church was at this time labouring, namely the usurpation of abbeys and benefices by great secular chieftains, an abuse existing side by side, and closely connected with, the scandal of concubinage among the clergy, with its inevitable consequence, the hereditary succession to benefices, and wholesale secularization of the property of the Church. These evils were indeed rife in other parts of Christendom; but Scotland was especially affected by them, owing to her want of a proper ecclesiastical constitution and a normal ecclesiastical government. The accession, and more especially the marriage, of Malcolm III were events destined to have a profound influence on the fortunes of the Scottish Church, and indeed to be a turning-point in her history. II. SECOND PERIOD: ELEVENTH TO SIXTEENTH CENTURY The Norman Conquest of England could not fail to exercise a deep and lasting effect also on the northern kingdom, and it was the immediate cause of the introduction of English ideas and English civilization into Scotland. The flight to Scotland, after the battle of Hastings, of Edgar Atheling, heir of the Saxon Royal house, with his mother and his sisters Margaret and Christina, was followed at no great distant date by the marriage of Margaret to King Malcolm, as his second wife. A greatniece of St. Edward the Confessor, Margaret, whose personality stands out clearly before us in the pages of her biography by her confessor Turgot, was a woman not only of saintly life but of strong character who exercised the strongest influence on the Scottish Church and kingdom, as well as on the members of her own family. The character of Malcolm III has been depicted in very different colours by the English and Scottish chroniclers, the former painting him as the severe and merciless invader of England, while to the latter he is a noble and heroic prince, called Canmore (Ceann-mor great head) from his high kingly qualities. All however agree that the influence of his holy queen was the best and strongest element in his stormy life. Whilst he was engaged in strengthening his frontiers and fighting the enemies of his country, Margaret found time, amid family duties and pious exercises, to take in hand the reform of certain outstanding abuses in the Scottish Church. In such matters as the fast of Lent, the Easter communion, the observance of Sunday, and compliance with the Church's marriage laws, she succeeded, with the king's support, in bringing the Church of Scotland into line with the rest of Catholic Christendom. Malcolm and Margaret rebuilt the venerable monastery of Iona, and founded churches in various parts of the kingdom; and during their reign the Christian faith was established in the islands lying off the northern and western coasts of Scotland, inhabited by Norsemen. Malcolm was killed in Northumberland in 1093, whilst leading an army against William Rufus; and his saintly queen, already dangerously ill, followed him to the grave a few days later. In the same year as the king and queen died Fothad, the last of the native bishops of Alban, whose extinction opened the way to the claim, long upheld, of the See of York to supremacy over the Scottish Church — a claim rendered more tenable by the strong Anglo-Norman influence which had taken the place of that of Ireland, and by the absence of any organized system of diocesan jurisdiction in the Scottish Church. Edgar, one of Malcolm's younger sons, who succeeded to his father's crown after prolonged conflict with other pretenders to it, calls himself in his extant charters "King of Scots", but he speaks of his subjects as Scots and English, surrounded himself with English advisers, acknowledged William of England as his feudal superior, and thus did much to strengthen the English influence in the northern kingdom. During his ten years' reign no successor was appointed to Fothad in the primacy; but at his death (when his brother Alexander succeeded him as king, the younger brother David obtaining dominion over Cumbria and Lothian, with the title of earl) Turgot became Bishop of St. Andrews, the first Norman to occupy the primatial see. Alexander's reign was signalized by the creation of two additional sees; the first being that of Moray, in the district beyond the Spey, where Scandinavian influence had long been dominant. The see was fixed first at Spynie and later at Elgin, where a noble cathedral was founded in the thirteenth century. The other new see was that of Dunkeld, which had already been the seat of the primacy under Kenneth Mac Alpine, but had fallen under lay abbots. Here Alexander replaced the Culdee community by a bishop and chapter of secular canons. Elsewhere also he introduced regular religious orders to take the place of the Culdees, founding monasteries of canons regular (Augustinians) at Scone and Loch Tay. Even more than Alexander, his brother David, who succeeded him in 1124, and who had been educated at the English Court (his sister Matilda having married Henry I), laboured to assimilate the social state and institutions of Scotland, both in civil and ecclesiastical matters, to Anglo-Norman ideas. His reign of thirty years, on the whole a peaceful one, is memorable in the extent of the changes wrought during it in Scotland, under every aspect of the life of the people. A modern historian has said that at no period of her history has Scotland ever stood relatively so high in the scale of nations as during the reign of this excellent monarch. Penetrated with the spirit of feudalism, and recognizing the inadequacy of the Celtic institutions of the past to meet the growing needs of his people, David extended his reforms to every department of civil life; but it is with the energy and thoroughness with which he set about the reorganization and remodelling of the national church that his name will always be identified. While still Earl of Cumbria and Lothian he brought Benedictine monks from France to Selkirk, and Augustinian canons to Jedburgh, and procured the restoration of the ancient see of Glasgow, originally founded by St. Kentigern. Five other bishoprics he founded after his accession: Ross, in early days a Columban monastery, and afterwards served by Culdees, who were now succeeded by secular canons; Aberdeen, where there had also been a church in very early times; Caithness, with the see at Dornoch, in Sutherland, where the former Culdee community was now replaced by a full chapter of ten canons, with dean, precentor, chancellor, treasurer, and archdeacon; Dunblane, and Brechin, founded shortly before the king's death, and both, like the rest, on the sites of ancient Celtic churches, The great abbeys of Dunfermline, Holyrood, Jedburgh, Kelso, Kinloss, Melrose, and Dundrennan were all established by him for Benedictines, Augustinians, or Cistercians, besides several priories and convents of nuns, and houses belonging to the military orders. To one venerable Celtic monastery, founded by St. Columba, that of Deer, we find David granting a charter towards the end of his reign; but his general policy was to suppress the ancient Culdee establishments, now moribund and almost extinct, and supersede them by his new religious foundations. Side by side with this came the complete diocesan reorganization of the Church, the erection of cathedral chapters and rural deaneries, and the reform of the Divine service on the model of that prevailing in the English Church, the use of the ancient Celtic ritual being almost universally discontinued in favour of that of Salisbury. Two church councils were held in David's reign, both presided over by cardinal legates from Rome; and in 1150 took place, at St. Andrews, the first diocesan synod recorded to have been held in Scotland. David died in 1153, leaving behind him the reputation of a saint as well as a great king, a reputation which has been endorsed, with singular unanimity, alike by ancient chroniclers and the most impartial of modern historians. David's grandson and successor, Malcolm the Maiden, was crowned at Scone — the first occasion, as far as we know, of such a ceremony taking place in Scotland. His piety was attested by his many religious foundations, including the famous Abbey of Paisley; but as a king he was weak, whereas England was at that time ruled by the strong and masterful Henry II, who succeeded in wresting from Scotland the three northern English counties which had been subject to David. Malcolm was succeeded in 1165 by his brother William the Lion, whose reign of close on fifty years was the longest in Scottish history. It was by no means a period of peace for the Scottish realm; for in 1173 William, in a vain effort to recover his lost English provinces, was taken prisoner, and only released on binding himself, to be the liegerman of the King of England, and to do him homage for his whole kingdom. During a great part of his reign he was also in conflict with his unruly Celtic subjects in Galloway and elsewhere, as well as with the Norsemen of Caithness. The Scottish Church, too, was harassed not only by the continual claims of York to jurisdiction over her, but by the English king's attempts to bring her into entire subjection to the Church of England. A great council at Northampton in 1176, attended by both monarchs, a papal legate, and the principal English and Scottish bishops, broke up without deciding this question; and a special legate sent by Pope Alexander III to England and Scotland shortly afterwards was not more successful. It was not until twelve years later that, in response to a deputation specially sent to Rome by William to urge a settlement, Pope Clement III (in March, 1188) declared by Bull the Scottish Church, with its nine diocese, to be immediately subject — to the Apostolic See. The issue of this Bull, which was confirmed by succeeding popes, was followed, on William subscribing handsomely to Richard Coeur de Lion's crusading fund, by the King of England agreeing to abrogate the humiliating treaty which had made him the feudal of superior of the King of Scots, and formally recognizing the temporal, as well as the spiritual independence of Scotland. William's reign, like that of its predecessors, was prolific in religious foundations, the principal being the great Abbe of Arbroath, a memorial of St. Thomas of Canterbury, with whom the king had been on terms of personal friendship. Even more noteworthy was the establishment of a Benedictine monastery in the sacred Isle of Iona by Reginald, Lord of the isles, whose desire, like that of the Scottish kings was to supersede the effete Culdees in his domains by the regular orders of the Church. In 1200 a tenth diocese was erected — that of Argyll, cut off from Dunkeld, and including an extensive territory in which Gaelic was (as it still is) almost exclusively spoken. The Fourth Lateran Council was held in Rome in 1215, the year-after William's death, under the great Pope Innocent III, and was attended by four Scottish bishops and abbots, and procurators of the other prelates; and we fin& the ecclesiastics of Scotland, as of other countries, ordered to contribute a twentieth part of their revenues towards a new crusade, and a papal legate arriving to collect the money. In 1225 the Scottish bishops met in council for the first time without the presence of a legate from Rome, electing one of their number, as directed by with a papal bull, to preside over the assembly with quasi-metropolitan authority and the title of conservator. The Scottish kings were regularly represented at these councils by two doctors of laws specially nominated by the sovereign. The thirteenth century, during the greater part of which (1214-86) the second and third Alexanders wore the crown of Scotland, is sometimes spoken of as the golden age of that country. During that long period, in the words of a modern poet, "God gave them peace, their land reposed"; and they were free to carry on the work of consolidation and development so well begun by the good King David II. Alexander II, indeed, when still a youth incurred the papal excommunication by espousing the cause of the English barons against King John, but when he had obtained absolution he married a sister of Henry III, and so secured a good understanding with England, The occasional signs of unrest among some of his Celtic subjects in Argyll, Moray, and Caithness were met and checked with firmness and success; and this reign with a distinct advance in the industrial progress of the realm, the king devoting special attention to the improvement of agriculture. Many new religious foundations were also made by him, including monasteries at Culross, Pluscardine, Beuly, and Crossraguel; while the royal favour was also extended to the new orders of friars which were spreading throughout Europe, and numerous houses were founded by him both for Dominicans and Franciscans, the friars, however, remaining under the control of their English provincials until nearly a century later. David de Bernham of St. Andrews and Gilbert of Caithness were among the distinguished prelates of this time, and did much for both the material and religious welfare of their dioceses. Alexander III, who succeeded his father in 1249, was also fortunate m the excellent bishops who governed the Scottish Church during his reign, and he, like his predecessors, made some notable religious foundations, including the Cistercian Abbey of Sweetheart, and houses of Carmelite and Trinitarian friars. An important step in the consolidation of the kingdom was the annexation of the Isle of Man, the Hebrides, and other western islands to the Scottish Crown, pecuniary compensation being paid to Norway, and the Archbishop of Trondhjem retaining ecclesiastical jurisdiction over the islands. Nearly all the Scottish bishops attended the general council convoked by Gregory X at Lyons in 1274, which, among other measures levied a fresh tax on church benefices in aid of a new crusade. Boiamund, a Piedmontese canon, went to Scotland to collect the subsidy, assessing the clergy on a valuation known as Boiamund's Roll, which gave great dissatisfaction but nevertheless remained the guide to ecclesiastical taxation until the Reformation. With the death of Alexander in 1286 the male line of his house came to an end, and he was succeeded by his youthful granddaughter, Margaret, daughter of King Eric of Norway. Edward I, the powerful and ambitious King of England, whose hope was the union of the Kingdom of Scotland with his own, immediately began negotiations for the marriage of Margaret to his son. The proposal was favourably received in Scotland; but while the eight-year-old queen was on her way from Orkney, and the realm was immediately divided by rival claimants to the throne, John de Baliol and Robert Bruce, both descended from a brother of William the Lion. King Edward, chosen as umpire in the dispute, decided in favour of Baliol; and relying on his subservience summoned him to support him when he declared war on France in 1294. The Scottish parliament, however entered instead into an alliance with France against England, whose incensed king at once marched into Scotland with a powerful army, advanced as far as Perth, dethroned and degraded Baliol, and returned to England, carrying with him from Scone the coronation stone of the Scottish kings, which he placed in Westminster Abbey, where it still remains. The interposition of Pope Boniface VIII procured a temporary truce between the two countries in 1300; but Edward soon renewed his efforts to subdue the Scotch, putting to death the valiant and patriotic William Wallace, and leaving no stone unturned to carry out his object. He died, however, in 1307; and Robert Bruce (grandson of Baliol's rival) utterly routed the English forces at Bannockburn in 1314, and secured the independence of Scotland. After long negotiations peace was concluded between the two kingdoms, and ratified by the betrothal of Robert's only son to the sister of the King of England. Robert died a few months later, and was succeeded by his son, David II, out of whose reign of forty years ten were spent, during his youth, in France, and eleven in exile in England, where he was taken prisoner when invading the dominions of Edward III. During the wars with England, and the long and inglorious reign of David, the church and people suffered alike. Bishops forgot their sacred character, and appeared in armour at the head of their retainers; the state of both of clergy and laity, was far from satisfactory and contemporary chronicles were full of lamentations at the degeneracy of the times. Some excellent bishops there were during the fourteenth century, notably Fraser and Lamberton of St. Andrews, the former of whom was chosen one of the regents of the kingdom, while Lamberton completed the noble cathedral of St. Andrews. Bishop David of Moray, a zealous patron of learning, is honoured as the virtual founder of the historic Scots College in Paris. A proof that religious zeal was still warm is afforded by the first foundation in Scotland, at Dunbar, of a collegiate church, in 1342, precursor of some forty other establishments of the same kind founded before the Reformation. David II died childless, and the first of the long line of Stuart kings now ascended the throne in the person of Robert, son of Marjorie (daughter of Robert Bruce) and the High Steward. During Robert's reign of nineteen years there was almost continual warfare with the English on the Border, France on one occasion sending a force to help her Scottish ally against their common enemy. Robert was succeeded in 1390 by his son Robert III, in whose reign Scotland suffered more from its own turbulent barons than from foreign foes. Robert, Duke of Albany, the king's brother, himself wielded almost royal power, imprisoned and (it was said) starved to death the heir-apparent to the throne; and when the king died in 1466, leaving his surviving son James a prisoner in England, Albany got himself appointed regent, and did his best to prevent the new king's return to Scotland. The years of Albany's dictatorship, which coincided with the general unrest in Christendom due to a disputed papal election, were not prosperous ones for the Scottish Church. Spiritual authority was weakened, and the encroachments of the State on the Church became increasingly serious. A collection of synodal statutes of St. Andrews, however, of this date which has come down to us shows that serious efforts were being made by the church authorities to cope with the evils of the time; and the long alliance with France of course brought the French and Scottish churches into a close connection which was in many ways advantageous, although one effect of it was that Scotland, like France, espoused the cause of the antipopes against the rightful pontiffs. The young king, James I, was at length released from England in 1424, after twenty years' captivity, returned to his realm; immediately showed himself a strong and gifted monarch. He condemned Albany and his two sons to death for high treason, took vigorous steps to improve and encourage commerce and trade, and evinced the greatest interest in the welfare of religion and the prosperity of the Church. The Parliament of 1425 directed a strict Inquisition into the spread of Lollardism or other heresies, and the punishment of those who disseminated them; and James also personally urged the heads of the religious orders in his realm to see to a stricter observance of their rule and discipline. The king sent eight high Scottish ecclesiastics to Basle to attend the general council there; but in the midst of his plans of reform he was assassinated at Perth in February, 1436. King James's solicitude as to the spread of heresy in Scotland was not without cause; for early in his reign preachers of the Wyclifite errors had come from England, prominent among them being John Resby, who was sentenced to death and suffered at Perth in 1407. The Scottish Parliament passed a special act against Lollardism in 1425; and Paul Crawar, an emissary from the Hussites of Bohemia, who appeared in Scotland on a proselytizing mission in 1433, suffered the same fate as Resby. An oath to defend the Church against Lollardism was taken by all graduates of the new University of St. Andrews, the foundation of which was a notable event of this reign. It was formally confirmed in 1414 by Pedro de Luna, recognized by the Scottish Church at that time as Pope Benedict XIII. Scotland was the last state in Christendom to adhere to the antipope, and only in 1418 declared her allegiance to the rightful pontiff, Martin V. The year before his death James received a visit from the learned and distinguished AEneas Sylvius Piccolomini, who afterwards became Pope Pius II. About the same time the new Diocese of the Isles was erected, being severed from that of Argyll; and the bishops of the new see fixed their residence at Iona. The new king, James II, had a long minority, during which there were constant feuds among his nobles; but he developed at manhood into a firm and prudent ruler, and he was fortunate in having as an adviser Bishop Kennedy of St. Andrews, one of the wisest and best prelates who ever adorned that see. James's early death, owing to an accident, in 1460, was doubly unfortunate, as his son and successor James III was a prince of far weaker character, unable to cope with the turbulent barons, some of whom broke out into open revolt, seducing the youthful heir to the throne to join them. Active hostilities followed, and James was murdered by a trooper of the insurgent army in 1488. The disturbances of his reign had their effect on the Scottish Church, in which abuses, such as the intrusion of laymen into ecclesiastical positions, the deprival suffered by cathedral and monastic bodies of their canonical rights, and the baneful system of commendatory abbots, flourished almost unchecked. New religious foundations there were, chiefly of the orders of friars; and the diocesan development of the Church was completed by the withdrawal of the See of Galloway from the jurisdiction of York, and those of Orkney and the Isles from Norway. This act of consolidation formed part of the provisions of an important Bull of Sixtus IV, dated 1472, erecting the See of St. Andrews into an archbishopric and metropolitan church for the whole realm, with twelve suffragan sees dependent on it. York and Trondhjem, of course, protested against the change; but it seemed to be equally unwelcome in Scotland. The new metropolitan, Archbishop Graham, found king, clergy, and people all against him; he was assailed by various serious charges, and finally deprived of his dignities, degraded from his orders, and sentenced to lifelong imprisonment in a monastery. His successor in the archbishopric, William Sheves, obtained a Bull from Innocent VIII appointing him primate of all Scotland and legatus natus, with the same privileges as those enjoyed by the Archbishop of Canterbury. The protest of the See of Glasgow was followed by a Bull exempting that see from the jurisdiction of the Primate, but in 1489 a law was passed declaring the necessity of Glasgow's being erected into an archbishopric. In 1492 the pope created the new archbishopric, assigning to it as suffragans the Sees of Dunkeld, Dunblane, Galloway, and Argyll. Two years later we hear of the arrest and trial of a number of Lollards in the new archdiocese; but they seem to have escaped with an admonition. From 1497 to 1513 the primatial see was occupied successively by a brother and a natural son of King James IV. The latter, who was nominated to the primacy when only sixteen, fell with his royal father and the the flower of the Scottish nobility at Plodden in 1513. Foreman, who succeeded him as archbishop, was an able and zealous prelate; but by far the most distinguished Scottish bishop at this period was the learned and holy William Elphinstone, Bishop of Aberdeen 1483-1514, and founder of Aberdeen University in 1494. In 1525 the Lutheran opinions seem first to have appeared in Scotland, the parliament of that year passing an act forbidding the importation of Lutheran books. James V was a staunch son of the Church, and wrote to Pope Clement VII in 1526, protesting his determination to resist every form of heresy. Patrick Hamilton a commendatory abbot and connected with the royal house, was tried and condemned for teaching false doctrine, and burned at St. Andrews in 1528; but his death, which Knox claims to have been the starting-point of the Reformation in Scotland, certainly did not stop the spread of the new opinions. James, whilst showing himself zealous for the reform of ecclesiastical abuses in his realm, resisted all the efforts of his uncle Henry VIII of England to draw him over to the new religion. He married the only daughter of the King of France in 1537, much to Henry's chagrin; but his young wife died within three months. Meanwhile his kingdom was divided into two opposing parties — one including many nobles, the queen-mother (sister of Henry VIII), and the religiously disaffected among his subjects, secretly supporting Henry's schemes and the advance of the new opinions; the other, comprising the powerful and wealthy clergy, several peers of high rank, and the great mass of his still Catholic and loyal subjects. Severe measures continued against the disseminators of Lutheranism, many suffering death or banishment; and there were not wanting able and patriotic counsellors to stand by the king, notable among them being David Beaton, whom we find in France negotiating for the marriage of James to Mary of Guise in 1537, and himself uniting the royal pair at St. Andrews. Beaton became cardinal in 1538 and Primate of Scotland a few weeks later, on the death of his uncle James Beaton, and found himself the object of Henry VIII's jealousy and animosity, as the greatest obstacle to that monarch's plans and hopes. Henry's anger culminated on the bestowal by the pope on the King of Scots of the very title which he had himself received from Leo X; open hostilities broke out, and shortly after the disastrous rout of the Scotch forces at Solway Moss in 1542 James V died at Falkland, leaving a baby daughter, Mary Stuart, to inherit his crown and the government of his distracted country. James V's death was immediately followed by new activity on the part of the Protestant party. The Regent Arran openly favoured the new doctrines, and many of the Scottish nobles bound themselves, for a money payment from Henry VIII, to acknowledge him as lord paramount of Scotland. Beaton was imprisoned, a step which resulted in Scotland being placed under an interdict by the pope, whereupon the people, still in great part Catholic, insisted on the cardinal's release. Henry now connived at, if he did not actually originate, a plan for the assassination of Beaton, in which George Wishart, a conspicuous Protestant preacher was also mixed up. Wishart was tried for heresy and burned at St. Andrews in 1546, and two months later Beaton was murdered in the same city. Arran, who had meanwhile reverted to Catholicism, wrote to the pope deploring Beaton's death, asking for a subsidy toward the war with England. The Protestants held the Castle of St. Andrews, among them being John Knox; and the fortress was only recovered by the aid of a French squadron. Disaffection and treachery were rife among the nobles, and the English Protector Somerset, secure of their support, led an English army over the border, and defeated the Scottish forces with great loss at Pinkie in 1547. A few months later the young queen was sent by her mother, Mary of Guise, to France, which remained her home for thirteen years. The French alliance enabled Scotland to drive back her English invaders; peace was declared in 1550, Mary of Guise appointed regent in succession to the weak and vacillating Arran, entering on office just as a Catholic queen, Mary Tudor, was ascending the English throne. Arran's half-brother, John Hamilton, succeeded Beaton as Archbishop of St. Andrews, James Beaton soon after being appointed to Glasgow, while the See of Orkney was held by the pious, learned, and able Robert Reid, the virtual founder of Edinburgh University. The primate convoked a provincial national council in Edinburgh in 1549, at which sixty ecclesiastics were present. A series of important canons was passed at this council, as well as at a subsequent one assembled in 1552, one result being the publication in the latter year of a catechism intended for the instruction of the clergy as well as of their flocks. From 1547 to 1555 John Knox was preaching Protestantism in England, Geneva, and Frankfort, and the new doctrines made little headway in Scotland. In 1555, however, he returned to Edinburgh, and started his crusade against the ancient Faith, meeting with little molestation from the authorities. He went back to Geneva in the following year; but his Scottish friends and supporters, emboldened by his exhortations, subscribed in December, 1557, the Solemn League and Covenant, for the express object of the overthrow of the old religion. Angered by the execution of Walter Mylne for heresy in 1558, the lords of the Congregation (as the Protestant party was now styled) demanded of the Queen Regent authorization for public Protestant service. Mary laid the petition before a provincial council which met in 1559, and which, while declining to give way to the Protestant demands, passed many excellent and salutary enactments, chiefly directed against the numerous and crying abuses which had too long been rampant in the Scottish Church. But no conciliar decrees could avert the storm about to burst over the realm. Knox returned to Scotland in 1559, and inaugurated the work of destruction by a violent sermon which he preached at Perth. There and elsewhere churches and monasteries were attacked and sacked. Troops arrived from France to assist the regent in quelling the insurgent Protestants, while in April, Elizabeth, invaded Scotland both by land and sea in support of the Congregation. The desecration and destruction of churches and abbeys went on apace; and in the midst of these scenes of strife and violence occurred the death of the queen regent, in June, 1560. Less than a month later, a treaty of peace was signed at Edinburgh, the King and Queen of Scots (Mary had married in 1558 Francis, Dauphin of France), granting various concession to the Scottish nobles and people. In pursuance of one of the articles of the treaty, the parliament assembled on 1 August, though without any writ of summons from the sovereign. Although the treaty had specially provided that the religious question at issue should be remitted to the king and queen for settlement, assemblage voted for adoption, as the state religion, of the Protestant Confession of Faith; four prelates and five temporal peers alone dissenting. three further statutes respectively abolished papal jurisdiction in Scotland, repealed all former statutes in favour of the Catholic Church, and made it a penal offense, punishable by death on the third conviction, either to say or to hear Mass. All leases of church lands granted by ecclesiastics subsequent to March, 1558, were declared null and void; and thus the destruction of the old religion in Scotland, as far as the hand of man could destroy it, was complete. No time or opportunity was given to the Church to carry out that reform of prevalent abuses which was foreshadowed in the decrees of her latest councils. As in England the greed of a tyrannical king, so in Scotland the cupidity of a mercenary nobility, itching to possess themselves of the Church's accumulated wealth, consummated a work which even Protestant historians have described as one of revolution rather than of reformation. III. THIRD PERIOD: SIXTEENTH CENTURY TO THE PRESENT DAY It does not belong to this article to trace the development of the doctrines and discipline of the new religion which supplanted Catholicism in Scotland in 1560 (see Established Church of Scotland). The aim of the Reformers was to stamp out every outward vestige of the ancient Faith before the return of the Catholic queen, now a widow; and the demolition of churches and monasteries continued unabated during 1561. In August of that year Mary arrived in Edinburgh, and was warmly welcomed by her subjects; but it was only with the greatest difficulty that she obtained toleration for herself and her attendants to practice their religion, anti-Catholic riots being of frequent occurrence. The few Catholic nobles, mostly belonging to the north, found themselves more and more withdrawn from Catholic life, while the prelates and clergy were in constant personal danger. Some champions of the Faith there still were, notably Ninian Winzet and Quintin Kennedy, ready to risk life and liberty in the public defence of their faith; and Mary herself did all in her power to cultivate relations with the Holy See. Her ambassador in France was Archbishop Beaton of Glasgow. Pius IV sent her the Golden Rose in 1561, and dispatched Nicholas of Goulda, a Jesuit, as nuncio to Scotland in the same year. Only one bishop ventured to receive the papal envoy, who sent to Rome a pitiful report of the religious condition of Scotland. Mary's marriage to Darnley, a Catholic noble, who was proclaimed King of Scots, afforded a fresh pretext to the disaffected Protestant lords to intrigue against the throne; and headed by Moray, the queen's own half-brother, they openly revolted against her. Their armed rising was unsuccessful, but their murderous plots continued, and Rizzio, Mary's confidential secretary, and her husband Darnley were both murdered within less than a year's interval, The seizure of Mary's person by Bothwell, her husband's assassin, and her subsequent marriage to him, belong to her personal history. A month after her marriage Mary was imprisoned by her traitorous subjects at Lochleven, and a few weeks later, in July, 1567, she was forced to sign her abdication, and virtually ceased to be Queen of Scotland. Her baby son, James VI, was hurriedly crowned at Stirling, and in August, Moray, now regent, returned to Scotland from Paris, where he had been in communication with the French Protestant leaders. The penal laws against Catholics were how enforced with fresh severity, the Bishop of Dunblane and many other ecclesiastics being heavily fined, and in some cases outlawed for exercising their ministry. Moray's first parliament renewed and ratified all the ecclesiastical enactments of 1560; but his efforts to conclude an alliance with England and with France were alike unsuccessful. He was confronted with a strong body of nobles adherent to the cause of Mary, who by their aid escaped from her prison; but in May, 1568, her forces were defeated by those of the regent at Langside, and the unfortunate queen fled over the border to English soil, which she was not to quit till her tragic death nineteen years later. The regent, after the abortive conferences at York and Westminster dealing with the charges against his sister, returned to Scotland, and continued, with the support of the general assembly of the Kirk, his severe measures against the Catholics. Every indignity short of death was inflicted on the priests who were apprehended in various parts of the kingdom; but whilst intriguing to obtain possession of the queen's person, Moray was suddenly himself cut off by the bullet of an assassin. Lennox, who succeeded him as regent, proved a vigorous antagonist of Mary's adherents; and one of the foremost of these, Archbishop Hamilton, was hanged at Stirling after a mock trial lasting three days. Robert Hay, chosen to succeed him by the few remaining members of the chapter, was never consecrated and the primatial see remained unoccupied by a Catholic prelate for upwards of three centuries. Mar succeeded Lennox as regent, and Morton followed Mar, being chosen on the very day of John Knox's, death (24 Nov., 1572). The iron hand of both pressed heavily on the Catholics, and we find, the Privy Council publishing in 1574 a list of outlaws, including several bishops, any dealing with whom is forbidden under pain of death. All Papists cited before the civil tribunals are to be required to renounce their religion, subscribe to Presbyterianism, and receive the Protestant communion. The persecution at home had had the effect of driving many distinguished Scottish Catholics to the continent. Paris, had been since 1560 the residence of Archbishop Beaton of Glasgow, and of the able and learned Bishop John Leslie of Ross, both devoted friends and counsellors of Queen Mary. The hopes that the young King James, who had been baptized and crowned with Catholic rites, might grow up in the religion of his ancestors, were destroyed by his signing in 1581 a formal profession of his adherence to Protestantism and detestation of Popery. This did not prevent him from entering into personal communication later with Pope Gregory XIII, when he thought his throne in danger from the ambition of Queen Elizabeth. He promised at the same time conciliatory measures towards his Catholic subjects, and affected solicitude for his unfortunate mother; but he never made any practical efforts to obtain her release, and her cruel death in 1586 seemed to leave him singularly callous; though he attempted to appease the Catholic nobles, in their deep indignation at Mary's execution, by restoring Bishop Leslie of Ross to his former dignities, and appointing Archbishop Beaton his ambassador in France. There was at this time a distinct reaction in favour of Catholicism in Scotland, and a number of missionaries, both secular and religious, were labouring for the preservation of the Faith. The Kirk, of course, took alarm and urged on the king the adoption of the severest measures for the suppression of every vestige of Catholicism. James himself headed an armed expedition against the disaffected Catholic nobles of the north in 1594, and after one severe rebuff put Huntly and Erroll, the Catholic leaders, to flight. They left Scotland forever in 1595, and thenceforward Catholicism a political force to be reckoned with, may be said to have been extinct in Scotland. A large proportion of the people still clung tenaciously to their ancient beliefs, and strenuous efforts were made, in the closing years of the sixteenth century, to provide for the spiritual want of what was now a missionary country. In 1576 Dr. James Cheyne had founded a college to educate clergy for the Scotch Mission, at Tournai; and after being transferred to Pont-à-Mousson, Douai, and Louvain, it was finally at Douai. The Scots College at Rome was founded by Pope Clement VIII in 1600; and there was also a Scots College in Paris, dating from 1325, while the Scots abbeys at Ratisbon and Würzburg likewise became after the Reformation the nursery of Scottish missionaries. In 1598 the secular clergy in Scotland were placed under the jurisdiction of George Blackwell, the newly appointed archpriest for England. Many devoted Jesuits were labouring in Scotland at this time, notably Fathers Creighton, Gordon, Hay, and Abercromby, of whom the last received, into the Catholic Church Anne of Denmark, the queen of James VI, probably in 1600, and made other distinguished converts. James's succession to the Crown of England in 1603, on the death of Queen Elizabeth, gave him much new occupation in regulating ecclesiastical matters in his new kingdom, and also in introducing, in the teeth of bitter opposition, the Episcopalian system into Scotland. Pope Clement wrote to the king in 1603, urging him to be lenient and generous towards his Catholic subjects, and after long delay received a civil but vaguely-worded reply. James's real sentiments, however, were shown by his immediately afterwards decreeing the banishment of all priests from the kingdom, and returning to the pope the presents sent to his Catholic queen. The remainder of his reign, as far as his Catholic subjects were concerned, was simply a record of confiscation, imprisonment, and banishment, inflicted impartially; and one missionary, John Ogilvie, suffered death for his Faith at Glasgow in 1615. The negotiations for the marriage of James's heir, first to a daughter of Spain, and then to Henrietta Maria of France, occasioned a good deal of communication between Rome and the English Court, but brought about no relaxation in the penal laws. In 1623 William Bishop was appointed vicar Apostolic for England and Scotland; but the Scotch Catholics were afterwards withdrawn from his jurisdiction, and subjected to their own missionary prefects. James VI died in 1625, after a reign which had brought only calamity and suffering to the Catholics of his native land. The thirty-five years which elapsed between the succession of Charles I and the restoration of his son Charles II, after eleven years of Republican government, were perhaps the darkest in the whole history of Scottish Catholicism. Charles I sanctioned the ruthless execution of the penal statutes, perhaps hoping thus to reconcile the Presbyterians to his unwelcome liturgical innovations; and his policy was continued by Cromwell, apparently out of pure hatred of the Catholic religion. Every effort was made to extirpate Catholicism by the education of children of Catholics in Protestant tenets; an the imprisonment and petty persecution of the venerable Countess of Abercorn showed that neither age nor the highest rank was any protection to the detested Papists. Queen Henrietta Maria, whom Pope Urban VIII urged to intervene on behalf of the Scotch Catholics, was powerless to help them, though a few instances of personal clemency on the part of Charles may be attributable to her influence. Meanwhile the Presbyterians laboured to destroy not only what was left of the shrines and other buildings of Catholic times, but to uproot every Catholic observance which still survived. In the height of the persecution we find steps taken in Rome to improve the organization of the Catholic body in Scotland; and in 1653 the scattered clergy were incorporated under William Ballantyne as prefect of the mission. They numbered only five or six at that date, the missionaries belonging to the religious orders being considerably more numerous, and including Jesuits, Benedictines, Franciscans, and Lazarists. Missionaries from Ireland were also labouring on the Scotch mission, and a college for the education of Scots clergy had been opened at Madrid in 1633, and was afterwards moved to Valladolid, where it still flourishes. Charles II, who succeeded his father in 1660, was undoubtedly well-disposed personally towards Catholics and their Faith, but his Catholic subjects in Scotland enjoyed little more indulgence under the episcopate restored by him in that country than they had done under the Presbyterians. The odious separation of children from their parents for religious reasons continued unabated; and in the districts of Aberdeenshire especially, where Catholics were numerous, they were treated as rigorously as ever. We have detailed reports of this period both from the prefect of the clergy, Winster, and from Alexander Leslie, sent by Propaganda in 1677 as Visitor to the Scottish mission. Their view of the religious situation was far from encouraging; but fresh hopes were raised among the Catholics eight years later by the accession of a Catholic king, James II, who at once suspended the execution of the penal laws declaring himself in favour of complete liberty of conscience. He opened a Catholic school at Holyrood, restored Catholic worship in the Chapel royal, and gave annual grants to the Scots College abroad and to the secular and regular missionaries at home. But the Catholics had hardly time to enjoy this respite from persecution, when their hopes were dashed by the Revolution of 1688, which drove James from the throne. William of Orange, notwithstanding his promises of toleration, did nothing to check the fanatical fury which now assailed the Catholics of England and Scotland. The scattered clergy of the north found themselves in a more difficult position than ever; and this perhaps induced Pope Innocent XII in 1694 to nominate a vicar Apostolic for Scotland in the person of Bishop Thomas Nicholson. His devoted labours are manifest from the reports which he addressed to Propaganda; but neither during the reign of William and Mary, nor of Anne, who succeeded in 1702, was there the slightest relaxation in the penal laws or their application. The Union of England and Scotland in 1707 made no change in this respect; and the first Jacobite rising, in 1715, entailed fresh sufferings on the Scottish Catholics, who were so virulently persecuted that they seemed in danger of total annihilation. Bishop Nicholson had obtained the services of a coadjutor, James Gordon, in 1705, and the devotion of the two prelates to their difficult duties was unbounded. In spite of the penal laws, Catholics were still numerous in the North and West, speaking chiefly the Gaelic language; and in 1726 it was decided to appoint a second vicar Apostolic for the Highlands, Hugh Macdonald being chosen. During his vicariate occurred the ill-fated rising of Charles Edward Stuart, the final failure of which, consequent on the disastrous battle of Culloden, brought fresh calamities on the Highland Catholics. The Highland clans were proscribed and more than a thousand persons were deported to America, Catholic chapels were destroyed, and priests and people prosecuted with the utmost severity. To the suffering of the Catholics under the first two Georges from their enemies without, was added the misfortune of dissensions within the fold. Regular and secular missionaries were at variance on the question of jurisdiction; and there is abundant evidence that the Scottish Church at this period was tainted with the poison of Jansenism, the Scots College in Paris being especially affected. Every means was taken by the Holy See to secure the orthodoxy of the Scottish clergy, who continued however for many years to be divided into the so-called liberal party, trained in France, and the more strictly Roman section, for the most part alumni of the Scots College at Rome. By far the most prominent of the latter was the illustrious Bishop George Hay, the chief ecclesiastical figure in the history of Scottish Catholicism during the latter part of the eighteenth century. Bishop Hay's life has been dealt with elsewhere, and it will suffice to say here that his episcopate lasted from within a few years of the accession of George III almost to the close of the long reign of that monarch. He saw the fanatical outburst caused in Scotland by the English Catholic Relief Bill of 1777, when Edinburgh and Glasgow were the scenes of outrage and pillage worthy of the blackest days of the penal laws; and he also saw in 1793 the Catholics of Scotland released by Parliament from the Most oppressive of those laws, though still liable to many disabilities. He did much to improve the condition and status of the Scots Colleges in Paris and Rome, which from various causes had fallen into a very unsatisfactory state; and his devotional and controversial writings won him repute beyond the limits of Scotland. During his long vicariate the Scottish Catholics, whose numbers had greatly fallen after the disastrous Jacobite rising of 1745, only very gradually increased. They numbered probably some 25,000 souls in 1780; and of these, it was stated, not more than twenty possessed land worth a hundred pounds a year. In 1800, seven years after the passing of the Relief Bill, the faithful were estimated to number 30,000, ministered to by three bishops and forty priests, with twelve churches. Six or seven of the priests were émigrés from France. With the cessation of active persecution, a good many new churches were erected throughout the country, and at the same time the Catholic population was augmented by a large influx of Irish. In 1827 Pope Leo XII added a new vicariate to the Scottish mission, which was now divided into the Eastern, Western, and Northern Districts. By this time the Catholic population had increased to 70,000, including fifty priests, with over thirty churches and about twenty schools. The concession to Catholics of civil and political liberty by the Emancipation Act of 1829 was preceded and followed in Scotland, as in England, by disgraceful exhibitions of bigotry and intolerance, although many prominent Scotsmen, including Sir Walter Scott, were entirely in its favour. The immediate result of the salutary measure of 1829 was the rapid extension and development of the Church in Scotland. A new ecclesiastical seminary was, by the generosity of a benefactor, established at Blairs, near Aberdeen; the first convent of nuns since the Reformation was founded in 1832, in Edinburgh; and in Glasgow alone the number of Catholics mounted up from a few scores to 24,000. Prominent among the bishops of Scotland during the first half of the nineteenth century was James Gillis, who was nominated as coadjutor for the Eastern District in 1837, the first year of the reign of Queen Victoria, and laboured indefatigably as administrator and preacher for nearly thirty years. The wave of conversions from Anglicanism which originated in the Tractarian movement in the Church of England was felt also in Scotland, where several notable converts were received during Bishop Gillis's episcopate, and several handsome churches were built, and new missions established, through their instrumentality. Many new schools were also erected, and more than one convent founded, under the zealous prelate, and in the Western District the progress of Catholicism was not less remarkable. Bishop Andrew Scott, who was appointed to the mission of Glasgow in 1805 and died as vicar Apostolic in 1846, saw during the interval the Glasgow Catholics increase from one thousand to seventy thousand souls; and his successors, Bishops Murdoch and Gray, were witnesses of a similar increase, and did much to multiply churches, missions, schools, and Catholic institutions throughout the vicariate. While in the sparsely-inhabited region included in the Northern Vicariate there was not, during this period, the same remarkable numerical increase in the faithful as in the more populous parts of Scotland, the work of organization and development there also went on steadily and continuously. During the thirty years' pontificate of Pius IX the question as to the advisability of restoring to Scotland her regular hierarchy was from time to time brought forward; but it was not until the very close of his reign that this important measure was practically decided on at Rome, partly as the result of the report of Archbishop Manning, as Apostolic Visitor to the Scottish Church, on certain grave dissensions between Irish and Scottish Catholics which had long existed in the Glasgow district. Pius IX did not live to carry out his intention; but the very first official act of his successor Leo XIII was to reerect the Scottish hierarchy by his Bull "Ex Supreme Apostolatus apice", dated 4 March, 1878. Thus reestablished, the hierarchy was to consist of two archbishoprics: St. Andrews and Edinburgh, with the four suffragan sees of Aberdeen, Argyll and the Isles, Dunkeld, and Galloway; and Glasgow, without suffragans. The exotic religious body styled the Scottish Episcopal Church immediately published a protest against the adoption of the ancient titles for the newly-erected sees; but the papal act roused no hostile feeling in the country at large, and was generally and sensibly recognized as one which concerned no one except the members of the Catholic body. They on their side welcomed with loyal gratitude a measure which restored to the Church in Scotland the full and normal hierarchical organization which properly belongs to her, and which might be expected to have the same consoling results as have followed a similar act in England, Holland, Australia, and the United States. If the "second spring" of Catholicism in Scotland has been less fruitful and less remarkable than in the countries just named, Scottish Catholics have nevertheless much to be thankful for, looking back through the past thirty years to what has been done in the way of growth, development, better equipment, and more perfect organization. Between 1878 and 1911 the number of priests, secular and regular, working in Scotland has increased from 257 to 555; of churches, chapels, and stations, from 255 to 394; of congregational schools from 157 to 213, of monasteries from 13 to 26, and of convents from 21 to 58. The Catholic population, reckoned to number in 1878 about 38,000 souls, has increased to fully 520,000. Of these only some 25,000, including the Gaelic-speaking inhabitants of the Western Highlands and islands, and of the Diocese of Aberdeen, are of purely Scottish descent, the other dioceses comprising a comparatively small number of Catholics of Scottish blood. The rest of the Catholics of Scotland, including at least 375,000 people in the single archdiocese of Glasgow are either themselves entirely Irish by birth and race or descended from recent immigrants from Ireland into Scotland. Glasgow also harbours, of course, a considerable but fluctuating body of foreign Catholics; and a certain number of Catholic Poles and Lithuanians are always employed in the coal-fields and iron-works of central Scotland. But it would probably be within the mark to estimate the Irish element in the Catholic population north of the Tweed as amounting to between 90 and 95 per cent of the whole; and its tendency is to increase rather than to diminish. The education of clergy for the Scottish mission is carried on at Blairs College, Aberdeen (number of students, 80); at St. Peter's College, near Glasgow (32), and at the Scots Colleges at Rome (33), and at Valladolid (14). There are also a few Scottish Students at the College of Propaganda at Rome; and 20 more, on French foundation-burses, were being educated in 1911 at the Ecole supérieure de Théologie at the College of Issy, near Paris. Good secondary schools for boys are conducted by the Jesuits at Glasgow, and by the Marist Brothers at Glasgow and Dumfries; and there are excellently equipped boarding-schools for girls at Aberdeen, Edinburgh, and elsewhere, under religious of various orders. The Sisters of Notre Dame are in charge of a fine training college for teachers just outside Glasgow; and a hospital at Lanark is managed by the Sisters of Charity, as well as a large orphanage for destitute children. The Nuns of the Good Shepherd, the Sisters of Nazareth, and the Little Sisters of the Poor carry on their works of charity and beneficence with zeal and success, being largely helped by kindly Protestants; and many Protestant parents entrust their children's education to the teaching orders of the Catholic Church. In the larger centres of population there is still a good deal of sectarian bitterness, fomented of course by the members of Orange and similar societies; but on the whole religious animosities have greatly died down in recent times, and in those districts of the Highlands where Catholics are most numerous, they live as a rule on terms of perfect amity with their Presbyterian neighbours. The public elementary schools of Scotland are controlled and managed by the school boards elected by the rate-payers of each parish; and Government grants of money are made annually not only to these schools, but also to other schools (including those under Catholic management) which, in the words of the Act of Parliament of 1872, are "efficiently contributing to the secular education of the parish or burgh in which they are situated". The amount of the grant is conditional on the attendance and proficiency of the scholars, the qualifications of the teachers, and the state of the schools; and the schools are liable to be inspected at any time by inspectors appointed by the Crown on the recommendation of the Scotch Education Department, and empowered to ascertain that the conditions necessary for obtaining the government grant have been fulfilled. No grant is made in respect of religious instruction; but such instruction is sanctioned and provided for in the code regulating the scheme of school work, parents being, however, at liberty to withdraw their children from it if they please. No complete statistics are available as to the total number of children in the Catholic elementary schools; but in the Archdiocese of Glasgow and the Diocese of Galloway, which together comprise fully four-fifths of the Catholic population of the country, 66,482 children were presented in 1910 for religious examination. Besides the elementary schools, what are known as "higher grade schools" also receive government grants in proportion to their efficiency, special additional grants being made to such schools in the six Highland counties. With regard to the legal disabilities under which Scottish Catholics still lie, notwithstanding the Emancipation Act of 1829, it is unnecessary, as the provisions of that act apply to Scotland equally with England, to do more than refer to the article England Since the Reformation. The only specifically Scottish office from which Catholics are debarred by statute is that of Lord High Commissioner to the General Assembly of the Established Church — an office which no Catholic, of course would desire to hold. The clauses in the Act of 1829 providing for the "gradual suppression and final prohibition" of religious order so men have in practice remained a dead letter; but they have in Scotland, as in England, the effect of seriously restricting the tenure and disposition of their property by religious communities. All trusts and bequests in favour of religious orders are void in law; and the members of such orders can hold property only as individuals. The English statutes (of Henry VIII and Edward VI) invalidating bequests made to obtain prayers and Masses, on the ground that these are "superstitious uses", do not apply either to Ireland or to Scotland; and it is probable the Scottish courts would recognize the validity of such bequests, as the Irish Courts undoubtedly do. (See Lilly and Wallis's "Manual of the Law specially affecting Catholics", London, 1893.) I. Celtic Period: INNES, Critical Essay on the Ancient Inhabitants of Scotland (London, 1729); SKENE, Celtic Scotland (Edinburgh, 1876-80); IDEM, Chronicles of the Picts and Scots (Edinburgh, 1861); LOGAN, The Scottish Gael (Inverness, s. d.); ANDERSON, Scotland in Early Christian Times (Edinburgh, 1881); WILSON, Archaeology and Prehistoric Annals of Scotland (Edinburgh, 1851); CAMERON, Reliquioe Celtioe (Inverness, 1892) MACLAGAN, Religio Scotica (Edinburgh, 1909); EDMONDS, The Early Scottish Church, its Doctrine and Discipline (Edinburgh, 1906); DOWDEN, The Celtic Church in Scotland (London, 1894); LEAL, The Christian Faith in Early Scotland (London, 1885). II. Middle Ages: FORDUN (with BOWER'S continuation), Scotichronicon, ed. GOODALL (Edinburgh, 1759); LESLIE, De Origine, moribus et rebus gestis Scotorum (Rome, 1678); SINCLAIR, Statistical Account of Scotland (Edinburgh, 1791); THEINER, Vetera monumenta Hibernorum atque Scotorum historiam illustrantia, 1216-1547 (Rome, 1864); WALCOTT, The Ancient Church Scotland (London, 1874); WYNTOUN, Orygynale Chronykil of Scotland (Edinburgh, 1872-79); Concilia Scotioe (Edinburgh, 1868); GORDON, Scotichronicon (including KEITH'S Catalogue of Scottish Bishops (Glasgow, 1867); INNES, Sketches of Early Scotch History (Edinburgh, 1861); the publications of the Scottish Text Society (Edinburgh) are of great value; and many episcopal registers and cartularies of the Scottish abbeys have been printed by the Bannatyne, Maitland, Spottiswoode, and other societies. III. General, including modern, history: BURTON, Hist. of Scotland to 1746 (Edinburgh, 19876); Hist. of Scotland, to the Union (Edinburgh, 1879) LANG, Hist of Scotland, to 1745 (Edinburgh, 1900-07) HUME BROWN, Hist. of Scotland (Cambridge, 1902); BELLESHEIM, History of the Catholic Church in Scotland (Edinburgh, 1887-90) vol IV has valuable appendices, with reports to Propaganda on the state of Scottish Catholics under the penal laws; GRUB, Ecclesiastical Hist of Scotland (Edinburgh, 1861) from an Episcopalian point of view, but impartially written; WALSH, Hist. of the Catholic Church of Scotland (Glasgow, 1874), a useful compilation; FORBES-LEITH, Narratives of Scottish Catholics under Mary and James VI (Edinburgh, 1885); IDEM, Memoirs of Scottish Catholics, 17th and 18th centuries (London, 1909); DAWSON, The Catholics of Scotland, 1593-1852 (London, 1890). D.O. HUNTER-BLAIR Established Church of Scotland Established Church of Scotland The religious organization which has for three centuries and a half claimed the adherence of the majority of the inhabitants of Scotland, may be said to date from August 1560, in which month the Scottish Parliament, assembled in Edinburgh without any writ from the sovereign, decided that the Protestant Confession of Faith (drawn up on much the same lines as the Confession of Westminster) should henceforth be the established, and only authorized, creed of the Scottish Kingdom. The same Parliament abolished papal jurisdiction, and forbade the celebration or hearing of Mass under penalty of death; but it made no provision for the appointment of the new clergy nor for their maintenance. At the first General Assembly, however, of the newly-constituted body, held in December, 1560, the First Book of Discipline was approved in which not only doctrinal questions and the conduct of worship were minutely legislated for, but detailed regulations were drawn up for the election and admission of ministers, and for their support on a generous scale from the confiscated revenues of the ancient Church. Scotland was divided ecclesiastically into ten districts, for each of which was appointed a superintendent to travel about, institute ministers, and generally set the Church in order. A scheme of popular and higher education was also sketched out, for which the early Scottish Reformers have been highly lauded; but it was never carried out, and the whole educational work of the founders of the Kirk consisted in purging the schools and universities of "idolatrous regents" (i.e. Catholic teachers), more than a century being allowed to elapse before there was any attempt at national education in Presbyterian Scotland. The fact was that the greedy nobles who had fallen on and divided amongst themselves the possessions of the Catholic Church, absolutely refused to disgorge them, notwithstanding their professed zeal for the new doctrines. Only a sixth part of the ecclesiastical revenues was grudgingly doled out for the support of the ministers, and even that was paid with great irregularity. The grasping avarice of the nobles was also responsible for all delay and difficulties in settling the system of church government on Presbyterian principles, as desired by the Protestant leaders. The barons saw with dismay the life-interest of the old bishops and abbots (preserved to them by the legislation of 1560) gradually lapsing, and their possessions falling to the Church. In a convention held in 1572 the lords actually procured the restoration of the old hierarchical titles, the quasi-bishops thus created being merely catspaws to the nobles, who hoped through them to get possession of all the remaining ecclesiastical endowments. Although the General Assembly refused to recognize this sham episcopate, the fact of its existence kept alive the idea that Episcopacy might eventually be the established form of government in the Scottish, as in the English, Protestant Church; and the question of Prelacy versus Presbytery remained a burning one for more than a century longer. During the long reign of James VI, whose vacillating character induced him first to cajole the Church with promises of spiritual independence and then to harass her by measures of the most despotic Erastianism, the religious condition of Scotland was in a state of continual ferment. The king succeeded in getting the bishops authorized to sit in Parliament in 1600; and when, three years later, he succeeded to the Crown of England, he openly proclaimed his favorite maxim, "No bishop, no king", declared Presbyterianism incompatible with the monarchy, suppressed the right of free assembly, and tried and punished the leaders of the Scottish Church for high treason. The discontent caused in Scotland by these high-handed measures came to a head after his death, when his son and successor, Charles I, visited Scotland in 1633, and professed himself pained by the baldness of public worship. His imposition, four years later, of the English liturgy on every congregation in Scotland, on pain of deprivation of the minister, was the signal for a general uprising, not less formidable because restrained. The Privy Council permitted (being powerless to prevent) the formation of a provisional government, whose first act was to procure the renewal of the National Covenant, first drawn up in 1580, engaging its subscribers to adhere to and defend the doctrine and discipline of the Scotch Protestant Church. The Covenant was signed by all classes of the people, and the General Assembly of 1638, in spite of the protest of the king's high commissioner, Lord Hamilton, abolished the episcopacy, annulled the royal ordinance as to the service-book, and claimed a sovereign right to carry out the convictions of the national church as to its position and duty. These high pretensions of the General Assembly, of which King Charles was, through his commissioner, a constituent part, were bound to come in conflict with Charles' lofty idea of his royal prerogative. He absolutely refused to concede the right of his Scottish subjects to choose their own form of church government, and marched an army to the border to enforce submission to his authority. The Scotch, however, possessed themselves of Newcastle; the king was ultimately obliged to sign a treaty favourable to them and their claims; and his own downfall, followed by the dictatorship of Oliver Cromwell, a sworn opponent of Prelacy, brought the leaders of the Scottish Church into important relations with the new order of things in England. The Scottish Commissioners took a prominent part in the Westminster Assembly of 1643, convened to draw up the new standards of doctrine and church government for England under the Commonwealth; and it was then and there that was framed the "Shorter Catechism" which still remains the recognized religious text-book of the Presbyterian Church of Scotland. The latter years of the Commonwealth were, in fact, an epoch of prosperity hitherto unknown for Scottish Presbyterianism; but the restoration of Charles II, who was nowhere more warmly welcomed than in his northern dominions, was a rude blow to their Church's hopes of continued peace and spiritual independence. Within a year of his assumption of the royal authority, Charles rescinded through his Parliaments all the acts approving the national covenant and abolishing the hierarchy; and a few months later his Scottish subjects were bidden by proclamations to "compose themselves to a cheerful acquiescence" in the re-establishment of the "right government of bishops:, on pain of imprisonment. Four new prelates were consecrated by English bishops for Scotland, and all occupiers of benefices had to get presentation from the patrons and collation from the bishops, or else be ejected from their livings, as nearly four hundred actually were. From this time until Charles II's death in 1685, an era of persecution prevailed in Scotland, large numbers of the Presbyterians refusing to conform to the Episcopal Church, and being treated in consequence with every kind of indignity, hounded from their houses, tortured, and in many cases massacred. The worship of the Covenanters was prohibited under pain of death, but was nevertheless largely attended all over the country, and the armed risings of the people against their oppressors were forcibly put down, the Covenanting forces being hopelessly defeated in several engagements. At length, on the king's death, came a few years' breathing-time and peace; for his Catholic successor, James II, himself of course a dissenter from the established religion, immediately conceded toleration and liberty of worship all over the kingdom, although some of his more fanatical subjects refused to accept a boon which they regarded as coming from a polluted source. The Revolution of 1688, and the flight of the Catholic king, opened the way to the abolition of the Prelatical government which was odious to the majority of Scotsmen; and one of the first acts of the Parliament assembled in the first year of the reign of William III (July, 1689) was to repeal all previous acts in favour of Episcopacy. The Presbyterian form of church government was not settled by this Parliament; but, in the following year, the Jacobite and Prelatical cause having been rendered hopeless by the death of its leader, Graham of Claverhouse, Viscount Dundee, the king and queen and the three estates of the realm formally ratified the Westminster Confession, and re-established the Presbyterian form of government and discipline. Lord Melville, a zealous Presbyterian, had already replaced Hamilton as the king's commissioner to the General Assembly, and the Restoration Act of Parliament, asserting the supremacy of the Crown in ecclesiastical cause, had been repealed. Another act ordered all professors and masters in every university and school to subscribe the Confession, and the popular election of ministers took the place of private patronage to benefices. The secular power thus re-established the Church as a fully-organized Presbyterian body, just as it had re-established Episcopacy thirty years before; but the new settlement was made not by the arbitrary will of the sovereign, but (according to the principles of the Revolution) as being that most in accordance with the will of the people, as indeed there is no reason to doubt that it was. A very considerable section, however, especially in the east and northeast of Scotland, and more particularly among the wealthy and aristocratic classes, remained attached to Episcopalian principles; and though those of the clergy who refused to conform to the Establishment were treated with considerable harshness, no attempt was made to compel the laity to attend Presbyterian worship, or submit to the rigid Presbyterian discipline. The majority of the Episcopalians were also Jacobites at heart, praying, if not working, for the restoration of the Stuart dynasty, and were thus a disturbing element in the country not only from a religious, but from a political point of view. The four Scottish universities (Aberdeen, Edinburgh, Glasgow, St. Andrews) were believed, and with reason, to be very unfavourably affected towards the new order of things in Church and State; and the visitation of them conducting in the closing years of the seventeenth century resulted in the majority of the principals being ejected from office for refusing to comply with the test ordered by the statute of 1690. The effect of this state of things was that when the General Assembly met for the first time after nearly forty years, the universities were unrepresented save by a single member, while there were hardly any members belonging to the nobility or higher gentry, or representing the wide district of Scotland north of the Tay. The Assembly ordered all ministers and elders to subscribe the Westminster Confession, and appointed a solemn fast-day in expiation of the national sins, among which was expressly mentioned the introduction of Prelacy. But in view of the divided state of the country, it showed its prudence by not attempting to renew the general obligation of the National Covenant. The efforts of the Assembly, through its commissioners, to purge out the old incumbents throughout the kingdom, and replace them by orthodox ministers, proved quite ineffectual in Aberdeen and other strongholds of Episcopacy; but on the whole, the established religion, backed by the authority of the State and supported by the majority of the people, held its own, and increased in strength and numbers during the reigns of William II and his successor Queen Anne. The latter, while herself a strong adherent of the Episcopal Church of England, showed no inclination to favour the hopes and schemes of the Episcopalian minority in Scotland. A proposal in the Scottish Parliament of 1703 that the free exercise of religious worship should be conceded to all Protestant Nonconformists (Catholics, of course, were carefully excluded) was met by a violent protest from the authorities of the Established Church, and was consequently dropped. The Episcopal body, however, continued its private worship, though not sanctioned by law, and provided for its continued organization by the consecration of two more bishops (the old hierarchy being almost extinct) in 1705, without, however, claiming for them any diocesan jurisdiction. The Union of England and Scotland into one kingdom in 1707, a measure unpopular with the great body of the Scottish nation, was resisted by many Presbyterians, through fear of the effect on their Church of a closer connection with a kingdom where Prelacy was legally established. Parliament, however, enacted, as a fundamental and essential condition of the Treaty of Union, that the Confession of Faith and the Presbyterian form of church government were "to continue without any alteration to all succeeding generations"; the religious tests were to be continued in the case of all holding office in universities and schools, and every succeeding sovereign was to swear at his accession to preserve inviolate the existing settlement of religion, worship, government, and discipline in Scotland. It was a rude shock to those who believed the unchallenged supremacy of the Scottish Church to be thus permanently secured to find the British Parliament, a few years later, not only passing an act tolerating Episcopalian worship in Scotland, but restoring that right of private patronage to benefices which, revived at the Restoration, had been abolished, it was thought forever, at the Revolution. The importance of the latter measure, from the point of view of the history of the Established Church, can hardly be exaggerated; for it was the direct incentive to, and the immediate cause of, the beginning of the long series of schisms within the body, the result of which has been, in the words of a Presbyterian historian, the "breaking-up of the church into innumerable fragments". There were already included within the pale of the establishment two widely differing parties: the old orthodox Presbyterians or "evangelicals", who upheld the national covenant to the letter, and looked upon the toleration of Episcopacy as a national sin crying to heaven; and the new and semi-prelatical party subsequently known as "moderates", who gradually became dominant in the government of the church, regarded their opponents as fanatics, declined to check, if they did not actually encourage, the Arminian or latitudinarian doctrines which were taking the place of the old Calvinistic tenets, and submitted without a murmur to the restoration of lay patronage, which struck at the very root of the essential principle of Presbyterian church government. The policy of the moderates prevailed; the revolt of the presbyteries was quelled, and the popular clamour to a great extent silenced. But at the same time thousands of people were alienated from the establishment, so that by the middle of the eighteenth century there were in every centre of population schismatic meeting-houses thronged with dissentient worshippers. The long period of ascendancy of the Moderate party in the Church of Scotland, which lasted from the reign of Queen Anne well into the nineteenth century -- a period of nearly a hundred years -- was on the whole an uneventful one. Faithful to the Hanoverian settlement, and closely allied with the state, the establishment grew in power and dignity, and produced not a few scholars and philosophers of considerable eminence. Principal William Robertson, the historian of Scotland, of America and of Charles V, was one of the most distinguished products of this period; and he may be taken also as typical of the cultured Presbyterian divines of the eighteenth century, whose least conspicuous side was the theological or spiritual element which one might have expected to find in the religious leaders of the time. Spirituality, in truth, was not the strong point of the prominent Scottish churchmen of that epoch, whose doctrinal laxity has been acknowledged and deplored by their modern admirers and fellow-churchmen. Rationalism was rife in manse and pulpit throughout Scotland; and the sermons of Hugh Blair, which were translated into almost every European language, and were praised as the most eloquent utterances of the age, are purely negative from any theological point of view, however admirable as rhetorical exercises. Whatever spiritual fervour or devotional warmth there was in the Presbyterianism of the eighteenth century is to be looked for not within the pale of the dominant church, but in the ranks of the seceders from the establishment -- the burghers and Anti-burghers, and other strangely-named dissentient bodies, who were at least possessed with an intense and very real evangelical zeal, and exercised a proportionate influence on those with whom they came in contact. That influence was exerted not only personally, and in their pulpits, but also in their devotional writings, which undoubtedly did more to keep the essential principles of Christianity alive in the hearts of their countrymen, in an unbelieving age, than anything effected by the frigid scholarship, philosophy, and rhetoric which were engendered by the established church of the country during the period under review. It is singular that the state Church of Scotland, whose own religious spirit was at so generally low an ebb during the greater part of the eighteenth century, should nevertheless have during that period made more or less persistent efforts to uproot the last vestiges of the ancient Faith in the northern parts of the kingdom, many of which had remained absolutely unaffected by the Reformation. It was in 1725 that the yearly gift called the Royal Bounty, still bestowed annually by the Sovereign, was first forthcoming, with the express object of Protestantizing the still Catholic districts of the Highlands. Schools were set up, Gaelic teachers and catechists instituted, copies of the Protestant Bible, translated into Gaelic, widely disseminated, and every effort made to win over to the Presbyterian tenets the poor people who still clung to the immemorial faith and practices of their fathers. Want of means prevented as much being done in this direction as was desired and intended; and for that reason, as well as owing to the unexpected reluctance of the Catholic Highlanders to exchange their ancient beliefs for the new evangel of the Kirk, the efforts of the proselytizers were only very partially successful, the inhabitants of several of the western islands, and of many isolated glens and straths in the western portion of the Highland mainland still persisting in their firm attachment to the old religion. Meanwhile the general revival of Evangelicalism, which was in part a reaction from the excesses and negations of the French Revolution, was beginning to stir the dry bones of Scottish Presbyterianism, which had almost lost any influence it had formerly exercised on the religious life of the people. The personal piety, ardent zeal, and rugged pulpit eloquence of men like Andrew Thomson and Thomas Chalmers awoke the Established Church from its apathy, and one of the first evidences of its new fervour was the official sanction given to foreign mission work, which had been condemned as "improper and absurd" by the General Assembly of 1796. The business of church extension at home was at the same time energetically undertaken; and though it was long hindered by the hopelessness of obtaining increased endowments from the Government -- the only means, curiously enough, by which the Church seemed for years to think the extension could be brought about -- private munificence came to the rescue, and within seven years more than two hundred churches were added to those already existing in Scotland. The first half of the nineteenth century, however, though a period of progress, was by no means a period of peace within the establishment. Side by side with the evangelical revival had sprung up again the old agitation about the essential evil of lay private patronage. Internally the church was torn by doctrinal controversies, resulting in the condemnation and expulsion of some ministers of distinction and repute, while in open opposition were the nonconforming bodies which had, at least temporarily, coalesced under the title of the United Seceders, preached uncompromising voluntaryism, and denounced all state connection with churches, and state endowments of religion, as intrinsically unscriptural and impious. It was, however, the age-long grievance about patronage which proved the rock on which the Established Church was to split asunder and to be wellnigh shattered. The Veto Act, passed by the General Assembly in 1833, provided that the minister presented by the patron was not to be instituted unless approved by a majority of heads of families in the congregation; but the highest legal tribunals in Scotland absolutely refused to sanction this enactment, as did the House of Lords, to which the Assembly appealed. The claim of the Church to legislative independence was rudely brushed aside by the President of the Court of Session, in his famous declaration that "the temporal head of the Church is Parliament, from whose acts alone it exists as the national Church, and from which alone it derives all its powers". The result of this momentous conflict was what was known as the "Disruption" of 1843, when 451 out of 1203 ministers quitted the church, together with fully a third of its lay members, and initiated a new religious organization thenceforth known as the Free Church (see FREE CHURCH OF SCOTLAND). The Established Church, shorn by the Disruption, of all the men who had been most prominent in promoting the evangelical revival, swept from its statute-book everything disallowed by the civil courts, became again "moderate" in its polity, and frankly Erastian in its absolute subservience to the civil power. With its national reputation seriously impaired, and abandoned by its labourers in the mission field, who all, with one solitary exception, joined the rival Church, its task was for many years a difficult and ungrateful one. It is to its credit as an organizing body that it promptly set to work, and with some measure of success, to repair the breaches of 1843, to recruit its missionary staff, to extend its borders at home, to fill up the many vacancies caused by the latest schism, and to erect and endow new parishes. In 1874, thirty-two years after the Disruption, the Assembly petitioned Parliament for the abolition of the system of patronage, so long the great bone of contention in the Church. The prayer was granted, and the right of electing their own ministers conferred on the congregations -- a democratic arrangement which, however gratifying to the electors, often places the candidate for their suffrages in a position both humiliating and undignified, and is not infrequently accompanied by incidents as ludicrous as they are disedifying. Nor has the new order of things apparently brought appreciably nearer the prospects of reunion between the Established and Free Churches, although the question of patronage, and not that of State recognition was the main point of cleavage between them. A union of a kind, though not a complete one, there has been of some of the religious bodies outside the pale of the Establishment; but the State Church herself seems powerless to recall or reunite the numerous sects which have wandered from her fold, difficult or impossible as it seems to the outside observer to discover what essential points of difference there are between them in matters either of doctrine, discipline, or church government. The Established Church of Scotland maintains that her system of government, by kirk-sessions, presbyteries, synods, and the General Assembly, is "agreeable to the Word of God and acceptable to the people"; but she does not claim for it exclusively the Divine sanction and authority. There is no doubt as to its general popularity in Scotland, to whose people the democratic element in Presbyterianism strongly appeals. In the lowest judicatory body, the kirk-session, the laymen or "elders" greatly preponderate, and they are as numerous as the ministers in presbyteries and synods; while the members of the supreme body, the General Assembly, are chosen by popular election. The Sovereign is represented at the Assembly by his Lord High commissioner; but his presidency is merely formal, and the Assembly is opened and dissolved not by him in the first place, but by the elected head or "moderator", in the name of Christ, the "head of the Church". It is needless however, to add that popular election and democratic government notwithstanding, the Scottish Established Church is, like its English sister, the creature of the State and absolutely subject to it; and nothing in its parliamentary creed can be changed except with the sanction of the authority to which it owes its existence. Viewed in the light of the history of the past three centuries, the passionate claim made by a section of Scottish Presbyterians to "spiritual independence" is as ludicrous as it is pathetic. Their Church enjoys exactly as much independence -- neither less nor more -- as may be conceded to it by the State which created and upholds it. Present-day Statistics The number of ecclesiastical parishes in Scotland (1911) is 1441; of chapels, 80; of mission stations, 170; total, 1691; and the increase of church sitting since 1880 is stated to be 196,000. The total endowments of the Church from all sources (i.e. the national exchequer, local funds, "teinds" or tithes, either in kind or commuted, and funds raised within the Church) are reckoned at about X360,000 annually. The number of communicants, as returned to the General Assembly in May, 1910, was 711,200; and there were 2222 Sunday schools taught by about 21,000 teachers, with a roll of children amounting to nearly 301,000. It is claimed in the official returns of the Church that her membership has increased 52 per cent in 36 years, during which period the growth of the total population of Scotland has increased only 33 per cent. The Established church performed in 1908 45 per cent of Scottish marriages, as compared with 26 per cent (United Free) and 10 per cent (Catholic). Reckoning the population of Scotland in 1911 as about 4, 750,000, the proportion of communicants of the Establishment would be about 14 per cent of the whole. The church of Scotland has in recent years displayed much energy in the extension of her work both at home and abroad. Since 1878 the Home and foreign Missions have doubled their incomes; 460 new parishes have been erected, and 380 new churches built; missions have been established in Africa and China, and a Universities Foreign Mission started; and guilds and associations have been founded in connection with a great variety of religious objects. During the same period of thirty-six years a sum of between sixteen and seventeen millions sterling (exclusive of government grants, school fees, and interest on capital) has been voluntarily contributed for parochial, missionary, and charitable purposes in connection with the Established Church. The four Scottish Universities all possess faculties of "divinity", with well-endowed professors lecturing on theological or quasi-theological subjects; and a degree at one of these universities, or at least a certificate of having attended courses of lectures therein, as a rule required for students aspiring to the Presbyterian ministry. Many "bursaries" or scholarships are available for students of divinity; and the course of studies prescribed for them is comprehensive and carefully arranged. It is impossible, however, to deny the fact, or to view it without apprehension, that the hold of dogmatic truth is becoming constantly weaker in the Established as in the Free Church, among teachers and learners alike. German rationalistic ideas have penetrated deeply into the divinity halls of the Kirk; and half an hour's conversation with a Scotch professor of Biblical criticism or systematic theology, or with the ablest of the younger generation of ministers who have sat at their feet, will be sufficient to show how wide has been the departure from the old orthodox standards of belief within the Church. The latest formula of subscription imposed on ministers at their ordination still professes a belief in the "fundamental doctrines of the Christian faith" contained in the Presbyterian Confession; but this does not apparently include any real acceptance either of the Divinity of Christ or of the inspiration of Holy Scripture, at least in the sense in which those doctrines are understood by Catholics. "In Presbyterian Scotland", writes a modern critic, "there are many good Christians, but Presbyterian Scotland is emphatically not a Christian country, any more than Protestant England." That such a deliberate verdict should be possible in the twentieth century of the Christian era is melancholy indeed. "Acts of the General Assemblies of the Church of Scotland", 1638-1854 (Edinburgh, 1843-75); "Confession of Faith of the Church of Scotland", (Edinburgh, 1638); "First and Second Book of Discipline" (s. l., 1621); SAGE, "An Account of the Present Persecution of the Church in Scotland" (London, 1690); "Brief and True Account of the Sufferings of the Church of Scotland occasioned by the Episcopalians" (London, 1690); "Short Statement of the origin and nature of the present divisions in the Church of Scotland" (London, 1840); FOTHERINGHAM, "Presbyterianism in Religious systems of the World" (Edinburgh, 1861); McCRIE, "The Public Worship of Presbyterian Scotland" (Edinburgh, 18920; CALDERWOOD, "History of the Church of Scotland" (Edinburgh, 1842-44); LEE, "Lectures on the History of the Church of Scotland from Reformation to Revolution" (Edinburgh, 1860); KINLOCH, "History of Scotland, chiefly in its Ecclesiastical Aspect" (Edinburgh, 1888); WALKER, "Scottish Church History" (Edinburgh, 1881); "Church of Scotland Year-book" (Edinburgh, 1911); POWER, "Presbyterianism in C. T. S. Lectures on Hist. Of Religions" (London, s.d.) D.O. HUNTER-BLAIR Scoto-Hibernian Monasteries Scoto-Hibernian Monasteries A convenient term under which to include the monastic institutions which were founded during the sixth century in the country now known as Scotland, though that name was not used in its present sense until four hundred years later. These institutions owed their origin to the zeal and energy of St. Columba, whose labors among the Picts and Scots extended over a period of nearly forty years, and whose biographer, Adamnan, the ninth abbot of Iona, is our chief authority on the subject, although his list of Columban foundations is probably incomplete, and the exact dates of their erection are uncertain. What is certain, however, is that these monastic houses grouped themselves round Iona as their centre, and long remained in close connection with her. Like the Columban houses in Ireland, they acknowledged the jurisdiction of Iona as that of their mother-house, and the communities belonging to them together formed the widespread organization known as the family of Iona, or muinter Ioe. Not all these monasteries were actually founded by St. Columba in person, some of them owing their origin to his immediate followers, whose names have in many cases survived the disappearance of all material traces of the establishments in question. Reeves, Skene, and other Scottish and Irish antiquarians have devoted much time, labor, and research in the endeavor to identify the localities mentioned by Adamnan and other early writers. With out following them into these topographical and philological details, it may be stated generally that vestiges of Columban foundations are to be found in the northern, eastern, and western districts of Scotland, formerly occupied respectively by the Northern and Southern Picts and by the Scots of Dalriada. Many of these monasteries were established on the islands off the west coast, including Tiree, Skye, Garveloch, Harris, Lewis, North and South Uist, Lismore, Mull, Eigg, Canna, Colonsay, and numerous smaller islands. Adamnan makes no mention of the monasteries founded by Columba and his contemporaries and followers in the Pictish territories north and east of the great central mountain-range known as Drumalban; but from other sources we know that there were many of such foundations, several of them being in the remote Orkney Islands. The Book of Deer, a notable foundation in the Buchan district, records the method in which these isolated monasteries were established among the heathen tribes, the head of a tribe granting a cathair, or fort, which was then occupied by a colony of clerics or missionaries a system of settlement in every respect similar to that prevailing in the Irish Church at the same period. All down the east coast, as far as the Forth, we find the name of Colum, Colm or Comb constantly associated at the present day with churches, chapels, parishes, fairs, and wells, showing how widespread were the influence and labors of the saint of Iona. In the territory of the Southern Picts, who as a nation had been converted to Christianity a century before by St. Ninian, though many of the faithful had since fallen away, the faith was revived, and new centres of religion and of missionary work were formed by the monasteries established by Columba and his friends. The monastic church of Abernethy was founded, or rather refounded, by King Gartnaidh, son and successor of Brude, Columba's own convert and warm ally. Another friend of the saint, Cainnech, founded the church and monastery of Kilrimont, celebrated in after times as St. Andrews. The monastic church of Dunkeld, though founded much later, at the eventful period when the Picts and Scots were united under the sceptre of Kenneth McAlpine, was essentially a Columban foundation, though by that time the influence of the venerable mother-house of Iona had greatly waned, and the jurisdiction over the Irish monastic churches had in fact been transferred to Kells in Meath. In Scotland Dunkeld, under royal patronage, took the place of Iona as the head of the Columban churches; and so clearly was this recognized that when the diocesan form of church government was established in Scotland, Iona was included in the Diocese of Dunkeld, and remained so long after Argyll, of which it formed a part, became the seat of a bishopric of its own. By that time, however the Columban or monastic church, dominant in Scotland for nearly two centuries, had, as an organized body, decayed and disappeared. Early in the eighth century the remnant of Columban monks were expelled by King Nectan, and the primacy of Iona came to an end. The numerous Columban monasteries, or at least such of them as were not abandoned and in ruins, came into the hands of the now dominant Culdees; and they in turn, when the Scottish Church came to be reorganized on the English model under the influence of St. Margaret and her family, found themselves gradually superseded by the regular monastic orders which were introduced into the country by the munificence of kings, princes, and nobles, and reared their splendid abbeys on the sites of the humble monasteries of Columban days. One Columban house only, the monastery of Deer already mentioned, which had been founded by Columba himself, and placed by him under the care of his nephew Drosden, preserved its original and Celtic character for fifty years beyond the reign of David I, who granted it a new charter, and showed it special favor. Early in the thirteenth century, however, it was extinguished like the rest, the monastery being made over to the Cistercian monks, who held it until the Reformation. The building, however, seems to have preserved something of the primitive simplicity of the Columban foundations; for one of the Cistercian abbots is recorded to have resigned his office and returned to the stately abbey of Melrose, which he preferred to what he called that poor cottage of the monks of Deir". To-day a certain number of place-names up and down the country, the patronal saints of a certain number of Scottish parishes, and a few grass-covered earthen mounds or fragments of walls, are all that is left to recall the numerous houses of the muintir Iæ, the cradle of Scottish Christianity thirteen centuries ago. SKENE, Celtic Scotland, II (Edinburgh, 1877); Chronicles of the Picts and Scots (Edinburgh, 1861); ADAMNAN, Life of St. Columba, ed. REEVES, Historians of Scotland, Vl (Edinburgh, 1874); ALLEN, The Early Christian Monuments of Scotland (Edinburgh, 1903); TRENHOLME, The Story of Iona (Edinburgh, 1909); Origines Parochiales Scotiae (Edinburgh, 1850-5); BELLESHEIM, Hist. of Cath. Church of Scotland, I (Edinburgh, 1887), 33-109; DOWDEN, The Celtic Church in Scotland (London, 1894); The Book uf Deer, ed. STUART for Spalding Club (Edinburgh, 1869). D.O. HUNTER-BLAIR The Scots College The Scots College Clement VIII gave Scotland its college at Rome. The Bull of foundation, dated 5 December, 1600, conferred on the college all the privileges already enjoyed by the Greek, German, and English colleges. The pope also bestowed on the infant college various endowments, including the revenue of an abbey in the Neapolitan kingdom and a monthly pension from the revenues of the Dataria. Later, when the old Scotch Hospice, which had stood for centuries where now stands the Church of S. Andrea delle Fratte, was closed, its revenues were transferred to the Scots College. The first students arrived in 1602, and for two years lived in the Via Tritone, but the site and buildings were unsuitable, and in 1604 they moved to the present admirable position in Via Quattro Fontane, close to the Quirinal Palace. The original buildings architecturally had little to commend them, but the handsome and commodious college which Poletti, the architect of St. Paul-without-the-Walls, erected on an extended site nearly a half a century ago, is much admired for its graceful architecture. Attached to the college is an elegant little church built in 1645, and dedicated to St. Andrew, Patron of Scotland. The first superior of the new institution was Mgr. Paolini, but in 1614 the Jesuits took charge, and the first of this line of rectors was Father Anderson, nephew of Mary Stuart's faithful friend, Leslie, Bishop of Ross. To him the college owes its rules and constitutions. During the Jesuit regime there was considerable trouble in the Scots as well as in the other pontifical colleges; many students were entering the Society, and the authorities at home accused the Jesuits of tampering with the young men's vocations. Even the stringent application of the Mission Oath prescribed by Alexander VII did not end the friction. When the Society was suppressed (1773) the bishops in Scotland were asked to send a secular priest to be the new superior; but in an evil hour they urged that they had no one to spare. They lived to rue their refusal, for under the rule of Italian secular priests, finances, discipline, studies, piety, vocations, all suffered, and it was not altogether an unqualified misfortune when in 1798, owing to the occupation of Rome by the soldiers of the French Revolution, the college was forcibly closed, and the few remaining students returned to Scotland. In 1820 it was reopened through the indefatigable exertions of the Scots agent, Paul MacPherson, who succeeded in recovering the dilapidated college buildings along with the depleted revenues, and who became the first rector from the Scots secular clergy. Gradually the college has bettered its status, and now (1911) with thirty-eight students to represent the half million of Scots Catholics it is proportionately the best attended of the colleges of Rome. The students have always frequented the Gregorian University. Among the benefactors of the college are Father William Thompson, the first Marchioness of Huntly, Cardinals Spinelli and Sacripanti, Henry Cardinal Duke of York, Mgr. Lennon, and Mgr. Taggart. A large proportion of the bishops who have ruled the Church in Scotland—to-day five out of six—have been Roman students, and all along a succession of pious, learned, and devoted missionaries from Rome has done much to keep alive and extend the Faith. Bishop Hay, whose centenary has been kept this year (1911) with special celebrations at Fort Augustus and Edinburgh, by his doctrinal and devotional works has laid the English-speaking Catholic world under a deep debt. Archbishop William Smith's work on the Pentateuch attracted much attention more than forty years ago among Biblical scholars as an answer to Colenso, and was pronounced by so great an authority as Cornely as the best work on the subject from any Catholic writer. The college has had its country house, where the students spend the summer recess, for nearly three centuries near Grottaferrata on the Alban Hills, in the midst of vineyards where the country is as health-giving and picturesque as it is full of legendary, historical, and antiquarian interest. The Scots College, like other pontifical colleges, is immediately subject to the Holy See, which now exercises its jurisdiction partly by a cardinal protector, and partly by the Sacred Consistorial Congregation. Previous to 1908 the papal authority was exercised through the Sacred Congregation of Propaganda, and the students were ordained with dimissorial letters issued by the cardinal protector. By a recent disposition the student's ordinary must declare in scriptis that he has no objection to offer against his subject's promotion to Orders. BELLESHEIM, Hist. of Cath. Church in Scotland, tr. HUNTER-BLAIR (London, 1889), III, 386-7; IV, passim; STROTHERT, Life of Bishop Hay in the Journal and appendix to the Scotichronicon, 26 and passim. ROBERT FRASER Ven. Montford Scott Ven. Montford Scott English martyr, b. in Norfolk, England; martyred at Fleet Street, London, on 2 July, 1591. He went to Douai College in 1574, being one of the earliest students at that seminary, and studied theology. The next year he was made subdeacon, and accompanied Dominic Vaughan to England. In Essex they fell into the hands of the Government, Dec., 1576, and under examination, Vaughan was weak enough to betray the names of Catholics both in London and Essex. They were then given over by the Privy Council to the Archbishop of Canterbury for further examination, but nothing more was elicited, and they were afterwards set at liberty. Scott returned to Douai on 22 May, 1577, and having been ordained priest at Brussels set out for the English mission on 17 June. The vessel in which he crossed to England was attacked by pirates, but he escaped with some loss of his goods. He is mentioned as having laboured in Kent (1580), Norfolk, Suffolk (1583), Lincolnshire and Yorkshire (1584). On 24 April, 1584, John Nedeham and others were indicted at Norwich for having on 1 June, 1582, received blessed beads from him. In 1584 he was captured at York at brought to London, where he remained a prisoner for seven years. His release was procured by a money payment of one Baker, on condition of his leaving the country, but Topcliffe immediately procurred his re-arrest. Meanwhile he had visited the confessors in Wisbeach Castle. He was brought to trail at the sessions at Newgate in company of Ven. George Beesley (30 June, 1591), ad was condemned on account of his priesthood and of his being in the country contrary to the Statute. The next day he was drawn to Fleet Street, where he suffered martyrdom. Topcliffe said that he had that day done the queen and the kingdom a singular piece of service in ridding the realm of such a praying and fasting papist as had not his peer in Europe. J.L. WHITFIELD Diocese of Scranton Diocese of Scranton (Scrantonensis). A suffragan see of Philadelphia, U.S.A., established on 3 March, 1868, comprises the Counties of Lackawanna, Luzerne, Bradford, Susquehanna, Wayne, Tioga, Sullivan, Wyoming, Lycoming, Pike, and Monree, all in the north-east part of Pennsylvania; area, 8,487 sq. miles. Scranton, the episcopal see, is in the heart of the anthracite region and is a progressive city of 130,000 inhabitants (1910). Other large cities are Wilkes-Barre, Williamsport, Hazelton, Carbondale, and Pittston. The pioneer Catholic settlers were principally of Irish and German descent, but in recent years the coal-mining industry has attracted numerous European labourers, mostly of the Slav and Italian races, until these now number almost one-half of the Catholic population. Early History Although many of the pioneer settlers were Catholic immigrants, yet the first official visit of a priest to this territory of which there is any authentic record was in 1787. In that year Rev. James Pellentz travelled up the Susquehanna River as far as Elmira, ministering to the Catholics scattered through this region. He returned to Baltimore, whence he had come, and reported conditions to his superiors. A few years after the visit of Father Pellentz the famous French settlement of Asylum or "Azilum" was founded (1793-94). The site chosen was on the banks of the Susquehanna River, opposite the present village of Standing-Stone, Bradford County. It seems to have been planned as a retreat for the nobility, who were forced to flee from the terrors of the French Revolution, and it was evidently intended that the queen herself should take refuge there. The most conspicuous building in the village, the "Queen's house" or "La grande maison", as it was generally called, was built and furnished for her special accommodation. These plans, however, miscarried, for before the house was completed the unfortunate queen had followed her husband to the guillotine. For ten years this unique settlement flourished. It was made up, as we are told, of "some of the nobility and gentlemen of the court of Louis XVI, several of the clergy, a few mechanics and a number of the labouring class". The village consisted of about fifty houses. At the close of the Revolution most of the prominent refugees at Asylum accepted the invitation of Napoleon and returned to France. In 1804 we find the settlement practically abandoned. This settlement was evidently made up almost entirely of French Catholics, and among them a few priests. From a contemporary writer we learn that among the inhabitants of Asylum in 1795 was a certain "M. Carles, a priest and canon of Guernsey" and also a "M. Becdellierre, formerly a canon". Religious services in the settlement were conducted by Ezra Fromentin, "acting priest in the little log chapel" and M. Carles. We read also of a certain Abbé Colin, who, after the abandonment of the settlement, went to the West Indies as chaplain in the army. Mention is also made of a beautiful illuminated Missal used there in the religious services, and afterwards presented to the Vatican Museum. Today scarcely a trace of this unique and interesting settlement remains. The earliest permanent Catholic settlements were at Friendsville, and Silver Lake, Susquehanna County. These, as well as the other Catholic settlers scattered throughout this district, were attended occasionally by priests sent from Philadelphia. In 1825, largely through the solicitations of Mr. Patrick Griffin, father of Gerald Griffin, the Irish novelist, dramatist, and poet, then a resident of Susquehanna County, Bishop Kenrick, of Philadelphia, sent Rev. John O'Flynn as the first resident pastor. His work, however, was rather that of a missionary, as his field of labour comprised thirteen counties in morth-eastern Pennsylvania and five counties in New York State. The first church was built in 1825 near Silver Lake. Father O'Flynn died at Danville in 1829, and was succeeded by Father Clancy. On 1 Feb., 1836, Rev. Henry Fitzsimmons was sent to take charge of this territory, and took up his residence at Carbondale, where a church had been built in 1832, Silver Lake being attended from Carbondale as a mission. In 1838 Rev. John Vincent O'Reilly was sent by Bishop Kenrick to assist in administering to the Catholics of this extensive territory. He took up his residence at Silver Lake, and his charge comprised the Counties of Suspuehanna, Bradford, Tioga, Potter, and Sullivan in Pennsylvania, and the five adjoining counties in New York State. The early history of the diocese is intimately bound up with the truly heroic labours of Father O'Reilly, and foundations of many of the present parishes were the results of his missionary zeal. His fruitful career was brought to an untimely end at the railway station at Susquehanna, 4 Oct., 1873. He was killed while rescuing a friend from the path of an approaching train. Bishops Rt. Rev. William O'Hara, D.D., the first bishop, was born at Dungiven, County Derry, Ireland, 14 Apr., 1816, where his early education was received. His philosophical and theological studies were made at the urban College of the Propaganda, Rome, where he was ordained, 21 Dec., 1842. His first appointment was as assistant at St. Patrick's Church, Philadelphia. He was afterwards made rector and professor of moral theology at St. Charles's Seminary. In 1856 he was appointed pastor of St. Patrick's Church, Philadelphia. He was afterwards made rector and professor of moral theology at St. Charles's Seminary. In 1856 he was appointed pastor of St. Patrick's Church, Philadelphia, where he remained until his consecration as Bishop of Scranton, 12 July, 1868. The diocese then numbered 50 churches and 25 priests. He died on 3 Feb., 1899, and is buried under the main altar of the cathedral of Scranton. Rt. Rev. Michael John Hoban, D.D., the second bishop, was born at Waterloo, New Jersey, 6 June, 1853. His early education was received at Hawley, Pennsylvania, whither his parents moved shortly after his birth. He afterwards attended St. Francis Xavier's College (New York), Holy Cross College (Worchester, Massachusetts), and St. John's College (Fordham). After one year at St. Charles's Seminary, Overbrook, he entered the American College, Rome in 1875, where he was ordained to the priesthood, 22 May, 1880. His first appointment was as assistant at Towanda. He afterwards laboured successively as assistant at Pittston and pastor at Troy. In 1887 he organized St. Leo's parish, Ashley, Pennsylvania, where the present beautiful church and rectory are monuments of his zeal. There he remained until his consecration as Bishop of Alalis and coadjutor Bishop of Scranton, 22 Mar., 1896. During his administration, since the death of Bishop O'Hara, he has enacted important legislation with regard to the internal affairs of the diocese, and under his inspiration the present beautiful and well-equipped St. Joseph's Infant Asylum, as also the Maloney Home for the Aged, have been added to the equipment of the diocese; the latter being the gift of the Marquess Martin J. Maloney of Philadelphia, in memory of his parents. Since the death of his predecessor, the diocese has grown from 152 priests, 121 churches, and a Catholic population of 135,000, to 265 priests, 232 churches, and a Catholic population of 265,000 (1911). Catholic Education Catholic education in the diocese began with, and received a great impetus from the great pioneer Father O'Reilly. In the autumn of 1842 he opened a college at St. Joseph's, Susquehanna County. From a very modest beginning, and under his immediate supervision, it grew and flourished; and in the twenty-two years of its existence educated two bishops and over a score of priests. It was destroyed by fire, 1 Jan, 1864, and was never rebuilt. At the present time higher education in the diocese is cared for by St. Thomas's College, in charge of the Brothers of the Christian Schools; The Latin and Greek courses being taught by two of the diocesan clergy. Mount St. Mary's Seminary, Scranton, conducted by the Sisters of the Immaculate Heart of Mary, and St. Ann's Academy, Wilkes-Barre, conducted by the Sisters of Christian Charity, are both flourishing and rapidly growing boarding-schools for girls. St. Mary's parochial high school, Wilkes-Berre, conducted by the Sisters of Mercy, deserves mention as a model of equipment and efficiency. Nearly all of the larger parishes have their own parochial schools conducted by the sisters of the different teaching communities. Facilities for the preservation of the languages of the various nationalities are afforded in their parochial schools, which, for the most part, are conducted by sisters familiar with the mother-tongue. To meet this need two new teaching orders have recently been established; Sisters of Sts. Cyril and Methodius (Slovak) and Sisters of St. Casimir (Lithuanian). Both these orders had their inception in the novitiate at Mount St. Mary's, Scranton, where the first candidates were trained. The diocese now numbers 49 parochial schools and 14,440 pupils (1911). Religious Passionist Fathers, St. Ann's Monastery, Scranton; Theatine Fathers (Spanish); Stigmata Fathers (Italian); Brothers of the Christian Schools. Sister Servants of the Immaculate Heart of Mary, mother-house and novitiate, Wilkes-Berre; Sisters of Christian Charity (German), mother-house and novitiate for the United States, Wilkes-Berre; Sisters of the Good Shepherd; Little Sisters of the Poor; Sisters of the Holy Family of Nazareth (Polish); Bernardine Sisters (Polish): Missionary Sisters of the Sacred Heart (Italian); Sisters of Sts. Cyril and Methodius (Slovak). Statistics Catholic population (U.S. religious census, 1906), 265,000, divided as follows: English-speaking, 133,000; Poles, 45,000; Italians, 21,000; Greek Ruthenians, 20,000; German, 16,000; Slovaks, 15,000; Lithuanians, 13,000; Magyars, 1,000; Syrians, 183; mission churches, 49; parochial schools, 49; pupils, 14,440; religious, 578; baptisms (1910), 12,725; orphan asylum, 1; infant asylum, 1; home for the aged poor, 1; house of the Good Shepherd, 1; hospital, 1; college, 1; value of Church property (1911), $5,4000,000. Official Catholic Directory; Shea, Life and Times of the Most Rev. John Carroll (New York, 1888); Bradsby, History of the Luzerne County (Chicago, 1893); Kerlin, Catholicity in Philadelphia (Philadelphia, 1909); La Rochefoucauld-Liancourt, voyage dans les Etats-unis d' Amérique (Paris, 1799-1800); Murray, The Story of Some French Fefugees and Their "Azilum" (Athens, 1903). ANDREW J. BRENNAN Scribes Scribes (Greek grammateis, nomodidaschaloi, teachers of the law). In the New-Testament period the scribes were the professional interpreters of the Law in the Jewish synagogues. The origin of the profession dates from the return of the Captivity, and its subsequent growth and importance resulted naturally from the formal and legalistic trend of Jewish piety during the post-Exilic period. The Law was revered as the precise expression of God's will, and by its multifarious prescriptions the daily life of every pious Jew was regulated in all its minute details. Love of the Law was the essence of piety, and the just or righteous were they who walked "in all the commandments and justifications of the Lord without blame" (Luke, I, 6). But as these commandments and justifications were exceedingly numerous, complicated, and often obscure, the needs of popular guidance called into existence a class of men whose special occupation was to study and expound the Law. The earliest mention of the title occurs in I Esdras, vii, 6, where Esdras is described as a "ready scribe in the law of Moses". What this meant is set forth in verse 10: "For Esdras had prepared his heart to teach in Israel the commandments and judgment". This description doubtless applies to the subsequent scribes of that period. They were pious men who through love of the Divine law occupied themselves in collecting, editing, and studying the sacred literature of the Hebrews and in explaining it to the people. The earlier scribes, like Esdras himself, belonged to the class of priests and Levites (I Esdr., vii, 12; II Esdr., viii, 7, 13; II Par., xxxiv, 13) who were originally the official interpreters of the Law, but unlike other priestly duties, the study and exposition of Holy Writ could be engaged in by pious laymen, and thus little by little the scribal profession became differentiated from the priesthood, while the latter remained chiefly occupied with the ever-growing sacrificial and ritualistic functions. When under Antiochus Epiphanes Hellenism threatened to overthrow the Jewish religion, the scribes joined the party of the zealous Assideans (I Mach., vii, 12, 13), who were ready to die for their faith (see account of the martyrdom of the scribe Eleazar, II Mach., vi, 18-31), while not a few aristocratic members of the priesthood favoured the Hellenistic tendencies. This resulted in a certain opposition between the two classes; the scribes, through their devotion to the Law, acquired great influence with the people while the priesthood lost much of its prestige. As a natural consequence, the scribes as a class became narrow, haughty and exclusive. Under the Asmonean rule they became the leaders of the new party of the Pharisees, and it is with the latter that we find them associated in the New-Testament records. They never wielded any political power, but they were admitted to the Sanhedrin on a par with the chief priests and elders and thus enjoyed official recognition. With the increasing formalism, which their influence doubtless helped to develop, the character of the scribes and their activities underwent a marked change. They neglected the deeper and more spiritual aspects of the Law, and from being men of sacred letters they became mainly jurists who devoted most of their attention to mere quibbles and subtle casuistry. Together with the Pharisees they are represented in the Gospels as being very ambitious of honour (Matt., xxiii, 2-7, Mark, xii, 38-40; Luke, xi, 43, 45, 46; xx, 46), and as making void the weightier precepts of the Law by their perverse interpretations by means of which they had gradually laid a most heavy burden upon the people. They are also rebuked by Christ because of the undue importance ascribed by them to the "traditions of the elders". Their teaching on this point was that Moses himself had delivered to Israel an oral as well as a written Law. This oral Law, according to their theory, had come down in an authentic form through the Prophets to Esdras, the first and greatest of the scribes, and rested practically on the same Divine authority as the written Word. Through this conception of an oral law to which all their traditional customs and interpretations, however recent, were referred, the scribes were led into many departures from the spirit of the written Law (Mark, vii, 13), and even with regard to the latter their teaching was characterized by a slavish literalism. The ever-accumulating mass of legal traditions and legal decisions was designated by the name Halaka (the way). Together with the written precepts it constituted the perfect rule of conduct which every Jew should follow. But while the scribes devoted their chief attention to the Law, both written and oral, they also elaborated in fantastic and arbitrary fashion, teachings of an edifying character from the historical and didactic contents of the Old Testament. These homiletic teachings were called Hagada, and embraced doctrinal and practical admonitions mingled with illustrative parables and legends. GIGOT, Outlines of New Testament History (New York, 1902), 81 sq. JAMES F. DRISCOLL Scriptorium Scriptorium A scriptorium is commonly a large room set apart in a monastery for the use of the scribes or copyists of the community. When no special room was devoted to this purpose, separate little cells or studies called "carrels" were usually made in the cloister, each scribe having a window and desk to himself. Of this arrangement the cloister of St. Peter's, Gloucester, now Gloucester Cathedral, supplies the most perfect example (see CLOISTER). The scriptorium was under the care of the precentor or else of one of his assistants called the armarius, whose duty it was to provide all the requisites needed by the scribes, such as desks, ink, parchment, pens, pen-knives, pumice-stone for smoothing down the surface of the parchment, awls to make the guiding marks for ruling lines, reading-frames for the books to be copied, etc. Most of these were manufactured on the premises: thus at Westminster the ink was made by the precentor himself, and he had to do it in the tailor's shop. The rules of the scriptorium varied in different monasteries, but artificial light was forbidden for fear of injury to the manuscripts, and silence was always enforced. As a general rule those of the monks who possessed skill as writers made this their chief, if not their sole active work. An anonymous writer of the ninth or tenth century speaks of six hours a day as the usual task of a scribe, which would absorb almost all the time available for active work in the day of a medieval monk. Very often the scriptorium of a monastery developed some peculiarities of writing which were perpetuated for considerable periods, and are of great value in ascertaining the source from which a manuscript comes. Thus at St. Albans the scribes for a long time affected a peculiar thirteenth-century style of hand with the long strokes of certain letters bent back or broken, while certain special variations from the common form of spelling, such as imfra for infra, are also peculiar to their work. Various names were in use to distinguish the different classes of writers. In monasteries the term antiquarii was sometimes used for those monks who copied books, the common writers who despatched the ordinary business of the house being called librarii, or simply scriptores. If a scribe excelled in painting miniatures or initial letters he usually confined himself to such work, and was called illuminator, while one who worked chiefly on legal documents was a notarius. The price of books varied a good deal at different dates, but was always what we should now call low, considering the time and labour involved. Thus in 1380 John Prust, a Canon of Windsor, received seventy-five shillings and eight pence for an Evangelium, or book of the liturgical Gospels; and in 1467 the Paston "letters" show that a writer and illuminator of Bury St. Edmunds received one hundred shillings and two pence for a Psalter with musical notes, illuminations, and binding. In 1469 William Ebesham wrote out certain legal documents at two-pence a leaf, and a book at "a peny a leaf, which is right wele worth". It is to be observed that on the invention of printing with movable types, although the new art met with strong opposition from the professional scribes, the monks commonly welcomed it, as it shown by the establishment of Caxton's press within the precincts of Westminster, and of very early presses at Subiaco and other monasteries. MADAN, Books in Manuscript (London, 1893); THOMPSON, Handbook of Greek and Latin Paloeography (London, 1894); IDEM, Customary of the monasteries. . .of Canterbury and Westminster (London, 1902); MAITLAND, The Dark Ages (London, 1845); FEASEY, Monasticism (London, 1898); GASQUET, English Monastic Life (London, 1904). G. ROGER HUDLESTON Scripture Scripture Sacred Scripture is one of the several names denoting the inspired writings which make up the Old and New Testament. I. USE OF THE WORD The corresponding Latin word scriptura occurs in some passages of the Vulgate in the general sense of "writing"; e.g., Ex., xxxii, 16: "the writing also of God was graven in the tables"; again, II Par., xxxvi, 22: "who [Cyrus] commanded it to be proclaimed through all his kingdom, and by writing also". In other passages of the Vulgate the word denotes a private (Tob., viii, 24) or public (Esdr., ii, 62; Neh., vii, 64) written document, a catalogue or index (Ps. lxxxvi, 6), or finally portions of Scripture, such as the canticle of Ezechias (Is., xxxviii, 5), and the sayings of the wise men (Ecclus., xliv, 5). The writer of II Par., xxx, 5, 18, refers to prescriptions of the Law by the formula "as it is written", which is rendered by the Septuagint translators kata ten graphen; para ten graphen, "according to Scripture". The same expression is found in I Esdr., iii, 4, and II Esdr., viii, 15; here we have the beginning of the later form of appeal to the authority of the inspired books gegraptai (Matt., iv, 4, 6, 10; xxi, 13; etc.), or kathos gegraptai (Rom., i, 11; ii, 24, etc.), "it is written", "as it is written". As the verb graphein was thus employed to denote passages of the sacred writings, so the corresponding noun he graphe gradually came to signify what is pre-eminently the writing, or the inspired writing. This use of the word may be seen in John, vii, 38; x, 35; Acts, viii, 32; Rom., iv, 3; ix, 17; Gal., iii, 8; iv, 30; II Tim., iii, 16; James, ii, 8; I Pet., ii, 6; II Pet., i, 20; the plural form of the noun, ai graphai, is used in the same sense in Matt., xxi, 42; xxii, 29; xxvi, 54; Mark, xii, 24; xiv, 49; Luke, xxiv, 27, 45; John, v, 39; Acts, xvii, 2, 17; xviii, 24, 28; I Cor., xv, 3, 4. In a similar sense are employed the expressions graphai hagiai (Rom., i, 2), ai graphai ton propheton (Matt., xxvi, 56), graphai prophetikai (Rom., xvi, 26). The word has a somewhat modified sense in Christ's question, "and have you not read this scripture" (Mark, xii, 10). In the language of Christ and the Apostles the expression "scripture" or "scriptures" denotes the sacred books of the Jews. The New Testament uses the expressions in this sense about fifty times; but they occur more frequently in the Fourth Gospel and the Epistles than in the synoptic Gospels. At times, the contents of Scripture are indicated more accurately as comprising the Law and the Prophets (Rom., iii, 21; Acts xxviii, 23), or the Law of Moses, the Prophets, and the Psalms (Luke, xxiv, 44). The Apostle St. Peter extends the designation Scripture also to tas loipas graphas (II Pet., iii, 16), denoting the Pauline Epistles; St. Paul (I Tim., v, 18) seems to refer by the same expression to both Deut., xxv, 4, and Luke, x, 7. It is disputed whether the word graphe in the singular is ever used of the Old Testament as a whole. Lightfoot (Gal., iii, 22) expresses the opinion that the singular graphe in the New Testament always means a particular passage of Scripture. But in Rom., iv, 3, he modifies his view, appealing to Dr. Vaughan's statement of the case. He believes that the usage of St. John may admit a doubt, though he does not think so, personally; but St. Paul's practice is absolute and uniform. Mr. Hort says (I Pet., ii, 6) that in St. John and St. Paul he graphe is capable of being understood as approximating to the collective sense (cf. Westcott. "Hebr.", pp. 474 sqq.; Deissmann, "Bibelstudien", pp. 108 sqq., Eng. tr., pp. 112 sqq., Warfield, "Pres. and Reform. Review", X, July, 1899, pp. 472 sqq.). Here arises the question whether the expression of St. Peter (II, Pet., iii, 16) tas loipas graphas refers to a collection of St. Paul's Epistles. Spitta contends that the term graphai is used in a general non-technical meaning, denoting only writings of St. Paul's associates (Spitta, "Der zweite Brief des Petrus und der Brief des Judas", 1885, p. 294). Zahn refers the term to writings of a religious character which could claim respect in Christian circles either on account of their authors or on account of their use in public worship (Einleitung, pp. 98 sqq., 108). But Mr. F.H. Chase adheres to the principle that the phrase ai graphai used absolutely points to a definite and recognized collection of writings, i.e., Scriptures. The accompanying words, kai, tas loipas, and the verb streblousin in the context confirm Mr. Chase in his conviction (cf. Dict. of the Bible, III, p. 810b). II. NATURE OF SCRIPTURE A. According to the Jews Whether the terms graphe, graphai, and their synonymous expressions to biblion (II Esdr., viii, 8), ta biblia (Dan., ix, 2), kephalis bibliou (Ps., xxxix, 8), he iera biblos (II Mach., viii, 23), ta biblia ta hagia (I Mach., xii, 9), ta iera grammata (II Tim., iii, 15) refer to particular writings or to a collection of books, they at least show the existence of a number of written documents the authority of which was generally accepted as supreme. The nature of this authority may be inferred from a number of other passages. According to Deut., xxxi, 9-13, Moses wrote the Book of the Law (of the Lord), and delivered it to the priests that they might keep it and read it to the people; see also Ex., xvii, 14; Deut., xvii, 18-19; xxvii, 1; xxviii, 1; 58-61; xxix, 20; xxx, 10; xxxi, 26; I Kings, x, 25; III Kings, ii, 3; IV Kings, xxii, 8. It is clear from IV Kings, xxiii, 1-3, that towards the end of the Jewish kingdom the Book of the Law of the Lord was held in the highest honour as containing the precepts of the Lord Himself. That this was also the case after the Captivity, may be inferred from II Esdr., viii, 1-9, 13,14, 18; the book here mentioned contained the injuctions concerning the Feast of Tabernacles found in Lev., xxiii, 34 sq.; Deut., xvi, 13 sq., and is therefore identical with the pre-Exilic Sacred Books. According to I Mach., i, 57-59, Antiochus commanded the Books of the Law of the Lord to be burned and their retainers to slain. We learn from II Mach., ii, 13, that at the time of Nehemias there existed a collection of books containing historical, prophetical, and psalmodic writings; since the collection is represented as unifrom, and since the portions were considered as certainly of Divine authority, we may infer that this characteristic was ascribed to all, at least in some degree. Coming down to the time of Christ, we find that Flavius Josephus attributes to the twenty-two protocanonical books of the Old Testament Divine authority, maintaining that they had been written under Divine inspiration and that they contain God's teachings (Contra Appion., I, vi-viii). The Hellenist Philo too is acquainted with the three parts of the sacred Jewish books to which he ascribes an irrefragable authority, because they contain God's oracles expressed through the instrumentality of the sacred writers ("De vit. Mosis", pp. 469, 658 sq.; "De monarchia", p. 564). B. According to Christian Living This concept of Scripture is fully upheld by the Christian teaching. Jesus Christ Himself appeals to the authority of Scripture, "Search the scriptures" (John, v, 39); He maintains that "one jot, or one tittle shall not pass of the law, till all be fulfilled" (Matt., v, 18); He regards it as a principle that "the Scripture cannot be broken" (John, x, 35); He presents the word of Scripture as the word of the eternal Father (John, v, 33-41), as the word of a writer inspired by the Holy Ghost (Matt., xxii, 43), as the word of God (Matt., xix, 4-5; xxii, 31); He declares that "all things must needs be fulfilled which are written in the law of Moses, and in the prophets, and in the psalms, concerning me (Luke, xxiv, 44). The Apostles knew that "prophecy came not by the will of man at any time: but the holy men of God spoke, inspired by the Holy Ghost" (II Pet., i, 21); they regarded "all scripture, inspired of God" as "profitable to teach, to reprove, to correct, to instruct in justice" (II Tim., iii, 16). They considered the words of Scripture as the words of God speaking in the inspired writer or by the mouth of the inspired writer (Heb., iv, 7; Acts, i, 15-16; iv, 25). Finally, they appealed to Scripture as to an irresistible authority (Rom., passim), they supposed that parts of Scripture have a typical sense such as only God can employ (John, xix, 36; Heb., i, 5; vii, 3 sqq.), and they derived most important conclusions even from a few words or certain grammatical forms of Scripture (Gal., iii, 16; Heb., xii, 26-27). It is not surprising, then, that the earliest Christian writers speak in the same strain of the Scriptures. St. Clement of Rome (I Cor., xlv) tells his readers to search the Scriptures for the truthful expressions of the Holy Ghost. St. Irenaeus (Adv. haer., II, xxxviii, 2) considers the Scriptures as uttered by the Word of God and His Spirit. Origen testifies that it is granted by both Jews and Christians that the Bible was written under (the influence of) the Holy Ghost (Contra Cels., V, x); again, he considers it as proven by Christ's dwelling in the flesh that the Law and the Prophets were written by a heavenly charisma, and that the writings believed to be the words of God are not men's work (De princ., iv, vi). St. Clement of Alexandria receives the voice of God who has given the Scriptures, as a reliable proof (Strom., ii). C. According to Ecclesiastical Documents Not to multiply patristic testimony for the Divine authority of Scripture, we may add the official doctrine of the Church on the nature of Sacred Scripture. The fifth ecumenical council condemned Theodore of Mopsuestia for his opposition against the Divine authority of the books of Solomon, the Book of Job, and the Canticle of Canticles. Since the fourth century the teaching of the Church concerning the nature of the Bible is practically summed up in the dogmatic formula that God is the author of Sacred Scripture. According to the first chapter of the Council of Carthage (A.D. 398), bishops before being consecrated must express their belief in this formula, and this profession of faith is exacted of them even today. In the thirteenth century, Innocent III imposed this formula on the Waldensians; Clement IV exacted its acceptance from Michael Palaeologus, and the emperor actually accepted it in his letter to the Second Council of Lyons (1272). The same formula was repeated in the fifteenth century by Eugenius IV in his Decree for the Jacobites, in the sixteenth century by the Council of Trent (Sess. IV, decr. de can. Script.), and in the nineteenth century by the Vatican Council. What is implied in this Divine authorship of Sacred Scripture, and how it is to be explained, has been set forth in the article INSPIRATION. III. COLLECTION OF SACRED BOOKS What has been said implies that Scripture does not refer to any single book, but comprises a number of books written at different times and by different writers working under the inspiration of the Holy Ghost. Hence the question, how could such a collection be made, and how was it made in point of fact? A. Question of Right The main difficulty as to the first question (quoestio juris) arises from the fact that a book must be Divinely inspired in order to lay claim to the dignity of being regarded as Scripture. Various methods have been suggested for ascertaining the fact of inspiration. It has been claimed that so-called internal criteria are sufficient to lead us to the knowledge of this fact. But on closer investigation they prove inadequate. + Miracles and prophecies require a Divine intervention in order that they may happen, not in order that they may be recorded; hence a work relating miracles or prophecies is not necessarily inspired. + The so-called ethico-aesthetic criterium is inadequate. It fails to establish that certain portions of Scripture are inspired writings, e.g., the genealogical tables, and the summary accounts of the kings of Juda, while it favours the inspiration of several post-Apostolic works, e.g., of the "Imitation of Christ", and of the "Epistles" of St. Ignatius Martyr. + The same must be said of the psychological criterium, or the effect which the perusal of Scripture produces in the heart of the reader. Such emotions are subjective, and vary in different readers. The Epistle of St. James appeared strawlike to Luther, divine to Calvin. + These internal criteria are inadequate even if they be taken collectively. Wrong keys are unable to open a lock whether they be used singly or collectively. Other students of this subject have endeavored to establish Apostolic authorship as a criterium of inspiration. But this answer does not give us a criterium for the inspiration of the Old Testament books, nor does it touch the inspiration of the Gospels of St. Mark and St. Luke, neither of whom was an Apostle. Besides, the Apostles were endowed with the gift of infallibility in their teaching, and in their writing as far as it formed part of their teaching; but infallibility in writing does not imply inspiration. Certain writings of the Roman pontiff may be infallible, but they are not inspired; God is not their author. Nor can the criterium of inspiration be placed in the testimony of history. For inspiration is a supernatural fact, known only to God and probably to the inspired writer. Hence human testimony concerning inspiration is based, at best, on the testimony of one person who is, naturally speaking, an interested party in the matter concerning which he testifies. The history of the the false prophets of former times as well as of our own day teaches us the futility of such testimony. It is true that miracles and prophecy may, at times, confirm such human testimony as to the inspiration of a work. But, in the first place, not all inspired writers have been prophets or workers of miracles; in the second place, in order that prophecies or miracles may serve as proof of inspiration, it must be clear that the miracles were performed, and the prophecies were uttered, to establish the fact in question; in the third place, if this condition be verified, the testimony for inspiration is no longer merely human, but it has become Divine. No one will doubt the sufficiency of Divine testimony to establish the fact of inspiration; on the other hand, no one can deny the need of such testimony in order that we may distinguish with certainty between an inspired and a non-inspired book. B. Question of Fact It is a rather difficult problem to state with certainty, how and when the several books of the Old and the New Testament were received as sacred by the religious community. Deut., xxxi, 9, 24 sqq., informs us that Moses delivered the Book of the Law to the Levites and the ancients of Israel to be deposited "in the side of the ark of the covenant"; according to Deut., xvii, 18, the king had to procure for himself a copy of at least a part of the book, so as to "read it all the days of his life". Josue (xxiv, 26) added his portion to the law-book of Israel, and this may be regarded as the second step in the collection of the Old Testament writings. According to Is., xxxiv, 16, and Jer., xxxvi, 4, the prophets Isaias and Jeremias collected their respective prophetic utterances. The words of II Par., xxix, 30, lead us to suppose that in the days of King Ezechias there either existed or originated a collection of the Psalms of David and of Asaph. From Prov., xxv, 1, one may infer that about the same time there was made a collection of the Solomonic writings, which may have been added to the collection of psalms. In the second century B.C. the Minor Prophets had been collected into one work (Ecclus., xlix, 12) which is cited in Acts, vii, 42, as "the books of the prophets". The expressions found in Dan., ix, 2, and I Mach., xii, 9, suggest that even these smaller collections had been gathered into a larger body of sacred books. Such a larger collection is certainly implied in the words II Mach., ii, 13, and the prologue of Ecclesiasticus. Since these two passages mention the main divisions of the Old-Testament canon, this latter must have been completed, at least with regard to the earlier books, during the course of the second century B.C. It is generally granted that the Jews in the time of Jesus Christ acknowledged as canonical or included in their collection of sacred writings all the so-called protocanonical books of the Old Testament. Christ and the Apostles endorsed this faith of the Jews, so that we have Divine authority for their Scriptural character. As there are solid reasons for maintaining that some of the New-Testament writers made use of the Septuagint version which contained the deuterocanonical books of the Old Testament, these latter too are in so far attested as part of Sacred Scripture. Again, II Pet., iii, 15-16, ranks all the Epistles of St. Paul with the "other scriptures", and I Tim., v, 18, seems to quote Luke, x, 7, and to place it on a level with Deut., xxv, 4. But these arguments for the canonicity of the deuterocanonical books of the Old Testament, of the Pauline Epistles, and of the Gospel of St. Luke do not exclude all reasonable doubt. Only the Church, the infallible bearer of tradition, can furnish us invincible certainty as to the number of the Divinely inspired books of both the Old and the New Testament. See CANON OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. IV. DIVISION OF SCRIPTURE A. Old and New Testaments As the two dispensations of grace separated from each other by the advent of Jesus are called the Old and the New Testament (Matt., xxvi, 28; II Cor., iii, 14), so were the inspired writings belonging to either economy of grace from the earliest times called books of the Old or of the New Testament, or simply the Old or the New Testament. This name of the two great divisions of the inspired writings has been practically common among Latin Christians from the time of Tertullian, though Tertullian himself frequently employs the name "Instrumentum" or legally authentic document; Cassiodorus uses the title "Sacred Pandects", or sacred digest of law. B. Protocanonical and Deuterocanonical The word "canon" denoted at first the material rule, or instrument, employed in various trades; in a metaphorical sense it signified the form of perfection that had to be attained in the various arts or trades. In this metaphorical sense some of the early Fathers urged the canon of truth, the canon of tradition, the canon of faith, the canon of the Church against the erroneous tenets of the early heretics (St. Clem., "I Cor.", vii; Clem. of Alex., "Strom.", xvi; Orig., "De princip.", IV, ix; etc.). St. Irenaeus employed another metaphor, calling the Fourth Gospel the canon of truth (Adv. haer., III, xi); St. Isidore of Pelusium applies the name to all the inspired writings (Epist., iv, 14). About the time of St. Augustine (Contra Crescent., II, xxxix) and St. Jerome (Prolog. gal.), the word "canon" began to denote the collection of Sacred Scriptures; among later writers it is used practically in the sense of catalogue of inspired books. In the sixteenth century, Sixtus Senensis, O.P., distinguished between protocanonical and deuterocanonical books. This distinction does not indicate a difference of authority, but only a difference of time at which the books were recognized by the whole Church as Divinely inspired. Deuterocanonical, therefore, are those books concerning the inspiration of which some Churches doubted more or less seriously for a time, but which were accepted by the whole Church as really inspired, after the question had been thoroughly investigated. As to the Old Testament, the Books of Tobias, Judith, Wisdom, Ecclesiasticus, Baruch, I, II, Machabees, and alos Esther, x, 4- xvi, 24, Daniel, iii, 24-90, xiii, 1-xiv, 42, are in this sense deuterocanonical; the same must be said of the following New- Testament books and portions: Hebrews, James, II Peter, II, III John, Jude, Apocalypse, Mark, xiii, 9-20, Luke, xxii, 43-44, John, vii, 53-viii, 11. Protestant writers often call the deuterocanonical Books of the Old Testament the Apocrypha. C. Tripartite Division of Testaments The prologue of Ecclesiasticus shows that the Old-Testament books were divided into three parts, the Law, the Prophets, and the Writings (the Hagiographa). The same division is mentioned in Luke, xxiv, 44, and has been kept by the later Jews. The Law or the Torah comprises only the Pentateuch. The second part contains two sections: the former Prophets (Josue, Judges, Samuel, and Kings), and the latter Prophets (Isaias, Jeremias, Ezechiel, and the Minor Prophets, called the Twelve, and counted as one book). The third division embraces three kinds of books: first poetical books (Psalms, Proverbs, Job); secondly, the five Megilloth or Rolls (Canticle of Canticles, Ruth, Lamentations, Ecclesiastes, Esther); thirdly, the three remaining books (Daniel, Esdras, Paralipomenon). Hence, adding the five books of the first division to the eight of the second, and the eleven of the third, the entire Canon of the Jewish Scriptures embraces twenty-four books. Another arrangement connects Ruth with the Book of Judges, and Lamentations with Jeremias, and thus reduces the number of the books in the Canon to twenty-two. The division of the New-Testament books into the Gospel and the Apostle (Evangelium et Apostolus, Evangelia et Apostoli, Evangelica et Apostolica) began in the writings of the Apostolic Fathers (St. Ignatius, "Ad Philad.", v; "Epist. ad Diogn., xi) and was commonly adopted about the end of the second century (St. Iren., "Adv. haer.", I, iii; Tert., "De praescr.", xxxiv; St. Clem. of Alex., "Strom.", VII, iii; etc.); but the more recent Fathers did not adhere to it. It has been found more convenient to divide both the Old Testament and the New into four, or still better into three parts. The four parts distinguish between legal, historical, didactic or doctrinal, and prophetic books, while the tripartite division adds the legal books (the Pentateuch and the Gospels) to the historical, and retains the other two classes, i.e., the didactic and the prophetic books. D. Arrangement of Books The catalogue of the Council of Trent arranges the inspired books partly in a topological, partly in a chronological order. In the Old Testament, we have first all the historical books, excepting the two books of the Machabees which were supposed to have been written last of all. These historical books are arranged according to the order of time of which they treat; the books of Tobias, Judith, and Ester, however, occupy the last place because they relate personal history. The body of didactic works occupies the second place in the Canon, being arranged in the order of time at which the writers are supposed to have lived. The third place is assigned to the Prophets, first the four Major and then the twelve Minor Prophets, according to their respective chronological order. The Council follows a similar method in the arrangement of the New- Testament books. The first place is given to the historical books, i.e., the Gospels and the Book of Acts; the Gospels follow the order of their reputed composition. The second place is occupied by the didactic books, the Pauline Epistles preceding the Catholic. The former are enumerated according to the order of dignity of the addresses and according to the importance of the matter treated. Hence results the series: Romans; I, II Corinthians; Galatians; Ephesians; Philippians; Colossians; I, II, Thessalonians; I, II Timothy; Titus; Philemon; the Epistle to the Hebrews occupies the last place on account of its late reception into the canon. In its disposition of the Catholic Epistles the Council follows the so- called western order: I, II Peter; I, II, III John; James; Jude; our Vulgate edition follows the oriental order (James; I, II, III, John; Jude) which seems to be based on Gal., ii, 9. The Apocalypse occupies in the New Testament the place corresponding to that of the Prophets in the Old Testament. E. Liturgical Division The needs of liturgy occasioned a division of the inspired books into smaller parts. At the time of the Apostles it was a received custom to read in the synagogue service of the sabbath-day a portion of the Pentateuch (Acts, xv, 21) and a part of the Prophets (Luke, iv, 16; Acts, xiii, 15, 27). Hence the Pentateuch has been divided into fifty-four "parashas" according to the number of sabbaths in the intercalary lunar year. To each parasha corresponds a division of the prophetic writings, called haphtara. The Talmud speaks of more minute divisions, pesukim, which almost resemble our verses. The Church transferred to the Christian Sunday the Jewish custom of reading part of the Scriptures in the assemblies of the faithful, but soon added to, or replaced, the Jewish lessons by parts of the New Testament (St. Just., "I Apol.", lxvii; Tert., "De praescr.", xxxvi, etc.). Since the particular churches differed in the selection of the Sunday readings, this custom did not occasion any generally received division in the books of the New Testament. Besides, from the end of the fifth century, these Sunday lessons were no longer taken in order, but the sections were chosen as they fitted in with the ecclesiastical feasts and seasons. F. Divisions to facilitate reference For the convenience of readers and students the text had to be divided more uniformly than we have hitherto seen. Such divisions are traced back to Tatian, in the second century. Ammonius, in the third, divided the Gospel text into 1162 kephalaia in order to facilitate a Gospel harmony. Eusebius, Euthalius, and others carried on this work of division in the following centuries, so that in the fifth or sixth the Gospels were divided into 318 parts (tituli), the Epistles into 254 (capitula), and the Apocalypse into 96 (24 sermones, 72 capitula). Cassiodorus relates that the Old Testament text was divided into various parts (De inst. div. lit., I, ii). But all these various partitions were too imperfect and too uneven for practical use, especially when in the thirteenth century concordances (see CONCORDANCES) began to be constructed. About this time, Card. Stephen Langton, Archbishop of Canterbury, who died 1228, divided all the books of Scripture uniformly into chapters, a division which found its way almost immediately into the codices of the Vulgate version and even into some codices of the original texts, and passed into all the printed editions after the invention of printing. As the chapters were too long for ready reference, Cardinal Hugh of St. Cher divided them into smaller sections which he indicated by the capital letters A, B, etc. Robert Stephens, probably imitating R. Nathan (1437) divided the chapters into verses, and published his complete division into chapters and verses first in the Vulgate text (1548), and later on also in the Greek original of the New Testament (1551). V. SCRIPTURE Since Scripture is the written word of God, its contents are Divinely guaranteed truths, revealed either in the strict or the wider sense of the word. Again, since the inspiration of a writing cannot be known without Divine testimony, God must have revealed which are the books that constitute Sacred Scripture. Moreover, theologians teach that Christian Revelation was complete in the Apostles, and that its deposit was entrusted to the Apostles to guard and to promulgate. Hence the apostolic deposit of Revelation contained no merely Sacred Scripture in the abstract, but also the knowledge as to its constituent books. Scripture, then, is an Apostolic deposit entrusted to the Church, and to the Church belongs its lawful administration. This position of Sacred Scripture in the Church implies the following consequences: (1) The Apostles promulgated both the Old and New Testament as a document received from God. It is antecedently probable that God should not cast his written Word upon men as a mere windfall, coming from no known authority, but that he should entrust its publication to the care of those whom he was sending to preach the Gospel to all nations, and with whom he had promised to be for all days, even to the consummation of the world. In conformity woth this principle, St. Jerome (De script. eccl.) says of the Gospel of St. Mark: "When Peter had heard it, he both approved of it and ordered it to be read in the churches". The Fathers testify to the promulgation of Scripture by the Apostles where they treat of the transmission of the inspired writings. (2) The transmission of the inspired writings consists in the delivery of Scripture by the Apostles to their successors with the right, the duty, and the power to continue its promulgation, to preserve its integrity and identity, to explain its meaning, to use it in proving and illustrating Catholic teaching, to oppose and condemn any attack upon its doctrine, or any abuse of its meaning. We may infer all this from the character of the inspired writings and the nature of the Apostolate; but it is also attested by some of the weightiest writers of the early Church. St. Irenaeus insists upon these points against the Gnostics, who appealed to Scripture as to private historical documents. He excludes this Gnostic view, first by insisting on the mission of the Apostles and upon the succession in the Apostolate, especially as seen in the Church of Rome (Haer., III, 3-4); secondly, by showing that the preaching of the Apostles continued by their successors contains a supernatural guarantee of infallibility through the indwelling of the Holy Ghost (Haer., III, 24); thirdly, by combining the Apostolic succession and the supernatural guarantee of the Holy Ghost (Haer., IV, 26). It seems plain that, if Scripture cannot be regarded as a private historical document on account of the official mission of the Apostles, on account of the official succession in the Apostolate of their successors, on account of the assistance of the Holy Ghost promised to the Apostles and their successors, the promulgation of Scripture, the preservation of its integrity and identity, and the explanation of its meaning must belong to the Apostles and their legitimate successors. The same principles are advocated by the great Alexandrian doctor, Origen (De princ., Praef.). "That alone", he says, "is to be believed to be the truth which in nothing differs from the ecclesiastical and and Apostolical tradition". In another passage (in Matth. tr. XXIX, n. 46-47), he rejects the contention urged by the heretics "as often as they bring forward canonical Scriptures in which every Christian agrees and believes", that "in the houses is the word of truth"; "for from it (the Church) alone the sound hath gone forth into all the earth, and their words unto the ends of the world". That the African Church agrees with the Alexandrian, is clear from the words of Tertullian (De praescript., nn, 15, 19). He protests against the admission of heretics "to any discussion whatever touching the Scriptures". "This question should be first proposed, which is now the only one to be discussed, `To whom belongs the faith itself: whose are the Scriptures'?. . .For the true Scriptures and the true expositions and all the true Christian traditions will be wherever both the true Christian rule and faith shall be shown to be". St. Augustine endorses the same position when he says: "I should not believe the Gospel except on the authority of the Catholic Church" (Con. epist. Manichaei, fundam., n. 6). (3) By virtue of its official and permanent promulgation, Scripture is a public document, the Divine authority of which is evident to all the members of the Church. (4) The Church necessarily possesses a text of Scripture, which is internally authentic, or substantially identical with the original. Any form or version of the text, the internal authenticity of which the Church has approved either by its universal and constant use, or by a formal declaration, enjoys the character of external or public authenticity, i.e., its conformity with the original must not merely be presumed juridically, but must be admitted as certain on account of the infallibility of the Church. (5) The authentic text, legitimately promulgated, is a source and rule of faith, though it remains only a means or instrument in the hands of the teaching body of the Church, which alone has the right of authoritatively interpreting Scripture. (6) The administration and custody of Scripture is not entrusted directly to the whole Church, but to its teaching body, though Scripture itself is the common property of the members of the whole Church. While the private handling of Scripture is opposed to the fact that it is common property, its administrators are bound to communicate its contents to all the members of the Church. (7) Though Scripture is the property of the Church alone, those outside her pale may use it as a means of discovering or entering the Church. But Tertullian shows that they have no right to apply Scripture to their own purposes or to turn it against the Church. He also teaches Catholics how to contest the right of heretics to appeal to Scripture at all (by a kind of demurrer), before arguing with them on single points of Scriptural doctrine. (8) The rights of the teaching body of the Church include also that of issuing and enforcing decrees for promoting the right use, or preventing the abuse of Scripture. Not to mention the definition of the Canon (see CANON), the Council of Trent issued two decrees concerning the Vulgate (see VULGATE), and a decree concerning the interpretation of Scripture (see EXEGESIS, HERMENEUTICS), and this last enactment was repeated in a more stringent form by the Vatican Council (sess. III, Conc. Trid., sess. IV). The various decisions of the Biblical Commission derive their binding force from this same right of the teaching body of the Church. (Cf. Stapleton, Princ. Fid. Demonstr., X-XI; Wilhelm and Scannell, "Manual of Catholic Theology", London, 1890, I, 61 sqq.; Scheeben, "Handbuch der katholischen Dogmatik", Freiburg, 1873, I, 126 sqq.). VI. ATTITUDE OF THE CHURCH TOWARDS THE READING OF THE BIBLE IN THE VERNACULAR The attitude of the Church as to the reading of the Bible in the vernacular may be inferred from the Church's practice and legislation. It has been the practice of the Church to provide newly-converted nations, as soon as possible, with vernacular versions of the Scriptures; hence the early Latin and oriental translations, the versions existing among the Armenians, the Slavonians, the Goths, the Italians, the French, and the partial renderings into English. As to the legislation of the Church on this subject, we may divide its history into three large periods: (1) During the course of the first millennium of her existence, the Church did not promulgate any law concerning the reading of Scripture in the vernacular. The faithful were rather encouraged to read the Sacred Books according to their spiritual needs (cf. St. Irenaeus, "Adv. haer.", III, iv). (2) The next five hundred years show only local regulations concerning the use of the Bible in the vernacular. On 2 January, 1080, Gregory VII wrote to the Duke of Bohemia that he could not allow the publication of the Scriptures in the language of the country. The letter was written chiefly to refuse the petition of the Bohemians for permission to conduct Divine service in the Slavic language. The pontiff feared that the reading of the Bible in the vernacular would lead to irreverence and wrong interpretation of the inspired text (St. Gregory VII, "Epist.", vii, xi). The second document belongs to the time of the Waldensian and Albigensian heresies. The Bishop of Metz had written to Innocent III that there existed in his diocese a perfect frenzy for the Bible in the vernacular. In 1199 the pope replied that in general the desire to read the Scriptures was praiseworthy, but that the practice was dangerous for the simple and unlearned ("Epist., II, cxli; Hurter, "Gesch. des. Papstes Innocent III", Hamburg, 1842, IV, 501 sqq.). After the death of Innocent III, the Synod of Toulouse directed in 1229 its fourteenth canon against the misuse of Sacred Scripture on the part of the Cathari: "prohibemus, ne libros Veteris et Novi Testamenti laicis permittatur habere" (Hefele, "Concilgesch", Freiburg, 1863, V, 875). In 1233 the Synod of Tarragona issued a similar prohibition in its second canon, but both these laws are intended only for the countries subject to the jurisdiction of the respective synods (Hefele, ibid., 918). The Third Synod of Oxford, in 1408, owing to the disorders of the Lollards, who in addition to their crimes of violence and anarchy had introduced virulent interpolations into the vernacular sacred text, issued a law in virtue of which only the versions approved by the local ordinary or the provincial council were allowed to be read by the laity (Hefele, op. cit., VI, 817). (3) It is only in the beginning of the last five hundred years that we meet with a general law of the Church concerning the reading of the Bible in the vernacular. On 24 March, 1564, Pius IV promulgated in his Constitution, "Dominici gregis", the Index of Prohibited Books. According to the third rule, the Old Testament may be read in the vernacular by pious and learned men, according to the judgment of the bishop, as a help to the better understanding of the Vulgate. The fourth rule places in the hands of the bishop or the inquisitor the power of allowing the reading of the New Testament in the vernacular to laymen who according to the judgment of their confessor or their pastor can profit by this practice. Sixtus V reserved this power to himself or the Sacred Congregation of the Index, and Clement VIII added this restriction to the fourth rule of the Index, by way of appendix. Benedict XIV required that the vernacular version read by laymen should be either approved by the Holy See or provided with notes taken from the writings of the Fathers or of learned and pious authors. It then became an open question whether this order of Benedict XIV was intended to supersede the former legislation or to further restrict it. This doubt was not removed by the next three documents: the condemnation of certain errors of the Jansenist Quesnel as to the necessity of reading the Bible, by the Bull "Unigenitus" issued by Clement XI on 8 Sept., 1713 (cf. Denzinger, "Enchir.", nn. 1294-1300); the condemnation of the same teaching maintained in the Synod of Pistoia, by the Bull "Auctorem fidei" issued on 28 Aug., 1794, by Pius VI; the warning against allowing the laity indiscriminately to read the Scriptures in the vernacular, addressed to the Bishop of Mohileff by Pius VII, on 3 Sept., 1816. But the Decree issued by the Sacred Congregation of the Index on 7 Jan., 1836, seems to render it clear that henceforth the laity may read vernacular versions of the Scriptures, if they be either approved by the Holy See, or provided with notes taken from the writings of the Fathers or of learned Catholic authors. The same regulation was repeated by Gregory XVI in his Encyclical of 8 May, 1844. In general, the Church has always allowed the reading of the Bible in the vernacular, if it was desirable for the spiritual needs of her children; she has forbidden it only when it was almost certain to cause serious spiritual harm. VII. OTHER SCRIPTURAL QUESTIONS The history of the preservation and the propagation of the Scripture-text is told in the articles MANUSCRIPTS OF THE BIBLE; CODEX ALEXANDRINUS (etc.); VERSIONS OF THE BIBLE; EDITIONS OF THE BIBLE; CRITICISM (TEXTUAL); the interpretation of Scripture is dealt with in the articles HERMENEUTICS; EXEGESIS; COMMENTARIES ON THE BIBLE; and CRITICISM (BIBLICAL). Additional information on the foregoing questions is contained in the articles INTRODUCTION; TESTAMENT, THE OLD; TESTAMENT, THE NEW. The history of our English Version is treated in the article VERSIONS OF THE BIBLE. A list of Catholic literature on Scriptural subjects has been published in the American Ecclesiastical Review, xxxi (August, 1904), 194-201; this list is fairly complete up to the date of its publication. See also the works cited throughout the course of this article. Most of the questions connected with Scripture are treated in special articles throughout the course of the ENCYCLOPEDIA, for instance, in addition to those mentioned above, JEROME; CANON OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES; CONCORDANCES OF THE BIBLE; INSPIRATION OF THE BIBLE; TESTAMENT, etc. Each of these articles has an abundant literary guide to its own special aspect of the Scriptures. A.J. MAAS Scruple Scruple (Lat. Scrupulus, "a small sharp, or pointed, stone", hence, in a transferred sense, "uneasiness of mind") An unfounded apprehension and consequently unwarranted fear that something is a sin which, as a matter of fact, is not. It is not considered here so much as an isolated act, but rather as an habitual state of mind known to directors of souls as a "scrupulous conscience." St. Alphonsus describes it as a condition in which one influenced by trifling reasons, and without any solid foundation, is often afraid that sin lies where it really does not. This anxiety may be entertained not only with regard to what is to be done presently, but also with regard to what has been done. The idea sometimes obtaining, that scrupulosity is in itself a spiritual benefit of some sort, is, of course, a great error. The providence of God permits it and can gather good from it as from other forms of evil. That apart, however, it is a bad habit doing harm, sometimes grievously, to body and soul. Indeed, persisted in with the obstinacy characteristic of persons who suffer from this malady, it may entail the most lamentable consequences. The judgment is seriously warped, the moral power tired out in futile combat, and then not unfrequently the scrupulous person makes shipwreck of salvation either on the Scylla of despair or the Charybdis of unheeding indulgence in vice. It is of great importance to be able to make a correct diagnosis of this disease. Hence especially guides of consciences should be familiar with the symptoms that betray its presence as well as with the causes which commonly give rise to it. For one thing, the confessor should not confound a delicate with a scrupulous conscience, neither should he interpret the reasonable solicitude sometimes discernible in those who are trying to emerge from a life of sin as a sign of scrupulosity. Then, too, ordinarily he ought not to hastily reach this conclusion on the very first experience of his penitent. It is true there are cases of scruples which may be recognized from the start, but this is not the rule. Some special indications that persons are really scrupulous, generally adopted by theologians are those enumerated by Lacroix. Among these is a certain rooted attachment to their own opinion which makes them unwilling to abide by the judgment of those whom they consult, even though these latter have every title to deference. In consequence, they go from one confessor to another, change their convictions with hardly a shadow of motive, and are tortured by an overshadowing dread that sin lurks in everything they do, and say, and think. The scrupulous may, and ought to, act in defiance of their misgivings, i.e. against their so-called conscience. Nor can they, therefore, be impeached as acting in a state of practical doubt. The unreal phantasm that affrights their imagination, or the unsubstantial consideration that offers itself to their disturbed reason, has no validity against the conscience once formed upon the pronouncement of the confessor or in some other equally trustworthy fashion. In the various perplexities as to the lawfulness of their actions they are not bound to employ any such scrutiny as would be incumbent upon persons in a normal condition. They are not bound to repeat anything of former confessions unless they are sure without protracted examination, that it is a mortal sin and has never been properly confessed. Their chief remedy is, having reposed confidence in some confessor, to obey his decisions and commands entirely and absolutely. They are counselled also to avoid idleness, and thus to close the avenue of approach to the wild conjectures and strange ponderings responsible for so many of their worries. They should remove the cause of their scruples in so far as it may have been of their own choosing. Hence they are to guard against the reading of ascetical books of a rigorist trend and any intercourse with those afflicted in the same way as themselves. If the source of their scruples be ignorance -- for example, with regard to the obligation of some commandment -- they are to be instructed, discretion being used in the imparting of the necessary information. If it be a propensity to melancholy, certain harmless pleasures and rational enjoyments may be employed with advantage. Confessors to whom falls the difficult task of receiving the confessions of these harassed souls are to carefully inquire into the origin of the anxieties laid before them. They are to treat their unhappy penitents in general with great kindness. Occasionally, however, some degree of severity may be useful when the penitent shows an extreme tenacity in adhering to his own unreasonable view of the situation. As a rule, the confessor's answers to the innumerable troubles submitted should be clear, unaccompanied by reasons, and so unhesitating as to inspire courage. He should not permit the presentation indefinitely of the various doubts, much less, of course, the repetition of past confessions. Finally, he may sometimes do what should hardly ever be done in any other instance, that is, forbid the penitent to have recourse to another confessor. SLATER, Manual of Moral Theology (New York, 1908); ST. ALPHONSUS LIGUORI, Theologia moralis (Turin, 1888); GENICOT, Theologi moralis institutiones (Louvain, 1898); BALLERINI, Opus theologicum morale (Prato, 1898). JOSEPH F. DELANY Scrutiny Scrutiny (Lat. scrutinium from scrutari to search, to investigate) A term variously employed in canon law. (1) In promotion to orders a scrutiny or examination of the candidate is to be made according to the warning of the Apostle: "Impose not hands lightly upon any man" (I Tim., v 22). That the practice is ancient is testified to by St. Cyprian (who died in 258) in his thirty-eighth epistle. The ninth canon of the Council of Nicæa (325) supposes the scrutiny of candidates to be already in use. Many later synods enforced and defined more exactly this scrutiny of those who aspired to orders. The present discipline is laid down by the Council of Trent (Sess. XXIII, Cap. v, de ref.), though its observance in every detail has not been reduced to practice in all countries. A three-fold scrutiny is ordered: first, through the inquiry into the qualities of the candidates by the parish priest and teachers and by public proclamation in the Church. The information thus obtained is to be embodied in a testimonial letter to the bishop. Secondly, shortly before ordination through the bishop himself and ecclesiastical persons appointed to examine into the morals, faith, and doctrine of the candidates. Thirdly, through the ceremonial form prescribed by the Pontificale Romanum for the ordination of a deacon or priest. (2) Scrutiny is also a form of ecclesiastical election and is made either by written ballot or by pronouncing the chosen name before legitimate scrutators alone. It is the usual form for electing the pope. (3) Scrutiny is also the term for the examination of catechumens before baptism. In ancient times there were three such scrutinies and later on the number was increased to seven. From the Middle Ages onwards owing to the fact that most who received baptism were infants the prescribed scrutinies were reduced to that now found in the ritual for conferring baptism. The subject-matter of these scrutinies was the faith and dispositions of the candidate. WERNZ, Jus Decretalium, II (Rome, 1899). WILLIAM H.W. FANNING Sculpture Sculpture In the widest sense of the term, sculpture is the art of representing in bodily form men, animals, and other objects in stone, bronze, ivory, clay and similar materials, whether the objects represented actually exist in nature or are the creation of the imagination of the artist. A more concise and exact definition of sculpture is the art which represents beauty in bodily form by means of figures entirely or partly in the round. Sculpture therefore depicts the beauty of the corporeal world, not as does painting by means of an illusory representation upon a fiat coloured surface, but by imitating in a solid substance these bodies in their entirety, and achieving the effect by means of form alone. This effect is called plastic beauty. Sculpture therefore does not include landscape with its accompanying vegetation, nor the phenomena of light and shade, which play such an important part in painting. Inasmuch as sculpture represents bodies in their actual form and contours, its favourite subject, in contrast to painting, is the single figure. And as the single figure never appears in close relation with its surroundings the significance of its personality is presented in a more effective and powerful manner, particularly so because it is usually raised above its surroundings by means of a pedestal, and is placed in the most advantageous light by a suitable background. By these means the statue becomes a monument, in which the characteristic traits of a personality are perpetuated with artistic charm. These attributes of the statue render it difficult for sculpture to combine several figures in a group in which detail is necessarily subordinated to the whole. The most important principle of the group is that the figures should be as closely joined together as is possible, or as is compatible with the artistic effect. Such a juxtaposition is very much hindered by the material in the case of figures in the round. These difficulties do not exist in the case of the relief, which should also be considered as sculpture, to which it belongs by reason both of the material used and of the technique. In certain characteristics, relief approaches so nearly to painting that it may be called the transitional art between painting and sculpture; it is, so to speak, pictorial sculpture. It prefers to represent several figures side by side, as for example, in the case of war scenes, festal processions, labour in the fields and at home; it therefore easily achieves what is hardly possible for sculpture in the round. There are two principal kinds of relief: Low Relief (bas-relief, basso-rilievo), the figures of which have only a limited thickness, and in which the appearance of solidity is achieved by the effect of light and shade; and High Relief (grand-relief, alto-rilievo), in which the figures sometimes appear entirely in the round. The chief demand which we make of a work of sculpture, whether it be a statue or a group, is artistic unity, that is to say, that all the parts should work together for the expression of a thought or an idea. In the case of the single statue it is not only the expression of the face which reveals the idea presented in the work of art, but the pose of the body and the posture of the limbs also contribute to the same end. For this reason everything irrelevant should, as far as possible, be avoided. This requirement has led to the principle first tersely enunciated by Lessing in his "Laocoön", and which has since been repeated innumerable times: that it is the purpose of sculpture (and also of painting) to represent human figures of great bodily beauty; from which Lessing made the further deduction, that the highest purpose of sculpture is not the representation of spiritual but of sensuous beauty, that is to say, the beauty of the human body free from all draperies. Modern æsthetes have gone so far as to maintain as a rule without exception, that sculpture should create only nude bodies. A scholar of such fine artistic perception as Schnaase went so far as to demand that sculpture, in order to give the most emphatic expression to its distinctive characteristics, and not to weaken the sensuous appeal of the nude, should reduce somewhat the expression of emotion in the countenance, which should, so to speak, be attuned a tone lower, in order that it may harmonize with the body. These views, however, are in accordance neither with the teachings of history nor with good morals. Not even with the ancient Greeks at the time of their most perfect development, was the representation of the nude body the chief aim of sculpture, and only in the age of their decline do the representations of the nude prevail. The most perfect creations of Grecian plastic art, the "Zeus" and the "Athena" of Phidias, were draped figures of gold and ivory,, to which pilgrimages were made, not in order to enjoy their sensuous beauty of body, but to forget sorrow and suffering and to be fortified in religious belief. Draperies can and should be used to emphasize the spiritual significance of man. That Christian religion and morals have justly found objections to the representations of the nude is quite obvious, as is also the fact that such objections are removed when historical events or other valid reasons demand its representation, as, for example, in the case of Adam and Eve in Paradise. Another subject of wide importance demanding a few words is the tinting of statues, or polychromy. Until a few decades ago scholars generally were of the opinion that the ancient sculptors used no other tints than the original colour of the marble; but closer investigation of the antique monuments as well as of the accounts in ancient literature prove beyond doubt that the Greeks slightly tinted their statues, as was necessary when they placed them in richly decorated interiors. Since this has become known our judgment of the polychromy of medieval sculpture has become a more favourable one. In accordance with the material used and the different methods of treatment sculpture is variously classified as follows: (1) Stone sculpture, or sculpture in a restricted sense, which for its noblest and most excellent works made use of marble. (2) Wood sculpture, which flourished especially in the Middle Ages; its success was much restricted by the practice of encasing the carved work with cloth covered with chalk, in order to facilitate polychromy. (3) Sculpture in metals, which not only creates the most lasting works, but allows greater freedom in the treatment of the material. From the perfection which it attained in antiquity metal sculpture degenerated greatly in the Middle Ages, when it was for the most part confined to relief. Not until the Italian Renaissance was the art of metal casting again resumed for monumental statues. (4) Repoussé sculpture, in which the metal was beaten into form by means of hammer and puncheon. In antiquity and in the Middle Ages this process was used for smaller subjects only, but since the seventeenth century it is used for great statues as well, as for instance the colossal statue of Arminius in the Teutoburgerwald. (5) Sculpture in clay or terra-cotta, in which the figure is moulded in a soft substance, which afterwards hardens either by drying or firing. In this art also the ancients created much that is important, and during the Renaissance the terra-cottas of Luca della Robbia and his followers acquired great celebrity. (6) Sculpture in ivory was used by the Greeks in combination with gold for monumental works (chryselephantine technique). In the Middle Ages and in modern times ivory is often used for works of small proportions; it is particularly suitable for delicate and pathetic subjects. (7) Glyptics, or the art of cutting gems, as well as the engraving of medals, coins, and seals, are varieties of sculpture which have a cultural rather than an artistic and æsthetic importance. The origin of sculpture in a wide sense belongs to prehistoric times. The first attempts to represent human beings by images were probably made in the Sandwich Islands. A higher stage of development is shown by the ancient Mexican sculptures, particularly those of the Maya period, among which, along with many crude expressions of exaggerated phantasy, are also found works showing a real observation of nature. A greater historic and æsthetic interest is first found in Egyptian sculpture, which in all times appears closely connected with architecture. As usual in primitive art, the works of the earliest or Memphitic period (until b.c. 3500) are distinguished by originality and naturalism, while in the later period the human figure was moulded in accordance with an unchangeable canon or type, from which only the countenances show any deviation. The sculptures of the later period are principally reliefs, produced by incised outlines and slight modelling; statues also occur, but groups are very rare. With the eleventh dynasty of Egyptian kings (about b.c. 3500) the size of the figures was increased to colossal proportions, but as they were all executed in accordance with the traditional type, sculpture gradually declined. No important revival occurred because Egyptian sculpture was gradually absorbed by the all-embracing Hellenistic art. Besides representations of religious scenes and episodes of Court life, those depicting the daily life of the people were also popular. These were conditioned by the belief of the Egyptians, that such representations were pleasing to the dead and that they beautified their life in the other world. The sculpture of Babylonia and Assyria, the survivals of which have been excavated on the sites of ancient Nineveh and Babylon, has, notwithstanding its shortcomings, produced works of imperishable importance. It is imperfect in the representation of man, who is portrayed in a conventional and typical manner, but in the representation of animal combats and hunting scenes it reveals a surprisingly close observation of nature, free composition, and youthful energy. In its subjects it is greatly the inferior of the Egyptian, since it serves almost entirely for the glorification of the great and little deeds of the deified rulers. The sculpture of the Persians has become known particularly through the excavations at Perseopolis. It served the same purpose as the Babylonian, but the relief is more correct in perspective, and the human figure shows a touch of individuality. Pre-Christian sculpture attained its zenith in Greece; its sculptures have in all times been considered as unrivalled masterpieces. We can only devote a few words to them here. The subjects of Greek sculpture were taken particularly from the domain of religion, even in the times of the decline, when belief in the gods was rapidly disappearing. Numerous votive statues for deliverance from calamities or for victorious battles, as well as those erected in the temples and their vicinity by the victors of the athletic games, belong, in a wide sense, to what may be called religious sculpture. Besides religious subjects, portraits and genre statues were produced in great numbers. In accordance with the material used three classes of Greek sculpture may be distinguished: chryselephantine statues, the nude parts of which were of ivory and the draperies of gold; marble (particularly Parian marble); bronze, in which material the Greeks achieved perfect mastery of solid casting as well as hollow casting in a fireproof mould. The excellences of Greek sculpture are extraordinary simplicity and clearness in composition, plastic repose as well as pleasing action, wonderful charm, and conscientious technical execution. The great beauty of body which immediately impresses one at the sight of Greek sculpture is explained partly by the beauty of the Greek race, partly by the daily observation of naked youths and men as they appeared in the palestra. But they reveal no sensual beauty in the modern sense, and only during the period after Phidias did sculptors venture to depict female goddesses, for instance Aphrodite, entirely nude. In addition to the excellences just mentioned especial characteristics appear in each separate period. Three or four periods of Greek sculpture are usually distinguished. Works of the first period, or of the Archaic style (b.c. 775-449), show in the beginning a lifeless constraint, but later reveal an expression of physical power and agility. The second period, the golden age (b.c. 449-323), is characterized at first by an ideal trend, represented especially by Phidias of the Attic School in his gold-ivory statues of the deities; partly also by a tendency to emphasize the highest physical beauty, the most celebrated representative of which is Polycletus of the Argive School. The tendency during the last part of the second period was towards graceful, bewitching beauty, combined with the expression of the most tender sentiment, through which subjectivity, gained the upper hand, and through which the decline or third period (323-146) was ushered in. This age still produced a number of much admired works, such as the Laocoön group, the Farnese Bull, the Apollo Belvedere. The centres of art shifted to Pergamon and Rhodes. To the fourth period, the period of decay (b.c. 146- a.d. 397) are attributed the works, which partly originals, partly copies, were created by Greek and Roman artists in Italy. Typical of this period is the prevalence of portraits, both busts and statues. Græco-Roman sculpture was finally destroyed, not, as the Assyrian and Babylonian, by violent suppression or gradual absorption, but by the infusion of a new spirit and of new ideas. The current views of early Christian art have very recently been radically changed because through the researches of Strzygowski and others, the Orient has received its just dues. Both in form and in technique Christian sculpture is, generally speaking, identical with the pagan from which it was developed. But what the latest modern research has shown us is this: that it was not Rome which produced the best and most ancient works of Christian sculpture, but the East, which is certainly the cradle of Christian art. In Asia Minor the influence of Hellenistic art was still so strong that many early Christian works present an almost classical character, but in the West, where this beneficent influence was lacking, sculpture fell earlier into decline. In pre-Constantinian times probably few works of sculpture were executed. This is especially true of representations of the Persons of the Trinity, because the Jews who had become Christians were averse to graven images, and the converted pagans were deterred by their remembrance of the innumerable statues of their former gods. But with the Emperor Constantine the production of sculptures in stone and bronze immediately began on a large scale. Few examples of the statuary of this period have been preserved; but among these are a "Pastor Bonus" in the Museum of the Lateran, and a "Christ" in Berlin, both probably Oriental works. On the other hand, numerous reliefs survive, because, after the ancient custom, the sarcophagi, of which a large number survive, were richly decorated with sculptural representations. The surviving Christian sarcophagi belong mostly to the fourth and fifth centuries, and may be classified into an Occidental and an Oriental group. To the latter belong the beautiful sarcophagi of Ravenna, whose art stood in very intimate relation with the Byzantine. Sculpture in wood and ivory, so highly developed in antiquity, was enlisted in the service of the Church, as is proven by the portals of the Basilica of S. Sabina at Rome, and the numerous preserved book-covers, diptychs, and pyxes. For our knowledge of the transition from the early Christian to medieval sculpture we are indebted principally to reliefs carved in ivory, for there is an almost complete dearth of statuary until the tenth century. Sculpture in ivory achieved great importance in the ninth and tenth centuries. In delicacy of execution, in rhythm of line, and in well-considered observance of the laws of composition, the masterpieces of this epoch approach the creations of the early Renaissance. This branch of sculpture flourished especially in France, at Tours, Corbie, and Metz. In comparison with these delicate ivory carvings, the first attempts of Romanesque stone sculpture appear crude and clumsy, but they contain the germs of a new life, which in the thirteenth century occasioned the first flower of medieval sculpture. It is typical of this period that sculpture, especially in stone, was predominantly subordinated to architecture and served almost exclusively for ecclesiastical purposes. The reliefs are entirely of symbolic character, and express thoughts which to a great extent have not yet been completely fathomed. At the beginning of this period (llth-l2th centuries) there was an important development of sculpture in bronze, at Hildesheim under Bishop Bernward (d. 1022), and at Magdeburg in the works of Master Riquinus. In Dinant (Belgium) also works of imposing beauty originated at this time, the best known of which is the baptismal font at Liège (1112), resting upon twelve bronze oxen -- the work of Renier de Huy. Until the end of the twelfth century sculpture in stone was almost entirely confined to reliefs, which served as decorations of baptismal fonts, portals, and choir-screens. The centre of German sculpture during this period was in the North, especially in Saxony. South Germany and the Rhineland are not poor in works of sculpture, but they are rather of an iconographic than of historical importance; as, for instance, the reliefs of the Schottenkirche (Scots' Church) at Ratisbon. At the beginning of the thirteenth century German sculpture attained its first triumph, which was accelerated by Byzantine and French influence. Several important schools flourished at the same time. In place of the traditional types and conventional draperies a lively, naturalistic presentation appears. Sculpture in bronze yields the first place to stone sculpture, and even statuary assumes its proper rank. The portals especially become the scenes of the new plastic decoration. In the tympanum the Last Judgement is generally represented; at the sides stand the wise and foolish virgins, the apostles, saints, and donors. The most important school of this period is the Saxon with sculptures at Wechselburg, Freiberg, and Naumburg; the Frankish School with the reliefs of the choir-screens and statues in the cathedral of Bamberg, and the Romanesque sculptures of the cathedral of Strasburg, which in many respects rival the best works of antique art. The sculptures of the remaining European countries during this period cannot be compared with the German; next in importance are those of France. Here representations of devils and hobgoblins occur with remarkable frequency -- probably the consequence of the "Diableries", then so popular in the plays. The earliest development in France occurred in Provence (Arles, Toulouse), where ancient traditions were followed. The most perfect examples are m Central France, where the sculptures of the cathedrals of Chartres, Le Mans, and Bourges achieve an imposing effect by reason of their solemn dignity and silent repose. In Italy also the church portals are decorated with mythological, legendary, and symbolic reliefs, but they lack all naturalness and consequently all artistic value. In no other country, however, were there so many artists who felt it necessary to immortalize their names by inscribing them upon their works. The transition to Gothic sculpture -- if, indeed, the expressions Romanesque and Gothic may be applied to sculpture -- is not sudden, but very gradual, as is always the case with the appearance of a new tendency in art and of all new ideals. As the ideal of the Romanesque sculptors was virility and a dignified naturalness, so the Gothic masters followed an ideal trend, which did not indeed do away immediately with naturalness, but gradually led to the conventionalization of figures, and a mechanical execution. The principal characteristics of the developed Gothic are that all persons have for the most part a youthful appearance, even though they are aged; their figures are slender and well-formed, with long and smoothly flowing draperies; finally, the countenances have a thoughtful, spiritual, and modest expression. As long as the Gothic sculptors practised moderation in the application of these characteristics, they created works of classic beauty; but when the later generations attempted to surpass their predecessors, they fell into mannerisms, and created works which to-day seem highly inartistic. We have only to recall many representations of the Crucified One, which are caricatures of a human figure. The so-called Gothic pose -- the exaggerated bend of the body towards one side and the constantly recurring smile, which almost becomes a grimace, are symptoms of the decline. The demand for Gothic statues was enormous, since architecture made the widest use of them in the decoration of the churches. A thousand statues and other sculptures were hardly sufficient for a cathedral; the cathedral of Milan possesses 6000. This necessitated great rapidity of execution, which indeed promoted manual dexterity, but did not promote artistic conscientiousness. The innumerable statues should not however, be examined and judged as individual works, but in relation to the buildings for which they were carved. From this point of view our only conclusion can be that it is hardly possible to conceive of anything more imposing than a Gothic cathedral with its wealth of decorative sculptures. The favourite place for sculptural decorations remains the portals, of which there are usually three on the façade of a Gothic cathedral. The sculptures which are here grouped together depict the entire scholastic theology in stone. A favourite subject is the life of our Saviour during His sojourn upon earth. The place of honour on the principal pier of the chief portal is usually given to Our Lady with the Christ Child. The culmination of such theological representations in stone are the portals of the cathedrals of Paris, Chartres, and Strasburg. The most perfect development of Gothic sculpture took place in France, where the style originated. The principal scene of this development is Central France, where the cathedrals of Amiens, Chartres, Paris, and Rheims display a large number of most excellent figures, not only on the portals, but covering the façade above the portals (the so-called royal gallery), and even the choir. The subjects of these representations are the Saviour of the World and its Supreme Judge, His Most Holy Mother, the apostles, saints, kings, prophets, and sybils, the Virtues and Vices, fables, and the occupations of man during each month of the year. This development began about 1150 at Chartres, and spread from there to St. Denis and Paris, attaining its highest development in the cathedral of Rheims with about 2500 statues, some of which indeed belong to the late Gothic period. The statues of the twelve apostles in the Ste Chapelle in Paris are gems of Gothic sculpture. About the same time (1400) able work was done by the Schools of Burgundy and the Netherlands, the most important monument of which is the tomb of Duke Philip the Bold at Dijon by Claus Slüter. In England sculpture has always been a stepchild among the arts. There was practically none during the Romanesque period, and even the early Gothic architecture either completely excluded sculptural representations in its edifices, or else used them only as decorations as on the keystones and spandrils of the arches and in capitals. The finest examples are at Lincoln, Salisbury, and Westminster. Statuary first appears rather suddenly in southern England and its most important monuments are at Wells and Exeter. These sculptures are characterized by pleasing simplicity, free composition, and dramatic action. A new phase of Gothic sculpture began with the discovery of the quarries on Purbeck Island, Dorsetshire, which provided a shell-limestone of warm, pleasing colours. The sculptures carved on the island were so numerous that an individual style developed there (1175-1325). At a later period London supplied the chief demand of the country for sculpture, which consisted for the most part of sepulchral monuments. Deserving of a special mention is the School of the "Alabasters", which for several centuries made use of the rich English quarries of alabaster to carve small and large sculptures, rather in a mechanical than an artistic fashion. Among the bronze-workers the family of the Torels, active for almost a century in London, is especially noteworthy; of these William Torel in 1291 cast the well-known bronze figures of Queen Eleanor and Henry III in Westminster Abbey. During the Gothic epoch Germany produced a great number of sculptural works, but until 1450 there is very little above mediocrity. About that year a new development began which lasted until 1550, and achieved such excellence that it may be termed the second flower of German medieval sculpture. Sculptures in bronze and wood rather than in stone, constitute the finest products of this period. While in the first period North Germany took the lead, in this second period the hegemony passed to Southern Germany, where the Frankish School culminated in the works of the three Nuremburg masters, Veit Stoss, Adam Kraft, and Peter Viseher, the Würtzburg School in Dill Riemenschneider, the Swabian, in Hans Multscher and Jörg Syrlin, and the Tyrolese, in Michael Pacher. The causes of this change and its chief characteristics can be briefly stated. In contrast with the early Gothic idealism a powerful realism now began to permeate art. People were represented exactly as in reality, with all the accidents of nature and costume; even the ugly and repulsive features were represented. The change in the character of the patrons of art played no small part in promoting this difference. Whereas formerly wealthy prelates and haughty nobles almost exclusively gave occupation to the artists, now, under the development of the third estate, the wealthy merchants or peasants caused monuments of devotion to be erected in the churches. This also caused a change in material. Although the common people gladly contributed to the decoration of the churches, they avoided the great expense of stone sculptures and confined themselves to presenting sculptures in wood. Indeed, for many of these works, stone was hardly feasible as a material. We have only to recall the choir-stalls, pulpits, and almost innumerable altars. This frequent use of wood had also its effect on stone sculpture. There are in existence stone "sacrament houses" (tabernacles for the Blessed Sacrament) of this period which are as twisted and spiral as if they had been carved from wood. The treatment of the draperies is another characteristic of late medieval sculpture. While in the fourteenth century the draperies fell smoothly and simply, now they were puffed and bagged, bunched, and broken in such a manner as never again occurred. The subjects of sculpture were almost exclusively of a religious character. In statuary the most popular subjects were the Pietà, Our Lady of Sorrows, and St. Anne with the Madonna and the Christ Child (for the cult of St. Anne was more popular at the end of the Middle Ages than ever before or after). The conditions for sculpture were especially favourable in Italy, where the chief attention was centred, not as in Germany or in France in the decoration of the portals and façade, but in pulpits, altars, and sepulchral monuments. Since it also had the finest of materials, marble, at its disposal, Italian art ultimately took the palm in sculpture. In the beginning relief was principally attempted; statuary was not used till later. The development of Italian sculpture begins in the thirteenth century in Tuscany, which for about three centuries plays the leading part. It was the time of the proto-Renaissance, which is identified with the names of Niccolo, Giovanni, Andrea Pisano (from Pisa), and Andrea Orcagua. The movement radiated from Pisa, but with Andrea Pisano, who was under the influence of Giotto, Florence became the centre and remained so throughout the entire early Renaissance. Siena which rivalled Florence in painting indeed produced a few able masters of sculpture, like Tino da Comaino (d. 1339), but it gradually lagged behind its rival. This circumstance, that the early Renaissance prospered above all in Florence, is of importance for the judgment of the Renaissance itself, which is still considered by many as a revival of antique art and therefore is designated anti-clerical, whereas in reality it is only an art which arose in the soul of the Italian people on the basis of ancient tradition. It was not Rome, therefore, where at that time the antique monuments were being brought to light and studied, but Florence which became the cradle of the early Renaissance. The most important works of this period are to be found in the churches, or in connexion with them, and they owed their origin to princes of the Church and to Church organizations. They are so pure and chaste in sentiment, so sublime in conception, that they are not inferior to the best works of the Middle Ages -- which is also a proof that the early Renaissance may not be designated as anti-religious. True, it cannot be denied that the late Renaissance, by a too close imitation of the antique, lost many of these noble qualities, and therefore in most of its works leaves the spectator cold and unaffected. Among the numerous masters of the early Renaissance in Florence in the first half of the fifteenth century, the following three are especially prominent: Ghiberti, who has become celebrated as the sculptor of the Paradise Portals of the Baptistery of Florence; Donatello, the uncompromising realist and the sculptor of many statues, and Luca della Robbia, who in his terra-cottas attained an almost classical harmony and charm. With them were associated a large number of masters of the second rank, of whom at least a few should be mentioned. Among the sculptors in bronze Andrea Verrochio is known through his world-famous group of Christ and St. Thomas in the church of Or San Michele, Florence; among the sculptors in marble Desiderio da Settignano, Rosselino, Mino da Fiesole, and Benedetto da Majano are famous. It is not necessary to consider these artists more fully here, because they are all treated in separate articles in The CATHOLIC ENCYCLOPEDIA. They exercised a wide-spread influence, and only Siena succeeded in maintaining an independent tendency in the art of Jacopo della Quercia (d. 1438). Lombardy and Venice also had important sculptors at their disposal, as may be seen in the sculptures of the Basilica of St. Anthony at Padua and many sepulchral monuments in the churches of City of Venice. In the age of Leo X, which is generally called the Golden Age of Italian art, sculpture also attained its apogee, judged from the purely formal point of view. Of imposing effect are the works of the Florentine Andrea Contucci, called Sansovino, as, for example, his Baptism of Christ. But all are surpassed in gigantic power and original composition by Michelangelo, who was unreservedly followed by the younger generation, not indeed to their advantage; for through this imitation they fell into mannerism, since the spirit of the great master was lacking in them, although they might imitate his external forms. Through Jacopo Sansovino (Tatti) Michelangelo's tendencies were transplanted to Venice. A few of the younger sculptors, who were able to preserve their independence, still created very able works, as did Giovanni da Bologna; but their works do not to a great extent belong to ecclesiastical art. As the entire art of the seventeenth century turned its back upon the dreary mannerism of the later sixteenth, so did also sculpture. It returned to naturalism, but not to the naive naturalism of the fifteenth century, but attempted a presentation which would show reality in its most effective form. Everything was calculated for effect and emotion. Thus the movements of the limbs are violent and exaggerated, the muscles stand out prominently, the draperies flutter and fly as if blown by a storm. Another characteristic of this style is the frequent and affected use of allegory and personification; thus a nude man with books under his arm in the Annunziata, Florence, personifies thought. This style is the well-known Baroque sculpture, which, in so far as it represents religious subjects, has been condemned and outlawed by many. While among Baroque sculptures there are many works which do not appeal to our Christian sentiment. nevertheless this judgment cannot be applied to all sculptures of the period. At all events a great number of these works bear testimony to the lively religious interest and also to the self-sacrifice of that much-condemned age. Furthermore, the Baroque sculptures should not be considered by themselves, but in connexion with the surrounding architecture. This period was ushered in by a man who enchained the mind of his contemporaries as hardly any artist has ever done, Larenzo Bernini, the favourite of six popes. Among others who worked in his spirit was Alessandro Algardi (d. 1653); but more independent of his influence was Stefano Maderna (d. 1636). The paths pointed out by Bernini led sculpture to an abyss, from which no great spirit rescued it. It sank into triviality, exaggerated naturalism, and virtuosity. Modern sculpture outside of Italy is in the main dependent on the development of Italian art. In France, where the Renaissance entered towards the end of the fifteenth century, sculpture, while preserving national peculiarities, is characterized by a simple, sometimes crude naturalism. It attained an important development on the Loire, with Tours as a centre, and Michael Colombe (d. 1512) as chief master. Not until the middle of the sixteenth century did the Italian influence become so powerful that French sculpture may be said to have reached its zenith. The most important representatives are Jean Goujon, Bontemps, and Pierre Pilon. The work of these sculptors, notwithstanding great formal beauty and technical ability, reveals a certain coldness and smoothness; and since 1560 secular subjects are preferred. This is even more the case with the younger generation represented by Pierre Pujet, François Giradon, and Antoine Coysevox, whose works bear a specifically French imprint, a certain affected, stilted and theatrical quality, which in the eighteenth century degenerates into an insipid elegance. In the Netherlands, as elsewhere, native and Italian influences contended with each other until the latter gained ascendency. Here besides some fine choir stalls were produced pulpits of a grandeur and magnificence unrivalled in other countries. The stairway, the body of the pulpit, and the sounding-board were treated as a single ornamental structure decorated with statues and carvings. Splendid examples of this sort are the pulpits of the cathedrals of Antwerp by the master, van der Voort, and the Church of St. Gudule in Brussels by Henri François Verbrüggen (1655-1724). Other important Flemish sculptors are François Duquesnoy (d. 1646), who was a contemporary of Bernini, under whose influence he carved St. Andrew in the cupola of St. Peter's at Rome; his pupils Arthur Quellinus and Adrain de Fries must also be mentioned. During the Renaissance period Spanish sculpture was chiefly of a decorative character, and was displayed especially on the façades of the churches and palaces and in the towering gilded wooden pulpits (retablos). Favourable to its growth was the Spanish custom of erecting in the churches sculptured scenes from the Passion and carrying them in processions. One of the most interesting masters is Damian Forment (d. 1533), who considered himself the equal of Phidias and Praxiteles; one of his ablest works is a retablos in the Cathedral del Pilar at Zaragoza. During the late Renaissance Pedro de Mena (d. 1693) carved for the church of Malaga forty-two statuettes of such beauty and individuality that they must be numbered among the most important works of all modern sculpture. In England there was no native sculpture for several generations after the disappearance of the Gothic style. The first sculptor who was again able to create a living art was Nicholas Stone (1586-1647); the first to labour in the spirit of the Renaissance was Grinling Gibbons, whose finest decorative works are in St. Paul's, London, and in Trinity College, Oxford. From the complicated and affected traits which the works of this period show, sculpture at a later period went to the opposite extreme; the first artist to return to the supposed classical purity and severity was Thomas Banks (1735-1805). It is not true that Germany until 1500 produced only unimportant works as has often been maintained. On the contrary the second flower of German Renaissance sculpture lasted till 1550, and many able masters date from that period. Contemporary with Peter Vischer flourished Pancraz Labewolf (d. 1563), Adolf Dauer (d. 1537), Gregor Erhardt (d. 1540), Hans Backofen (d. 1519), Heinrich and Johann Douvermann (d. 1540), and others. Two masters of the first rank belonging to a later period are Andreas Slüter (d. 1714) in Berlin and Raphael Donner (d. 1741) in Austria. Under the impetus of the movement for the revival of classical antiquity inspired by Winkelmann, sculpture in the nineteenth century achieved an unexpected development, but it produced but one master who was recognized by all nations as pre-eminent, the Dane, Bertel Thorwaldsen. His numerous works breathe the Classic spirit, and are to a great extent taken from antique subjects. Among his few Christian works "Christ and the Twelve Apostles" in the Frauenkirche at Copenhagen are especially celebrated. Thorwaldsen had many imitators, particularly in Germany. At Munich L. Schwanthaler represented the Classical tendencies under the patronage of the romantically inclined Ludwig I. In North Germany Schadow and particularly Rauch followed native tendencies, as did also Rietschl, whose "Pietà" is one of the most important modern works of a religious character. After the great wars and victories (1866-70) numerous sculptors filled the public places of German cities with monumental statues, but in these real art is far too frequently eclipsed by trivial and affected accessories. An artist who devoted himself exclusively to religious sculpture was the Westphalian Achtermann (d. 1885), who again created works of deep religious sentiment. Of the now living sculptors we mention Bolte in Münster, who is a follower of his countryman Achtermann, and George Busch in Munich, who is remarkable for the power and breadth of his creations. Whereas sculpture in Italy is distinguished by its technical bravure rather than by its spiritual excellences, French sculpture has for a long time taken the lead in the modern development, not only by reason of its admirable treatment of the most varied materials, but also through its universality of thought. Lately indeed an unpleasant naturalism has made itself increasingly felt, even leading to the destruction of plastic form. A pioneer in this dangerous path was Rodin whose works have been admired by many as almost wonders of the world. At the same time a more ideal tendency flourishes, the chief representative of which is Bartholomé, the sculptor of the celebrated tomb at Père-Lachaise in Paris, which is perhaps the greatest achievement of French sculpture in the nineteenth century. SCULPTURE IN ENGLAND The principal representative of the classical tendency in English sculpture was John Flaxman (1755-1826), who found his inspiration in Greek rather than in Roman art. He is chiefly known for his pure classical figures on Wedgwood pottery, but his marble reliefs are also of great beauty, Among the numerous classicists who followed were: Francis Chantrey, Sir Richard Westmacott, E. H. Bailey, and especially John Gibson (1790-1860), whose religious works include a relief of Christ blessing the little children. The classical tendency prevailed until the last quarter of the nineteenth century, but the later part of the period was marked by increasing naturalism. The chief representations of the transition include John Henry Foley (1818-74), whose statues of Goldsmith, Burke, and Grattan at Dublin are noteworthy; Thomas Brock, whose works include the O'Connell monument at Dublin and the Victoria Memorial in London, England's most ambitious monument of sculpture, seventy feet high, and containing many symbolic figures; George Armstead (1828-1905), who carved a St. Matthew and other marble figures for the reredos of the Church of St. Mary, Aberavon; Sir J. E. Boehm (1834-91); Thomas Woolner (1825-93), a member of the Pre-Raphaelite Brotherhood. The most important British sculptor of the nineteenth century was Alfred Stevens (1817-75), a pupil of Thorwaldsen, but whose classical training did not preclude great originality in all branches of sculpture. His Wellington monument in St. Paul's Cathedral is perhaps the most important that English sculpture has produced. Mention should also be made of Lord Leighton (1830-1896), whose sculpture excels his painting, and particularly of George Frederick Watts, in whose works great power and originality are united with a high spiritual significance. The great change in English sculpture since about 1875 is due to French influence. For many years Jules Dalou, a French political exile of 1870, was in charge of the modelling classes in South Kensington Museum. His teachings substituted structure and movement for the previous haphazard methods, and inaugurated a sane and healthy naturalism. His pupils include Hamo Thorneycroft, whose finely-modelled Teucer inaugurated the new movement. Other important sculptors of the same tendencies are E. Onslow Ford, educated at Munich; J. M. Swan, the animal sculptor; and George Frampton, whose works are of a fine decorative quality and quite original (including a very attractive St. George). But the most original and influential figure of British art of the present day is Alfred Gilbert, who excels in all branches of sculpture, and whose very modern style unites the goldsmith's to the sculptor's art. His works include a beautiful high relief of Christ and Angels for the reredos of the St. Albaus' Cathedral. Nearly all of these men enjoyed French training, but their art possesses certain qualities which are distinctly national. SCULPTURE IN THE UNITED STATES Sculpture in the United States is a development of the last three quarters of the nineteenth century. It has developed in connexion with the schools of Western Europe, but without being less individual or national than they. Its history may be divided into three periods: (1) The Classical Period, (1825-50); (2) the Middle Period (1850-80), in which classicism still exists, but increasingly gives way to a more national development; (3) the Contemporary or Cosmopolitan Period, developed as elsewhere, under French influence. The Classical School Neither the Puritan doctrines of the early settlers nor the other religious tendencies of the early nineteenth century were friendly to the development of sculpture. There were no facilities for technical training of any description, no monuments to study or inspire. Consequently, the few sculptors of colonial and early revolutionary periods were unimportant and formed no schools. The real development began in 1825 with the departure of Horatio Greenough of Boston (1805-52) for Rome. The character of his art is well known from his half-draped gigantic statue of Washington as the Olympian Zeus, which long stood before the Capitol at Washington. Hiram Powers (1805-73) did similar work, but of a more sentimental character, in such statues as his celebrated "Greek Slave", an example of the nude, chastely treated, and his "Eve Disconsolate". Thomas Crawford (1813-57), a pupil of Thorwaldsen, is known as the sculptor of the bronze "Liberty" surmounting the dome of the Capitol at Washington, the bronze portals of the Capitol, and the pedimental group of the Senate Chamber. Middle or Native Period Even during the classical period the transition to a more national art began. The pioneer was Henry Kirk Brown (1814-86), whose work, unaffected by his Italian study, is best typified in his remarkable equestrian statue of George Washington in Union Square, New York. Another important sculptor of native tendencies was Erastus Dow Palmer (1817-1904), who was practically self-trained and never left America. His ideal nude figures were the best executed up to that time, while his "Angel of the Sepulchre" shows his strength in religious subjects. Thomas Ball (1819) set a new standard in public monuments by such works as his equestrian statue of General Washington in Boston and his Lincoln monument in Washington. Representatives of the Classical School during the middle period include the many-sided W. W. Storey, Randolph Rogers, W. H. Rinehart, whose works may be best studied in Baltimore, and Harriet Hosmer. Mention may also be made of the statues of Civil War subjects by John Rogers (1824-1904), which enjoyed great popularity without being real art. The most distinguished artist of the later middle period was J. Q. A. Ward (1830-1910), a pupil of H. K. Brown, whose art is powerful, simple and sculpturesque. He was as successful in his public monuments as in his statues, such as the "Indian Hunter", which stands in Central Park, New York. Contemporary Sculpture The most recent development of American sculpture was ushered in by the Centennial Exposition at Philadelphia in 1876, which revealed the superiority of European, particularly of the French work. From that time Paris became the training school of American sculptors, with the result of an unprecedented improvement in the technique and content of their art and the gradual development of a national school of great promise. Among the first to show the Parisian influence was O. L. Warner (1844-96), but the most prominent figure thus far in American sculpture is Augustus St. Gaudens (1848-1907). To the highest technical efficiency he added remarkable powers of characterization. His Shaw memorial relief at Boston and the statue of Lincoln in Chicago were epoch-making, and his General Sherman in Central Park, New York, places him in the first rank of American sculptors. His religious works include a beautiful "Amor Caritas" in the Luxembourg Museum, Paris. Foreign influence is absent from the work of Daniel Chester French (1850-), whose art is characterized by restraint and a certain purity of conception. Among his most charming works are "Death and the Sculptor" (Art Institute, Chicago) and the O'Reilly memorial in Boston, with a beautiful figure of Erin mourning. Frederick Macmonnies is the most thoroughly French of all our sculptors, while Herbert Adams has found inspiration in the early Florentine masters. Other prominent sculptors of the Cosmopolitan period include Bela L. Pratt, of Boston, Charles Grafly, of Philadelphia, Lorado Taft, of Chicago, and Douglas Tilden, of San Francisco, whose art is the most radical of all. But the centre of American sculpture is New York. Mention should be made of Charles H. Niehaus, a master of modelling, who represents the German influence, of F. W. Ruckstuhl, and Carl Bitter, whose decorative work is celebrated, and of Paul Bartlett, the sculptor of the La Fayette statue in Paris. The most important of the animal sculptors are the late Edward Kemys, whose specialty was native American wild animals, E. C. Potter, and A. C. Proctor, who has also portrayed the American Indian; but the most powerful sculptor of the Indian is Cyrus E. Dallin, The two most characteristically American of the younger men are both from the West; Solon H. Borglum, the sculptor of the Indian, the cowboy, and the bronco, and George Gray Barnard, whose strong and simple art unites great breadth with an ideal characterization. There has been little opportunity for ecclesiastical sculpture in the United States; the most important commission was the three portals of St. Bartholomew's Church, New York, completed in 1904; the central portal and frieze by D. C. French and Andrew O'Connor, the others by Herbert Adams and Philip Martiny. These very profuse decorations are excellent from the modern point of view, but too little subordinated to the architecture to be monumental. The sculptures of the Anglican Cathedral of St. John the Divine, New York, by Gutzon Borglum are noteworthy. BABELON, tr. EVETTS, Manual of Oriental Antiquities (London, 1889); MITCHELL, A History of Ancient Sculpture (London, 1883); FURTWÄNGLER, Meisterwerke der griechischen Plastik (Leipzig-Berlin, 1893); OVERBECK, Geschichte der qriechischen Plastik (Leipzig, 1893); KUHN, Geschichte der Plastik (Einsiedeln, 1909); LÜBKE, Geschichte der Plastik (2nd ed., Leipzig, 1880); J. SORENSEN, Malerei, Bildnerei u. Schmückende Kunst (Freiburg, 1901); KLEINSCHMIDT, Geschichte der christlichen Kunst (Paderborn, 1910); GONSE, La sculpture française depuis le 14. siècle (Paris, 1895); REYMOND, La sculpture florentine (Florence, 1897-98); REBER and BAYERSDERFER, Klassischer Skulpturen-Schats (Munich, 1900); ARMSTRONG, Art in Great Britain and Ireland (London, 1909); MARQUAND AND FROTHINGHAM, Hist. of Sculpture (New York, 1897); SHORT, Hist. of Sculpture (London, 1907). SPEELMANN, British Sculpture of To-day (London, 1901); CHANCELLOR, Lives of the British Sculptors (London, 1911); TUCKERMAN, Book of the Artists (New York, 1870); CLARKE, Great American Sculptors (Philadelphia, s. d.); HARTMANN, Modern American Sculpture (New York, s. d.); CAFFIN, Masters of American Sculpture (New York, 1903); TAFT, Hist. of American Sculpture (New York, 1903). GEORGE KRIEHN & BEDA KLEINSCHMIDT Archdiocese of Scutari Archdiocese of Scutari (SCUTARENSIS) The first known bishop was Bassus (387). The bishops of Scutari were at first subject to the Metropolitan of Salonica, Primate of all Illyricum, but when Justinian I transferred the primacy to Achrida, they became suffragans of the latter see. In the early Middle Ages Scutari was suffragan of Dioclea. From the seventh to the middle of the twelfth century no bishop is known. Among its best-known bishops are: Francis II de Sanctis (1471-1491); Fra Dominicus Andrijasevic (died at Rome in 1639), a famous theologian and philosopher, friend of Gregory XV and of Urban VIII; Dominicus II Babic (1677-1686); Antonius III de Nigris (1693-1702), martyred in 1702 by the Turks. In 1867 Scutari was que principaliter united with the Archdiocese of Antivari, and in this way Pius IX made Scutari an archdiocese and metropolis. The first archbishop of the united diocese, Mgr. Charles Pooten, native of Teveran near Aachen, who had been Apostolic Administrator of Antivari (1834-1855), died at Scutari on 15 January, 1886. From 1063 to 1886 only 53 bishops of Scutari are known. On 23 October, 1886, the Archdiocese of Scutari was separated from that of Antivari, and remained an archdiocese and a metropolis with three suffragans: Alessio, Sappa, and Pulati. The ancient See of Ulcinium, in the territory of Scutari, was in 1571 occupied by the Turks and ceased to exist, for no Christians remained. During the existence of Ulcinium, its bishops were suffragans of the Metropolitan of Antivari or of that of Dioclea. About the middle of the sixteenth century the ancient See of Suacium was forever suppressed. Other ancient sees in this territory were the Sees of Dinnastrum and Balazum. The Archdiocese of Scutari comprises 29 parishes, of which 8 are held by Franciscans, and has a Catholic population of about 33,807. Its present metropolitan is Mgr. Paschalis Guerini, born at Pezzagno in Dalmatia, 21 May, 1821; ordained priest on 27 June, 1848; appointed Coadjutor Bishop of Scutari and titular Bishop of Paphos on 6 May, 1879; elected as Metropolitan and Archbishop of Scutari on 23 November, 1886. The episcopal residence is at Scutari. The Archdiocese of Scutari has a Collegium Pontificium Albaniense founded as a central seminary (1853) by the Holy See. Burned and again destroyed by the Turks, it was reopened in 1859, the Emperor of Austria, Francis Joseph I, bearing two-thirds of the expense. The Austrian Government supported at first fifteen seminarians, now twenty-four; Propaganda supports ten; the remaining eleven are at the charge of their bishops. It is administered by the Jesuits. A preparatory school, the Collegium S. Francisci Xaverii, was opened in 1841 by the Jesuits, to which in 1868, by the wish of Pius IX, a course of philosophy was added and later a trade-school (Handelsschule). The Franciscans have a college or so-called probandat at Scutari and a novitiate at Rubigo. The Scolopii have an orphanage for boys, and there is also an orphanage for poor girls. There are Sisters of Charity of St. Vincent de Paul, and four Catholic elementary schools. The Franciscans have hospices at Arramadhe-Scutari and at Kastrati, and a monastery at Scutari. The schools and colleges are sustained mostly by the Propaganda and by the Austrian Government. FARLATI, Illyricum sacrum, VII, 304-334; GAMS, Series episcoporum Eccl. Cath. (Ratisbon, 1873, 1886), 408; THEINER, Monumenta Slavorum, I, nn. 170, 254, 284, 285, 286, 352, 368, 640; II, nn. 78, 228 (p. 214), 233 (p. 217-18); NARKOVIC, Dukljansko-barska metropolija (Zagreb, 1902), 39 sq.; NIHACEVIC, Iz Albanije o Albaniji u "Serafinskom Perivoju" (Lijevno-Sarajevo, 1909), Godina XXIII, 126-129. ANTHONY-LAWRENCE GANCEVIC Scythopolis Scythopolis A titular metropolitan of Palaestina Secunda. It is the ancient Bethsan so often mentioned in the Bible, as proved by texts in the writings of Josephus. Its Greek name Scythopolis is very likely derived from a colony of Scythians who invaded Palestine in the seventh century B.C. (Herodotus, I, 103-5), and left some of their number behind (Pliny, "Hist. natur.", V, 16; John Malalas, "Chronographia", V, in P.G. XCVII, 236; George Syncellus, "Chronographia", 214 etc.). The earliest known use of the name is in II Mach., xii, 29, and in the Greek text of Judith, iii, 10. Although Sythopolis was the only town situated on the right bank of the Jordan, it was the capital of Decapolis and in the fourth century became the civil and ecclesiastical metropolis of Palestina Secunda. Several bishops are known. Patropnilus, intimate friend of Arius and his adherents, assisted at the Council of Nicaea in 325 and at various councils of the Arians till 360. Cruel and fanatical, he ill treated the Catholic bishops exiled to Scythopolis, especially St. Eusebius of Vercelli. He was deposed by the Council of Seleucia in 359 and died soon after; his remains were desecrated by the pagans in 361. We may also mention Philip and Athanasius, both Arians; Saturninus, present at the Council of Constantinople in 381; Theodosius, friend of St. John Crysostom; Acacius, friend of St. Cyril of Alexandria; St. Servianus, killed by Monophysites in 452, honoured on 21 February; John, who wrote in defence of the Council of Chalcedon; Theodore, who about 553 was compelled to sign an anti-origenist profession of faith, still preserved (Le Quien, "Oriens christianus." III, 681-94). At the time of Frankish occupation, the see was transferred to Nazareth; the Greeks long preserved the Sees of Scythopolis and Nazareth, but only the latter now exists. Among illustrious Christians of Scythopolis were: St. Procopius, martyr (8 July), who belonged to the clergy of the town (Delehaye, "Les Légendes hagiographiques", Paris, 1905, 144-6); Asterius, commentator of the Psalms in the fourth century, cited with praise by St. Jerome; Cyril, charming historian of monastic life in Palistine, who wrote seven lives of saints. In the sixth century there were four churches at Scythopolis, dedicated to St. Thomas, St. John, St Procopius, and St. Basil, a local martyr. Many monks lived in the town and its environs, occupied in making baskets and fans from the palms in the neighboring forests (Sozomen, "Hist. ecclés.", VIII, 13); with them the four Tall Brothers took refuge when expelled from Egypt by the patriarch Theophilus for so called origenist ideas. In 634 the Greeks were defeated by the Arabs in the marshes of Bethsan; in 1182 the little town fought valiantly against Saladin. Today Beisan is a Mussulman village, situated by the railway from Caipha to Mzerib in the Hauran. The ancient ruins still exist, especially those of the theatre which measures 130 metres in half-circumference; the ruined acropolis stands in the hill of Kalat el Hosn. The climate is charming, the land very fertile and well watered. Rabbi Simon ben Lakish said: "If paradise is in Palestine, its gate is at Beisan". SMITH, Dict. Gr. and Roman Geog., s. v. Bethsan; ROBINSON. Biblical Researches, 326-9; Survey of Western Palestine. Mémoires 11 (London, 1882), 101-13; NEUBAUER, La géographie du Talmud (Paris, 1868), 174 sqq.; GUÉRIN, Description de la Palestine Samarie, I (Paris, 1874), 284-98; LEGENDRE in Dict. de la Bible, s. v. Bethsan; BOUILLON in Echos d'Orient, I, 371-8; THOMPSEN, Loca sacta (Halle. 1907), 106. S. VAILHÉ Seal Seal The use of a seal by men of wealth and position was common before the Christian era. It was natural then that high functionaries of the Church should adopt the habit as soon as they became socially and politically important. An incidental allusion in one of St. Augustine's letters (217 to Victorinus) lets us know that he used a seal. The practice spread and it seems to be taken for granted by Clovis at the very beginning of the Merovingian period (Mon. Germ. Hist.: Leg., II, 2). Later ecclesiastical synods require that letters under the bishop's seal should be given to priests when for some reason they lawfully quitted their own proper diocese. So it was enacted at Chalon-sur-Saône in 813. Pope Nicholas I in the same century complains that the bishops of Dôle and Reims had contra morem sent their letters to him unsealed (Jaffé, "Regesta", nn. 2789, 2806, 2823). The custom of bishops possessing seals may from this date be assumed to have been pretty general. At first they were only used for securing the document from impertinent curiosity and the seal was commonly attached to the ties with which it was fastened. When the letter was opened by the addressee the seal was necessarily broken. Later the seal served as an authentication and was attached to the face of the document. The deed was thus only held to be valid so long as the seal remained intact. It soon came to follow from this point of view that not only real persons like kings and bishops, but also every kind of body corporate, cathedral chapters, municipalities, monasteries, etc., also required a common seal to validate the acts which were executed in their name, During the early Middle Ages seals of lead, or more properly "bulls", were in common use both in East and West, but except in the case of the papal chancery, these leaden authentications soon went out of favour in western Christendom and it became the universal practice to take the impressions in wax. In England hardly any waxen seals have survived of earlier date than the Norman Conquest. In the British Museum collection the earliest bishop's seals preserved are those of William of St. Carileph, Bishop of Durham (1081-96) and of St. Anselm, Archbishop of Canterbury (1093-1109). The importance of the seal as a means of authentication necessitated that when authority passed into new hands the old seal should be destroyed and a new one made. When the pope dies it is the first duty of the Cardinal Camerlengo to obtain possession of the Fisherman's Ring, the papal signet, and to see that it is broken up. A similar practice prevailed in the Middle Ages and it is often alluded to by historians, as it seems to have been a matter of some ceremony. Thus we are concisely told: "There died in this year Robert de Insula, Bishop of Durham. After his burial, his seal was publicly broken up in the presence of all by Master Robert Avenel." (Hist. Dunel. Scrip. Tres., p. 63). Matthew Paris gives a similar description of the breaking of the seal of William, Abbot of St. Albans, in 1235. GIRY, Manuel de Diplomatique (Paris, 1894), 622-657; DEMAY, Inventaire des sceaux de la Normandie (Paris, 1881); BIRCH, Seals, Connoisseurs' Library (1907); BIRCH, Catalogue of Seals in British Museum (London, 1887-99); D'ARCQ, Collection de Sceaux (3 vols., Paris, 1868). HERBERT THURSTON. The Seal of Confession The Law of the Seal of Confession In the "Decretum" of the Gratian who compiled the edicts of previous councils and the principles of Church law which he published about 1151, we find (secunda pars, dist. VI, c. II) the following declaration of the law as to the seal of confession: "Deponatur sacerdos qui peccata p nitentis publicare præsumit", i.e., "Let the priest who dares to make known the sins of his penitent be deposed", and he goes on to say that the violator of this law should be made a life-long, ignominious wanderer. Canon 21 of the Fourth Lateran Council (1215), binding on the whole Church, lays down the obligation of secrecy in the following words: "Let the priest absolutely beware that he does not by word or sign or by any manner whatever in any way betray the sinner: but if he should happen to need wiser counsel let him cautiously seek the same without any mention of person. For whoever shall dare to reveal a sin disclosed to him in the tribunal of penance we decree that he shall be not only deposed from the priestly office but that he shall also be sent into the confinement of a monastery to do perpetual penance" (see Hefele-Leclercq, "Hist. des Conciles" at the year 1215; also Mansi or Harduin, "Coll. conciliorum"). It is to be noted that neither this canon nor the law of the "Decretum" purports to enact for the first time the secrecy of confession. In a context cited further on the great fifteenth-century English canonist, Lyndwood, speaks of two reasons why a priest is bound to keep secret a confession, the first being on account of the sacrament because it is almost (quasi) of the essence of the sacrament to keep secret the confession. (Cf. also Jos. Mascardus, "De probationibus", Frankfort, 1703, arg. 378.) ENGLAND Medieval England At a much earlier date in Anglo-Saxon England we meet with several laws concerning confession. The laws of Edward the Elder (921-4), son of Alfred the Great, enjoin: "And if a man guilty of death (i.e., who has incurred the penalty of death) desires confession let it never be denied him". This injunction is repeated in the forty-fourth of the secular laws of King Canute (1017-35). These laws are prefaced thus: "This then is the secular law which by the counsel of my 'witan' I will that it be observed all over England". The laws of King Ethelred who reigned from 978 to 1016 declare (V, 22): "And let every Christian man do as is needful to him: let him strictly keep his Christianity and accustom himself frequently to shrift (i.e., confess): and fearlessly declare his sins". The very close connexion between the religion of the Anglo-Saxons and their laws, many of which are purely ordinances of religious observance enacted by the State, the repeated recognition of the supreme jurisdiction of the pope, and the various instances of the application in the Church in England of the laws of the Church in general lead conclusively to the opinion that the ecclesiastical law of the secrecy of confession was recognized by the law of the land in Anglo-Saxon England. In the period between the Norman Conquest and the Reformation we find the law of the Church in general as to the inviolability of the seal of confession stringently enjoined by English councils. The Council of Durham (1220) declared as follows: "Ne sacerdos revelet confessionem-Nullus ira, vel odio, vel Ecclesiæ metu vel mortis in aliquo audeat revelare confessiones, signo vel verbo generali vel speciali ut dicendo 'Ego scio quales vos estis', sub periculo ordinis et beneficii, et si convictus fuerit, absque misericordia degradabitur", i.e., "A priest shall not reveal a confession-let none dare from anger or hatred or fear of the Church or of death, in any way to reveal confessions, by sign or word, general or special, as (for instance), by saying 'I know what manner of men ye are' under peril of his Order and Benefice, and if he shall be convicted thereof he shall be degraded without mercy" (see Wilkins, "Concilia", I, 577, 595). The Provincial Council of Oxford, held in 1222, contains a similar canon, in which degradation is prescribed for any breach of the seal. We find the law, as laid down by the 21st canon of the Lateran Council, declared in the Acts of the Synod of Exeter in 1287 (Spelman, "Concilia", II, 357). The fact that the laws of the Church were so emphatic on the subject, coupled with the fact that the Church was then the Church of the nation, affords good ground for inferring that the secular courts recognized the seal. The recognition of it would not have rested on any principle of immunity from disclosure of confidential communications made to clergymen. It would have rested on the fact that confession was a sacrament, on the fact of that necessity for it which the doctrine of the Church laid down, on the fact of the practice of it by both king and people, and on the fact that the practice was wholly a matter of spiritual discipline and one, moreover, in regard to which the Church had so definitely declared the law of absolute secrecy. It is stated by some, among others by the Commissioners appointed to report upon the ecclesiastical courts in their report published in 1883, that the ecclesiastical courts in England did not regard themselves as bound by the rules of canon law framed by the Church outside England, by the various papal Decrees, Rescripts etc. But the Commissioners add that these courts paid great respect and attention to these Rules, Decrees etc. There seems to be so much weighty evidence against this view that it is difficult to accept it. Sir Frederick Pollock and Professor Maitland in their joint "History of English Law" (I, 94 and 95) say that the jus commune or common law of the universal Church was the law of the Church in England. In this connexion important material is contained in the "Provinciale" of Lyndwood (Oxford, 1679), the only great English canonist. The "Provinciale" consists of the provincial constitutions of fourteen archbishops of Canterbury from Stephen Langton (d. 1228) to Henry Chichele (d. 1443). When Lyndwood was engaged on this compilation he was the principal official of the Archbishop of Canterbury: he had been, also, the prolocutor of the clergy in the Convocation of Canterbury. Professor Maitland, in his essays on "Roman Canon Law in the Church of England", expresses the opinion that the ecclesiastical courts in England regarded the general body of canon law, including the various papal Decrees and Rescripts and the commentaries of the various great writers, as their law, which they had to administer. In citing Lyndwood as providing us with strong ground for this opinion Professor Maitland aptly says: "At any rate he will state the law which he administers in the chief of all the English ecclesiastical courts". In the "Provinciale" there is a constitution of Walter, Archbishop of Canterbury, apparently Walter Reynolds, transferred from the See of Worcester to the primatial see in 1313. The constitution begins with a prohibition to priests who have fallen into mortal sin to say Mass without first going to confession and warning them against imagining, as some believers erroneously do, that mortal sins are forgiven by the general confession made in the recitation of the Confiteor. It continues as follows: "Also let no priest dare from anger, hatred or fear, even of death, to disclose in any manner whatsoever, whether by sign, gesture or word, in general or in particular, anybody's confession. And if he shall be convicted of this he shall be deservedly, degraded, without hope of reconciliation". Upon this constitution we have the following commentary by Lyndwood, occurring upon the word "Confession": "Supply 'Sacramental'. For in a Confession which is not sacramental, when, for instance, anyone in secret counsel reveals to some one else something which is not in the nature of sin, thus, suppose he reveals to a priest what he owes or what is owing to him, the priest is not to receive such a secret under the seal of Confession. And although through indiscretion he may have so received it, he is not to conceal it unless as a matter of counsel or secret. Wherefore, if the priest were ordered (compulsus) by a judge to tell the truth about such a debt, whenever a judge rightly inquires about the matter in order that he may know the truth, he is bound to do so, notwithstanding that he may have received the secret under the seal of Confession. And though he may have sworn to keep the matter secret, yet if afterwards that debt should be forfeited and the judge makes inquiry thereinto, if the priest is examined, he is bound to tell the truth, notwithstanding his sworn promise. For that oath is not binding on him, being an unlawful one and, thus, one not to be kept to the prejudice of another's right"; -- he cites in support, St. Thomas Aquinas and Hostiensis -- "but if some such debt is unjustly demanded by some tyrant, then though he is aware of the debt he ought to keep silence about it, or to change the subject or to reply sophistically ('respondere sophistice')" -- he cites in support a commentary on Raymond de Pennaforte. -- "But", Lyndwood continues, "what if the priest should know that matter by any other means than by Confession before the spiritual tribunal (in foro animæ)? It may be said that in as far as he knows it by any other means and he is ordered (compulsus) by a judge he may tell it, but not, of course, so as he heard it in confession: but let him say, as follows: 'I heard it thus or I saw it thus'. But let him always refrain as far as possible from speaking about the person so as to avoid scandal unless there be immediate necessity"; -- he cites in support, Innocent IV, the glossary on Raymond de Pennaforte and Astisanus, a Friar Minor and writer of the fourteenth century. Dealing with the priest's being found guilty of revealing a confession, he says: "But what if the person confessing consents to its being revealed, because, perchance, he calls the Confessor as a witness?" His answer is: "The doctors say that he may reveal it. But understand this in such way that the priest shall on no account reveal that which he knows only through confession (hoc tamen sic intellige quod sacerdos illud, quod scit solum per confessionem, nullo modo debet revelare). But the person who has confessed can intimate the matter to him in some other way which gives him leave to reveal it: and then he can tell, but, none the less, he ought to avoid scandal as much as possible. For he is bound to conceal the confession for two reasons, viz., on account of the sacrament, because it is almost of the essence of the sacrament to conceal the confession (quia quasi de essentia Sacramenti est celare Confessionem): likewise for reason of the scandal. The first is removed by the permission of the person confessing, but the second remains none the less: and, therefore, where scandal is to be feared, he ought not to make use of such permission. These are the pronouncement of Thomas and of Peter, according to what is noted by John in 'Summa Confessionis Rubrica de Confessione celanda, quæstio, 100', and with this pronouncement Johannes Andræus seems to agree. But I ask -- what if confession is made of some sin about to be committed, but not yet committed? For instance, some one confesses that he wants to kill a man or to commit some other misdeed and he says that he is unable to resist the temptation. May the priest reveal it? Some say that he may reveal it to such a person as can be beneficial and not detrimental (tali qui potest prodesse et non obesse), but the doctors of theology in this case say in general (communiter) that he must not reveal it, but must keep it entirely secret (omnino celare). Henry de Segusio says, however, that whatever he can properly (bono modo) do for the prevention of the sin, he ought to do, but without mention of person and without betrayal of him who makes the confession. Others say that where the confession is one of a sin about to be committed it is not a real confession, and that to the person making it, a penance cannot be given (neo tali dari potest p nitentia) and for these reasons it may be revealed to those who can be beneficial and not detrimental as I have said before"; -- he quotes Rudovicus and Guido of Baysio. He states that Henry de Bohic "seems to adhere to the opinion of those theologians who say that even where future danger threatens, as, for instance, in the case of a heretic who proposes to corrupt the faith, or of a murder or of some other future temporal injury, the confessor ought to furnish a remedy (adhibere remedium) as far as he can without the revelation of the Confession, as, for instance, by moving those confessing to desist and otherwise using diligence to prevent the purpose of the person confessing. He may, too, tell the prelate to look rather diligently (diligentius) after his flock: provided that he does not say anything through which by word or gesture he might betray the person confessing. And this opinion I hold to be more correct and more in keeping with the law, which speaks plainly. But the other opinion which sanctions the revelation of the Confession to those who can be beneficial and not detrimental might hold good when the person confessing consents to it according to what I have said above". Lyndwood then continues as follows: "One may deduce from the premises that if a judge maliciously presses and inquires of a priest whether he knows anything of such a fact, which he has, perhaps, heard in confession, if he cannot, by changing the subject or by some other means, turn aside the unjust judge, he can answer that he knows nothing thenceforth (inde), because it is secretly understood (subintelligitur) 'as man': or he can say simply 'I know nothing through confession' because it is secretly understood 'nothing to be revealed to you'." Upon the word "generaliter" there is the following comment: "And so truly, not at all (i.e. the confession is not to be in any way revealed) when the confession has been made to the priest not as judge but as the minister of God. For if anything have been revealed to him as judge he is not bound to conceal it"; -- he cites Hostiensis in support. it is to be observed that there is nowhere an exception in respect of the crime of treason. His commentary on the duty of not disclosing the confession of a crime proposed to be committed tends to show that he would not have recognized any such exception. A manual, called "Pupilla oculi" (see Gasquet, "Pre-Reformation Essays"), which appears to have been mainly designed for practical use among the clergy, was compiled towards the end of the fourteenth century by John de Burgh, a professor of theology and Chancellor of the University of Cambridge. According to Mr. Edward Badeley who wrote in 1865 a most able pamphlet on the privilege of the seal of confession entitled "The Privilege of Religious Confessions in English Courts of Justice", this manual, to which Professor Maitland also refers, enjoyed great popularity. Its counsels to confessors who may happen to be witnesses in a court of justice are sufficiently like those already cited from Lyndwood's "Provinciale" to render it unnecessary to quote them. Lyndwood thus affords us, as Professor Maitland points out, even by the fact of citing these various authorities, very strong evidence that the general canon law was the law of the English ecclesiastical courts also. It may be remarked here that before the Reformation ecclesiastical canons were made by the authority of the synod with the sanction of the metropolitan. No crown sanction was required for their validity as canons. But the particular law in question was not one demanding observance in ecclesiastical courts merely, but in the civil and criminal courts of the land and on all occasions. It is an established principle of English law that no such rule or law could have become legally binding in England without being allowed and accepted there. The accuracy of the principle itself seems unquestionable and probably the only difference of opinion will arise as to the causes which might lead to the allowance and acceptance in England of rules of canon law. Adopting merely the basis that only such decrees and such rules of canon law as had been in fact received and accepted in England were binding there, we have evidence that the aforesaid Fourth Lateran Council, as to, at least, two of its decrees, viz., as to pluralities and as to clandestine marriages, was received and accepted in England. The judgments of the Courts in the case of Evans v. Ascuithe, tried in the third year of Charles I and reported in Palmer's "Reports", is based upon the validity of the former decree in England and it cites two cases, decided in the reign of Edward III, showing that the law declared by that decree had been acted upon by the civil courts of the land in that reign. The judgment of the Court of King's Bench delivered by Lord Hardwicke, in the case of Middleton v. Croft [(1736) cases temp. Ld. Hardwicke, 326], though not expressly saying that the second decree was accepted and allowed in England, by its reasoning shows us that such was the case. Remarkable evidence of the acceptance of the decrees of the Council of Lateran in England is brought to our notice by Professor Maitland in his introduction to his edition of "Pleas of the Crown for the County of Gloucester for the year 1221". Speaking of trial by ordeal he says: "In 1215 the Lateran Council condemned the ordeal and at the beginning of Henry's (the Third) reign the relation of England to Rome was such that this decree of the Church was at once, and of course, obeyed. As already said, the next eyre (i.e. Circuit of judges for trials in the various counties), and a very general eyre it was, took place in the winter of 1218-9. The judges had already started on their journeys when an order of the king in council was sent round to them. It was dated 26th January, 1219, and is of such great moment in the history of our law, and, seemingly, so little known, that its substance shall be stated -- 'When you started on your eyre it was as yet undetermined what should be done with persons accused of crime, the Church having forbidden the ordeal'." The order, thereupon, proceeds to suggest certain rules for the judges to follow. In the Anglican Church In the "Codex Juris Ecclesiastici Anglicani" (London, 1761) by Dr. Edmund Gibson, chaplain to the Archbishop of Canterbury and afterwards Bishop of London, is found a compilation of the various canons and constitutions which had been made for the Church in England at different times. In his introduction to that work, in which he cites the statute 25 Hen. VIII, c. 21, concerning Peterspence and the exercise of papal jurisdiction in England, the author, in touching upon canon law, says as follows: "This is another branch of the Laws of the Church of England and is partly Foreign and partly Domestick. The Foreign is what we commonly call the Body of Canon Law consisting of the Councils, Decrees of Popes and the like: which obtained in England by virtue of their own Authority (in like manner as they did in other parts of the Western Church) till the time of the Reformation: and from that time have continued upon the foot of Consent, Usage, and Custom". He cites 25 Hen. VIII, c. 21. He goes on to say that before the Reformation, their not being repugnant to the laws of the land was the condition of these laws being received here. But he also cites commentaries of John de Athon on certain constitutions of Otho and Othobon, which the commentator says were not received here. Dr. Gibson cites a constitution of Simon Sudbury, Archbishop of Canterbury (1378), ordering confessions to be heard three times a year, and that whoever would not confess at least once a year should be prevented from entering a church while living and should not receive Christian burial when dead: and this order was to be published frequently in the churches. That the particular decree as to the secrecy of the seal of confession was locally re-enacted by English councils and synods has already been shown. Its importance, whether as enacted by the Universal Council of the Lateran or re-enacted by the English councils, seems to have been only confirmatory of something already well established in the Church or, at most, as definitely declaring the punishment for the violation of the secrecy. That the decree was allowed and accepted by the civil courts of England can only be a matter for deduction. There is no direct proof of it, as there is, for instance, in the cases of these two other decrees, which are cited only as some evidence of the probability of the acceptance of this particular decree. Before enumerating other and chief grounds of this probability it is well to remember that if the law of the secrecy of confession was already well established in the Church it would be very unlikely that we should find evidence of any direct notice of the decree as in the cases of the two others. But there seems to be absolutely no evidence which could cause one to doubt that a rule declared by the Church as to a matter essentially bound up with a sacrament, which formed part of the necessary religious practice of the nation, would have been unhesitatingly accepted by the nation by reason of the mere fact that the universal Church had declared it. As there are such strong grounds for holding that the rule only solemnly declares an obligation upon priests which the nation had always believed to lie upon them, one would not expect to find any overt acceptance of the rule. Again, it is important to remember that the rule itself concerned priests mainly and that, undoubtedly, they were bound by it, and we see from the English canons re-enacting it the severe penalties to which they became liable in the ecclesiastical courts in England for any breach of it. Therefore, the disregard of it by the civil courts would have caused a perpetual conflict between these two tribunals even where the former was only exercising the jurisdiction which rightfully belonged to it, besides the fact that it would have so sharply conflicted with the religion practised by the nation. The question of jurisdiction over clerks transgressing ecclesiastical law was entirely in the hands of the Church. The "Report of the Ecclesiastical Courts Commission, 1883", to which we have already alluded, tells us that "ecclesiastical jurisdiction in its widest sense covered all the ground of ecclesiastical relations, persons, properties, rights and remedies: clergymen in all their relations". But the jurisdiction of the ecclesiastical courts extended even much further, including as it did the province of marriage, and that of probate coupled with the devolution of movable property in cases of intestacy. Within this latter province there would have been, perhaps, more than in any other province within the jurisdiction of any court, occasion for desiring to know something that might have transpired under the seal of confession. Pollock and Maitland's "History of the Laws of England" tells us that intestacy was regarded with an abhorrence somewhat akin to that with which a death without sacramental confession was regarded. This may probably be a considerable overstatement, but it serves to show that this province was, at least, as much calculated as any other to raise the question of the seal of confession. Again, let us remember that in some districts, such as Durham and Chester, bishops exercised temporal jurisdiction. Even in the King's Courts, as Lord Coke points out, oftentimes the judges were priests, before Innocent IV prohibited priests from acting as judges. Pollock and Maitland's "History of the Laws of England" gives us as a specimen date, that of 16 July, 1195, on which there sat in the Court of King's Bench an archbishop, three bishops, and three archdeacons. The same book tells us that "it is by popish clergymen that our English common law is converted from a rude mass of customs into an articulate system, and when the 'popish clergymen' yielding at length to the pope's commands no longer sit as the principal justices of the king's court the golden age of the common law is over". It is highly improbable that at a period when systematization of the common law was proceeding at the hands of "popish clergymen" a rule compelling the disclosure of confession would have grown up. Finally, it is worthy of some observation that there is not a single reported case, textbook or commentary, during the whole pre-Reformation period which contains any suggestion that the laws of evidence did not respect the seal of confession. These grounds seem sufficient to lead to the conclusion that before the Reformation the seal was regarded as sacred by the common law of England. Sir Robert Phillimore in his work on (Anglican) ecclesiastical law makes a definite statement to this effect. The only recorded statute of the English Parliament which deals with the right of confession is Statute I of the 9th year of Edward II, c. 10. The statute is called "Articuli Cleri", and the part referred to deals with the rights of offenders who abjure the realm and, fleeing to a church for refuge, claim privilege of sanctuary. After stating that such persons are to be allowed to have the necessaries of life and that they are to be at liberty to go out of the church to relieve nature, the statute continues as follows: "Placet etiam Domino Regi, ut latrones vel appellatores quandocunque voluerint possint sacerdotibus sua facinora confiteri: sed caveant confessores ne erronice hujusmodi appellatores informent". This law, long obsolete, was repealed in 1863, and is translated in the collections of the Statutes (Statutes of the Realm, I, 173), and in Pickering's edition of "Statutes at Large" (Cambridge, 1782): "And the King's Pleasure is, that Thieves or Appellors (whensoever they will) may confess their Offences unto Priests: but let the Confessors beware that they do not erroneously inform such Appellors". Sir Edward Coke, the great common lawyer who was Chief Justice under James I, in the 2nd Institute, c. X, says: "This branch extendeth only to thieves and approvers indited of felony, but extendeth not to high treasons: for if high treason be discovered to the confessor, he ought to discover it for the danger that thereupon dependeth to the king and the whole realme: therefore the branch declareth the common law, that the privilege of confession extendeth only to felonies" . . . "for by the common law", he states further on, "a man indited of high treason could not have the benefit of clergy nor any clergyman privilege of confession to conceale high treason", it is not quite clear from his comment, but it seems likely, that Sir Edward Coke has interpreted the concluding caution to the confessors as a recognition of the seal of confession, and, if so, it would seem that he has wrongly interpreted it, because the translation of the word "informare" as "to inform against" would appear to be incorrect. The correct interpretation of the clause would seem to be as one of warning to the confessors not to inform these offenders, when they are admitted to hear their confessions, of what is going on outside. Therefore, except in so far as it shows that the right of freely confessing was reserved to these offenders, the statute, in its actual words, contains no declaration of the privilege of the seal of confession. But Sir Edward Coke's comment is important as being a statement by him of the existence of the privilege at common law in respect of felonies. For the exclusion of it from cases of high treason there appears to be no foundation except Sir Edward Coke's own view as quoted, because the two cases which he cites in support of that view nowise support it. The first of these cases is that of Friar John Randolf, cited from the Rolls of Parliament, 7 Henry V, who was the confessor of Queen Joan, widow of Henry IV. There is nothing in that record from which Sir Edward Coke's averment that the queen's conspiracy had been proved by the disclosure of her confession to Friar Randolf can be deduced. The words are "Tant p relation & confession d'une frere John Randolf de l'ordre des Freres Menours come p autres evidences creables". The word "confession is, clearly, there used in its primary sense of an admission. The reports of the matter in Holinshed's "Chronicles" and in Stow's "Chronicle of England" support this view as they state that Randolf was imprisoned, Holinshed saying that "it was reported that he had conspired with the quaene by sorcerie and necromancie to destroie the King", while Stow says that he had counselled the queen to her crime. Thus, evidently, when he was imprisoned on the charge of the conspiracy with the queen he confessed it. The second case is one which occurred after the Reformation. It is the trial of the Jesuit, Fr. Garnet, on the charge of conspiracy in the Gunpowder Plot. It is reported in the records of the state trials. There is not only no mention of any decision by the court that the privilege of confession did not extend to the concealment of high treason, but there is not even the faintest indication of any opinion to that effect by any member of the court. There was no question of the giving of evidence by a witness before a court of justice of matter revealed to him in confession. The issue being whether Fr. Garnet was a party to the conspiracy, the question of his cognizance and, if cognizant, of his non-disclosure of it was essential. It was not disputed that he had heard the particulars of the plot from Greenwell, one of the conspirators, but the defence was that he had heard them only in confession, though he had previously received a general indication of the plot from another of the conspirators, Catesby. Not only was the defence not rejected at once by the court as being had in law, but, to infer from the arguments put to the prisoner upon it by certain members of the court, it was treated with a seriousness which seems surprising in a post-Reformation period, and, especially, at a moment of such strong anti-Catholic feeling. Lord Salisbury, a member of the court, asked Fr. Garnet if there must not be confession and contrition before the absolution, and, having received an affirmative answer, he observed to him that Greenwell had shown no penitence, or intention to desist. "Hereby", he said, "it appears that either Greenwell told you out of confession, and then there would be no secrecy: or, if it were in confession, he professed no penitency, and therefore you could not absolve him." He further said to him that after Greenwell had told him in particular what Catesby meant, and he then called to mind what Catesby had previously told him (Fr. Garnet) in general, he might have disclosed it out of his general knowledge from Catesby. He further asked him why, after Greenwell's confession, when Catesby wished to tell him the particulars, he had refused to hear him, to which Fr. Garnet answered that he was loth to hear any more. Sir Edward Coke, for the prosecution, addressed to the court six arguments on the subject, the first being that this particular confession was not sacramental, the fifth being that Fr. Garnet had learned of the conspiracy from Catesby extra confessionem, and the last being that "by the common law, howsoever it (the confession) were, it being a crimen l s majestatis, he ought to have disclosed it". There is no indication of any adoption by the court of this last proposition. The confession in question was only an item in the evidence brought forward. One infers from the report that the court were not satisfied with the defence, as a fact, of the confession, and, also, that they considered the charge to be proved from the other evidence. In a paper on the law relating to confession in criminal cases by Mr. Charles H. Hopwood, the writer admits the probability of the recognition of the seal before the Reformation. He says that Garnet's case even as cited by Lord Coke could hardly be in point, inasmuch as Garnet was not called as a witness in the Gunpowder treason trial, and that the obligation of the seal of confession, if put forward by Garnet at all, was only done so by way of his own defence that he was not a conspirator, but merely knew whatever he knew through hearing the confession of the others, and that Sir E. Coke appears almost to confess and avoid this plea by retorting that the confession was one of crime not yet executed. Sir Edward Coke in his commentary on the "Articuli Cleri", c. 10, interpreting the wording of it as he does, says that it declares the common law. His supporting this statement by the citation of a then recent case, together with his own argument, already mentioned, in that case, affords strong evidence that this great common lawyer was of opinion that even in his post-Reformation period the common law of England recognized the privilege of confession, except in the case of treason. If that is his view, as seems, at least, highly probable, it is profoundly interesting as the opinion of a very distinguished lawyer and a fierce champion of Protestantism. It is important, however, to bear in mind that by the penal laws Catholicism was a proscribed religion. The practice of it was subjected to severe penal statutes and priests performing its rites were rigorously penalized. Statute law displaces the common law if the latter is inconsistent with the provisions of the statute. It is true that there is no statute which expressly declares that religious confession shall not be privileged from disclosure in the witness-box. But so many statutes were passed against the practice of the Catholic religion that it would seem inconsistent with them to hold that such a privilege still prevailed at common law. Confession and the Book of Common Prayer In the first half of the nineteenth century nearly all these laws were repealed, most of them having been for some time inoperative. There has never been any legislation one way or the other about the disclosure in evidence of religious confession. If the privilege had ceased to be part of the common law legislation would he necessary to re-establish it. If it survived in the common law it can only have done so through the allowance of it in the case of the Protestant Church of England. If there was any such allowance it might be argued that by the sanction now given by the State to the practice by Catholics of their religion the same allowance to them, too, is to be implied. In order to consider whether any allowance of the privilege of religious confession endured in the Protestant Church of England, it is necessary to consider whether confession itself endured there and, if so, to what extent. It is material to recollect that the whole system of spiritual jurisdiction and the administration of canon law in England received a paralyzing blow with the advent of the Reformation. The Submission of the Clergy Act in 1533 (25 Henry VIII, c. 19) deprived the laws of the universal Church, under the headship of the pope, of all the validity in England which was based on the mere ground of their being Decrees of the universal Church. That statute appointed a commission of thirty-two persons, sixteen lay and sixteen ecclesiastical, to inquire into the various ecclesiastical constitutions and canons, and it enacted that such of them as, in the opinion of the commissioners or the majority of them, ought to be abolished, should be abolished, and such of them as, in their opinion, ought to stand, should stand, the king's assent being first obtained; but until they should have so determined, any canons, or constitutions which were not contrariant to the laws, statutes, or customs of the realm or were not to the damage of the king's prerogative, were still to be used and executed as before. The statute was repealed in the reign of Queen Mary, but revived in that of Elizabeth; however, the commission never completed its labours and never arrived at any determination. The same direction is further pursued by other statutes in the same reign. Thus the preamble to 25 Henry VIII, c. 21, states that the realm of England is subject only to such laws as have been made within the kingdom or such as, by the sufferance of the sovereign, the people of the realm have taken by their own consent to be used among them, and to the observance of which they have bound themselves by long use and custom, which sufferance, consent, and custom are the basis of the force thereof. In an Act of the same reign relating to marriage, the prelude runs thus: "Whereas the usurped power of the bishop of Rome hath always intangled and troubled the meer jurisdiction and regal power of this realm of England". There is, also, the Act 37 Henry VIII, c. 17, which declares that "by the word of God" the king is "supreme head in earth of the church of England", having power and authority to exercise all manner of ecclesiastical jurisdiction. Thus, in the reign of Henry VIII, the whole basis of canon law -- the jurisdiction of the universal Church with the pope for its head -- was removed, and for such canon law and ecclesiastical jurisdiction as remained a new basis was constructed, viz, that of the consent of the English nation and the royal sufferance. Professor Maitland observes that these various statutes impose upon the ecclesiastical courts "not merely new law, but a new theory about the old law". "Their decisions", he says, "were dictated to them by acts of Parliament -- and that is a very new phenomenon." "In this reign", he says, "we come upon a sudden catastrophe in the history of the spiritual courts." This reign is the introduction of the Protestant Reformation into England inasmuch as it nationalizes the Church, makes it dependent upon the State, separates it from the authority of the pope, and constitutes the king supreme head. Still we find the king sternly checking the growth of Protestant doctrine and by the Statute of the Six Articles, passed in the thirty-first year of his reign, we find it declared that "auricular confession is expedient and necessary to be retained and continued, used and frequented in the Church of God", and it was thereby made a felony to assert a contrary opinion. Therefore, with the exception, conceivably, of its exclusion in cases deemed to offend against the king's prerogative which was then carried to great lengths, there is no reason to think that the privilege of the seal would not have been observed in that reign. But under Edward VI and his Calvinistic uncle, the Lord Protector Somerset, the Church of the State rapidly became Protestant in its doctrine also, and in matters other than that of its headship. In the first year of his reign (1547), we find a mention of confession in a royal injunction issued to all his subjects, clergy and laity. The ninth of the royal injunctions issued that year runs as follows: "That they (i.e. parsons, vicars and other curates) shall in confessions every Lent examine every person that cometh to confession to them, whether they can recite the articles of their faith, and the Ten Commandments in English, and hear them say the same particularly". In the First Prayer Book of Edward VI, published by parliamentary authority (1548), the Communion service prescribes a general confession. The service for the visitation of the sick contains a mention of confession and a form of absolution in the following words: "Here shall the sick person make a special confession, if he feel his conscience troubled with any weighty matter: After which confession the Priest shall absolve him after this sorte: Our Lord Jesus Christ who hath left power to his Church to absolve all sinners which truly repent and believe in him, of his great mercy forgive thee thine offences; and by his authority committed to me, I absolve thee from all thy sins, in the name of the father and of the son and of the holy ghost". This Prayer Book goes on immediately to say: "and the same form of absolution shall be used in all private confessions. The Second Prayer Book, which was published in 1552, contains the same form as the First Prayer Book in the service for the visitation of the sick, but it omits all mention of private confession. It also prescribes the general confession in the service before the Communion, as to which last named, however, it expressly denies transubstantiation or consubstantiation. This denial was omitted in the Third Prayer Book and is omitted from the Prayer Book as finally settled in 1662. The service for the visitation of the sick remains the same in that final version with the exception that, instead of saying "Here the sick person shall make a special confession", it says: "shall be moved to make a special confession of his sins, and that, after the direction to absolve him, there are the words "(if he humbly and heartily desire it)". The mention of private confession is omitted. We receive an indication of the nature of the confession spoken of from the exhortation to the Communion service, prescribed in all the versions of the Prayer Book, which directs the minister to exhort the congregation in the following words: "And if there be any of you whose conscience is troubled and grieved in anything, lacking comfort or counsel let him come to me or to some other discreet and learned priest, taught in the law of God, and confess and open his sin and grief secretly, that he may receive such ghostly counsel, advice and comfort that his conscience may be relieved and that of us (as of the ministers of God and of the Church) he may receive comfort and absolution to the satisfaction of his mind, and avoiding of all scruple and doubtfulness: requiring such as shall be satisfied with a general confession not to be offended with them that do use, to their further satisfying, the auricular and secret confession to the Priest: nor those also which think needful or convenient for the quietness of their own consciences particularly to open their sins to the priest to be offended with them that are satisfied with their humble confession to God and the general confession to the church". The latter part, from "requiring, etc.", was omitted in the Second and subsequent Prayer Books. In the ordination service prescribed in the Prayer Book the bishop is to speak the following words: "Receive the holy ghost for the office and work of a Priest in the Church of God now committed to thee by the Imposition of our hands. Whose sins thou dost forgive they are forgiven; and whose sins thou dost retain they are retained". The two "Books of the Homilies" are official documents of the Protestant Church of England. The publication of homilies was much encouraged by Archbishop Cranmer and other leaders of the Reformation in England and by the sovereign, King Edward VI. They were designed for the use of the clergy in their parish churches, mainly in order to put doctrine before the people in plain language. The first "Book of the Homilies" appeared in 1547. The reading of the homilies or one of them every Sunday in parish churches was enjoined by royal authority. They subsequently received sanction from the mention made of them in the Communion service contained in the Prayer Book. It is evident that it was intended that further homilies should be written later. The second "Book of the Homilies" was published by the authority of Queen Elizabeth and was appointed to be read in every parish church. It contains a homily on Repentance, the second part of which, definitely and with argument, condemns the doctrine of the necessity of auricular confession. The condemnation concludes as follows: "I do not say but that, if any do find themselves troubled in conscience, they may repair to their learned curate or pastor, or to some other godly learned man, and shew the trouble and doubt of their conscience to them, that they may receive at their hand the comfortable salve of God's word: but it is against the true Christian liberty, that any man should be bound to the numbering of his sins, as it hath been used heretofore in the time of blindness and ignorance". We find, on the other hand, on the revival of Catholicism under Edward's successor, Queen Mary, some special mentions of confession which appear to indicate that its practice was regarded as one of the tests of orthodoxy. In articles of visitation of his diocese by Bonner, Bishop of London, in 1554, we find the following inquiry under Art. XX: "Whether any person have refused or contemned to receive the sacrament of the altar, or to be confessed and receive at the priest's hand absolution according to the laudable custom of this realm?" Among similar articles set forth in 1557 by Cardinal Pole for the visitation of his Archdiocese of Canterbury, we find the following: "Touching the Lay People. III. Item, Whether they do contemn or despise by any manner of means any other of the sacraments, rites or ceremonies of the church, or do refuse or deny auricular confession?" This may be said to constitute the official documentary evidence of the doctrine and discipline of the Church of England with regard to confession. It was not ranked as a sacrament, and the exercise of it was to be optional, the only instance with regard to which we find any imperative words used being that of a dying person who should feel his conscience troubled with "any weighty matter". It may be that these last words are a literal translation of the Latin "gravi materia" frequently used, and so, perhaps, may denote, approximately, grievous or mortal sin. But even as to this occasion we find, as already pointed out, the words "shall make" altered to "shall be moved to make". It was not part of the doctrine of the Church of England as it continued established under Edward VI and, subsequently, from the accession of Elizabeth onwards, that auricular confession was necessary for forgiveness. The Statute of the Six Articles was repealed in the first year of Edward VI. The opinion and belief in the Protestant Church of England during that and the succeeding centuries were opposed to such a doctrine. Anglican Canonists and Theologians Bishop Hooker, the Caroline divine, was opposed to obligatory confession. In the afore-mentioned "Codex Juris Ecclesiastici Anglicani" of Dr. Gibson, the writer characterizes as follows the Sacraments of Penance and Extreme Unction: "Title XXI. The Two Popish Sacraments of Penance and Extreme Unction". In the "Parergon Juris Canonici Anglicani", published by Dr. John Ayliffe (London, 1726), we find in the introduction (p. XL) this passage: "Tho' several Titles of the Canon Law are out of use with us here in England by reason of the gross Idolatry they contain in them, as the Title of the Authority and Use of the Pall, the Title of the Mass, the Title of Relicts, and the Worship of the Saints, the Title of Monks and Regular Canons, the Title of keeping the Eucharist and Chrism, and such other of the like Quality: Yet these are retained in the general". lit is true that he does not include confession amongst these titles, but, on the other hand, he makes no reference to any laws as to it in the Church of England. Moreover, in the chapter on public penance (p. 420) we find a statement that penance is distinguished by the Romanists and the canon law as (1) external which includes confession to a priest, and that it is this first kind which they make a sacrament for the interest and advantage of the priesthood as it consists in the absolution of the priest. "But", Dr. Ayliffe continues, "we Protestants who deny Penance to be a Sacrament say that it consists in sorrow, confessing to God in Foro Conscientiæ." In Wheatley's "Rational Illustration of the Book of Common Prayer, being the substance of everything liturgical in Bishop Sparrow, Mr. L'Estrange, Dr. Comber, Dr. Nichols, and all former Ritualists, Commentators or Others upon the same Subject, collected and reduced into one continued and regular method and interspersed all along with new observations", we find (p. 374) the following comment on the words contained in the service for the visitation of the sick, which have been set out above: "i.e. I suppose if he has committed any sin, for which the censure of the Church ought to be inflicted or else if he is perplexed concerning the nature or some nice circumstances of his crime". On the words of absolution we find this marginal note: "Seems only to respect the censures of the Church", which means, apparently, that it is not the imparting of a Divine forgiveness for the actual sin. The only occasion in which the concealment of a confession is imposed as a duty by the Protestant Church of England seems to be in the canons which were made in 1603. Canon 113 deals with the suppression of evil deeds by the reporting thereof by the persons concerned with the administration of each parish. It provides for the presentment to the Ordinary by parsons, vicars, or curates of the crimes and iniquities committed in the parish. It concludes with the following reservation: "Provided always, That if any man confess his secret and hidden sins to the minister, for the unburdening of his conscience, and to receive spiritual consolation and ease of mind from him: we do not in any way bind the said minister by this our Constitution, but do straitly charge and admonish him, that he do not at any time reveal and make known to any person whatsoever any crime or offence so committed to his trust and secrecy (except they be such crimes as by the laws of this realm his own life may be called into question for concealing the same) under pain of irregularity". There are three points to be observed in the canon: First, the confession there referred to, from the likeness of the words used to those used in such parts of the liturgy as mention confession, which have been noticed above, seems to be the confession mentioned in the liturgy, viz, such form of confession as survived in the Protestant Church of England. Second, there is an express exemption from the duty of secrecy where such duty should conflict with one imposed by the civil power under a certain penalty. There does not appear to have been, in fact, at that time any law which made the mere concealment of any crime, including treason, an offence punishable with forfeiture of life. But this in no way affects the principle laid down in the canon. The exemption is a marked departure from the pre-Reformation ecclesiastical law on the subject as shown by the pre-Reformation English canons and otherwise. Third, even apart from the exemption, the language used to declare the injunction bears a marked contrast to the language used to declare the secrecy in pre-Reformation days. It is evident that secrecy is not quasi of the essence of this confession, as Lyndwood had declared it to be of the confession of which he wrote. The confession as to whose secrecy the Fourth Lateran Council in behalf of the Church in the whole world, and the English Councils of Durham, Oxford, etc., in behalf of the Church in England, had made stringent decrees seems to have been banished by the Reformation. It results from the Submission of the Clergy Act, mentioned above, that a canon is void if it contravenes common or statute law, and, accordingly, it becomes void if at any subsequent period a statute inconsistent with it is passed, as was held in the recent case of R. v. Dibdin (Law Reports, 1910, Probate, 57). It does not seem that there was in 1603 any statute to which canon 113 was necessarily contrariant or that any has been passed since. When we have to decide whether or not it conflicted with the common law it must be remembered that many items of the common law must have disappeared or have undergone considerable alteration by such a change in the whole national life as that which was caused by the Reformation. Rules of canon law and certain precepts of the Church had, undoubtedly, formed some of the stones in the growing fabric of English common law. So, where the practices to which these rules or precepts applied were repudiated or considerably modified one must expect a corresponding cessation or modification of the common law relating thereto. Of many such instances confession would be one. Even the Established Church of England did not claim for this confession which she sanctioned absolute inviolability, as the canon which has just been quoted shows. The Civil Courts It was decided by the Court of King's Bench in a judgment delivered by Lord Hardwicke in the case of Middleton v. Croft, already referred to, that the canons of 1603, though binding on the clergy, do not bind the laity. The reason for this is that though canons, in order to be valid must, as these did, receive the royal sanction, they are made in convocation, and, thus, without representation of the laity. Accordingly, if this canon infringed a right enjoyed by the lay subjects of the realm it would, seemingly, in as far as it did so, not be valid against them. Thus, a canon purporting to forbid clergymen from appearing as witnesses in any action which a subject might lawfully bring in the king's courts would, seemingly, be void as against the subject. The fundamental principle is that a witness shall give in evidence the whole truth that he knows concerning the matter in dispute and that the parties to the dispute are entitled to have that evidence given. The rules which regulate and which, in certain exceptional cases, restrict the giving of evidence are the growth of practice and of the rulings of judges, occurring mainly within the last two to three centuries (see the judgment of Parke B. in the case of The Queen v. Ryle, 9 M. & W., 244). The rule which excludes evidence, the requiring of which would be contrary to public policy, as may occur in relation to the conduct of the business of a state department, is an instance. In view of the absolute repudiation by the State of the jurisdiction of the Catholic Church and in view of the abandonment of the Sacrament of Confession as practised before the Reformation, one may fairly presume that, from the date of that event, confession would no longer have been regarded as a ground from motives of public policy, entitling to an exemption from the principle of the disclosure of all the truth known about the cause, were it to be civil or criminal. Important Cases and Decisions We know for certain that in the gradual growth of the rules of evidence as laid down within the last two to three centuries by the judges of the King's Courts the cases of privilege from exemption from disclosure are few, and that the only private relationship which the courts recognized as enjoying the privilege was that between client and attorney or counsel. We find an express instance of the recognition of privilege in the case of that particular relationship in the judgment of the Court of King's Bench in 1663 in the case of Sparke v. Middleton (I Keble's Reports, 505). In an anonymous case reported in Skinner's "Reports", 404, in 1693, Lord Chief Justice Holt said that the privilege would extend to a law scrivener, because he would be counsel to a man with whom he would advise. But he is reported to have added "otherwise of a Gentleman, Parson etc.". Mr. Badeley in his pamphlet, already referred to, maintains that Lord Holt did not mean this last assertion to be general and exclusive. This may conceivably be so. It is recorded in another anonymous case, which we find in Lord Raymond's "Reports", p. 733, that the same judge refused to admit the evidence of a person entrusted by both the parties to the cause to make and keep secret a bargain; and he added that "(by him) a trustee should not be a witness in order to betray the trust". But the last decision cannot be said to be in agreement with the law of evidence as generally laid down. In the case of Vaillant v. Dodemead [(1743) 2 Atkyn's "Reports", 524] Lord Hardwicke L.C. held that to claim the privilege as clerk in court or agent to a party was too general, "for", he said, "no persons are privileged from being examined in such cases but persons of the profession, as counsel, solicitor, or attorney". But we find the privilege even in the cases of the relationship of client to attorney or counsel restricted to the subsistence of that relationship when professionally created by the employment by the client of the attorney or counsel as such and that it is not extended to confidential communications taking place between a person and a friend whom he confidentially consults because he happens to be a solicitor (Wilson v. Rastall, 1792, 4 Term Reports, 753). In the Duchess of Kingston's case [(1796), 20 State Trials, p. 572] it was held that a physician or surgeon was compellable to give evidence of matters which might have come to his knowledge in the course of his professional relationship to a party to a suit. The great commentator on the laws of England, Mr. Justice Blackstone, confines the privilege to communications made for the purpose of a legal cause. He specifies the persons who are exempted as "counsel, attorney or other person intrusted with the secrets of the cause". Mr. Serjeant Peake in his work on the law of evidence expressly excludes clergymen or priests or physicians. At the same time one may observe in the judgment in the case of Wilson v. Rastall as in some other cases the indication of a potentiality of an expansion of this side of the law of evidence. "I have always understood", Lord Kenyon said, giving judgment, "that the privilege of a client only extends to the case of the attorney for him: Though whether or not it ought to be extended farther, I am happy to think may be inquired into in this cause." He meant that the matter would not be definitely concluded as an appeal would be possible. In the case of Du Barré v. Livette (Peake's "Nisi Prius Cases", 108) the same judge, Lord Kenyon, logically held that the privilege would extend so as to preclude an interpreter between a solicitor and a foreign client from giving evidence of what had passed. In the report of that case we find that the plaintiff's counsel informed the court that Mr. Justice Buller had recently tried on circuit a case of the King v. Sparkes: that the prisoner, in that case, was a "papist" and that it came out at the trial that he had made a confession of his crime (a capital one) to a Protestant clergyman: that this confession was received in evidence by the judge: and that the prisoner was convicted and executed. It seems obvious from what we are told about the two persons concerned that neither of them could have regarded the confession as sacramental. Lord Kenyon said that he would have paused before admitting such evidence. He added "But this case differs from it. The Popish religion is now no longer known to the law of this country, nor was it necessary for the prisoner to make that confession to aid him in his defence. But the relation between attorney and client is as old as the law itself". The case of Butler v. Moore was decided in Ireland by Sir Michael Smith, Master of the Rolls, in 1802. It is reported in MacNally's "Rules of Evidence", p. 253. It concerned the will of Lord Dunboyne, who had abandoned the Catholic Faith: he was alleged, however, to have returned to it and, thereby, to have come within the penal law which deprived "lapsed papists" of the power to make a will. The circumstances under which he abandoned his Faith and those under which he is generally said to have returned to it are as follows: He was Bishop of Cork at the time of the death of the previous peer. Anxious to be able to transmit in a direct line the peerage and the headship of an ancient house, the new Lord Dunboyne appealed to Rome for a dispensation from his vow of celibacy. It was refused him, and, thereupon, he joined the Protestant Church and married, but had no issue. It is said that one day while he was driving along a country road a woman rushed out of a cottage, calling for a priest for some one who lay dangerously ill inside. Lord Dunboyne answered her "I am a priest", and, entering the cottage, he heard the dying person's confession. From a certain moment, said to have been this, till the end of his life he conformed again, at least, privately, to the Catholic Faith. His will was disputed by his sister, Mrs. Catherine O'Brien Butler, on the ground that, having reconformed to Catholicism, he was incapable of making one. In order to prove that fact she administered interrogatories to Father Gahan, a priest who had attended Lord Dunboyne shortly before his death, to the following effect: What religion did Lord Dunboyne profess, first, from 1783 to 1792? and, second, at the time of his death, and a short time before? As to the first question, Fr. Gahan answered that Lord Dunboyne professed the Protestant religion. To the second question he demurred on the ground that his knowledge (if any) arose from a confidential communication made to him in the exercise of his clerical functions, which the principles of his religion forbade him to disclose, nor was he bound by the law of the land to answer. The Master of the Rolls held, after argument by counsel, that there was no privilege, and he overruled the demurrer. Fr. Gahan adhered to his refusal to answer and he was adjudged guilty of contempt of court and was imprisoned. In 1823 in the case of the King v. Redford, which was tried before Best C.J. on circuit, when a Church of England clergyman was about to give in evidence a confession of guilt made to him by the prisoner, the judge checked him and indignantly expressed his opinion that it was improper for a clergyman to reveal a confession. In 1828 in the case of Broad v. Pitt (3 C. & P., 518), where the privilege of communications to an attorney was under discussion, the same judge said: "The privilege does not apply to clergymen since the decision the other day in the case of Gilham. I, for one, will never compel a clergyman to disclose communications made to him by a prisoner: but if he chooses to disclose them, I shall receive them in evidence". As a fact, the case of R. v. Gilham (1 Moo. C. C., 186), tried in 1828, did not decide nor did it even turn on the question of privilege of confession to a clergyman. It turned on the question of the admissibility in evidence against a prisoner of an acknowledgment of his guilt which had been induced by the ministrations and words of the Protestant prison chaplain. The acknowledgment of the murder with which he was charged was made by the prisoner to the jailer and, subsequently, to the authorities; he appears to have made no acknowledgment of it to the chaplain himself. In the case of the King v. Shaw [(1834) 6 C. & P., 392], a witness who had taken an oath not to reveal a statement which had been made to him by the prisoner, was ordered to reveal it. "Everybody", said Mr. Justice Patteson, who tried the case, "except counsel and attorneys, is compellable to reveal what they may have heard." In the case of Greenlaw v. King [(1838) 1 Beav., p. 145], Lord Langdale M.R. said: "The cases of privilege are confined to solicitors and their clients; and stewards, parents, medical attendants, clergymen, and persons in the most closely confidential relation, are bound to disclose communications made to them". The foundation of the rule protecting communications to attorneys and counsel was stated by Lord Brougham, Lord Chancellor, in an exhaustive judgment on the subject in the case of Greenough v. Gaskell [(1833) 1 Mylne & Keen, p. 103], to be the necessity of having the aid of men skilled in jurisprudence for the purpose of the administration of justice. It was not, he said, on account of any particular importance which the law attributed to the business of people in the legal profession or of any particular disposition to afford them protection, though it was not easy to see why a like privilege was refused to others, especially to medical advisers. A like opinion was expressed by Turner V.C. in the case of Russell v. Jackson [(1851) 9 Hare, p. 391] in the following words: "It is evident that the rule which protects from disclosure confidential communications, between solicitor and client does not rest simply upon the confidence reposed by the client in the solicitor, for there is no such rule in other cases, in which, at least, equal confidence is reposed: in the cases, for instance, of the medical adviser and the patient, and of the clergyman and the prisoner". Moreover, in the relationship of lawyer and client the privilege was confined to communications between them made in respect of the particular litigation and it did not extend to communications generally passing between a client and his lawyer professionally. But the principle has developed so as now to include all professional communications passing in a professional capacity, and to the information and belief founded thereon: Minet v. Morgan [(1873) 8 Chancery Appeals, p. 366]; Lyell v. Kennedy [(1883) 9 Appeal Cases, p. 90]. In the former case Lord Selborne, Lord Chancellor, said: "There can be no doubt that the law of the Court as to this class of cases did not at once reach a broad and reasonable footing, but reached it by successive steps, founded upon that respect for principle which usually leads the Court aright". In 1853 in the case of the Queen v. Griffin, a Church of England workhouse chaplain was called to prove conversations with a prisoner charged with child-murder whom, he stated, he had visited in a spiritual capacity. The judge, Mr. Baron Alderson, strongly intimated to counsel that he thought such conversations ought not to be given in evidence, saying that there was an analogy between the necessity for privilege in the case of an attorney to enable legal evidence to be given and that in the case of the clergyman to enable spiritual assistance to be given. He added, "I do not lay this down as an absolute rule: but I think such evidence ought not to be given". In 1865 the question attracted public attention in England upon the prosecution of Constance Kent for a murder committed five years previously. She made a statement confessing her guilt to a Church of England clergyman, the Rev. Arthur Wagner, and she expressed to him her resolution to give herself up to justice. He assisted her in carrying out this resolution and he gave evidence of this statement before the magistrates. But he prefaced his evidence by a declaration that he must withhold any further information on the ground that it had been received under the seal of "sacramental confession". He was but slightly pressed by the magistrates, the fact of the matter being that the prisoner was not defending the charge. At the Assizes, Constance Kent pleaded guilty and her plea was accepted so that Mr. Wagner was not again called. The position which Mr. Wagner assumed before the magistrates caused much public debate in the press. There was considerable expression of public indignation that it should have been suggested that Mr. Wagner could have any right as against the State to withhold evidence on the ground which he had put forward. The indignation seems to have been largely directed against the assumption that sacramental confession was known to the Church of England. Questions were asked in both Houses of Parliament. In the House of Lords, Lord Westbury, Lord Chancellor, in reply to the Marquis of Westmeath, stated that "there can be no doubt that in a suit or criminal proceeding a clergyman of the Church of England is not privileged so as to decline to answer a question which is put to him for the purposes of justice, on the ground that his answer would reveal something that he had known in confession. He is compelled to answer such a question, and the law of England does not even extend the privilege of refusing to answer to Roman Catholic clergymen in dealing with a person of their own persuasion". He stated that it appeared that an order for commitment had in fact been made against Mr. Wagner. If that is so, it was not enforced. On the same occasion Lord Chelmsford, a previous Lord Chancellor, stated that the law was clear that Mr. Wagner had no privilege at all to withhold facts which came under his knowledge in confession. Lord Westmeath said that there had been two recent cases, one being the case of a priest in Scotland, who, on refusing to give evidence, had been committed to prison. As to this case Lord Westmeath stated that, upon an application for the priest's release being made to the Home Secretary, Sir George Grey, the latter had replied that if he were to remit the sentence without an admission of error on the part of the Catholic priest and without an assurance on his part that he would not again in a similar case adopt the same course, he (the Home Secretary) would be giving a sanction to the assumption of a privilege by ministers of every denomination which, he was advised, they could not claim. Lord Westbury's statement in the House of Lords drew a protest from Dr. Phillpotts, the then Bishop of Exeter, who wrote him a letter strongly maintaining the privilege which had been claimed by Mr. Wagner. The bishop argued that the canon law on the subject had been accepted without gainsaying or opposition from any temporal court, that it had been confirmed by the Book of Common Prayer in the service for the visitation of the sick, and, thus, sanctioned by the Act of Uniformity. From the bishop's reply to Lord Westbury's answer to his letter it is apparent that Lord Westbury had expressed the opinion that the 113th canon of 1603 simply meant that the "clergyman must not mero motu and voluntarily and without legal obligation reveal what is communicated to him in confession". He appears, also, to have expressed an opinion that the public was not at the time in a temper to bear any alteration of the rule compelling the disclosure of such evidence. The second case referred to by Lord Westmeath was that of the Queen v. Hay, tried before Mr. Justice Hill at the Durham Assizes in 1860 (2 Foster and Finlaison, p. 4). The prosecutor had been robbed of his watch by the prisoner and another man. A police inspector had subsequently received the watch from Fr. Kelly, a priest in the neighbourhood, upon his calling at the presbytery. Fr. Kelly was summoned as a witness by the prosecutor, and as the oath was about to be administered to him he objected to its form -- not, he explained, to that part of it which required him to tell the truth and nothing but the truth, "but as a minister of the Catholic Church", he said, "I object to that part which states that I shall tell the whole truth". The judge answered him: "The meaning of the oath is this: it is the whole truth touching the trial which you are asked: which you legitimately, according to law, can be asked. If anything is asked of you in the witness-box which the law says ought not to be asked -- for instance, if you are asked a question the answer to which might criminate yourself -- you would be entitled to say, 'I object to answer that question'". The judge told him that he must be sworn. When asked by counsel from whom he had received the watch Fr. Kelly replied: "I received it in connexion with the confessional". The judge said: "You are not asked at present to disclose anything stated to you in the confessional: you are asked a simple fact -- from whom did you receive that watch which you gave to the policeman?". Fr. Kelly protested: "The reply to a question would implicate the person who gave me the watch, therefore I cannot answer it. If I answered it my suspension for life would be a necessary consequence. I should be violating the laws of the Church as well as the natural laws". The judge said: "On the ground that I have stated to you, you are not asked to disclose anything that a penitent may have said to you in the confessional. That you are not asked to disclose: but you are asked to disclose from whom you received the stolen property on the 25th December last. Do you answer or do you not?". Fr. Kelly replied: "I really cannot, my Lord", and he was forthwith committed into custody. It may be fairly deduced from Mr. Justice Hill's words that he would not have required Fr. Kelly to disclose any statement which had been made to him in the confessional, and, in this sense, his words may be said to give some support to the Catholic claim for privilege for sacramental confession. But we need not wonder that he was not ready to extend the protection to the act of restitution, though, even in the eyes of non-Catholics, it ought, in all logic, to have been entitled to the same secrecy, in view of the circumstances under which, obviously, it was made. The laws of evidence except where they have been prescribed or declared by statute are the growth of the rulings of judges and of practice which has been followed. Thus, their origin affords an opportunity for development in accordance with the development of society itself and of its principles and opinions. We have seen this development in regard to the extension of the privilege, accorded from the beginning to communications passing between counsel and attorneys and their clients. It is conceivable that this spirit of development may spread itself over other provinces as to which no privilege shall theretofore have been recognized. It is possible that it may be even now ready to declare the privilege in the case of religious confession when that case next arises. Some indication of this possibility is found in the case of Ruthven v. De Bonn, which was tried before Mr. Justice Ridley and a jury in 1901. The defendant, a Catholic priest, having been asked a general question as to the nature of the matters mentioned in sacramental confession, was told by the judge that he was not bound to answer it. The writer was present in court at the hearing of the trial and, as far as his recollection serves him, he understood Mr. Justice Ridley to say something to the effect that the judges had come to this mind in the matter, but the report of the trial in "The Times" of 8 February, 1901, does not contain such a statement. The learned judge said to the plaintiff, who was conducting his case in person: "You are not entitled to ask what questions priests ask in the confessional or the answers given. If upon a case involving the question of the privilege next arising a ruling in favour of it should be made, this would be probably rather as a growth of the conception of public policy and not as a matter of traditional common law. There is a case in 1893 (Normanshaw v. Normanshaw, 69 L. T., 468) which was heard before the then President of the Divorce Court, Sir Francis Jeune, which shows a kind of middle attitude with regard to the question. A witness, a vicar of the Church of England, objected to giving evidence of a conversation which he had had with the respondent upon her being sent to see him after her misconduct. Upon the witness objecting to disclose the conversation, the President said that each case of confidential communication should be dealt with on its own merits and that he saw no reason why this particular converstaion should not be disclosed and he ordered the witness to disclose it. In summing up he remarked that it was not to be supposed for a single moment that a clergyman had any right to withhold evidence from a court of law, and that it was a principle of our jurisprudence that justice should prevail, and that no unrecognized privilege could be allowed to stand in the way of it. But it is to be observed that there had been no allegation of a religous confession. It is probable from the manner in which the President expressed himself that if a sacramental confession had been alleged he would not have ordered its disclosure. On the other hand, in 1881, in the case of Wheeler v. Le Marchant (17 Ch. D., 681), where the production of certain correspondence between the defendants' solicitors and their surveyors, passing before action brought, was in question, the Court of Appeal held that the principle which protected communications between client and legal advisers did not extend to the communications between solicitors and other persons not made for the purposes of litigation. The following words were spoken in his judgment by Sir George Jessel M.R., a judge of great eminence: "In the first place, the principle protecting confidential communications is of a very limited character. . . . There are many communications, which, though absolutely necessary because without them the ordinary business of life cannot be carried on, still are not privileged. . . . Communications made to a priest in the confessional on matters perhaps considered by the penitent to be more important than his life or his fortune, are not protected". The tenth edition of Taylor, "On Evidence", edited by Hume-Williams, contains a note by the editor saying that he has advised magistrates that they are bound not to suffer statements to be withheld from evidence on the ground of their having been made by way of religious confession. But the editor appears to base the obligation of their disclosure on the decision in the case of R. v. Gilham, which, as said above, does not seem to be to the effect attributed to it. In Sir Robert Phillimore's work on "The Ecclesiastical Law of the Church of England" we find the following statement: "It seems to me at least not improbable that, when this question is again raised in an English court of justice, that court will decide it in favour of the inviolability of the confession, and expound the law so as to make it in harmony with that of almost every other Christian state". In Best's work on "The Law of Evidence" we find not only an expression of opinion that the privilege should be accorded but one to the effect that there is ground for holding that the right to the privilege is existent. Jeremy Bentham As regards the policy of exempting from disclosure statements made to clergymen by way of religious confession, opinion is not unanimous. Jeremy Bentham, writing in the early years of the nineteenth century, devotes a whole chapter to serious, considered argument that Catholic confession should be exempted from disclosure in judicial proceedings, even in Protestant countries. The chapter is headed: "Exclusion of the Evidence of a Catholic Priest, respecting the confessions entrusted to him, proper". The following are extracts of some of the most remarkable passages in it. "Among the cases", it begins, "in which the exclusion of evidence presents itself as expedient, the case of Catholic confession possesses a special claim to notice. In a political state, in which this most extensively adopted modification of the Christian religion is established upon a footing either of equality or preference, the neccssity of the exclusion demanded will probably appear too imperious to admit of dispute. In taking a view of the reasons which plead in favour of it, let us therefore suppose the scene to lie in a country in which the Catholic religion is barely tolerated: in which the wish would be to see the number of its votaries decline, but without being accompanied with any intention to aim at its suppression by coercive methods. Any reasons which plead in favour of the exclusion in this case will, a fortiori, serve to justify the maintenance of it, in a country in which this religion is predominant or established." He refers the reasons in favour of the exclusion to two heads: 1. evidence (the aggregate mass of evidence) not lessened; and 2. vexation, preponderant vexation. Under the first heading he says that the effect of non-exclusion would be the decrease in the practice of confession. "The advantage gained by the coercion", he says, "gained in the shape of assistance to justice, would be casual, and even rare: the mischief produced by it, constant and all-extensive. . . . The advantages of a temporal nature, which, in the countries in which this religious practice is in use, flow from it at present, would in a great degree be lost: the loss of them would be as extensive as the good effects of the coercion in the character of an aid to justice. To form any comparative estimate of the bad and good effects flowing from this institution, belongs not, even in a point of view purely temporal, to the design of this work. The basis of the inquiry is that this institution is an essential feature of the Catholic religion, and that the Catholic religion is not to be suppressed by force. If in some shapes the revelation of testimony thus obtained would be of use to justice, there are others in which the disclosures thus made are actually of use to justice, under the assurance of their never reaching the ears of the judge. Repentance, and consequent abstinence from future misdeeds of the like nature; repentance, followed even by satisfaction in some shape or other, satisfaction more or less adequate for the past: such are the wellknown consequences of the institution: though in a proportion which, besides being everywhere unascertainable, will in every country and in every age be variable, according to the degree and quality of the influence exercised over the people by the religious sanction in that form, and the complexion of the moral part of their character in other respects." These words are all the more remarkable when we call to mind what a strenuous opponent the author of them was to the privilege allowed to communications between legal advisers and their clients. It is noticeable that, in dealing with this question, the Catholic religion alone presents itself to the mind of Jeremy Bentham as being concerned with it. The whole chapter is exclusively limited to the claim for protection for the Catholic practice of confession. It must be admitted by the most ordinary impartial observer that Catholics are in fact upon a different and much stronger footing in regard to the matter than any other religious body, because they are the only large religious organization, in Western Europe and America, of whose discipline, in the continuation of long tradition and practice, confession forms a vital constituent part. It is noticeable that British judges and lawyers, where denying the existence of the privilege, have stated that it cannot be allowed even in the case of Catholics, thereby recognizing, in the light of obvious fact, that their claim is not only most forcible but is peculiar. As it has been sought to indicate, one can hardly contend as a legal sequence that the removal of the proscription of Catholicism by the State has revived the privilege in favour of confession, the existence of which in pro-Reformation days has been sought here to be proved. But there are cogent arguments, on the ground of public policy and of the desirability of candid consistency in state conduct, in favour of the seal being respected. The Catholic religion is now not only tolerated in England and Ireland, but it is sanctioned by the State, which appoints as its own officers Catholic chaplains to the army, the navy, and to the prisons. Moreover, the State knows full well that confession is an essential part of Catholic practice and that the inviolability of the seal is an essential part of confession; the three main objects for which these chaplains are required are that they may hear the confessions of the persons in their charge, say Mass in their presence, and communicate them. To say that, despite these facts, the Catholic chaplain of a remand prison might be required, under pain of committal, to disclose, on the prisoner's trial, a sacramental confession which the latter had made, would seem like laying a trap for both the priest and the prisoner. No one having the least acquaintance with trials as conducted by English or Irish judges to-day can think of such an event except as being in the remotest degree improbable. Yet, if the confession should have been made voluntarily, without the inducement of any hope or fear by any person possessed, in some way, of authority, the same legal principles would seem to apply to it as would apply to such a confession made by any other penitent or in any other place. If it should become an established principle, whether by judicial ruling or by legislation, that religious confession should be immune from disclosure in courts of justice, it is highly probable that the principle will embrace any denomination in which a confession in the nature of a religious exercise shall have occurred. One is disposed to believe that such a principle would accord with the bulk of modern feeling towards the question. IRELAND The legal position as to the seal of confession is the same with regard to Ireland as it is with regard to England. SCOTLAND In Scottish law there does not appear to be any exact or clearly defined principle protecting from disclosure confessions to clergymen. But there appears to be a recognized leaning towards such protection, at least, to a limited extent. It is to be observed that none of the works referred to below mention sacramental confession as practised by Catholics, which, perhaps, would be regarded by the courts as having a peculiar claim to protection. In the case of Anderson and Marshall, which is cited by Hume as having taken place in 1728, Hume tells us that Anderson had made a confession in the presence of a minister and two bailies. Though Anderson, he tells us, had sent for the minister in order to dlsburden his conscience to him, evidence of the confession was received at the trial of Anderson. Hume comments unfavourably upon the reception in evidence of this confession, on the ground that the admission of such evidence tends to deprive a prisoner of the relief of confession to a person in a spiritual capacity. But he says further on (p. 350) that there is no privilege on the part of "surgeons, physicians or clergymen with respect even to circumstances of a secret nature, which have been revealed to them in the course of their duty", He thinks that probably no clergyman will ever be called upon to disclose any confession made to him by a prisoner under arrest. He goes on to give a hypothetical case of a person pursuing a course of crime and then, being suddenly seized with compunction, making a confession to the clergyman of his parish, and, finally, relapsing and completing his crime. He thinks that in such a case, on the crime being committed, the clergyman might, on the ground of public expediency, be required to give evidence of this confession, made at the previous stage, as being important in the history of the crime. But he cites no authority. Tait, in his "Treatise on the Law of Evidence in Scotland" (p. 396), having dealt with the disqualification of a witness by having been agent or advocate of the opposite party, says: "There is only one other situation in which the law allows the exclusion of evidence on the ground of confidence, and that chiefly in reference to proceedings of a criminal nature as where a prisoner in custody and preparing for his trial, has confessed his crime to a clergyman in order to obtain spiritual advice and comfort". But Tait's authority seems to be derived from Hume, who is cited above. Alison, in his work on the "Practice of the Criminal Law of Scotland", having cited Anderson and Marshall's case, makes the following statement: "And there is nothing exceptionable in the admission of such testimony, if he heard the confession tanquam quilibet; that is, if he heard it as an ordinary acquaintance or bystander, and not in the confidence and under the seal of a religious duty. But our law utterly disowns any attempt to make a clergyman of any religious persuasion whatever divulge any confessions made to him in the course of religious visits, or for the sake of spiritual consolation; as subversive of the great object of punishment, the reformation and improvement of the offender". INDIA In India the British law as to the seal of confession is the same as in England BRITISH COLONIES Apart from any express legislation or from any local law to the contrary prevailing, the law on the subject in the British Colonies and throughout the British Empire would be the same as that which prevails in England. In Cape Colony the law is the same as in England. The legal adviser is privileged: there is no ordinance or statute extending the privilege to the priest. Of the Commonwealth of Australia, Victoria, by the Evidence Act, 1890, S. 55, has enacted that "No clergyman of any church or religious denomination shall, without consent of the person making the confession, divulge in any suit, action or proceeding whether civil or criminal any confession made to him in his professional character according to the usage of the church or religious denomination to which he belongs". In New Zealand, by the Evidence Act, 1908, S. 8 (1), "a minister shall not divulge in any proceeding any confession made to him, in his professional character, except with the consent of the person who made such confession. For the Dominion of Canada the law on the subject is the same as in England. There is no Dominion legislation upon the subject. But the Province of Quebec, by Art. 275 of its Code of Civil Procedure, has enacted that a witness "cannot be compelled to declare what has been revealed to him confidentially in his professional character as religious or legal adviser". But even apart from this express legislation the privilege of the seal has been transmitted, in Quebec, from the old French law of the province, the continuance of the liberty of the Catholic religion having been guaranteed (see Gill v. Bouchard, 1896, R. J., 5 Q. B., 138). In the case of Massé v. Robillard [(1880) 10 Revue légale, p. 527] -- which turned upon a political election -- a witness was asked, with regard to his voting, whether he had been to confession to a certain priest and for what reason that priest had refused to hear his confession. The defendant to the suit objected to the question as being a violation of the privilege of confession. It was argued on the other side that the privilege did not extend so as to prohibit a penitent from revealing what had been said by the priest. The court upheld the objection, deciding that a witness cannot be asked what a priest said to him during confession and that the disclosure of what has been said during confession is not permitted. In the case of Gill v. Bouchard, referred to above, it was held by the Court of Queen's Bench, on an appeal from a judge of the Superior Court, that a priest, who was being sued for damages for having (it was alleged) induced an apprentice to leave his master, could not be compelled to disclose what he had said to the apprentice on the subject during the latter's confession, even though his advice to the apprentice was the alleged unlawful act for which he was being sued. It was held that the priest was protected by Art. 275 of the Code of Civil Procedure, and that, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, the priest's statement that whatever he had said was said while he was fulfilling his functions as religious adviser must be final and conclusive. Thus, unless the person seeking to get in evidence what has passed in the confessional can prove that such matter has not passed in the performance of the practice of confession or in the fulfilment by the priest of his duty as confessor or religious adviser, the priest's statement that if anything has passed, it has passed in the fulfilment of such duty or in the course of confession is conclusive, and any question upon the matter is entirely precluded by that statement. In this particular case the priest had, at the trial, answered: "If I spoke to the child about the matter it was in the confessional". (The boy's father told the court that the boy had said that drinking and bad words took place at his master's workshop.) The priest was then asked whether "he had counselled or advised the apprentice to leave his master's service, either in the confessional or elsewhere?". The priest objected to answering this question and contended that he was not legally bound to do so. The judge of the Superior Court held, on the ground that the question was one as to whether the priest had or had not committed a legal wrong, that he was not exempt from the obligation of answering it, and as the priest continued to refuse, he was declared guilty of contempt of court and ordered to be imprisoned. This decision, as already mentioned, was, after an exhaustive argument of the question, reversed on appeal by the Court of Queen's Bench, which declared the law to be as stated above. In Newfoundland, by the Consolidated Statutes, 1872, C. 23, s. 11, which section has since been incorporated in the Consolidated Statutes, 1892, it is enacted that "a clergyman or priest shall not be compellable to give evidence as to any confession made to him in his professional character". UNITED STATES OF AMERICA The position of the question at common law is the same in America as it is in England. In the case of the Commonwealth v. Drake [(1818) 15 Mass., 154], we find it argued on the one side that a confession of a criminal offence made penitentially by a member of a certain Church to other members, in accordance with the discipline of that Church, may not be given in evidence. These others were called as witnesses. The solicitor-general, on the other hand, argued that religious confession was not protected from disclosure. It is true that he, also, took the point that in this case "the confession was not to the church nor required by any known ecclesiastical rule", but was made voluntarily to friends and neighbours. The court held that the evidence was rightly received. On the other hand, in the case of People v. Phillips (1 Southwest L. J., 90), in the year 1813, the Court of General Sessions in New York, in a decision rendered by De Witt Clinton, recognized the privilege, and 10 Dec., 1828 it was embodied in the law of the State of New York. This was directly owing to the trial of Rev. Anthony Kohlmann, S.J., who refused to reveal in court information received under the seal of confession. (See KOHLMANN, ANTHONY; and Sampson, "The Catholic Question in America", New York, 1813, appendix). There is also Smith's case reported in the "New York City Hall Recorder", vol. II, p.77, which, apparently, was decided in the same way. But these few reported cases, as to the first of which we have no report of the grounds of the decision, and the two latter of which come from inferior courts, are hardly of sufficient weight to help to a real determination of the question one way or the other. If the question had ever had occasion to call for the considered judgment of a court of appeal, there is no doubt that the answer to it at common law would have been deduced from its history in England. But some of the states have made the privilege a matter of statute law. In Arizona (Revised Statutes, 1910, S. 2535, par. 5) a clergyman or priest cannot without the consent of the person making the confession be examined as to any confession made to him in his professional character in the course of discipline enjoined by the Church to which he belongs. The same provision is enacted in the Penal Code, S. 1111, with the prelude "There are particular relations in which it is the policy of the law to encourage confidence and to preserve it inviolate". The Territory of Alaska (C. C. P., 1900, S. 1037) and the State of Oregon (annot. C. C. P., 1892, S. 712, par. 3) have provisions almost identically the same as that prevailing in Arizona with the substitution of the words "shall not" for "cannot". The States of Colorado (Annotated Statutes, 1891, S. 4824), California (Code of Civil Procedure, 1872, S. 1881, par. 3), Idaho (Revised Stat., 1887, S. 5958), Minnesota (Gen. Stat., 1894, S. 5662), Montana. (Code of Civil Proc, 1895, S. 3163 (3), Nevada (Gen. Stat., 1885, S. 3405), Washington (Code and Stat. 1897, S. 5994), Utah (Rev. Stat., 1898, S. 3414) North Dakota (Rev. Codes, 1895, S. 5703 (3), and South Dakota (Stat., 1899, S. 6544) have statutory provisions similar to that prevailing in Arizona. In California the provision was amended by the Code Commission, 1901, by the addition to S. 1881 of the words: "Nor as to any information obtained by him from a person about to make such confession and received in the course of preparation for such confession". The Commission also added a section (1882) to the effect that when a person who has made such a confession testifies, without objection on his part, to it or to any part of it, the clergyman to whom it was made may be examined fully as to it in the same action or proceeding: and that nothing contained in S. 1882 is to affect the right of the court to admit evidence of such confession when no objection is reasonably interposed thereto, or when the court finds as an inference from proper evidence that the consent has been expressly or impliedly given. But all the amendments of the Commission have been held to be void on formal grounds (Lewis v. Dunne, 134 Cal., 291). By the Statutes of the State of Arkansas, 1894 (S. 2918): "No minister of the gospel or priest of any denomination shall be compelled to testify in relation to any confession made to him in his professional character, in the course of discipline enjoined by the rules or practice of such denomination". By the Revised Statutes of the State of Indiana, 1897 (S. 507), certain classes of persons are enumerated who are "not to be competent witnesses", which classes include "clergymen as to confessions or admissions made to them in course of discipline enjoined by their respective churches". Similarly, in the State of Missouri (Revised Statutes, 1899, S. 4659), "a minister of the gospel or priest of any denomination, concerning a confession made to him in his professional character, in the course of discipline enjoined by the rules of practice of such denomination," is to be incompetent to testify. The States of Kansas [General Statutes, 1901, S. 4771 (5)], and Oklahoma (Statutes, 1893, S. 335) have laws by which "a clergyman or priest, concerning any confession made to him in his professional character in the course of discipline enjoined by the church to which he belongs, without the consent of the person making the confession" is to be incompetent as a witness. In the State of Iowa it is enacted (Code, 1897, S. 4608) that no "minister of the gospel or priest of any denomination shall be allowed, in giving testimony, to disclose any confidential communication properly intrusted to him in his professional capacity, and necessary and proper to enable him to discharge the functions of his office according to the usual course of practice or discipline". But the prohibition is not to apply to cases where the party in whose favour it is made waives the right. The State of Nebraska (Compiled Statutes, 1899, S. S. 5907 and 5908) has like provisions. It has, also, (S. 5902) a similar enactment to that in force in Kansas, which has been mentioned above. In the State of Kentucky it is enacted (C. C. P., 1895, 606 (5) that a clergyman or priest shall not testify to any confession made to him in his professional character in the course of discipline enjoined by the Church to which he belongs, without the consent of the person confessing. In Ohio (Annotated Revised Statutes, 1898, S. 5241) and in Wyoming (Revised Statutes, 1887, S. 2589) there are almost identical enactments, save for the final qualification as to consent, which is omitted. North Dakota (Revised Codes, 1895, S. 5704) and South Dakota (Statutes 1899, S. 6545) have provisions that if a person offers himself as a witness that is to be deemed a consent to the examination also of a clergyman or priest on the same subject within the meaning of the enactment. Colorado (Annotated Statutes, 1891, S. 4825) and Oklahoma have like provisions as to implied consent. In the State of Michigan it is enacted (Compiled Laws, 1897, S. 10, 180) that "No minister of the gospel or priest of any denomination whatsoever shall be allowed to disclose any confessions made to him in his professional character in the course of discipline enjoined by the rules or practice of such denomination". In the State of New York it is enacted (Code of Civil Procedure, 1877, S. 833) that "a clergyman or other minister of any religion shall not be allowed to disclose a confession made to him in his professional character in the course of discipline enjoined by the rules or practice of the religious body to which he belongs". By S. 836 the protection is to apply unless the person who has confessed expressly waives it upon the trial or examination. In the State of Wisconsin (Statutes, 1898, S. 4074) there is an enactment like unto S. 833 of the New York Code of Civil Procedure with the addition of the qualification "without consent thereto by the party confessing". In the State of Vermont it is enacted (Statutes, 1896, no. 30) that "no priest or minister of the gospel shall be permitted to testify in any court in this State to statements made to him by any person under the sanction of a religious confessional". In Hawaii it is enacted (Civil Law, 1897, S. 1418) that "no clergyman of any church or religious denomination shall, without the consent of the person making the confession, divulge in any action, suit or proceeding, whether civil or criminal, any confession made to him in his professional character according to the uses of the church or religious denomination to which he belongs". It will be noted that in each case, with the exception of Hawaii, Iowa, and Vermont, the enactment contains the words "discipline enjoined", while of these others, Hawaii has the words "according to the uses of the church or religious denomination", and Vermont has the words "under the sanction of a religious confessional". Iowa appears to have the most widely-worded provision on the subject: a "confidential communication to a clergyman properly entrusted to him in his professional capacity" is included in the same sentence with confidential communications to an attorney, counsellor, or doctor, and the only other qualification put upon it is that it should be "necessary and proper to enable him (the clergyman) to discharge the functions of his office according to the usual course of practice or discipline". But the statutes would not cover a casual communication made to a clergyman which is not made to him by reason of his professional capacity (State v. Brown, 1895, 95 Iowa, 381). In like manner it was held in 1835 in the State of New York that a communication made to a clergyman by a member of his congregation, but not made to him as a clergyman or in the course of discipline, was not within the privilege (People v. Gates (1835), 13 Wend., 311). Similarly, in Indiana, it has been held that where the evidence given by a priest does not concern any confession made to him in the course of discipline, enjoined by the Church, the evidence is admissible (Gillooley v. State (1877), 56 Ind., 182); that only statements made to clergymen in obedience to some supposed religious duty are privileged (Knight v. Lee, 80 Ind., 201). The States of Georgia, Louisiana, North Carolina, Pennsylvania, Tennessee, and Texas have statutes protecting communications made to attorneys professionally. From the fact of such communications being protected by statute while these passing between priest and penitent are not so protected it does not necessarily follow that no privilege is accorded to those latter communications, because the former were already privileged at common law. FRANCE In the western portion of the Continent of Europe the sacredness of the seal of confession received public recognition at a very early date. Among the Capitularies of Charlemagne the first capitulary of the year 813, Article XXVII, is as follows: "that inquiry shall be made whether what is reported from Austria (de partibus Austriæ) is true or not, viz., that priests, for reward received, make known thieves from their confessions (quod presbyteri de confessionibus accepto pretio manifestent latrones)". The Austria here referred to is the eastern part of the old Western Empire, then called Austria. In France it was an incontestably established principle not only that a confessor could not be examined in a court of justice as to matters revealed to him in confession, but that admissions made in confession, if disclosed, might not be received or acted upon by the court and would not be evidence. Merlin and Guyot, distinguished writers on French jurisprudence, cite a decree of the Parliament of Normandy deciding the principle and laying down that a person charged upon the evidence of a confession cannot be convicted and must be discharged. They cite decrees of other Parliaments laying down the sacredness of the seal of confession. Among others, they cite a decree of the Parliament of Paris in 1580, that a confessor could not be compelled to disclose the accomplices of a certain criminal, whose names the criminal had confessed to him when going to the scaffold. These decrees were judicial. From the able and comprehensive argument of the appellant's counsel in the Quebec case of Gill v. Bouchard, which has been mentioned above, much valuable information on the French law upon the subject is to be obtained. In that argument there is cited a decree by the Parliament of Flanders in 1776 declaring that the evidence of a witness who repeated a confession which he had overheard was not admissible, and reversing the judgment which had been passed on the admission of such evidence. Muteau, another distinguished French jurist, speaks in clear and emphatic terms of the sacredness of the seal, citing, also, various instances in proof. He tells us in a foot-note of a certain Marquise de Brinvilliers, among whose papers, after she had been arrested, was found a general confession (apparently made in pursuance of religious discipline) accusing herself of an attempt to murder various members of her family. The court trying her, he says, absolutely ignored this confession: Muteau gives us a quotation from rodius in Pandect f. 73, in which rodius says: "He who has confessed to a priest is not held to have confessed". In Bonino's case, which is cited in the course of the appellant's argument in Gill v. Bouchard as having been decided by the Court of Cassation of Turin (at that time part of the French Empire) in February, 1810, and as being reported in the "Journal du Palais périodique", VIII, 667, the court is reported to have decided that an open avowal made by a penitent in consequence of his being counselled in confession to make such avowal ought not to be received in evidence against him. Merlin and Muteau tell us that formerly the breach of the seal by a priest was punishable with death. Guyot says that canonists are not agreed as to whether the breach is an offence cognizable by the civil courts (si c'est un délit commun ou un cas royal), but that several canonists maintain that the civil judges ought to have cognizance of it. This appears to be his own view because the breach is a grave crime against religion and society, a public scandal, and a sacrilege. He cites, however, a decree of the Parliament of Toulouse of 16 Feb., 1679, deciding that the cognizance of the offence belonged to the ecclesiastical judge. All these three writers except from the general inviolability of the seal the single case of high treason, that is, an offence against the person of the king or against the safety of the State. Merlin and Guyot, appear to base their authority for this exception on a statement by Laurent Bouchel, a distinguished French advocate (1559-1629). He practised before the French Parliament; he was also an expert in canon law and he wrote a work on the Decrees of the Gallican Church. They cite Bouchel as stating that "on account of the gravity and importance of the crime of high treason the confessor is excused if he reveals it that he (Bouchel) does not know if one ought to go further and say that the priest who may have kept such a matter secret and not have denounced it to the magistrate would be guilty and would be an accomplice; that one cannot doubt that a person who is informed of a conspiracy against the person and estate of the prince would be excommunicated and anathematized if he did not denounce it to the magistrate to have it punished". It is to be noticed that this statement by Bouchel, as cited by Merlin and Guyot, does not mention any decree or decision or any other authority supporting it. Muteau, in excepting high treason, appears to base the exception mainly upon a decree of Louis XI, of 22 December, 1477, enjoining "upon all persons whatsoever" to denounce certain crimes against the safety of the State and the person of the king which might come to their knowledge. He says that the theologians have invariably maintained that confessors were not included among persons bound to reveal high treason. Muteau points out, also, that the Inquisition itself uniformly laid down that "never, in no interest," should the seal of confession be violated. Dalloz (aîné) in his learned and comprehensive work on jurisprudence, in which the whole of French law is compiled and commented on under the numerous subjects affected by it, says that as the laws of France (his work was published in 1853, when he was an advocate practising at the imperial Court of Paris) protect the rules of ecclesiastical discipline, they could not exact from the clergyman, in breach of these rules, the disclosure of secrets revealed to him in the exercise of his ministry. Citing the canon of the Council of Lateran enjoining the secrecy of the seal, which, he tells us, only reproduces an older rule going back to the year 600, he observes that the inviolability declared by it is absolute and without distinction. The decision of the Court of Cassation in Laveine's case (30 Nov., 1810, Receuil général des lois et des arrêts, XI, i, 49) affords support, not by the actual decision, but by certain words used in it, to the contention for the exception of high treason, while the actual decision is commonly cited as one of the leading judicial authorities for the general principle of the immunity of the confessor. It was a case in which restitution had been made by a thief through a priest outside confession, the thief, however, stating at the time that he regarded the conversation as being to his confessor and as made under the seal of confession, to which the priest assented. The court of first instance held that only a communication received in sacramental confession would be privileged and that, therefore, the priest was bound in this case to disclose the name of the thief. The Court of Cessation reversed this decision. Its judgment commences with a reference to the existence of the Concordat and to the result that the Catholic religion is placed under the protection of the State, and it goes on to say that a confessor may not be ordered to disclose secret communications made to him in the exercise of his calling, "excepting those cases which appertain directly to the safety of the State" (hors les cas qui tiennent immédiatement à la sûreté de l'état). Commenting on these words, Dalloz (aîné) says that the jurist, Legraverend, admits the exception. Dalloz appears not to agree with it. "The oath," he says, "prescribed by the Concordat and the Organic Articles is no longer used: even if it were, the obligation which would result from it to disclose to the Government what was being plotted to its prejudice in the diocese or elsewhere could not apply to confession. The duty of informing having been, moreover, struck out from our laws, at the time of the revision of the penal code in 1832, it could not subsist in such a case." By Art. 378 of the French Penal Code "doctors, surgeons, and other officers of health as well as apothecaries, mid-wives, and all other persons who, by their status (état) or profession are the depositaries of secrets confided to them, revealing such secrets, except in cases in which the law obliges them to inform (hors les cas où la loi les oblige à se porter dénonciateurs) shall be punished with imprisonment from one to six months, and with a fine of from 100 to 500 francs." The exception, mentioned in the article, of persons obliged by law to be informers, as pointed out by M. Dalloz, has become obsolete owing to the fact that Articles 103-107, which dealt with the obligation of informing, were repealed by the law of 28 April 1832. Dr. H. F. Rivière, counsellor to the Court of Cassation, in his edition of the French Codes (Code Pénal, p. 68) has a note to that effect. M. Armand Dalloz, the son and collaborator of the author of the "Jurisprudence générale," says in another work: "Supposing that one may admit a derogation from this principle in favour of the interests of the State compromised by some plot, which is, at least, very debatable, one must, nevertheless maintain in private cases the obligation of secrecy in its integrity". The same writer says that the exception of the confessor is deduced from the principle of Art. 378 of the Penal Code, from the needs of the soul and, above all, from the laws which have recognized the Catholic religion. "And it would be repugnant," he continues, "that one could, in any case at all, force the religious conscience of the confessor in constraining him to break, in defiance of one of the most imperious duties of his office, the seal of confession." In Fay's case [(Dec. 4, 1891), Receuil général des lois et des arrêts, 1892, 1, 473] the Court of Cassation held that the ministers of religions legally recognized are obliged to keep secret communications made to them by reason of their functions; and that with regard to priests no distinction is made as to whether the secret is made known in confession or outside it, and the obligation of secrecy is absolute and is a matter of public policy: C. Penal 378. The annotator of the report begins his notes by saying that it is an universally admitted point that the exemption from giving evidence is necessarily extended to priests with regard to the matters confided to them in confession. He cites, among other cases, one of the Court of Cassation in Belgium declaring that there has never been any doubt that priests are not bound to disclose confessions in the witness-box. The Concordat between France and the Holy See having been broken, and, consequently, the Catholic religion being no longer established in France under the auspices of the State, part of the grounds adduced for some of the decisions cited above cease to hold good. But Art. 378 of the Penal Code endures, and, as shown, there is no longer any statutory obligation upon the classes of persons enumerated in it to give information of crime of any nature. Consequently, in virtue of that article, confessors are not only absolutely exempt from any obligation ever to disclose a confession, but they are under a statutory obligation never to do so. SPAIN In Spain, from an indirect report given by Muteau, we get stern proof, at a comparatively early period, of the abhorrence in which a breach of the seal of confession was held. According to Muteau, Raviot, in his "Observations sur le reccuil des arrêts de Perrier", cites a Spanish writer as stating that under James I of Aragon, who reigned in the thirteenth century, if a priest were convicted of a breach of the seal of confession, his tongue was cut out. The same unnamed author says, we are told, that priests convicted of the offence have been handed over by popes to the civil power to receive the punishment of death. In a country in which there are still to-day so many laws for maintaining respect for the Catholic religion, it is clear that the law would not demand that priests should be required to reveal in the witness-box what had been said to them in sacramental confession. ITALY Farinaccius, a famous sixteenth-century Italian writer on jurisprudence, perhaps the most gifted and able lawyer of his day, and almost universally followed (his "Praxis criminalis" being for two centuries the standard for the great majority of criminal jurisdictions in Western Continental Europe) expressly denies that cases of high treason form any exception to the general and uniform rule of the inviolability of the seal of confession. He states (Quæst. 51: nn. 99, 100 and 101) as follows: "Sacerdos non potest delicta commissa per confitentem revelare etiam quod sint atrocissima ac etiam quod continentur sub crimine læsæ majestatis, imo nec etiam ad id cogi potest de mandato papæ", i.e., "a priest may not reveal the offences committed by the person confessing, even though they be of the most atrocious, and even though they come under the crime of high treason: and, what is more, he cannot even be compelled thereto by order of the pope". In modern Italy, by the Code of Civil Procedure, Art. 288, doctors, surgeons, etc., and every other person to whom by reason of his state, profession, or office a secret has been confided, may not be obliged to give evidence of such secret under pain of nullity (i. e., of his evidence), save in the cases in which the law expressly obliges them to give information of any matter to the public authority. There appears to be no such express obligation upon priests in the law. GERMAN EMPIRE By the Code of Civil Procedure for the German Empire of 30 Jan., 1877, book II, part I, title 7, par. 348, certain classes of persons are entitled to refuse to give evidence. The fourth class consists of "clergymen in respect of matters which have been confided to them in their exercise of the care of souls". It was held by a decision of the Imperial Court of 8 June, 1883, that if a clergyman should have communicated to a third person any matter so confided to him he would not be exempt from giving evidence of the communication to the third person. Dr. von Wilmowski and Justizrath Levy in their edition of the German Imperial Code of Civil Procedure have a comment expressing doubt as to the correctness of this decision. Paragraph 350 enacts that clergymen may not refuse to give evidence when they are released from the obligation of secrecy. Dr. von Wilmowski and Levy comment as follows upon this paragraph: "Whether clergymen are effectually released through the consent of the confident or through permission of their superiors is to be decided according to the religious conceptions (Religionsbegriffe) of the denomination to which the clergyman belongs. By Catholic ecclesiastical law a release from the obligation to keep secret anything communicated under the seal of confession is entirely excluded (c. 12, X, de p nit. 5, 38)" AUSTRIA In Austria by the Code of Criminal Procedure (Straf-process-Ordnung) of 23 May, 1873, par. 151, certain classes of persons may not be examined as witnesses and if they should be so examined their evidence shall be null and void (bei sonstiger Nichtigkeit ihrer Aussage). The first class consists of clergymen in respect of what has been confided to them in confession or otherwise under the seal of clerical professional secrecy. EGYPT In Egypt there is in the Penal Code (Art. 274) a provision to the same effect as that of Art. 378 of the French Penal Code. MEXICO By the Penal Code of Mexico, promulgated 20 December, 1891, Art. 768, confessors, doctors, surgeons etc. are not to be compelled by the authorities to reveal secrets which have been confided to them by reason of their state or in the exercise of their profession, nor are they to be compelled to give notice of offences of which they have become cognizant in this way. BRAZIL By the Penal Code of the United States of Brazil, Art. 192, it is a penal offence to reveal any person or secret of whom or which notice or cognizance is had by reason of office, employment, or profession (see CONFESSION; SECRET). MASCARDUS, De probationibus (Frankfort, 1703); WILKINS, Concilia Magn Britanni et Hiberni, I (London, 1737), 577, 595; SPELMAN, Concilia, II (London, 1664), 357; LYNDWOOD, Provinciale (seu Constitutiones Angli) cui adjiciuntur Constitutiones legatin D. Othonis et D. Othobonis, cum annotationibus Johannis de Athona (Oxford.- 1679); Statutes of the Realm (London, 1810); Statutes at Large, ed. PICKERING (Cambridge, 1762); HOLINSHED, Chronicles (London, 1587); STOW, Chronicle of England (London, 1631-2); The Two Books of the Homilies, ed. GRIFFITHS (Oxford, 1859); GIBSON, Codex juris eccl. anglic. (Oxford, 1761); AYLIFFE, Comment, by Way of Suppl. to the Canons and Constitutions of the Church of England (London, 1726); BLACKSTONE, Comment. on the Laws of England, III (21st ed., London, 1844), xxiii; PEAKE, Law of Evidence (5th ed., London, 1822), 175; CORBETT, Complete Collect. of the State Trials, II (London, 1809); BENTHAM, Rationale of Judicial Evidence, ed. MILL, IV (London, 1827), 586; CARDWELL, Documentary Annals of the Reformed Church of England (Oxford, 1854); BADELEY, Privilege of Religious Confessions in English Courts of Justice (London, 1865); PHILLIMORE, Ecclesiastical Law of the Church of England, 1 (2nd ed., London, 1895), vi; POLLOCK AND MAITLAND, Hist. of English Law before the time of Edward I (Cambridge, 1895); MAITLAND, Roman Canon Law in the Church of England (London, 1898); HOPWOOD, Law of Confession in Criminal Cases (London, 1871); WHEATLEY, Rational Illustration of the Book of Common Prayer (Oxford, 1846); MAITLAND, Pleas of the Crown for the County of Gloucester for the year 1221 (London, 1884); MACNALLY, Rules of Evidence on Pleas of the Crown (Dublin, 1802); TAYLOR, Law of Evidence, ed. HUME-WILLIAMS, I (10th ed., London, 1906), 647-9; BEST, Law of Evidence, ed. LELY (London, 1906); ALISON, Pract. of the Crim. Law of Scotland, II (Edinburgh, 1833), 586; TAIT, Law of Evidence in Scotland (Edinburgh, 1827); HUME, Comment. on the Law of Scotland respecting Crimes, II (3rd ed., Edinburgh, 1829), xii, 335; WIGMORE, System of Evidence in Trials at Common Law, IV (Boston, 1905), lxxxiv; GREENLEAF, Law of Evidence, ed. CROSSWELL, I (15th ed., Boston 1892) xiii; Corpus juris germanici ant. (Magdeburg, 1738); GUYOT, Répertoire universel et raisonné de jurisprud. civ. crim. canon. et bénéfic, IV (new ed., Paris, 1784), 420; MERLIN, Répert. univ. et raisonné de jurisprud., V(5th ed., Brussels, 1825), 406; DALLOZ, Jurisprud. générale, XIV (Paris, 1853), 754; RIVIÈRE, HÉLIE, AND PONT, Codes français et lois usuelles (16th ed., Paris, 1888); VON WILMOWSKI AND LEVY, Civilprozessordnung und Gerichtsverfassungsgesetz für das Deutsche Reich nebst den Einführungsgesetzen, I (7th ed., Berlin, 1895); NASH, Life of Lord Westbury, II (London, 1888); LILLY AND WALLIS, The Law Specially affecting Catholics (London, 1893). R.S. NOLAN Seattle Seattle DIOCESE OF SEATTLE (SEATTLENSIS). The Diocese of Seattle (Seattlensis) comprises the entire State of Washington, U.S.A., and embraces an area of 66,680 sq. miles with over a million inhabitants. The diocese was originally created on 24 July, 1846, by Pius IX as the See of Walla Walla, but on 31 May, 1850, the name was changed to that of the Diocese of Nesqually, with Vancouver, Washington, as the episcopal city. Owing to important considerations, the title was again changed, in September, 1907, to that of the Diocese of Seattle, with the new cathedral and residence of the bishop in the city of the same name on Puget Sound. One hundred years ago the State of Washington formed a portion of that great terra incognita called the "Oregon Country", whose rugged and romantic wilderness is described' by the Jesuit missionary, Father De Smet, in his account of the Oregon missions. The introduction of the Catholic Faith into the States of Washington and Oregon is somewhat remarkable. It was not primarily brought about, as in so many instances, by priests of religious orders, but by secular priests who came at the earnest solicitations of Catholic laymen. Simon Plamondon of Cowlitz, Washington, initiated a petition for priests in 1833, and renewed it in the year 1835. Hence, the State of Washington may lay claim to being the cradle of Catholicism in the North-west. The Hudson Bay Company for many years carried on an extensive fur trade in the North-west territory, which extended as far south as the Columbia River. Its employees were a heterogeneous aggregation; and hence, though an English corporation with headquarters in London, it numbered among them many French Canadians. These hardy trappers and hunters, far from all civilization and with little hope of ever returning to their homes, took Indian women as wives and established families in the Wallamette and Cowlitz valleys on land granted to them by the company. These retired hunters, advancing in years, longed for the ministrations of the religion of their youth. The fatherly chief factor, Dr. John McLoughlin, who presided at Fort Vancouver (established. in 1828), tried to maintain a religious spirit among his men, as much from policy as to satisfy their desires, by gathering them on Sundays for religious services; but he clearly saw, though himself a Protestant at that time, that his ministrations did not satisfy the Catholics. Protestant missionaries arrived from the United States. McLoughlin welcomed them in the midst of his mixed class of settlers, hoping that now the religious problem was solved. He soon became aware that a denominational brand of Christianity was distasteful to the French Canadians. On their behalf, therefore, he sent, in 1834 and 1835, two earnest appeals for priests to the nearest Catholic bishop, Right Rev. J. N, Provencher of Red River, Canada, and through him to Archbishop J. River, of Quebec. Their replies were most discouraging; they had no priests to send to so distant a field. The Hudson Bay Company, moreover, informed of the appeal, refused transportation for any Catholic missionaries to their territory. McLoughlin, however, was not so easily conquered, and his services to the company were too important to be disregarded. Finally the Home Office relented, and in 1837 Fathers F. N. Blanchet and M. Demers of the Archdiocese of Quebec were allowed to accompany the annual convoy to the North-west. The two missionaries arrived at Vancouver, Washington, on 24 Nov., 1838. Their reception was an ovation for the Catholic Faith. Tears were shed when the Holy Sacrifice was offered for the first time. When the few days of mutual joy had passed the priests would willingly have proceeded to the south side of the Columbia where twenty-six families claimed their services, but the orders of their ecclesiastical superiors disposed otherwise, and they permanently located north of the Columbia River. The Hudson Bay Company maintained no less than twenty-eight established posts in the territory north of the Columbia River, which was inhabited by about 100,000 Indians. At Cowlitz, therefore, with its four Catholic families, Father Blanchet opened his first mission, which can rightfully claim to be the parent church of the North-west. Here he erected in 1839 a log building, twenty by thirty feet in size, which he dedicated to St. Francis Xavier, and which served as his chapel and residence. During the erection of this building an unexpected difficulty presented itself. A delegation of Nesqually Indians wished to see the "real Blackrobe" and to be instructed by him. Being ignorant of their language and at a loss to make himself understood, he thought of a novel contrivance to instruct them. He made a long flat stick or ladder with forty short parallel lines on it to represent the four thousand years before Christ; these were followed by thirty-three points and three crosses to show the years of Christ's life and the manner of His death. A church and twelve perpendicular marks denoted the beginning of the Catholic Church at the death of Christ through the Apostles; eighteen further horizontal marks and thirty-nine points showed the time elapsed since the death of the Saviour. The lesson proved successful. The Indians took home copies of the stick, which they called the Sa-cha-lee-stick, and which is known as the "Catholic ladder". On the completion of his architectural labours, Father Blanchet made several short visits to the Wallamette Valley settlers. Meanwhile Father Demers followed the route of the hunters and trappers, and visited the Indian settlements in the interior. He was welcomed everywhere by both whites and natives. During the following four years the two missionaries met but rarely-twice a year in Vancouver to console and encourage each other. The only change made in their lives during this period came when Chief Factor Douglas notified them (October, 1839) that his company had no longer any reason for preventing their establishing themselves south of the Columbia. In consequence of this notification, Father Blanchet took up his residence at St. Paul, Oregon, while Father Demers was left at the Cowlitz mission. From this moment he was in charge almost exclusively of the whole present State of Washington, although Father Blanchet made a few journeys to the Nesqually Indians, and even planted the cross on Whitby Island, where he said Mass in 1840. Manuel Bernier of Newaukum Prairie accompanied Father Blanchet from Cowlitz to the NesqualIy Prairie and to Whitby Island, where they built the first church on Puget Sound. The Oblate Fathers also established missions for the Indians and whites on Puget Sound. The semi-annual meeting in 1842 was of special importance for the Oregon missions. Father De Smet, who had come from the Rocky Mountains missions to Vancouver in quest of supplies, was present, and, as a result of the conference, he set out for Europe to obtain help and to expose their needs to the sovereign pontiff. Archbishop Signay was likewise interested in their work; he had not only sent an appeal to Rome, but, as soon as available, despatched to their assistance Fathers A. Langlois and J.B. Bolduc. These priests arrived at Vancouver on 17 Sept., 1843. The former took charge of Walla Walla. Father Demers retired to the newly-founded Oregon City. Father De Smet returned in August, 1844, accompanied by four Jesuit Fathers and six Sisters of Notre-Dame de Namur; and almost simultaneously, on 4 Nov., 1844, at St. Paul, letters arrived, containing the news that the territory had been created a vicariate, with Father F. N. Blanchet as vicar Apostolic. The briefs appointing Father Blanchet as Vicar Apostolic of Oregon were received at Vancouver on 4 Nov., 1844. He was named bishop with the titular See of Philadelphia, which, on some representation to Rome, was changed to that of Drusa, after his consecration at Montreal, on 25 July, 1845. Bishop Blanchet sailed for Europe to lay the news of his extensive vicariate before the Holy See, and Father Demers was appointed vicar-general and administrator of the vicariate during his absence. In the autumn of 1847 Bishop Blanchet returned to the Oregon coast, accompanied by five secular priests, two deacons, one novice, three Jesuit Fathers, three lay brothers, and seven Sisters of Notre-Dame de Namur. Meanwhile Rome had transformed his vicariate into an ecclesiastical province, and on his return he found himself the first Archbishop of Oregon City which comprised all the territory west of the Cascade Mountains. His suffragans were to be his own brother, Magloire, as bishop of the newly-created Diocese of Walla Walla which extended east of the Cascade Mountains, and his vicar-general Father Demers as Bishop of the new Diocese of Vancouver Island. A unique historical feature characterized the erection of the ecclesiastical Province of Oregon. The three constituting dioceses were created rather simultaneously than successively; they were the result of a wise division of a large field of labour rather than the dismemberment of a constituted and governed see. Vicar Apostolic F. N. Blanchet, while returning from Rome, was suddenly raised to the archiepiscopal dignity, and his brother, A. M. A. Blanchet, seemingly without the archbishop's knowledge, was nominated and consecrated his suffragan before the former had actually taken charge of his archdiocese. Bishop A. M. A. Blanchet (consecrated 27 Sept., 1846; d. 25 Feb., 1887), was formerly a canon of the Montreal cathedral. Accompanied by Father A. B. Brouillet and two students from Montreal and Father Rosseau with five Oblate Fathers from St. Louis, the new bishop arrived at Fort Walla Walla, on 5 Sept., 1847. Aided by his experienced brother, he soon acquainted himself with the new conditions and the great task before him, and during his long apostolic career he showed himself at all times a man of great self-sacrifice and wisdom under the most trying circumstances. His tact was especially tested when the deplorable massacre of Dr. M. Whitman and his family by enraged Cayuse Indians occurred in November, 1847. The troubles following this massacre and the reprisals by the whites during the subsequent Cayuse war placed the whole vicinity of Walla Walla for more than two years in such a state of turmoil that the bishop was obliged to remove permanently to Fort Vancouver. Here he constructed of logs his residence and a church, his cathedral which he dedicated to St. James in memory of the St. James Cathedral of Montreal. A few years later these buildings were replaced by better, though wooden, structures. With the approval of the Holy See, the name of the diocese and the bishop's seat were changed on 31 May, 1850, the diocese becoming known as the Diocese of Nesqually. The first priest ordained for the Walla Walla diocese was Father Chirouse, O.M.I. He was stationed at St. Rose's mission, which was established in 1847 among the Yakimas. On account of the Indian wars this mission with St. Joseph's was abandoned, but was revived in 1866 by Father St. Onge and Rev. J. B. Boulet. The register of the Oblate Fathers for Puget Sound contains no less than 3,811 baptisms from January, 1848, to August, 1868. The Tulalip mission among the Snohomish, Swinimish, Lummis and St. Pierre Reserve of Seattle or Duwamish Indians was opened in 1860. Bishop Demers held the first religious service in Seattle. The present state (territory of Washington) then seceded from the old Oregon territory. This political change caused a new division of the Diocese of Nesqually, whose limits now became identified with those of the new territory. Little more remains to be said of Bishop Blanchet's episcopate. A source of joy for him was the arrival, on 8 Dec., 1856 of several Sisters of Providence from Montreal, who on that day began their mission of charity in the hospitals of the North-west. Broken in health and strength, Bishop Blanchet resigned his office in 1879. Bishop A. Junger (consecrated 28 Oct., 1879; d. 26 Dec., 1895) became the second Bishop of Nesqually. He had been in the territory of Washington since his ordination in 1862. His active missionary life as a priest was short. After two years as assistant to Father Brouillet at Walla Walla, he was recalled by Bishop Blanchet to Vancouver, where he laboured until he was left in charge of the diocese as its bishop. To him is due the erection at Vancouver in 1884, of a large cathedral, Gothic in design and built of brick and stone, to replace the wooden structure erected thirty years previously. Bishop Junger's chief aim was to relieve his clergy, who were hardly able. to attend the wants of an increasing Catholic population throughout the state, and to facilitate attendance at the Divine Services. Many small churches and chapels were built during his incumbency. Another object of his solicitude was the Christian education of the younger generation. During his administration the Jesuits transformed (1886) their common school at Spokane into a college for boys, and entered (1889) the small but growing town of Seattle. At his invitation the Redemptorist and Benedictine Orders, the Sisters of St. Dominic, St. Francis, the Holy Names, and the Visitation entered the diocese and began their useful work. At his death the diocese had: 41 churches and chapels; 37 secular priests; 21 priests of religious orders. The Right Rev. Edward J. O'Dea (b. 23 Nov., 1856, at Roxbury, Mass.; consecrated 8 Sept., 1896, at Vancouver) became third Bishop of Nesqually and first Bishop of Seattle. Preceding his elevation to the episcopal dignity he spent twelve years in the service of the Archdiocese if Oregon. The new bishop was confronted with financial difficulties. He came into a strange territory, and had to assume a cathedral debt of $25,000 which at this period of incipient diocesan development and general financial depression throughout the country pressed heavily upon him. The foundation for the reorganization of the diocese was laid at a diocesan synod held in 1898, when a constitution for its government was adopted and promulgated. On this occasion also the bishop's financial embarrassment was taken from his shoulders by his clergy. The spiritual needs of the youthful commonwealth were his next care. The former territory had become a state. The Indians, decimated by disease and other causes, were relegated to small reservations, and industrious and thrifty immigrant farmers were rapidly taking their places. From a white population of 75,000 in 1880 the new state was making gigantic strides towards its goal of more than one million inhabitants in 1910. The bishop's solicitude was not limited to the general needs of the diocese; it extended also to the wants of the children and the needy. He encouraged the establishment of parochial schools when possible. In 1909 an industrial home for neglected and orphan boys was established under his personal supervision. To protect the Italian immigrants and their families against the dangers to their faith in large cities, he invited the Missionary Sisters of the Sacred Heart, an Italian religious order, to the city of Seattle, and encouraged them in their difficult and often ungrateful work. Washington's centre of population had shifted towards Puget Sound, and Seattle became a city of 237,000 inhabitants. Its new cathedral, the Cathedral of St. James, built on a hill overlooking the city and harbour, was begun in 1905 and was dedicated on 22 Dec., 1907. By Decree of 11 Sept., 1907, the name of the see was changed to that of the Diocese of Seattle. Statistics There are in the diocese (1911): 141 priests, including 52 of religious orders; 76 churches with resident priests, and 166 mission churches and chapels; 43 brothers and 503 sisters of religious orders; 6 colleges for boys; 18 academies for girls, of which 2 are Normal schools; 32 parochial schools with 5126 pupils; 1 protectorate, now accommodating 78 boys; 1 home for working girls; 2 rescue homes for girls; 6 orphanages with over 500 children; 13 hospitals; 3 homes for aged poor. The estimated Catholic population of Washington is about 100,000. DE SMET, Western Missions and Missionaries (New York, 1859); IDEM, Oregon Missions and Travels over the Rocky Mountains (New York, 1847); PALLADINO, Indian and White (Baltimore, 1894); BLANCHET, Historical Sketches of the Catholic Church in Oregon (Portland, 1878); SNOWDEN, History of Washington (New York, 1909); COSTELLO, The Siwash (Seattle, 1895). W.J. METZ Sebaste Sebaste A titular see in Phrygia Pacatiana, suffragan of Laodicea. Sebaste is known to us, apart from Hierocles, "Synecdemus", 667-8, by its coins and more so by its inscriptions; the latter identify it with the present village of Sivasli, in a fertile region at the foot of Bourgas Dagh, in the eastern portion of the plain of Banaz Ova, a vilayet of Brousse. The neighouring village of Sedjukler, a mile and a half distant, is also full of its ruins. Sebaste owes its name and foundation to Emperor Augustus, who established inhabitants of the adjacent villages in it; the Phrygian god Mên and his Grecian equivalent Zeus, as well as Apollo and Artemis, were adored there. The town was governed by strategi or archons, and in A.D. 99 a gerousia or council was established. Several of the inscriptions, which have been discovered in Sebaste, are Christian. Le Quien (Oriens christ., I, 805) mentions seven bishops, six of whom are known to have taken part in councils, by their signatures: Modestus at Chalcedon, 451; Anatolius at Constantinople, 553 (possible Bishop of Sebaste in Cilicia); Plato at Constantinople, 692; Leo at Nicaea, 787; Euthymius at Constantinople, 869; Constantine at the Photian Council, Constantinople, 879; Theodore, the author of a lost historical work, in the tenth century. The see is mentioned in the "Notitiae episcopatuum" until the thirteenth century, sometimes under the name of Sebastia. Another Sebaste occurs in the "Notitiae episcopatuum" as a bishopric in Cilicia Prima, Tarsus being its metropolis, and also a Julio-Sebaste, a see in Isauria, suffragan of Seleucia. SMITH, Dict. of Greek and Roman Geog. s.v.; RAMSAY, Asia Minor, 381, etc.; IDEM, The Cities and Bishoprics of Phrygia, 560, 581 seq., 600 seq., 616, 791, and passim. S. PÉTRIDÈS Sebastia Sebastia (SIVAS). An Armenian Catholic diocese. The city, which existed perhaps under another name in pre-Roman times, was called Sebastia and enlarged by Augustus (Babelon and Reinach, "Monnaies d'Asie Mineure", I, 101); under Diocletian it became the capital of Armenia Prima and after Justinian who rebuilt its walls, the capital of Armenia Secunda (Procopius, "De Ædificiis", III, 4; Justin., "Nov.", xxxi, 1). Towards 640 Sebastia numbered five suffragan bishoprics and only four in the tenth century (Gelzer, "Ungedruckte . . . Texte der Notitiae episcopatuum", 538, 553). In 1347 the diocese still existed, and as late, perhaps, as 1371 (Miklosich and Muller, "Acta patriarchatus Constantinopolitani", I, 257, 558; II, 65, 78); in the fifteenth century it had become merely a titular see. Among its bishops, of whom Le Quien mentions fifteen (Oriens christ., I, 419-26), were: St. Blasius, whose feast is celebrated 3 February; Eulalius, present at the Council of Nicaea in 325; Eustathius, who was several times condemned, and who played a considerable part in the establishment of monasticism; St. Meletius, who later became Bishop of Antioch; St. Peter, brother of St. Basil the Great of Caesarea (feast 9 January). This city produced many martyrs: St. Antiochus, feast 16 July; Saint Irenarchus under Diocletian, 29 November; Sts. Atticus, Eudoxius, and their companions, martyrs under the Emperor Licinius, 2 November; St. Severian, 9 September; and especially the Forty Martyrs, soldiers who were plunged into a frozen lake and suffered martyrdom in 320, and whose feast occurs 9 March. In the beginning of the eleventh century the city was governed under the suzerainty of the Greek emperors, by an Armenian dynasty which disappeared about 1080; in the twelfth century it became the residence of the Turcoman emirs; in the thirteenth century, of the Seljuk princes, one of whom, Ala-ed-Din, rebuilt the city in 1224. To this epoch may be traced several very beautiful medrissas, or schools, still in a state of preservation. Another Turkish dynasty was there exterminated in 1392 by Sultan Bajazet. Taken and destroyed in 1400 by Timur, who, it is said, caused the massacre of its 100,000 inhabitants, Sebastia passed anew under the sway of the Osmanlis. Sivas is the chief city of a vilayet and numbers 45,000 inhabitants, of whom 10,000 are Armenian Gregorians, 2000 schismatic Greeks, 200 Catholics, and the remainder Turks. The Catholic Armenian diocese comprises 3000 faithful, 18 priests, 7 churches, 4 chapels, a large college conducted by the French Jesuits, and a school taught by the Sisters of St. Joseph of Lyons. At Tokat, a dependency of this diocese, are also a Jesuit house, Sisters of St. Joseph, and Armenian Sisters. SMITH, Dict. of Gr. and Rom. Geog., s.v., GIRARD, Siras, huit siecles d'histoire in Revue de l'orient chretien, X, 79-95, 169-81, 283-8, 337-49; CUINET, La Turquie d'Asie, I, 663-73; CUMONT, Studia Pontica (Brussels, 1906), 217-26; Missiones catholicae (Rome 1907), 758; PlOLET, Les missions catholiques francaises au XIX siecle, I, 178-80. S. VAILHÉ St. Sebastian St. Sebastian Roman martyr; little more than the fact of his martyrdom can be proved about St. Sebastian. In the "Depositio martyrum" of the chronologer of 354 it is mentioned that Sebastian was buried on the Via Appia. St. Ambrose ("In Psalmum cxviii"; "Sermo", XX, no. sliv in PL, XV, 1497) states that Sebastian came from Milan and even in the time of St. Ambrose was venerated there. The Acts, probably written at the beginning of the fifth century and formerly ascribed erroneously to Ambrose, relate that he was an officer in the imperial bodyguard and had secretly done many acts of love and charity for his brethren in the Faith. When he was finally discovered to be a Christian, in 286, he was handed over to the Mauretanian archers, who pierced him with arrows; he was healed, however, by the widowed St. Irene. He was finally killed by the blows of a club. These stories are unhistorical and not worthy of belief. The earliest mosaic picture of St. Sebastian, which probably belongs to the year 682, shows a grown, bearded man in court dress but contains no trace of an arrow. It was the art of the Renaissance that first portrayed him as a youth pierced by arrows. In 367 a basilica which was one of the seven chief churches of Rome was built over his grave. The present church was completed in 1611 by Scipio Cardinal Borghese. His relics in part were taken in the year 826 to St. Medard at Soissons. Sebastian is considered a protector against the plague. Celebrated answers to prayer for his protection against the plague are related of Rome in 680, Milan in 1575, and Lisbon in 1599. His feast day is 20 January. KLEMENS LÖFFLER Blessed Sebastian Newdigate Bl. Sebastian Newdigate Executed at Tyburn, 19 June, 1535. A younger son of John Newdigate of Harefield Place, Middlesex, king's sergeant, and Amphelys, daughter and heiress of John Nevill of Sutton, Lincolnshire. He was educated at Cambridge, and on going to Court became and intimate friend of Henry VIII and a privy councillor. He married and had a daughter, named Amphelys, but his wife dying in 1524, he entered the London Chaterhouse and became a monk there. He signed the Oath of Succession "in as far as the law of God permits", 6 June, 1534. Arrested on 25 May, 1535, for denying the king's supremacy, he was thrown into the Marshalsea prison, where he was kept for fourteen days bound to a pillar, standing upright, with iron rings round his neck, hands, and feet. There he was visited by the king who offered to load him with riches and honours if he would conform. He was then brought before the Council, and sent to the Tower, where Henry visited him again. His trial took place, 11 June, and after condemnation he was sent back to the Tower. With him suffered Blessed William Exmew and Blessed Humphrey Middlemore. JOHN B. WAINEWRIGHT Sebastopolis Sebastopolis A titular see in Armenia Prima, suffragan of Sebastia. The primitive name of this city was Carana, dependent on Zela, which was included in the principality given toAteporix by Anthony of or Augustus. On the death of the Galatian tetrarch (3 or 2 B.C.) it was incorporated in Pontus Galaticus and made part of the Roman Empire. Carana formed a city peopled by the inhabitants of the surrounding country, and whose era was dated from this event. It is probably at that time or perhaps a little later, in A.D. 19, that the name of Sebastopolis appeared. The town was organized like all the provincial cities; it worshiped the emperors; with some adjacent towns it formed a conventus of which the capital was Neocaesarea; it had coins dating from Trajan. The city received its importance from its position on the great highway leading from Tavium in Galatea towards Sebastia and Armenia. It seems that Trajan, who annexed Pontus Galaticus to the reorganized Cappadocia, made Sebastopolis a centre of Roman culture in a still barbarous country. Adrian visited the city in 124; under this prince and his successors its beauty was increased by the erection of new edifices, a stadium, a portico, a gymnasium, and temples; the principal god was Hercules, whence its surname Heracleopolis. Under Justinian (Novell. xxxi, 1) Sebastopolis was one of the villages of Armenia Secunda; later one finds it placed by the Greek "Notitiae episcopatum" in Armenia Secunda or Prima, until the thirteenth century, first among the suffragans of Sebastia. Le Quien (Oriens christ., I, 425) gives four bishops: Meletius, fourth century; Cecropius 451; Gregory, 458; Photius, 692. By the inscription Sebastopolis is identified with Soulou Serai, a village of 500 inhabitants to the south-east of Zileh, formerly Zela, vilayet of Sivas. The chief ancient relic is a bridge over the Scylax. There is also a Byzantine cemetery which furnishes numerous inscriptions. SMITH, Dict. of Gr. and Rom. Geog., s. v.; ANDERSON, Studia Pontica (Brussels, 1903), 34-6; F. AND E. CUMONT, Ibid. (Brussels, 1906), 201-9. S. PÉTRIDÈS Sebenico Sebenico (SIBINICENSIS). Suffragan of Zara. Sebenico was the seat of a bishop before the establishment of a see. As the people could not get along with their bishop in Trau, they chose their own bishops until fifty years later the energetic Boniface VIII established the see and appointed as first bishop the Franciscan, Sisgorich. The building of the cathedral, which was not consecrated until a century later, was begun in 1443. The Dominican bishop, Vincenzo Arrigoni, did much for the see; he held seven synods between 1602-26. John Berzich attended the Vienna synod in 1849. Johann Zaffron was Pater concilii of the Vatican council. Despite the additions of Scardona (1813), parts of Trau and Tinin (1828), the bishopric Sebenico has but 93,000 Catholics with 54 priests, 83 friars in 7 stations, and 68 nuns in 4 stations. FARLATI, Illyricum sacrum, IV (Venice, 1775), 449-500; THEINER, Vetera monumenta Slavorum meridionalium historiam illustrantia (Rome, 1863), nos. 80, 82 sq., 210 sq., 498, 505, 521, 523 sq., 570; IDEM, Monum. Hungariae (Rome, 1859), I, 381, II, 490 GAMS, Series episcop. eccles. (Ratisbon, 1873), 419. C. WOLFSGRUBER Angelo Secchi Angelo Secchi Astronomer, b. at Reggio in Emilia, Italy, 18 June, 1818; d. 26 Feb., 1878. He was the son of a joiner, Antonio Secchi. His mother (née Luise Belgieri), a practical middle-class woman, had her son taught even sewing and knitting. After studying for several years in the gymnasium kept by the Jesuits in his native town, Secchi in his sixteenth year entered the Jesuit Order at Rome on 3 Nov., 1833. After completing his humanistic and philosophical studies at the Roman College, on account of his extraordinary talent for the natural sciences he was appointed tutor of mathematics and physics at Rome in 1839, and professor of physics in the Jesuit college at Loreto in 1841. In the autumn of 1844 he began the study of theology under the most distinguished professors (Passaglia, Perrone, Patrizi, Ant. Ballerini), and on 12 Sept., 1847, was ordained priest by Mgr Canali. At the outbreak of the Roman revolution in 1848, he had to leave Rome with all his fellow-Jesuits. Accompanied by his teachers, de Vico and Pianciani, he travelled first through Paris to England, where he resided for a short period at Stonyhurst College. On 24 Oct., 1848, he sailed with twenty other exiled Jesuits from Liverpool to the United States, which he reached on 19 Nov. Secchi's companion, de Vico, renowned as the discoverer of several comets, had succumbed in London to typhus fever contracted in consequence of the hardships of the journey, and in death was honoured in an enthusiastic notice by John Herschel in the "Monthly Notices of the Astronomical Society". Secchi settled in Georgetown, near Washington, District of Columbia, where the American Jesuits conducted a university and an observatory (then under the care of Father Curley). Here he brought his suddenly interrupted theological studies to a close by a brilliant examination for the doctorate, and joined the faculty of the university as professor of physics. Astronomy as yet claimed little of his attention, as ho wished to perfect himself as a physicist. Of decisive importance for his later achievements in the domain of meteorology was his close friendship with the celebrated hydrographer, meteorologist, and astronomer, F. M. Maury, who lived in Washington. To this friendship, through the medium of Secchi, Italy owed its first acquaintance with the epoch-making discoveries of the great American, whose valuable services in marine meteorology and navigation cannot be overrated. In later years Secchi dedicated to his friend, "as a token of our mutual friendship", his work, "Sui recenti progress! della Meteorologia" (Rome, 1861), and on his death in 1873 gave him an enduring memorial in a warm and touching necrology (cf. "Bullettino meteoroloigco del Collegio Romano", XII, Rome, 1873). Contrary to expectation, Secchi's residence at Georgetown soon came to an end, when the Roman revolution was forcibly terminated by the French general, Oudinot. On 21 September, 1849, he had to begin his return journey to England, and in 1850 he undertook the direction of the observatory in the Roman College, for which post his teacher de Vico had warmly recommended him on his death-bed. Because of the instability of the foundation walls and the want of modern instruments, Secchi was at first (1850-52) compelled to be content with his investigation concerning the radiation of the sun, the rings of Saturn, and the planetoids. By the end of 1852, however, his energy had succeeded in having a new observatory prepared on the firm vault of the Church of St. Ignatius in the Roman College, and fitted with new instruments. From this time date Secchi's brilliant scientific activity and the European fame of his observatory. On account of the extraordinary variety of his investigations, we must distinguish three persons in Secchi; the astronomer, the meteorologist, and the physicist. As an astronomer Secchi began with a revision of the great catalogue of the double stars made by W. Struve at Dorpat (1824-37). After seven years of strenuous labour he was able to print the chief portion of his results in the "Memorie del Collegio Romano" (Rome, 1859) with 10,000 verified double stars; this was continued in two supplements, published by his assistant in 1868 and 1875. One of the best calculators of the courses of the double stars, the astronomer Doberck of Dublin, has to a great extent taken Secchi's catalogue as the basis of his calculations. Hand in hand with this gigantic task went his study of the physical conditions of the planets Saturn, Jupiter, and Mars, and of the tour great moons of Jupiter. On the discovery of spectrum analysis by Kirchhoff and Bunsen (1860), Secchi was the first to investigate closely the spectra of Uranus and Neptune. From 1852 the moon also became the subject of his investigations. He made so exact a micrometrical map of the great crater of the moon (Copernicus) that the Royal Society of London had numerous photographic copies made of it, and had them distributed among those interested in astronomy. All Secchi's studies on the planets were included in his great work, "II quadro fisico del sistema solare secondo le piu recenti osservazioni" (Rome, 1859). However, the chief object of his study was the sun, with its wonderful faculae and spots, to which he devoted from the very beginning his incessant attention, industriously registering his observations. Epoch-making for the study of the sun was his expedition to Spain to observe the total eclipse of 18 July, 1860, because by him and his fellow-observer it was first definitively established by photographic records that the corona and the prominences rising from the chromosphere (i.e. the red protuberances around the edge of the eclipsed disc of the sun) were real features of the sun itself, and not optical delusions or illuminated mountains on the moon. When, on the occasion of the eclipse of the sun of 18 August, 1868, the French astronomer Pierre Janssen demonstrated practically the possibility of studying the protuberances even in clear daylight by certain manipulations of the spectroscope (this had been independently shown in theory by Norman Lockyer in London), Secchi was one of the first to keep a regular diary of all phenomena connected with the protuberances and of all other data concerning the physics of the sun. He thus laid the foundation of the unique "Sun Records", which have been continued to the present day; no other observatory in the world possesses a work of this character which has been kept so long (cf. Millosevich, "Commemorazione del P. Secchi" Rome, 1903, p. 20). Secchi also took part in the Italian expedition to observe the eclipse of the sun on 22 Dec., 1870, in Augusta, Sicily. Although his observations were not favoured by the weather, he was repaid for this journey by the discovery of what is called the "flash spectrum" which is considered a direct proof of the existence of a "reverting stratum" ("umkerenden Schicht"), a mixture of glowing metal vapours which lies over the photosphere and by its elective absorption produces the dark Fraunhofer lines in the sun's spectrum. During this same eclipse Professor Young of the American expedition saw clearly in his spectroscope the bright lines of the flash spectrum. Secchi published the results of his own investigations and those of others in a French work long regarded as standard: "Le soleil. Expose des principales découvertes modernes" (Paris, 1870). The second appeared in two volumes as an edition de luxe (Paris, 1875-77), after the German translation by Schellen had appeared under the title "Originalwerk bezuglich der neuesten vom Verfasser hinzugefügten Beobachtungen u. Entdeckungen" (Brunswick, 1872). In the study of the fixed stars Secchi distinguished himself not only by the invention of new instruments (heliospectroscope, star spectroscope, telespectroscope), but especially by the discovery of what are known as the five Secchi types of stars deduced from about 4000 spectra of stars, on which he had been at work since 1863. The unexpected discovery that all fixed stars may, according to their physico-chemical nature, be reduced to a few spectral types, was an achievement of as great significance as Newton's law of gravitation. This great law was confirmed by the works of d'Arrest of Copenhagen and E. C. Pickering of Harvard (in his well-known "Draper Catalogue"). When H. C. Vogel of Potsdam (1874) changed Secchi's purely empirical division of the stars into a genetic development of the stars from type to type, the theory of the unity of the world and of the identity of the fixed stars and the sun received most profound scientific demonstration and confirmation. Secchi published his views concerning the world of stars in "Le Stelle" (Milan, 1877), which appeared in German as the thirty-fourth volume of the "Internationale wissenschaftliche Bibliothek" (Leipzig, 1878). Passing over his other investigations concerning comets, groups of stars, and nebulous stars, we may remark in passing that Schiaparelli's celebrated treatise on the relations between the groups of asteroids and comets was published in Secchi's "Bullettino meteorologico" (Rome, 1866). As a meteorologist, Secchi was, as already said, an enthusiastic disciple of the American F. M. Maury, whose discoveries he utilized and continued with uninterrupted zeal throughout his life. He turned his attention to the most varied phenomena, e.g. the aurora borealis, the origin of hail, of quicksand, the effects of lightning, the nature of good drinking water, etc. He was the first to ascribe, on the basis of ingenious experiments, the telluric lines of the spectrum of the sun to the influence of atmospheric vapour. Secchi especially studied the "Roman climate". Still greater interest for him had the investigation of terrestrial magnetism and terrestrial electric currents. He was the first to organize a systematic observation of these currents as an eventual means of prognosticating the weather, and worked with good results in union with other observatories with similar aims (e.g. Greenwich, England). The Magnetic Observatory, arranged and fitted by Secchi in 1858, was for a long period the only one in Italy. Commissioned by Pius IX, who promoted all his undertakings with princely liberality, he made long travels through France and Germany in 1858 to procure the most suitable projection lenses for the lighthouses of the papal harbour towns. He secured, however, his greatest fame by his invention of the "Meteorograph", a skilfully-constructed weather machine, which works day and night and records the curves of atmospheric pressure, temperature, rainfall, rainy season, . strength of wind, and relative dampness of the atmosphere. In its original form the "Meteorograph" was extremely simple, but in 1867, through the munificence of Pius IX, it received a magnificent case, and in this form claimed the admiration of everybody at the Paris Exhibition of 1867. It created a great sensation, and Secchi received as prize of honour from the hands of Napoleon III the large gold medal and the insignia of Officer of the Legion of Honour; from the Emperor of Brazil he received the Order of the Golden Rose. An exact description of the apparatus with illustrations is given in the brochure, "II meteorografo del Collegio Romano" (Rome, 1870). As physicist Secchi was a disciple of Piancini, and devoted himself from the beginning preferentially to astrophysics, then to a great extent regarded as of secondary importance. American readers will be interested to learn that Secchi contributed one of his best works on "Electrical Rheometry" to the "Smithsonian Contributions to Knowledge", III (Washington, 1852). If we may include in physics geodetic measurements, the calculation of the trigonometric basis on the Appian Way for the future triangulation of the Papal States especially deserves honourable mention. By discharging this tedious and difficult task on the commission of the papal government between 2 Nov., 1854, and 26 April, 1855, he supplied one of the most important fundamental data for the subsequent gradation of Southern Europe. His results were edited in model fashion in the great work, "Misura della Base trigonometriea eseguita sulla Via Appia" (Rome, 1858). He acquired world-wide fame as a physicist by his greatly-admired work, "Sulla unitá delle forze fisiche" (Rome, 1864), which attempts to trace all natural processes to kinetic energy. With astounding acumen he here combines in a uniform picture all the results of earlier natural science, and anticipates and even in certain ways outstrips later investigations and views. The second edition (2 vols., Milan, 1874) was translated into French, English, German, and Russian. Secchi was, however, too much of a philosopher and a Christian to venture, after the fashion of more modern Materialists and Monists, to extend his "kinetic atomistics" to the domain of the soul and the intellectual. On the contrary, his whole natural system was founded on a theistic basis, inasmuch as he traced back the world of matter and its motion to a Divine creative act. In two magnificent lectures, which he published at the beginning of his "Lezioni elementari di fisica terrestre" (Turin and Rome, 1879) and independently in a German translation by Dr. Güttler (Leipzig, 1882; 4th ed., 1885), he gave a more than eloquent expression to his Christian view of life. After the capture of Rome by the Piedmontese in 1870, his firmness of faith and his fidelity to the pope and the Jesuit Order were more than once put to a rude test. But no enticements, however alluring, of the new rulers (e.g. the general supervision of all the observatories; the granting of the senatorial dignity with express release from the constitutional oath) could induce him to falter in his loyalty or fidelity. The new authorities did not venture to expel him from his laboratory, and he continued his investigations until he succumbed to a fatal disorder of the stomach. MOIGNO, P. Secchi, sa vie, son observatoire, ses travaux, ses écrits (Paris, 1879): * RESPIGHI, Elogio del P. Secchi (Rome, 1879); MANUELLI. Sulla vita e le Opere del P. Secchi (Reggio, 1881); and in connexion therewith Civiltà Cattolica, series XL, vol. VII (Rome, 1881), 580 sqq.; BRICARELLI, Della vita e delle opere del P. Secchi (Rome, 1888); MILLOSEVICH, Commemorazione del P. Secchi(Rome, 1003); Al P. Secchi nell XX V. della morte il Comitato Romano (Rome, 1903); the most complete biography, with catalogue of his some 800 writings, is POHLE, P. Angelo Secchi, ein Lebens- u. Kulturbild aus dem 19. Jahrhundert (2nd ed., Cologne, 1904). J. POHLE Sechelt Indians Sechelt Indians (Properly SICIATL). A small tribe speaking a distinct language of Salishan linguistic stock, formerly occupying the territory about the entrance of Jervis and Sechelt inlets, Nelson Island, and south Texada Island, and now gathered upon a reservation on the Sechelt Peninsula in south-western British Columbia, under the jurisdiction of the Fraser river agency. In their primitive condition the Sechelt consisted of four divisions occupying different settlements. Socially they had three castes: chiefs, nobles, or respectables, and the lower class. The chiefs as a rule owed their hereditary distinction to the superior generosity of some ancestor on occasion of the great ceremonial gift-distribution or potlatch, common to all the tribes of the North-west Coast. The middle class, or nobles, consisted of the wealthy and those of unquestioned respectable parentage, and its members were eligible to the chiefship through the medium of the potlatch. The third and lowest class consisted of the thriftless and the slaves, which last were prisoners of war or their descendants, and could never hope to attain the rank of freemen. They seem to have been without the secret societies which constituted so important a factor in the life of several other tribes of the region, but their shaman priests and doctors of both sexes possessed great influence, and in some cases appear to have had clairvoyant powers. The severe tests to which candidates were subjected, including long fasts, seclusion, and sleepless vigils, served to limit their number to those of superior physique and will power and to correspondingly increase the respect in which they were held. Certain candidates for occult hunting powers were prohibited from having their hair cut and were shut up in boxlike receptacles, from which they were never allowed to issue for years, except after dark and accompanied by guards, to prevent their being seen by others. the same custom prevailed also among the neighbouring Thompson River Indians. Descent was in the male line, and polygamy was common. The clan system proper apparently did not exist, and the carved and painted poles set up in front of the houses were, in this tribe, commemorative rather than totemic. Both boys and girls were secluded and subjected to a special discipline for some days at the puberty period. The general religion was animistic, with many tabu regulations, the chief gods being the sun and the "Great Wanderer". The dead were laid away in boxes upon the surface of the ground on some retired island. Their souls were supposed to ascend to the sun and to return later in a second incarnation. A few of their myths have been recorded by Hill-Tout. The Sechelt subsisted by hunting, fishing, and the gathering of roots and berries, the salmon, the deer, and the salal berry being the three most important food items, and the fishing, hunting, and drying paraphernalia, their most important belongings,. Their houses were long communal structures of cedar boards divided into family compartments by hanging mats, related families generally living together. A continuous platform running around the inside served both as lounge and bed. Food was stored in secret places outside. Baskets of various sizes and purposes, woven from cedar rootlets and taste-fully designed and decorated, were the principal household furniture, together with bowls, tubs, and dance masks of cedarwood. Dressed skins, fabrics of cedar-bark, and blankets woven from the hair of mountain sheep, or of dogs, served for dress. Head-flattening was practiced, as among other tribes of the region. Practically all of the former beliefs and customs, except such as relate to household economies, are now obsolete and almost forgotten. The work of Christianization and civilization was begun among the Sechelt in 1860 by the Oblate Father (afterwards Bishop) Pierre P. Durieu (d. 1899). At that time, they, in common with nearly all the tribes of the North-west coast, were sunk in the lowest depths of drunkenness and degradation from contact with profligate whites. In spite of abuse and threats, Father Durieu persevered, with such good effect that in a few years the whole tribe was entirely Catholic, with heathenism and dissipation alike eliminated. For the better advancement of civilization and religion he gathered the people of the several scattered villages into a new compact and orderly town, Chatelech (meaning "Outside Water"), with about one hundred neat cottages, each with its own garden, an assembly hall, band pavilion, street lamps, waterworks, and a mission church, all built by the Indians, under supervision, and paid for by themselves. A flourishing boarding-school in charge of the Sisters of St. Anne cares for the children. Hill-Tout, our principal authority on the tribe, says: "As a body, the Síciatl are, without doubt, the most industrious and prosperous of all the native peoples of this province. . . . Respecting their improved condition, their tribal and individual prosperity, highly moral character and orderly conduct, it is only right to say that they owe it mainly, if not entirely, to the Fathers of the Oblate mission, and particularly to the late Bishop Durieu, who more than forty years ago went first among them and won them to the Roman Catholic Faith. And most devout and reverent converts have they become, cheerfully and generously sustaining the mission in their midst, and supplying all the wants of the mission Fathers when amongst them". The Sechelt probably numbered originally at least 1000 souls, but were already decreasing from dissipation and introduced diseases before Father Durieu's advent. In 1862, in common with all the tribes of southern British Columbia, they were terribly wasted by an epidemic of smallpox introduced by gold-miners. During the continuance of the scourge some twenty thousand Indians of the various tribes were vaccinated by the four Oblate missionaries then in the country. In 1904 they were reported at 325. They number now about 250, all Catholics. Their principal industries are hunting, fishing, and lumbering, while the women are expert basket-makers. According to the official report, "they are very honest, industrious and ambitious, and are making marked progress. Drunkenness is practically unknown and they are strictly moral". BOAS, Fifth Rept. on North-western Tribes of Canada, Brit. Assn. Adv. Sci. (London, 1889); CANADA, DEPT. IND. AFFAIRS Annual Reports (Ottawa); HILL-TOUT, Rept. on the Ethnology of the Síciatl in Jour. Anthrop. Institute of Gt. Brit. and Ireland, XXXIV (London, 1904); MORICE, Hist. Catholic Church in Western Canada (Toronto, 1910). JAMES MOONEY St. Sechnall (Secundinus) St. Sechnall (Secundinus.) Bishop and confessor, b. 372 or 373; d. at Dunshaughlin, 27 Nov., 457. Son of Restitutus, a Lomard, and Liamain, sister of St. Patrick, he was one of nine brothers, eight of whom became bishops in Ireland. His early life and training is obscure, but he appears to have studied in Gaul, and to have accompanied St. Patrick to Ireland in 432. The first documentary evidence we have is an entry in the Irish Annals recording the arrival of St. Sechnall and his brother St. Auxilius "to help St. Patrick". He had much experience before his coming to assist in the conversion of the Irish. In 433 he was appointed by St. Patrick as first Bishop of Dunshaughlin (co. Meath), and so great was his reputation for learning and prudence, that he was assistant Bishop of Armagh from 434 until his death. At the commencement of his episcopal rule, the local fair (aonach) was accustomed to be held in the church enclosure, and as the people ignored the saint's denunciation as to holding a fair on hallowed ground, we read that "the earth opened and swallowed up thirteen horses, chariots and drivers, while the remainder fled". He died after an episcopate of fourteen years. The name of his see in the corrupt form, Dunshaughlin (correctly Domnach Sechnaille), testifies to the veneration in which he was held. St. Sechnall's fame in the literary world is as the writer of the earliest Latin poem in the Irish Church, the well-known alphabetic hymn commencing "Audite omnes amantes Deum, sancta merita". This he composed in praise of his uncle, St. Patrick, and was rewarded with the promise that whoever would recite daily (morning and evening) the concluding three verses with proper disposition would obtain everlasting bliss in Heaven. It consists of twenty-three stanzas in the same metre as employed by St. Hilary in his hymn "Ymnum dicat turba fratrum, Ymnum cantus personet", and was printed by Colgan and Muratori. It was regarded as a lorica or preserver to be sung (or recited) in any great emergency, and its singing was one of the "Four honours" paid to St. Patrick, being assigned as the hymn for the feast of the national Apostle. Another beautiful hymn by St. Sechnall is "Sancti venite, Christi corpus sumite", traditionally sung by angels in the church of Dunshaughlin, and adopted for use at the reception of Holy Communion. W.H. GRATTAN-FLOOD Seckau Seckau DIOCESE OF SECKAU (SECOVIENSIS) Diocese in Styria, Austria, suffragan of Salzburg. The See of Seckau was founded by Archbishop Eberhard II of Salzburg, with the permission of Honorius III, 22 June, 1218, and made suffragan of Salzburg. Emperor Frederick II gave his consent, 26 October, 1218, and conferred on the incumbent of the sec the dignity of prince of the Roman Empire. The first bishop was Provost Karl von Friesach (1218-30). Under Joseph II the diocese was reorganized and its territory enlarged. The original intention of that emperor, to establish an archbishopric at Graz, was frustrated by the opposition of the Archbishop of Salzburg. In 1786, however, the residence of the prince-bishop was transferred from Seckau to Graz, the capital of Styria, but the name of the diocese remained unchanged. A new cathedral chapter was installed at Graz, composed at first of three dignitaries and four canons. The see included thenceforth the Salzburg territory in Styria; at the same time a new diocese (Leoben) was created for Upper Styria. After the death of the first and only Bishop of Leoben, the administration of this see, since 1808, was entrusted to the bishops of Seckau. The limits of Seckau are due to a regulation of 1859, incorporating the Diocese of Leoben with that of Seckau, while Seckau ceded Southern Styria with its (chiefly) Slovenian population to the Diocese of Lavant. At the present time (1909) the Diocese of Seckau comprises all Upper and Middle Styria, with a population nearly all German. Among the prince-bishops of Seckau in earlier days the foremost is Martin Brenner (1585-1615), distinguished by his labours for the restoration of Catholic life in Styria. In the nineteenth century Seckau was adorned by such men as Roman Sebastian Zängerle (1824--18) and the apostolic Johann Baptist Zwerger (1867-93), highly esteemed for his great zeal and his popular religious writings. Dr. Leopold Schuster, who became prince-bishop in 1893, was before his elevation professor of Church history in the University of Graz, and is well known for his historical writings. In 1910, the diocese numbered 937,000 Catholics, distributed over 336 parishes, with 45 deaneries. The cathedral chapter consists of eleven residential canons and six honorary canons. The following religious communities are established in the diocese: the Benedictines in the venerable Abbey of Admont (founded 1074) and at St. Lambrecht (1103); since 1883 also at Seckau, which house was made an independent abbey in 1887, and is in the hands of the Beuren Congregation; the Cistercians at Rein (founded 1129); the Canons Regular of St. Augustine at Vorau (founded 1163). There are Dominicans at Gray Franciscans at Graz, Lankowitz, Maria-Trost, am Gleichenberg; Minorites at Graz; Capuchins at Leibnitz, Hartberg, Schwanberg, Knittelfeld, Murau, and Irdning; Carmelites at Graz; Brothers of St. John of God at Graz, Algersdorf, and Kainbach; Lazarists at Graz, Redemptorists at Mautern and Leoben. The orders and congregations of women in the diocese devote themselves principally to the care of the sick (Sisters of St. Elizabeth, Sisters of St. Vincent de Paul, Sisters of the Holy Cross) and the education of the young (Ursulines, Ladies of the Sacred Heart). The students of the diocesan seminary receive their theological education at the University of Graz. Of the religious communities, the Benedictines have a theological school of their own at Admont; the Redemptorists at Mautern; the Dominicans and Lazarists at Graz, where there is also a diocesan seminary for boys connected with a gymnasium. Preparatory schools for classical studies (Unter-Gymnasien) are conducted by the Benedictines at Admont and St. Lambrecht. Not a few famous scientists have come from the secular clergy of the diocese and from the religious orders. The scientific services of the earlier monastic houses deserve praise. The following periodicals are carried on by the diocesan clergy: "Kirchliches Jahrbuch fur die kath. Geistlichkeit" (Graz, 1837-40); "Der Kirchenschmuck, Blätter des christlichen Kunstvereins der Diözese Seckau" (since 1870), edited by Job. Graus; "Literarischer Anzeiger" (first with the restriction "zunächst fur den kath. Klerus der Kirchenprovinz Salzburg"; since 1902, with the additional title "Katholisches Literaturblatt") published since 1886, and conducted since 1902 by Gutjahr and Haring. Great zeal for the spread of Catholic literature is shown by the "Katholischer Pressverein", to which is also due the foundation of the Catholic printing press and publishing house, "Styria". The cathedral at Graz is a rare monument of Gothic architecture. No less remarkable as ecclesiastical architecture are the churches of the ancient monasteries. In recent times the "Christlicher Kunstverein fur die Diözese Seckau" has, fostered the study of Christian art in general and displayed rare practical interest in new ecclesiastical edifices and for the restoration of some older ones (Sacred Heart Church, Graz; Romanesque Cathedral, Seckau). The ancient pilgrimage of Mariazell (annually 80,000 to 100,000 pilgrims from all parts of Europe) is in the Diocese of Seckau. PUSCH, Diplomataria sacra ducatus Styriae, ed. FRÖHLICH, (2 vols., Vienna, 1750); AQUILINUS CAESAR, Annales ducatus Styriae (Graz, 1768-77); IDEM, Stoats- und Kirchengeschichte des Herzogthums Steyermark (Graz, 1786-88); KLEIN, Geschichte des Christenthums in Oesterreich und Steiermark (1840-42); Die katholische Kirche unserer Zeit und ihre Diener in Wort und Bild, II (2nd ed., Munich, 1907), 302-08; SCHUSTER, Furstbischof Martin Brenner, ein Charakterbild aus der steirischen Reformationsgeschichte (Graz and Leipzig, 1898); SENTZER, Roman Sebastian Zängerle, Fürstbischof von Seckau und Administrator der Leobener Diocese, 1771-1848 (Graz, 1901); VON OER, Furstbischof Johann Baptist Zwerger von Seckau (Graz, 1897); ZSCHOKKE, Die iheologischen Studien und Anstalten der kath. Kirche in Oesterreich (Vienna and Leipzig, 1894), 220-35, 744-74, 1152-54, 1218-22, 1223 sq. FRIEDRICH LAUCHERT Secret Secret The Secret (Lat. Secreta, sc. oratio secreta) is the prayer said in a low voice by the celebrant at the end of the Offertory in the Roman Liturgy. It is the original and for a long time was the only offertory prayer. It is said in a low voice merely because at the same time the choir sings the Offertory, and it has inherited the special name of Secret as being the only prayer said in that way at the beginning. The silent recital of the Canon (which is sometimes called "Secreta", as by Durandus, "Rat. div. off.", IV, xxxv), did not begin earlier than the sixth or seventh century, Cardinal Bona thinks not till the tenth (Rer. liturg., II, 13, §1). Moreover all our present offertory prayers are late additions, not made in Rome till the fourteenth century (see OFFERTORY). Till then the offertory act was made in silence, the corresponding prayer that followed it was our Secret. Already in "Apostolic Const.", VIII, XII, 4, the celebrant receiving the bread and wine, prays "silently" (Brightman "Eastern Liturgies", p. 14), doubtless for the same reason, because a psalm was being sung. Since it is said silently the Secret is not introduced by the invitation to the people: "Oremus". It is part of the Proper of the Mass, changing for each feast or occasion, and is built up in the same way as the Collect (q. v.). The Secret too alludes to the saint or occasion of the day. But it keeps its special character inasmuch as it nearly always (always in the case of the old ones) asks God to receive these present gifts, to sanctify them, etc. All this is found exactly as now in the earliest Secrets we know, those of the Leonine Sacramentary. Already there the Collect, Secret, Postcommunion, and "Oratio ad populum" form a connected and homogeneous group of prayers. So the multiplication of Collects in one Mass (see COLLECT) entailed a corresponding multiplication of Secrets. For every Collect the corresponding Secret is said. The name "Secreta" is used in the "Gelasian Sacramentary"; in the Gregorian book these prayers have the title "Super oblata". Both names occur frequently in the early Middle Ages. In "Ordo Rom. II" they are: "Oratio super oblationes secreta" (P.L., LXXVIII, 973). In the Gallican Rite there was also a variable offertory prayer introduced by an invitation to the people (Duchesne, "Origines du culte", Paris, 1898, pp. 197-8). It has no special name. At Milan the prayer called "Oratio super sindonem" (Sindon for the veil that covers the oblata) is said while the Offertory is being made and another "Oratio super oblata" follows after the Creed, just before the Preface. In the Mozarabic Rite after an invitation to the people, to which they answer: "Præsta æterne omnipotens Deus", the celebrant says a prayer that corresponds to our Secret and continues at once to the memory of the saints and intercession prayer. It has no special name (P.L., LXXXV, 540-1). But in these other Western rites this prayer is said aloud. All the Eastern rites have prayers, now said silently, after the Great Entrance, when the gifts are brought to the altar and offered to God, but they are invariable all the year round and no one of them can be exactly compared to our Secret. Only in general can one say that the Eastern rites have prayers, corresponding more or less to our offertory idea, repeated when the bread and wine are brought to the altar. At either high or low Mass the celebrant, having answered "Amen" to the prayer "Suscipiat Dominus sacrificium", says in a low voice the Secret or Secrets in the same order as he said the Collects, finding each at its place in the proper Mass. He ends the first and last only with the form "Per Dominum nostrum" (as the Collects). The last clause of the last Secret: "Per omnia sæcula sæculorum" is said or sung aloud, forming the "ekphonesis" before the Preface. DURANDUS, Rationale divinorum officiorum, IV, xxxii: GIHR, The Holy Sacrifice of the Mass (tr. St. Louis, 1908), 547-9. ADRIAN FORTESCUE Sect and Sects Sect and Sects I. ETYMOLOGY AND MEANING The word "sect" is not derived, as is sometimes asserted, from secare, to cut, to dissect, but from sequi, to follow (Skeat, "Etymological Dict.", 3rd ed., Oxford, 1898, s. v.). In the classical Latin tongue secta signified the mode of thought, the manner of life and, in a more specific sense, designated the political party to which one had sworn allegiance, or the philosophical school whose tenents he had embraced. Etymologically no offensive connotation is attached to the term. In the Acts of the Apostles it is applied both in the Latin of the Vulgate and in the English of the Douay version to the religious tendency with which one has identified himself (xxiv, 5; xxvi, 5; xxviii, 22; see xxiv, 14). The Epistles of the New Testament disparagingly apply it to the divisions within the Christian communities. The Epistle to the Galatians (v, 20) numbers among the works of the flesh, "quarrels, dissensions, sects"; and St. Peter in his second Epistle (ii, 1) speaks of the "lying teachers, who shall bring in sects of perdition". In subsequent Catholic ecclesiastical usage this meaning was retained (see August. contra Faust. Manich. XX, 3); but in Christian antiquity and the Middle Ages the term was of much less frequent use than "heresy" or "schism". These words were more specific and consequently clearer. Moreover, as heresy directly designated substantial doctrinal error and sect applied to external fellowship, the Church, which has always attached paramount importance to soundness in doctrine, would naturally prefer the doctrinal designation. With the rise of Protestantism and the consequent disruption of the Christian religion into numerous denominations, the use of the word sect has become frequent among Christians. It usually implies at present disapproval in the mind of the speaker or writer. Such, however, is not necessarily the case as is evidenced by the widely used expression "sectarian" (for denominational) institutions and by the statement of the well-known authority H. W. Lyon that he uses the word "in no invidious sense" ("A Study of the Sects", Boston, 1891, p. 4). This extension of the term to all Christian denominations results no doubt, from the tendency of the modern non-Catholic world to consider all the various forms of Christianity as the embodiment of revealed truths and as equally entitled to recognition. Some churches, however, still take exception to the application of the term to themselves because of its implication, in their eyes, of inferiority or depreciation. The Protestant denominations which assume such an attitude are at a loss to determine the essential elements of a sect. In countries like England and Germany, where State Churches exist, it is usual to apply the name "sect" to all dissenters. Obedience to the civil authority in religious matters thus becomes the necessary prerequisite for a fair religious name. In lands where no particular religion is officially recognized the distinction between Church and sect is considered impossible by some Protestants (Loofs, "Symbolik", Leipzig, 1902, 74). Others claim that the preaching of the pure and unalloyed Word of Go, the legitimate administration of the sacraments and the historical identification with the national life of a people entitle a denomination to be designated as a Church; in the absence of these qualifications it is merely a sect (Kalb, 592-94). This, however, does not solve the question; for what authority among Protestants will ultimately and to their general satisfaction judge of the character of the preaching or the manner in which the sacraments are administered? Furthermore, an historical religion may contain many elements of falsehood. Roman paganism was more closely identified with the life of the nation than any Christian religion ever was, and still it was an utterly defective religious system. It was a non-Christian system, but the example nevertheless illustrates the point at issue; for a religion true or false will remain so independently of subsequent historical association or national service. To the Catholic the distinction of Church and sect presents no difficulty. For him, any Christian denomination which has set itself up independently of his own Church is a sect. According to Catholic teaching any Christians who, banded together refuse to accept the entire doctrine or to acknowledge the supreme authority of the Catholic Church, constitute merely a religious party under human unauthorized leadership. The Catholic Church alone is that universal society instituted by Jesus Christ which has a rightful claim to the allegiance of all men, although in fact, this allegiance is withheld by many because of ignorance and the abuse of free-will. She is the sole custodian of the complete teaching of Jesus Christ which must be accepted in its entirety by all mankind. Her members do not constitute a sect nor will they consent to be known as such, because they do not belong to a party called into existence by a human leader, or to a school of thought sworn to the dictates of a mortal master. They form part of a Church which embraces all space and in a certain sense both time and eternity, since it is militant, suffering, and triumphant. This claim that the Catholic religion is the only genuine form of Christianity may startle some by its exclusiveness. But the truth is necessarily exclusive; it must exclude error just as necessarily as light is incompatible with darkness. As all non-Catholic denominations reject some truth or truths taught by Christ, or repudiate the authority instituted by him in his Church, they have in some essential point sacrificed his doctrine to human learning or his authority to self-constituted leadership. That the Church should refuse to acknowledge such religious societies as organizations, like herself, of Divine origin and authority is the only logical course open to her. No fair-minded person will be offended at this if it be remembered that faithfulness to its Divine mission enforces this uncompromising attitude on the ecclesiastical authority. It is but a practical assertion of the principle that Divinely revealed truth cannot and must not be sacrificed to human objection and speculation. But while the Church condemns the errors of non-Catholics, she teaches the practice of justice and charity towards their persons, repudiates the use of violence and compulsion to effect their conversion and is ever ready to welcome back into the fold persons who have strayed from the path of truth. II. HISTORICAL SURVEY; CAUSES; REMEDY OF SECTARIANISM The recognition by the Church of the sects which sprang up in the course of her history would necessarily have been fatal to herself and to any consistent religious organization. From the time when Jewish and pagan elements threatened the purity of her doctrine to the days of modernistic errors, her history would have been but one long accommodation to new and sometimes contradictory opinions. Gnosticism, Manichæism, Arianism in the earlier days and Albigensianism, Hussitism, and Protestantism of later date, to mention only a few heresies, would have called for equal recognition. The different parties into which the sects usually split soon after their separation from the Mother Church would have been entitled in their turn to similar consideration. Not only Lutheranism, Calvinism, and Zwinglianism, but all the countless sects springing from them would have had to be looked upon as equally capable of leading men to Christ and salvation. The present existence of 168 Christian denominations in the United States alone sufficiently illustrates this contention. A Church adopting such a policy of universal approval is not liberal but indifferent; it does not lead but follows and cannot be said to have a teaching mission among men. Numerous general causes may be assigned for the disruption of Christianity. Among the principal ones were doctrinal controversies, disobedience to disciplinary prescriptions, and dissatisfaction with real or fancied ecclesiastical abuses. Political issues and national sentiment also had a share in complicating the religious difficulty. Moreover reasons of a personal nature and human passions not infrequently hindered that calm exercise of judgment so necessary in religious matters. These general causes resulted in the rejection of the vivifying principle of supernatural authority which is the foundation of all unity. It is this principle of a living authority divinely commissioned to preserve and authoritatively interpret Divine Revelation which is the bond of union among the different members of the Catholic Church. To its repudiation is not only due the initial separation of non-Catholics, but also their subsequent failure in preserving union among themselves. Protestantism in particular, by its proclamation of the right of private interpretation of the Sacred Scriptures swept away with one stroke all living authority and constituted the individual supreme judge in doctrinal matters. Its divisions are therefore but natural, and its heresy trials in disagreement with one of its fundamental principles. The disastrous results of the many divisions among Christians are keenly felt to-day and the longing for union is manifest. The manner, however, in which the desired result may be attained is not clear to non-Catholics. Many see the solution in undogmatic Christianity or undenominationalism. The points of disagreement, they believe, ought to be overlooked and a common basis for union thus obtained. Hence they advocate the relegation of doctrinal differences to the background and attempt to rear a united Christianity chiefly on a moral basis. This plan, however, rests on a false assumption; for its minimizes, in an unwarranted degree, the importance of the right teaching and sound belief and thus tends to transform Christianity into a mere ethical code. From the inferior position assigned to doctrinal principles there is but one step to their partial or complete rejection, and undenominationalism, instead of being a return to the unity desired by Christ, cannot but result in the destruction of Christianity. It is not in the further rejection of truth that the divisions of Christianity can be healed, but in the sincere acceptance of what has been discarded; the remedy lies in the return of all dissenters to the Catholic Church. Catholic authorities: BENSON, Non-Catholic Denominations (New York, 1910); MÖHLER, Symbolism, tr. ROBERTSON, 3rd ed. (New York, s. d.); PETRE, The Fallacy of Undenominationalism in Catholic World, LXXXIV (1906-07), 640-46; DÖLLINGER, Kirche u. Kirchen (Munich, 1861); VON RUVILLE, Back to Holy Church, tr. SCHOETENSACK (New York, 1911); a Catholic monthly magazine specifically devoted to Church unity is The Lamp (Garrison, New York) non-Catholic authorities: CARROLL, The Religious Forces of the United States, in American Church Hist. Series I (New York, 1893); KALB, Kirchen u.. Sekten der Gegenwart (Stuttgart, 1907); KAWERAU, in Realencyklop. f. prot. Theol., 3rd ed., s. v.; SEKTENWESEN in Deutschland; BLUNT, Dict. of Sects (London, 1874); MASON, A Study of Sectarianism in New Church Review, I (Boston, 1894), 366-82; McBEE, An Eirenic Itinerary (New York, 1911). N. A. WEBER. Secular Clergy Secular Clergy (Lat. clerus sæcularis) In the language of religious the world (sæculum) is opposed to the cloister; religious who follow a rule, especially those who have been ordained, form the regular clergy, while those who live in the world are called the secular clergy. Hence the expression so frequently used in canonical texts: "uterque clerus", both secular and regular clergy. The secular cleric makes no profession and follows no religious rule, he possesses his own property like laymen, he owes to his bishop canonical obedience, not the renunciation of his own will, which results from the religious vow of obedience; only the practice of celibacy in Holy Orders is identical with the vow of chastity of the religious. The secular clergy, in which the hierarchy essentially resides, always takes precedence of the regular clergy of equal rank; the latter is not essential to the Church nor can it subsist by itself, being dependent on bishops for ordination. (See CLERIC; REGULARS.) Du CANGE, Glossarium, s.vv. Sæculum; Clericus. A. BOUDINHON Secularism Secularism A term used for the first time about 1846 by George Jacob Holyoake to denote "a form of opinion which concerns itself only with questions, the issues of which can be tested by the experience of this life" (English Secularism, 60). More explicitly, "Secularism is that which seeks the development of the physical, moral, and intellectual nature of man to the highest possible point, as the immediate duty of life — which inculcates the practical sufficiency of natural morality apart from Atheism, Theism or the Bible — which selects as its methods of procedure the promotion of human improvement by material means, and proposes these positive agreements as the common bond of union, to all who would regulate life by reason and ennoble it by service" (Principles of Secularism, 17). And again, "Secularism is a code of duty pertaining to this life founded on considerations purely human, and intended mainly for those who find theology indefinite or inadequate, unreliable or unbelievable. Its essential principles are three: 1. The improvement of this life by material means. 2. That science is the available Providence of man. 3. That it is good to do good. "Whether there be other good or not, the good of the present life is good, and it is good to seek that good" (English Secularism, 35). I. HISTORY The origin of Secularism is associated especially with the names of Holyoake and Bradlaugh. George Jacob Holyoake (born at Birmingham, 13 April, 1817; died at Brighton, 22 January, 1906) met Robert Owen in 1837, became his friend, and began to lecture and write articles advocating socialism or co-operation. In 1841, with Southwell, Ryall, and Chilton, he founded a magazine called "The Oracle of which was succeeded by "The Movement" (1843), and by "The Reasoner" (1846). In 1861 the publication of the latter was discontinued, and Holyoake founded "The Counsellor" which later on, was merged with Bradlaugh's "National Reformer". Owing to differences between Bradlaugh and Holyoake, the latter withdrew from "The National Reformer," started the publication of "The Secular World and Social Economist" (1862-64), and in 1883 of "The Present Day". Among the political and economical agitations in which Holyoake took a leading part may be mentioned those for the repeal of the law prohibiting the use of unstamped paper for periodical publications, for the abolition of all oaths required by law, for the secularization of education in the public schools, for the disestablishment of the Church, for the promotion of the co-operative movement among the working classes, etc. Charles Bradlaugh (born at Hoxton, London, 26 September, 1833; died 30 January, 1891) was a zealous Sunday school teacher in the Church of England, when Rev. Mr. Packer, the incumbent of St. Peter's, Hackney Road, asked him to prepare for confirmation which was to be administered by the Bishop of London. "I studied a little", writes Bradlaugh, "the Thirty-nine Articles of the Church of England, and the four Gospels, and came to the conclusion that they differed" (Autobiography, 6). He wrote this to Rev. Mr. Packer, who hastily denounced him as an atheist. His views, which at this time were deistical later on reached extreme Atheism. From 1853 till 1868 he wrote a great number of articles under the pseudonym of "Iconoclast", gave many lectures, and held many public debates. In 1858 he edited "The Investigator", and in 1859 founded "The National Reformer". Elected by Northampton as a member of the House of Commons in 1880, he refused to take the required oath, and was not allowed to sit in the House. Re-elected the following year, he consented to take the oath, but this was refused on account of his Atheism. Finally, in 1886, the new Speaker allowed him to take the oath and sit in Parliament. In 1858 Bradlaugh succeeded Holyoake as president of the London Secular Society, and in 1866 enlarged the scope of this association by founding the National Secular Society, over which he presided until 1890, when he was succeeded by Mr. G. W. Foote, the actual president. The following words from Bradlaugh's farewell speech are significant: "One element of danger in Europe is the approach of the Roman Catholic Church towards meddling in political life. . . . Beware when that great Church, whose power none can deny, the capacity of whose leading men is marked, tries to use the democracy as its weapon. There is danger to freedom of thought, to freedom of speech, to freedom of action. The great struggle in this country will not be between Freethought and the Church of England, not between Freethought and Dissent, but — as I have long taught, and now repeat — between Freethought and Rome" (Charles Bradlaugh, II, 412). In the United States, the American Secular Union and Freethought Federation, presided over by Mr. E. P. Peacock, with many affiliated local societies, has for its object the separation of Church and State, and for its platform the nine demands of Liberalism, namely: 1. that churches and other ecclesiastical property shall be no longer exempt from taxation; 2. that the employment of chaplains in Congress, in state legislatures, in the army and navy, and in prisons, asylums, and all institutions supported by public money, shall be discontinued, and that all religious services maintained by national, state, or municipal governments shall be abolished; 3. that all public appropriations for educational and charitable institutions of a sectarian character shall cease; 4. that, while advocating the loftiest instruction in morals and the inculcation of the strictest uprightness of conduct, religious teaching and the use of the Bible for religious purposes in public schools shall be prohibited; 5. that the appointment by the President of the United States and the governors of the various states of religious festivals, fasts, and days of prayer and thanksgiving shall be discontinued; 6. that the theological oath in the courts and in other departments of government shall be abolished, and simple affirmation under the pains and penalties of perjury, established in its stead; 7. that all laws directly or indirectly enforcing in any degree the religious and theological dogma of Sunday or Sabbath observance shall be repealed; 8. that all laws looking to the enforcement of Christian morality as such shall be abrogated, and that all laws shall be conformed to the requirements of natural morality, equal rights and impartial justice; 9. that, in harmony with the Constitution of the United States and the constitutions of the several states, no special privileges or advantages shall be conceded to Christianity or any other religion; that our entire political system shall be conducted and administered on a purely secular basis; and that whatever changes are necessary to this end shall be consistently, unflinchingly, and promptly made. Although the name Secularism is of recent origin, its various doctrines have been taught by free-thinkers of all ages, and, in fact, Secularism claims to be only an extension of free-thought. "The term Secularism was chosen to express the extension of freethought to ethics" (English Secularism, 34). With regard to the question of the existence of God, Bradlaugh was an atheist, Holyoake an agnostic. The latter held that Secularism is based simply on the study of nature and has nothing to do with religion, while Bradlaugh claimed that Secularism should start with the disproof of religion. In a public debate held in 1870 between these two secularists, Bradlaugh said: "Although at present it may be perfectly true that all men who are Secularists are not Atheists, I put it that in my opinion the logical consequence of the acceptance of Secularism must be that the man gets to Atheism if he has brains enough to comprehend. "You cannot have a scheme of morality without Atheism. The Utilitarian scheme is a defiance of the doctrine of Providence and a protest against God". On the other hand, Holyoake affirmed that "Secularism is not an argument against Christianity, it is one independent of it. It does not question the pretensions of Christianity; it advances others. Secularism does not say there is no light or guidance elsewhere, but maintains that there is light and guidance in secular truth, whose conditions and sanctions exist independently, and act forever. Secular knowledge is manifestly that kind of knowledge which is founded in this life, which relates to the conduct of this life, conduces to the welfare of this life, and is capable of being tested by the experience of this life" (Charles Bradlaugh, I, 334, 336). But in many passages of his writings, Holyoake goes much further and seeks to disprove Christian truths. To the criticism of theology, Secularism adds a great concern for culture, social progress, and the improvement of the material conditions of life, especially for the working classes. In ethics it is utilitarian, and seeks only the greatest good of the present life, since the existence of a future life, as well as the existence of God, "belong to the debatable ground of speculation" (English Secularism, 37). It tends to substitute "the piety of useful men for the usefulness of piety" (ibid., 8). II. CRITICISM The fundamental principle of Secularism is that, in his whole conduct, man should be guided exclusively by considerations derived from the present life itself. Anything that is above or beyond the present life should be entirely overlooked. Whether God exists or not, whether the soul is immortal or not, are questions which at best cannot be answered, and on which consequently no motives of action can be based. A fortiori all motives derived from the Christian religion are worthless. "Things Secular are as separate from the Church as land from the ocean" (English Secularism, 1). This principle is in strict opposition to essential Catholic doctrines. The Church is as intent as Secularism on the improvement of this life, as respectful of scientific achievements, as eager for the fulfilment of all duties pertaining to the present life. But the present life cannot be looked upon as an end in itself, and independent of the future life. The knowledge of the material world leads to the knowledge of the spiritual world, and among the duties of the present life must be reckoned those which arise from the existence and nature of God, the fact of a Divine Revelation, and the necessity of preparing, for the future life. If God exists, how can Secularism inculcate the practical sufficiency of natural morality?" If "Secularism does not say there is no light or guidance elsewhere" how can it command us to follow exclusively the light and guidance of secular truth? Only the Atheist can be a consistent Secularist. According as man makes present happiness the only criterion of the value of life, or on the contrary admits the existence of God and the fact of a Divine Revelation and of a future life, the whole aspect of the present life changes. These questions cannot be ignored, for on them depends the right conduct of life and "the development of the moral and intellectual nature of man to the highest possible point". If anything can be known about God and a future life, duties to be fulfilled in the present life are thereby imposed on "all who would regulate life by reason and ennoble it by service". "Considerations purely human" become inadequate, and the "light and guidance" found in secular truth must be referred to and judged from a higher point of view. Hence the present life in itself cannot be looked upon as the only standard of man's worth. The Church would fail in her Divine mission if she did not insist on the insufficiency of a life conducted exclusively along secular lines, and therefore on the falsity of the main assumption of Secularism Again, the Catholic Church does not admit that religion is simply a private affair. God is the author and ruler not only of individuals, but also of societies. Hence the State should not be indifferent to religious matters (see ETHICS). How far in practice Church and State should go together depends on a number of circumstances and cannot be determined by any general rule, but the principle remains true that religion is a social as well as an individual duty. In practice again, owing to special circumstances, a secular education in the public schools may be the only possible one. At the same time, this is a serious defect which must be supplied otherwise. It is not enough for the child to be taught the various human sciences, he must also be given the knowledge of the necessary means of salvation. The Church cannot renounce her mission to teach the truths she has received from her Divine Founder. Not only as individuals, but also as citizens, all men have the right to perform the religious duties which their conscience dictates. The complete secularization of all public institutions in a Christian nation is therefore inadmissible. Man must not only be learned in human science; his whole life must be directed to the higher and nobler pursuits of morality and religion, to God Himself. While fully recognizing the value of the present life, the Church cannot look upon it as an end in itself, but only as a movement toward a future life for which preparation must be made by compliance with the laws of nature and the laws of God. Hence there is no possible compromise between the Church and Secularism, since Secularism would stifle in man that which, for the Church, constitutes the highest and truest motives of action, and the noblest human aspirations. HOLYOAKE, The Principles of Secularism (London, 1860); IDEM, Sixty Years of an Agitator's Life (London, 1892), autobiography; IDEM, The Origin and Nature of Secularism (London, 1896); published simultaneously in America under the title English Secularism, A Confession of Belief (Chicago, 1896); McCABE, Life and Letters of George Jacob Holyoake (London, 1908); GOSS, A Descriptive Bibliography of the Writings of George Jacob Holyoake, with a Brief Sketch of his Life (London, 1908); The Autobiography of Mr. Bradlaugh (London, s. d.); BONNER, Charles Bradlaugh (7th ed., London, 1908); FLINT, Anti-Theistic Theories (5th ed., Edinburgh, 1894). C. A. DUBRAY. Secularization Secularization (Lat. sæcularizatio) Secularization, an authorization given to religious with solemn vows and by extension to those with simple vows to live for a time or permanently in the "world" (sæculum), i. e., outside the cloister and their order, while maintaining the essence of religious profession. It is a measure of kindness towards the religious and is therefore to be distinguished from the "expulsion" of religious with solemn vows, and the "dismissal" of religious with simple vows, which are penal measures towards guilty subjects. On the other hand, as secularization does not annul the religious character, it is distinct from absolute dispensation from vows; this likewise is a lenient measure, but it annuls the vows and their obligation, and the one dispensed is no longer a religious. As a general rule dispensation is the measure taken in the case of religious with simple vows while secularization is employed where there are solemn vows. Nevertheless there are exceptions in both cases. Sometimes lay religious with solemn vows or lay sisters are wholly dispensed from their vows, religious life in the world being very difficult for lay persons; in other instances religious men or women with simple vows are authorized at least for a time to lay aside their habit and live outside their houses, at the same time observing their vows; such is the case for instance with the religious men and women in France, who have temporary renewable secularization in virtue of the Instructions of the S. C. of Bishops and Regulars (24 March, 1903). It is not therefore correct to speak of religious dispensed from their vows as secularized; the expression applies only to religious with solemn vows, especially to religious priests. Secularization is granted to these regulars like dispensation to religious with simple vows, either for reasons of general order or for motives of personal and private order. To the first class belong expulsions and suppression of religious houses by various governments, for instance, Spain in 1839, Italy in 1866, France in 1902; to the second class belong various reasons of health, family, etc. Secularization may be summarized under two heads: maintenance of the religious life, and at the same time relaxation of the religious life so far as is necessary in order to live in the world. Secularization is divided into temporary and perpetual; the first is simply the authorization given to a subject to live outside of his order, either for a fixed time, e. g., one or two years, or for the duration of particular circumstances, conditions of health, family, business, etc., but there is no change in either the conditions or duties of the religious. He is dependent on his superiors, only he is placed provisionally under the jurisdiction of the bishop of the place, to whom he is subject in virtue of the vow of obedience. In most instances the religious lays aside his habit, retaining privately however something indicative of his religious affiliation. At the expiration of the time of indult the religious returns to his cloister, unless this temporary secularization be granted in preparation for perpetual secularization, e. g., to allow a religious priest to find a bishop who will consent to receive him in his diocese. Perpetual secularization on the other hand wholly removes the subject from his order, whose habit he puts off, and of which he no longer has the right to ask his support, without previous agreement. But the one secularized does not cease to be a religious; his vows remain a permanent obligation and he thus continues to observe the essentials of a religious life. The vow of chastity being purely negative is observed in the world as in the cloister; the vow of obedience remains intact, but henceforth binds the subject to his bishop, to whom he owes not only canonical obedience, like every cleric, but also the full religious obedience vowed at profession. The vow of poverty necessarily undergoes alleviation with respect to temporal goods, but binds as to capacity to acquire and give away, as well as to bequeath without indults, which are readily granted at need. In the absence of indults the property of the secularized person goes to his order (S. C. Bishops and Regulars, 6 June, 1836). But the most important aspect of perpetual secularization as regards regulars is the regulation of their ecclesiastical status. The regular ordained to poverty, the religious ordained to a common revenue depend not on a bishop, but on their superiors. If they pass by secularization into the secular clergy they cannot remain without an ordinary and must necessarily be attached to a diocese. Formerly it was admitted that the one secularized fell once more under the jurisdiction of his original ordinary, but what was at first that ordinary's right eventually became a responsibility (cf. S. C. Bishops and Regulars in Colonien., 24 Feb., 1893), and this discipline aroused just complaints (cf. postulatum of the Bishops of Prussia, 19 Aug., 1892). Also the Decree "Auctus admodum" given by the Congregation of Bishops and Regulars (4 Nov., 1892) declared that every religious cleric who desired to be secularized or to leave his congregation must first find a bishop willing to receive him among his own clergy, and if prior to this he left his house he was suspended. Now no bishop is compelled to receive a religious into his diocese; if be admits him it is on the same condition as a cleric. This is why by common law the religious must first secure for himself an ecclesiastical patrimony; in dioceses where this law is not observed religious acquire the same rights and contract the same obligations towards the bishop as incorporated secular clerics. Though he may perform sacerdotal duties and receive legitimate emoluments he cannot without indult receive a residential benefice or a cure of souls (S. C. of Regular Discipline, 31 Jan., 1899). To prevent persons from becoming religious in order to attain ordination under the easiest conditions with the intention of subsequently seeking secularization and entering the ranks of the secular clergy the Decree of 15 June, 1909, decided that to all Rescripts of temporary or perpetual secularization or dispensation from perpetual vows be de facto annexed, even if they are not expressed, the following clauses and prohibitions, dispensation from which is reserved to the Holy See; these religious are debarred from: 1. every office (and if they are eligible to benefices) every benefice in major or minor basilicas and cathedrals; 2. every position as teacher and office in greater or lesser clerical seminaries; in other houses for the instruction of clerics; in universities or institutes conferring degrees by Apostolic privilege; 3. every office in episcopal curiæ; 4. the office of visitor or director of religious houses of men or women, even in diocesan congregations; 5. habitual dwelling in localities where there are houses of the province or mission left by the religious. Finally if the religious wishes to return to his order he has not to make again his novitiate or his profession, but takes rank from the time of his return. The word secularization has a very different meaning when applied not to persons but to things. It then signifies ecclesiastical property become secular, as has occurred on several occasions in consequence of governmental usurpation (see LAICIZATION). The word may also signify the suppression of sovereign or of feudal right belonging to ecclesiastical dignitaries as such. The chief ecclesiastical principalities of the Holy Roman Empire, notably the electorates, were secularized by the Decree of 25 Feb., 1803. The word secularization may also be applied to the abandonment by the Church of its goods to purchasers after governmental confiscations, most frequently after a merciful composition or arrangement. Concessions of this kind were made by Julius III for England in 1554, by Clement XI for Saxony in 1714, by Pius VII for France in 1801, by Pius IX for Italy in 1886, and finally by Pius X for France in 1907. Cf. the canonists under the title De statu monachorum, lib. iii, tit. 38; GENNARI, Consultations canoniques, cons. iii (French tr., Paris, 1909); BOUIX, De jure regularium (Paris, 1897); VERMEERSCH, De relig. instit. et personis (2nd ed., Bruges, 1909); NERVEGNA, De jure practico regularium (Rome, 1901). A. BOUDINHON. Thomas Sedgwick Thomas Sedgwick Regius professor of divinity at Cambridge, 1557, rector of Stanhope, Durham, and vicar of Gainford, Durham, both in 1558; d. in a Yorkshire prison, 1573. He was deprived of the three preferments noted above soon after Elizabeth's accession, and was restricted to within ten miles of Richmond, Yorkshire, from 1562 to 1570, when he seems to have been sent to prison at York. An unfriendly hand in 1562 describes him as "learned but not very wise". He argued against Bucer in 1550, and against Cranmer, Latimer, and Ridley in April 1554, when he was incorporated D.D. at Oxford. He had been rector of Edwarton, Suffold, 1552. Lady Margaret professor of divinity, 1554, vicar of Enfield Middlesex, 1555, and rector of Toft, Cambridgeshire, 1556, but had given up these four preferments before Queen Mary died. COOPER in Dict. Nat. Biol..,s.v.; Catholic Record Society Publications, V (London, 1905), 193; Record Office, State Papers Dom. Arc. Eliz., XVII, 72; GEE, Elizabeth Clergy, passim. JOHN B. WAINEWRIGHT Sedia Gestatoria Sedia Gestatoria The Italian name of the portable papal throne used on certain solemn occasions in the pontifical ceremonies. It consists of a richly-adorned, silk-covered armchair, fastened on a suppedaneum, on each side of which are two gilded rings; through these rings pass the long rods with which twelve footmen (palafrenieri), in red uniforms, carry the throne on their shoulders. Two large fans (flabella) made of white feathers -- a relic of the ancient liturgical use of the flabellum, mentioned in the "Constitutiones Apostolicae", VIII, 12 -- are carried at the sides of the Sedia Gestatoria. This throne is used more especially in the ceremonies at the coronation of a new pope, and generally at all solemn entries of the pope to St. Peter's or to public consistories. In the first case three bundles of tow are burnt before the newly-elected pontiff, who sits on the Sedia Gestatoria, whilst a master of ceremonies says: "Sancte Pater sic transit gloria mundi," (Holy Father, so passes the glory of the world). The custom of carrying the newly-elected pope, and formerly in some countries the newly-elected bishop, to his church can be, in some instances, traced back very far and may be compared with the Roman use of the Sedia curulis, on which newly-elected consuls were carried through the city. Already Ennodius, Bishop of Pavia (d. 521) records in his "Apologia pro Synodo" (P.L., LXIII, 206; "Corpus Script. eccl.", VI, Vienna, 1882, 328) "Gestatoriam sellam apostolicae confessionis" alluding to the cathedra S. Petri, still preserved in the choir of St. Peter's at Rome. This is a portable wooden armchair, inlaid with ivory, with two iron rings on each side. Besides the present constant use of the Sedia Gestatoria at the coronation of the pope (which seems to date from the beginning of the sixteenth century), etc., it served in the past on different other occasions, for instance when the pope received the yearly tribute of the Kingdom of Naples and of the other fiefs, and also, at least since the fifteenth century, when he carried the Blessed Sacrament publicly, in which case the Sedia Gestatoria took a different form, a table being adjusted before the throne. Pius X made use of this on the occasion of the Eucharistic Congress at Rome in 1905. BONANNI, Gerarchia ecclesiastica considerata nelle vesti sacre e civile usate da quelli li quali la compongono (Rome, 1720), 390-95; CANCELLIERI, Storia de' solenni possessi de' Sommi Pontefici detti anticamente Processi o Processioni dopo la loro Coronazione dalla Basilica Vaticana alla Lateranense (Rome, 1802), 146-47, 272; DE ROSSI, Bullettino di Archeologia cristiana (Rome, 1967), 33 sq.; KRAUS, Real Encyclopadie der christlichen Altertumer, II (Freiburg, 1886), 156 sq. See also FLABELLUM. LIVARIUS OLIGER Sedilia Sedilia (Plural of Latin sedile, a seat.) The name given to seats on the south side of the sanctuary, used by the officiating clergy during the liturgy. The earliest examples are found in the catacombs, where a single stone seat at the south end of the altar was used by the celebrant. Similar single seats are found in Spain (at Barcelona, Saragossa, Toledo, and elsewhere) and England (at Lenham and Beckley). In course of time the number of seats was increased to three (for celebrant, deacon, and sub-deacon), which is the number usually found, though sometimes there are four and even five. They became common in England by the twelfth or thirteenth century, and were frequently recessed in the thickness of the wall of the church. In other European countries they are comparatively rare, movable wooden benches or chairs being usual. Some early English examples are merely stone benches, but the later ones were almost invariably built in the form of niches, richly decorated with carved canopies, moulded shafts, pinnacles, and tabernacle work. The piscina was often incorporated with them, its position being east of the sedilia proper. Four seats, instead of three, are found at Durham, Furness, and Ottery, and five at Southwell, Padua (S. Maria), and Esslingen. In many cases they are on different levels and the celebrant occupied the highest, i.e., the easternmost. But when they were all on the same level, which is said to indicate the date at which priests began to act as assistants at Mass, there is some doubt as to which was the celebrant's. If there were only three, it was probably the central one, as in the present Roman usage, but with four or five nothing can be stated with certainty, though possibly the easternmost was considered the highest in dignity. Mention may here be made of the royal chair of Scotland given by Edward I to Westminster Abbey to be used as the celebrant's chair, and it is probably this same seat, on the south side of the high altar, that figures in the "Islip Roll." WALCOTT, Sacred Arch ology (London, 1868); LEE, Glossary of Liturgical and Ecclesiastical Terms (London, 1877); MARTIGNY, Dict. des antiquités chrét. (Paris, 1865). G. CYPRIAN ALSTON Seduction Seduction (Lat. seducere, to lead aside or astray) Seduction is here taken to mean the inducing of a previously virtuous woman to engage in unlawful sexual intercourse. Two cases are distinguishable. The seducer may have brought about the surrender of his victim's chastity either with or without a promise of subsequent marriage. For the purpose of this article we do not suppose the employment of violence, but only persuasion and the like. The obligation of restitution in either hypothesis for the bodily damage wrought, considered specifically as such, cannot be imposed. The obvious reason is that its performance is impossible. We are speaking of course only of the court of conscience. In certain cases the civil tribunal may justly mulct the seducer to make pecuniary compensation, and he will be bound to obey. If the woman has been lured into carnal relations by the promise of marriage, it is the generally received and practically certain teaching that the man is bound to marry her. This is true, independently of whether she has become pregnant or not. Granted that the bargain is a vicious one, still she has executed her part of it. What remains is not sinful, and unless it is carried out she is subjected to an injury reparable ordinarily only by marriage. This doctrine holds good whether the promise be real or only feigned. Moralists note that this solution does not cover every situation. It will not apply, for instance, if the woman can easily gather from the circumstances that her seducer has no serious intention to wed her, or if he is vastly her superior in social position, or if the outcome of such an union is likely to be very unhappy (as it will often be). None the less, even in these conditions, the betrayer may at times be obliged to furnish other reparation, such as money for her dowry. When no promise of marriage has been given by the seducer and the woman has yielded freely to his solicitations, the only obligation devolving on the man is one which he shares with his paramour, viz., to care for the fruit of their sin, if there is any. Strictly speaking, he has done no injury to her; she has accepted his advances. The only duty therefore which emerges is one that touches, not her, but the possible offspring. It must be observed, however, that if he, by talking about his crime, has brought about the defamation of his partner or her parents, he will be obliged to make good whatever losses they sustain in consequence. Then, however, the immediate source of his responsibility is not his criminal intercourse with her, but the shattering of her and her parents' reputation. SLATER, Manual of Moral Theology (New York, 1908); LEHMKUHL, Theologia Moralis (Fribourg, 1887); GENICOT, Theologi Moralis Institutiones (Louvain, 1898); D'ANNIBALE, Summula Theologi Moralis (Rome, 1908). JOSEPH F. DELANY Sedulius Sedilius Christian poet of the fifth century. The name of Cælius, which at times precedes that of Sedulius, finds but little confirmation in the manuscripts. All our information regarding his personal history comes from two sources. Isidore of Seville in his "De viris illustribus" assigns Sedulius the seventh place, before Possidius, while Avitus and Dracontius have respectively the twenty-third and twenty-fourth places. On the other hand, some manuscripts of Sedulius contain a biographical notice which may have been written by Gennadius. This account represents Sedulius as a Layman, who lived at first in Italy and was devoted to the study of philosophy; consequently he probably wrote his works in Achaia during the reign of Theodosius the Younger (died 450) and of Valentinian III (died 455). The principal work of Sedulius is a poem in five books called "Carmen paschale". The first book contains a summary of the Old Testament; the four others a summary of the New Testament. A prose introduction dedicates the work to a priest named Macedonius. The author says that he had given himself at first to secular studies and to the "barren diversions" of secular poetry. The poem is skilfully written and is more original than that of Juvencus. Sedulius takes for granted a knowledge of the story of the Gospels, and this enables him to treat his subject more freely. He gives his attention chiefly to the thoughts and sentiments which would naturally arise from meditations on the sacred writings. He pays, however, less care to uniting the various parts and making of them a coherent recital. He follows usually the Gospel of St. Matthew. His ordinary method of exegesis consists of allegory and symbolism. Thus the four Evangelists correspond to the four seasons, the twelve Apostles to the twelve hours of the day and the twelve months, the four arms of the cross to the four cardinal points. The style is a skilful imitation and shows evidences of an extensive reading of Terence, Tibullus, Ovid, Lucan, and above all of Virgil. At times the rhetoric is unfortunately influenced by what he has read, as in the ten lines (V, 59-68) of invective against Judas. It is, however, in the prose paraphrase of the "Carmen", the "Opus paschale", that the most unfortunate impression is produced. In the poem the language of Sedulius is dignified and almost classic, in the prose version it becomes diffuse, pretentious, and incorrect. The prose version, the "Opus paschale" was written at the request of the priest Macedonius in order, as it appears, to fill up the gaps of the poem. Facts scarcely indicated in the "Carmen" are treated at length in the "Opus", and the expressions borrowed from the Bible give the work a more ecclesiastical character. Sedulius also wrote two hymns. One is epanaleptic in form, that is, in the distich, the second half of the pentameter repeats the first half of the hexameter. Up to line 48 the author sets in opposition the types of the Old Testament and the realities of the New, a theme very favourable to epanalepsis. The poem is only of interest for the history of typology. In the Sequence of these 110 lines other antitheses are utilized, notably those of the benefits of God and of the ingratitude of man, The other hymn is abecedarian, It is composed of twenty-three strophes, each of which commences with a letter of the alphabet. The strophe is made of four iambic dimeters (eight syllables). The structure of these lines is generally correct, excepting an occasional hiatus and the lengthening of syllables when in difficulties. The poem is a summary of the story of the Gospels, treated very freely, for in 92 lines 40 relate the childhood of Christ. The diction is at the same time simple and distinguished, the style easy and concise. These qualities led the church to take parts of this hymn for its offices: "A solis ortus cardine" for Christmas, and "Hostis Herodes impie" under the form of "Crudelis Herodes Deum" for Epiphany, It has also taken two lines of the "Carmen" (II, 63-64) to serve as the Introit in the Masses of the Blessed Virgin, "Salve Sancta Parens". The best edition of Sedulius is that of J. Huemer in the "Corp. script. eccl. lat." (Vienna, 1885). From a note which is found in several manuscripts we learn that the works of Sedulius were edited as early as the fifth century by Turcius Rufius Asterius (consul in 494), author of a superscription in the Medicean manuscript of Virgil. HUEMER, De Sedulii poet vita et scriptis commentatio (Vienna, 1878); BOISSIER, Le Carmen paschale et l'opus paschale in Journal des savants (Paris, Sept., 1881), 553; IDEM in Revue de philologie, VI (Paris, 1882), 28. PAUL LEJAY Sedulius Scotus Sedulius Scotus An Irish teacher, grammarian and Scriptural commentator, who lived in the ninth century. Sedulius is sometimes called Sedulius the Younger, to distinguish him from Coelius Sedulius also, probably, an Irishman, the author of the "Carmen Paschale", and other sacred poems. The Irish form of the name is Siadhal, or Shiel. Sedulius the Younger flourished from 840 to 860. There are, altogether, six Siadhals mentioned in the "Annals of the Four Masters" between the years 785 and 855. Of these, one was present at a council at Rome in 721, and another was Abbot of Kildare, and died in 828. The best known, however, and the most important, was neither of these, but a Siadhal who, during the reign of the Emperor Lothair (840-855) was one of a colony of Irish teachers at Liege. It appears from the manuscript records of the ninth century that there was a teacher at St. Lambert, Liege, who was known as Sedulius Scotus, and was a scribe and a poet. He was a student of Greek, and, according to Montfaucon, it was he who copied the Greek Psalter now no. 8047 in the "Bibliotheque de l'Arsenale", Paris. His poems, to the number of ninety, are published by Traube in the "Poetae AEvi Carolini", which is a portion of the "Monumenta Germaniae Historica". It is quite probable that, towards the end of his days, he went to Milan, following the example of his countryman, Dungal, who established a school at Pavia. When and where he died is unknown. Sedulius's most important works are his treatise "De Rectoribus Christianis", a commentary on Porphyry's "Isagoge", or introduction to the logic of Aristotle, and a scriptural commentary "Collectanea in omnes beati Pauli Epistolas". The first of these is a noteworthy contribution to Christian ethics. It is the first, apparently, of a long line of treatises written during the Middle Ages for the instruction of Christian princes and rulers, a dissertation on the duties peculiar to that state of life, a "Mirror for Princes", as such works came to be called at a much later period. Sedulius's work shows, among other remarkable traits, a deep moral feeling, a realization of the fact that the mission of the state is neither purely economic on the one hand nor exclusively ecclesiastical, on the other. The question of the relations between Church and State had, indeed, been raised, and Sedulius, it need hardly be said, does not hesitate to affirm the rights of the Church and to defend them. He is not on the side of those who, seeing in Charlemagne the ideal of a pontiff and ruler in one person, were in favor of the idea that the prince should in fact be supreme in matters religious. On the contrary, he is in favor of a division of temporal and spiritual powers and requires of the prince a careful observance of the Church's rights and privileges. The description of the qualifications of the Queen (pp. 34 sq. in Hellmann's ed.) is not only Christian in feeling and tone, but also humanistic, in the best sense of the word. The commentary on the "Isagoge" was known in Western Europe in the Latin version only. Not the least interesting of the writings of Sedulius are his letters, some of which are published in the "Neues Archiv", II, 188, and IV, 315. In them are narrated the vicissitudes of the Irish exiles on the Continent, and an insight is given into the attitude towards those exiles by the authorities, civil and ecclesiastical, as well as by the people. HELLMANN, Sedulius Scotus (Munich 1906); Cath. Univ. Bulletin (April, 1898, and July, 1907). WILLIAM TURNER Seekers Seekers An obscure Puritan sect which arose in England in the middles of the seventeenth century. They represented an Antinomian tendency among some of the Independents, and professed to be seeking for the true Church, Scripture, Ministry, and Sacraments. In his contemporary account Richard Baxter says of them: "They taught that our scripture was uncertain; that present miracles are necessary to faith; that our ministry is null and without authority, and our worship and ordinances unnecessary or vain, the Church, ministry, scripture and ordinances being lost, for which they are now seeking." He adds the absurd statement: "I quickly found that the Papists principally hatched and actuated this sect, and that a considerable number that were of this profession were some Papists and some infidels." (Life and Times, 76). According to Baxter, they amalgamated with the Vanists. Weingarten considers that they held Millenarian views. Probably the name denotes a school of thought rather than a definitely-organized body. BAXTER, Reliquiæ Baxterianæ (London, 1696); WEINGARTEN, Die Revolutionskirchen Englands (Leipzig, 1868). EDWIN BURTON Francis X. Seelos Francis X. Seelos Born at Füssen, Bavaria, 11 January, 1819; died at New Orleans, La., 4 Oct., 1867. When a child, asked by his mother what he intended to be, he pointed to the picture of his patron, St. Francis Xavier, and said: "I'm going to be another St. Francis." He pursued his studies in Augsburg and Munich, and entered the Congregation of the Most Holy Redeemer, offering himself for the Amricnan Mission; he arrived in America on 17 April, 1843. That following year, 16 May, 1844, he made his religious profession at the Redemptorist novitiate, Baltimore, and seven months later he was ordained by Archbishop Eccleston of Baltimore. He was assigned to St. James, Baltimore. In May 1845, he was sent to Pittsburg, where he had as superior Ven. John Neumann. In 1851 Father Seelos was appointed superior of the Pittsburg community, where he laboured untiringly for nine years. His confessional was constantly besieged by crowds of people of every description and class. It was said by many that he could read their very souls. From Pittsburg, he was transferred to St. Alphonsus's, Baltimore, where he fell dangerously ill. On his recovery he was appointed prefect (spiritual director) of the professed students, and he succeeded in winning the love an esteem of all who were privleged to be under his spiritual guidance. In 1860 his name was proposed for the vacant Holy See of Pittsburg, but humbly refused the honour. The year 1962 found him again at mission work. In 1866 he was summoned to Detroit, and in September of the same year to New Orleans, Louisiana. The cause of his beatification is in progress. ZIMMER, Leben des P.F.Z. Seelos (New York, 1887); BECK, Die Redemptorists in Ammapolis (Ilchester, 1904); BENEDETTI, Album Servorum Dei, C.SS.R. (Rome, 1903); SHEA, History of the Catholic Church in the United States, I (New york, 1908). CORNELIUS J. WARREN Seerth Seerth Seerth, a Chaldean see, appears to have succeeded the See of Arzon in the same province, several of the Nestorian bishops of which in the fifth and sixth centuries are known (Chabot, "Synodicon orientale". 666), as are also a large number of Jacobite bishops (Revue de l'Orient Chrétien, VI, 192). The diocese began to have Catholic titulars in the time of Julius III. Seerth is now the chief town of a sandjak in the vilayet of Bitlis, containing 15,000 inhabitants. It has fine orchards and vineyards, is an industrial centre containing much gypsum, and manufacturing arms and printed calico. The Dominicans have a mission there; the Catholic bishop, Mgr Addai Scher, is well known by his editions of Syriac texts. American Protestants have schools supported by their missionary societies. The diocese contains 3000 faithful, 20 priests, 24 churches or chapels, 43 stations, and 3 primary schools. Revue de l'Orient Chrétien, I, 477; CUINET, La Turque d' Asie, II 596-605; Missiones catholicæ (Rome, 1907, 813 S. VAILHÉ Diocese of Seez Séez (SAGIUM.) Diocese embracing the Department of Orne. Re-established by the Concordat of 1802, which, by adding to it some parishes of the dioceses of Bayeux, Lisieux, Le Mans, and Chartres, and by cutting off some districts formerly included in it, made it exactly coextensive with the department. It is suffragan to the Archdiocese of Rouen. Mgr. Duchesne is of opinion that for the period anterior to 900 no reliance can be placed on the episcopal catalogue of Séez, which we know by certain compilations of the sixth century. This catalogue mentions Sigisbald and Saint Latuinus (Lain or Latuin) as the first two bishops of the sec. Saint Landry, martyr, would be the third. Some historians say that Sigisbald had lived about 451, and Landry about 480; others, relying on a later tradition, assign Saint Latuinus to the first century and make him a missionary sent by Saint Clement. The first bishop of Séez historically known, according to Mgr. Duchesne, is Passivus, who assisted at four councils after the year 533. As bishops of Séez the following merit mention: St. Raverennus (date uncertain), whom Mgr. Duchesne does not include in the episcopal list; St. Aunobertus (about 689); assassinated, whose double episcopacy Mgr. Duchesne assigns to the close of the seventh or the beginning of the eighth century; St. Adalhelmus (Adelin), author of a work on the life and miracles of St. Opportuna; Gervaise (1220-28), a Premonstratensian, who had the confidence of Celestin III, Innocent III, and Honorius III; Jean Bertaut (1607-11), who, with his fellow-student and friends, Du Perron, contributed greatly to the conversion of Henry IV, and who was esteemed for his poetical talents; for the occupation of the See of Séez in 1813 by Guillaume Baston (1741-1825), see BASTON, GUILLAUME-ANDRÉ-RENÉ. St. Evroul, a native of the Diocese of Bayeux, founded, after 560, several monasteries in the Diocese of Séez; one of them became the important Abbey of St-Martin-de-Séez, which, owing to the influence of Richelieu, its administrator-general, was reformed in 1636 by the Benedictines of St-Maur. Rotrou II, Count of Perche, in fulfillment of a vow, established in 1122, at Soligny, the Abbey of La Trappe, in favour of which Bulls were issued by Eugene III (1147), Alexander III (1173), and Innocent III (1203), and which was reformed in 1662 by Abbot Amand Jean le Bouthillier de Rancé (q.v.). During the Revolution the Trappists went with Dom Augustin de Lestranges, 26 April, 1791, into Switzerland, where they founded the convent of La Val Saint, but returned to Soligny soon after the accession of Louis XVII. Among the abbots of the Trappists monastery at Soligny were: Cardinal Jean du Bellay, who held a number of bishoprics and resigned his abbatial dignity in 1538; the historian Dom Gervaise, superior of the abbey from 1696-8. On the occasion of the Massacre of St. Bartholomew (1572) Matignon, leader of the Catholics, succeeded in saving the lives of the Protestants at Alençon. The cathedral of Séez dates from the twelfth century; that of Alençon was begun in the fourteenth. The following saints are the object of special devotion: SS. Ravennus and Rasyphus, martyred in the diocese about the beginning of the third century; St. Céronne (d. about 490), who founded two monasteries of nuns near Mortagne; St. Cenerius, of Céneri (d. about 669), born at Spoleto, founder of the monastery of St. Cenerius; St. Opportuna, sister of St. Chrodegang, and her aunt, St. Lanthilda, abbesses of the two monasteries of Almenèches (end of the seventh or beginning of the eighth century); St. Evremond (d. about 720), founder of the monasteries of Fontenay les Louvets and Montmevrey; St. Osmund, Bishop of Salisbury (d. 1099), who as Comte de Séez, had followed William the Conqueror into England. The chief pilgrimages in the diocese are: Notre-Dame de Champs at Séez, Notre-Dame du Vallet, Notre-Dame du Repos, near Almenèches, three very ancient shrines; Notre-Dame de Lignerolles, a pilgrimage of the seventh century; Notre-Dame de Recouvrance, at Les Tourailles, dating beyond 900; Notre-Dame de Longny, established in the sixteenth century; Notre-Dame du Lignon, a pilgrimage of the seventeenth century. In 1884 Mgr. Buguet, curé of Montligeon chapel, founded an expiatory society for the abandoned souls in Purgatory, since erected by Leo XIII into a Prima Primaria archconfraternity, which publishes six bulletins in different languages and has members in every part of the world. Notre Dame de la Chapelle Montligeon is also a place of pilgrimage. The Grande Trappe of Soligny still exists in the Diocese of Séez, which before the application of the law of 1901 against religious congregations had different teaching congregations of brothers, in addition to the Redemptorists. Among the congregations of nuns originating in the diocese may be mentioned: the Sisters of Providence, a teaching and nursing institute founded in 1683 with mother-house at Séez; the Sisters of Christian Education, established in 1817 by Abbé Lafosse, mother-house at Argentan, and a branch of the order at Farnborough in England; the Sisters of Mercy, founded in 1818 by Abbé Bazin to nurse the sick in their own homes. At the close of the nineteenth century the religious congregations had in the diocese: 2 infant asylums, 24 infant schools, 3 workshops, 1 school for the blind, 1 for the deaf and dumb, 4 boys' orphanages, 11 girls' orphanages, 2 refugees, 16 hospitals, 16 convents of nuns devoted to the care of the sick at home, and 1 insane asylum. At the time of the destruction of the Concordat (1905) the diocese contained 326,952 inhabitants, 45 cures, 467 succursal churches, 135 vicariates towards the support of which the State contributed. Gallia Christiana (nova), XI (1759), 674-711, instr. 151-200; DUCHESNE, Fastes épiscopaux, II, 229-34; FISQUET, France pontificale, diocèse de Séez (Paris, 1866); HOMMEY, Histoire Générale ecclésiastique et civile du diocèse de Séez (Alençon, 1899-1900); MARAIS AND BEAUDOUIN, Essai historique sur la cathédrale et le chapître de Séez (Alençon, 1878); BLIN, Vie des saints du diocèse de Séez et histoire de leur culte, I (Laigle, 1873). GEORGES GOYAU Charles John Seghers Charles John Seghers Bishop of Vancouver Island (today Victoria), Apostle of Alaska. b. at Ghent, Belgium, 26 Dec., 1839; d. in Alaska, 28 Nov., 1886. Left an orphan at a very early date, he was brought up by his uncles. After having studied in local institutions and in the American Seminary at Louvain, he was ordained priest on 31 May, 1863. On 14 Sept. of the same year he left for Vancouver Island, where for the space of ten years he was engaged in valuable missionary labours among the pioneer whites and the natives. On 23 March, 1873, he was appointed to succeed Bishop Demers (q.v.). One of the first cares of the new prelate was to visit the territory of Alaska, after which he turned his attention towards the west coast of Vancouver Island, where he established missions for the Indians. In 1877 he again repaired to Alaska, and evangelized in succession St. Michael's, Nulato, Ulukuk, Kaltag, Nuklukayet, and various other points along the Yukon. He did not return to Victoria before 20 Sept., 1878. He was then named coadjutor to the Archbishop of Oregon City, whom he succeeded 12 Dec,. 1880. After meritorious apostolic labours in his new field of action, as no titular could be found for his old diocese of Victoria, he generously volunteered to return thither, with a view to following up his work in Alaska. This act of disinterestedness deeply touched Leo XIII, and on 2 April, 1885, Archbishop Seghers again took possession of his former see. Whites and Indians then received the benefit of his ministrations, and two missions were founded (1885) in Alaska, one at Sitka, the other at Juneau. But in the course of his fifth expedition to that distant land, he was heartlessly murdered by a white companion named Fuller, whose mind had become more or less unbalanced under the stress of the hardships of the journey and the evil counsels of an American who foresaw in the coming of the two Jesuit priests the archbishop had brought with him an implied reproach. The remains of the bishop were ultimately transferred to Victoria. DE BAETS Mgr. Seghers, l'Apôtre de l'Alaska (Paris, 1896); MORICE, History of the Catholic Church in Western Canada (Toronto, 1910) A.G. MORICE Paolo Segneri, the Elder Paolo Segneri, the Elder Italian Jesuit, preacher, missionary, ascetical writer, b. at Nettuno, 21 March (cf. Massei) 1624; d. at Rome, 9 Dec., 1694. He studied at the Roman College, and in 1637 entered the Society of Jesus, not without opposition from his father. The eloquent Oliva was his first master in the religious life; Sforza Pallacicini taught him theology. Under such guides his virtues and talents developed to maturity. He lectured on humanities for several years, and was ordained priest in 1653. By a careful study of Scripture, the Fathers, and the Orations of Cicero, he had prepared himself for the pulpit, for which he had ever felt a strong attraction. He volunteered for the foreign missions, but Tuscany, the Papal States, and the chief cities of Italy were to be the scene of his labours. He preached at first in the great cathedrals, and then for twenty-seven years (1665-92) gave popular missions with an eloquence surpassed only by his holiness. His "Quaresimale" (Florence, 1679, tr. New York, 1874) had been read and admired by Antonio Pignatelli, who as Pope Innocent XII summoned the missionary to preach before him, and made him theologian of the Penitentiaria. Segneri's biographer, Massei, states distinctly that "Le Prediche dette nei palazzo apostolico" (Rome, 1694) won the admiration of the pontiff and his Court. After St. Bernadine of Siena and Savanarola, Segneri was Italy's greatest orator. He reformed the Italian pulpit. Marini and the Marianisti with the petty tricks and simpering graces of the "Seicento" had degraded the national literature. The pulpit even was infected. Segneri at times stumbles into the defects of the "Seicentisti", but his occasional bad taste and abuse of profane erudition cannot blind the impartial critic to his merits. The "Quaresimale", "the Prediche", the "Panegyrici Sacri" (Florence, 1684, translated by Father Humphrey, London, 1877), stamp him as a great orator. His qualities are a vigour of reasoning, a strategist's marshaling of converging proofs and arguments, which recall Bourdaloue; a richness of imagination which the French Jesuit does not possess; a deep and melting pathos. He is particularly cogent in refutation; to harmony of thought and plan, he unites a Dorian harmony of phrase; he is full of unction, priestly, and popular. He has two sources of inspiration, his love of God and of the people before him. To his oratorical powers, he added the zeal of an apostle and the austerities of a great penitent. All this readily explains his wonderful success with people naturally emotional and deeply Catholic. Entire districts flocked to hear him; extraordinary graces and favours marked his career. His triumphs left him simple as a child. In his theological discussion with his superior-general, Thyrsus Gonzalez, who was a firm champion of Probabiliorism, he combined the respect and obedience of the subject with the reasonable and manly independence of the trained thinker (cf. Lettere sulla Materia del Probabile" in vol. IV of "Opere", Venice, 1748). Segneri wrote also "Il penitente istruito (Bologna, 1669); "Il confessore istruito" (Brescia, 1672); "La Manna dell anima" (Milan, 1683, tr. London, New York, 1892); "Il Cristiano istruito" (Florence, 1690). His complete works (cf. Somervogel) have been frequently edited: at Parma, 1701; Venice, 1712-58; Turin, 1855, etc. The "Quaresimale" has been printed at least thirty times. Some of Segneri's works have been translated into Arabic. Hallam criticizes Segneri unfairly; Ford is more just in his appreciation. MASSEI, Breve ragguaglio della Vita del Ven. Servo di Dio il Padre Paolo Segneri (Florence, Parma, 1701), tr. In no. 27 of the Oratory Series (London, 1851); TIRABOSCHI, Storia della letteratura italiana (Modena, 1771-82); VIII: FABRONI, Vita Italorum (Pisa, 1788-99); PATRIGNANI-BOERO, Menologio (Rome, 1859); AUDISIO, Lezioni di Eloquenza Sacra (Turin, 1859); I, Lecture vi, II, Lecture xxvi, xxix, III, Lecture vi, vii; FORD, Sermons from the Quaresimale, with a preface relating to the author (London, 1869) Protestant; HALLAM, Introd. To the Lit. of Europe (New York, 1841), II, 26; DE COPPIER, LE p. Segneri considéré comme Orateur in Etudes (Dec., 1878); TREBBI, Il Quaresimale, con discorso ed analisi (Turin, 1883); MORRIS, The Lights in Prayer of the Ven. Frs. De la Puente, de la Colombiére, and the Rev. r. P. Segneri, S.J. (London, 1893); BELLONI, Il seicento (Milan, 1899); TACCHI-VENTURI, Lettere inedite di P. Segneri. . . intorno all opera segneriana "La Concordia" (Florence, 1903); BULGARELLI, Il P. Segneri e la diocesi di Modigliana (Saluzzo, 1908); BAUMGARTNER, Die Gestichte der Weltliteratur, VI Band, Die italienische Literatur (St. Louis, 1911); Civiltô, 3rd Series, VIII, 454; 15th Series, XII, 257; 16th Series, V, 314; 18th Series, V, 142; SOMMERVOGEL, Bibl. De la C. de J., VII; FORNACIARI, Disegno storico della letteratura italiana (Florence, 1898). JOHN C. REVILLE Segni Segni (SIGNINSIS). Located in the Province of Rome. The city, situated on a hill in the Monti Lepini overlooks the valley of the river Sacco. There still exist the double enclosure of a cyclopean wall and the gates, the architrave of which is a large monolith; one of these is the famous Porta Saracinesca. There are also the ruins of a church (St. Peter's) and some underground excavations, which recall Etruscan influence. Under Tarquin the Proud, of Etruscan origin, it became a colony. With other Latin cities it rebelled against Rome more than once. On several occasions it served as a place of refuge for the popes, and Eugenius III erected a palace there. In the twelfth century it came into possession of the Conti Marsi, which family gave four members to the papal ranks. In 1558 it was sacked by the forces of the Duke of-Alba in the war against Paul IV; immense booty was captured, as the inhabitants of the other towns of the Campagna had fled thither. Segni is the birthplace of Pope St. Vitalianus and of the physician Ezio Cleti. The Cappella Conti in the cathedral is worthy of admiration. The first known bishop of Segni is Sanctulus (about 494); among his successors are: St. Bruno (1079), who wrote an excellent commentary on the Scriptures; Trasmundo (1123), deposed for supporting Anacletus II, the antipope; on his repentance he was restored; under John III (1138), St. Thomas a Becket was canonized in the cathedral (1173); Lucio Fazini (1482), renowned for his erudition; Fra Bernardino Callini (1541), wrote the life of St. Bruno; Giuseppe Panfili, O.S.A. (1570), deposed and imprisoned on account of his misdeeds; Paolo Ciotti (1784), who governed the diocese with great wisdom during the Revolution. The diocese is immediately subject to the Holy See; it contains 12 parishes; 58 secular and 18 regular priests; 20,000 inhabitants; 3 houses of religious and 8 of nuns; a college for young boys and 5 educational establishments for young girls. CAPPELLETTI, Le chiese d'Italia, II (Venice, 1887). U. BENIGNI Segorbe Segorbe (Also CASTELLÓN DE LA PLANA; SEGOBIENSIS; CASTETELLIONENSIS) Diocese in Spain, bounded on the north by Castellón and Teruel, on the east by Castellón, on the south by Valencia, and on the west by Valencia and Teruel, has its jurisdiction in the civil Provinces of Castellón, Valencia, Teruel, and Cuenca. It is suffragan of Valencia, and its capital, containing 7500 inhabitants, is also the capital of the Province of Castellón de la Plana. This city, though the capital of a province, has no episcopal see: by the Concordat of 1851 the See of Tortosa, to which diocese a large part of the province belongs, is to be transferred to it. According to the common opinion, Segorbe is the ancient Segobriga, of which Pliny speaks as the capital of Celtiberia. For this reason it is probable that the town has been the seat of a bishopric from very early times; however, no name of any Bishop of Segorbe is known earlier than Proculus, who signed in the Third Council of Toledo. Porcarius assisted at the Council of Gundemar; Antonius, at the fourth of Toledo; Floridius, at the seventh; Eusicius, at the ninth and tenth; Memorius, at the eleventh and twelfth; Olipa, at the thirteenth; Anterius at the fifteenth and sixteenth. After this we have no information of its bishops until the Arab invasion, when its church was converted into a mosque. In 1172 Pedro Ruiz de Azagra, son of the Lord of Estella, took the city of Albarracín, and succeeded in establishing there a bishop (Martín), who took the title of Arcabricense, and afterwards that of Segobricense, thinking that Albarracín was nearer to the ancient Segobriga than to Ercavica or Arcabrica. When Segorbe was conquered by Jaime I in 1245, its church was purified, and Jimeno, Bishop of Albarracín, took possession of it. The bishops of Valencia opposed this, and Arnau of Peralta entered the church of Segorbe by force of arms. The controversy being referred to Rome, the bishops of Segorbe had part of their territory restored to them; but the Schism of the West supervened, and the status quo continued. In 1571 Francisco Soto Salazar being bishop, the Diocese of Albarracín was separated from Segorbe. Eminent among the bishops of the latter was Juan Bautista Pérez, who exposed the fraudulent chronicles. In modern times Domingo Canubio, the Dominican, and Francisco Aguilar, author of various historical works are worthy of mention. The cathedral, once a mosque, has been completely rebuilt in such a manner that it preserves no trace of Arab architecture. It is connected by a bridge with the old episcopal palace. Its time-stained tower and its cloister are built on a trapezoidal ground-plan. The restoration was completed in 1534; and in 1795 the nave was lengthened, and new altars added, in the episcopate of Lorenzo Haedo. Segorbe possessed a castle, in which King Martin of Aragon lived and held his court; but the demolition of this building was begun in 1785, and its materials were used for the construction of the hospital and Casa de Misericordia. The seminary is in the Jesuit college given by Carlos III. The convents of the Dominicans, Franciscans, the Augustinian nuns, and the Charterhouse (Cartuja) of Valdecristo have been converted to secular uses. PEREZ-AGUILAR, Episcopologium Segobricense; VlLLAGRASA Antiguedades de la Igl. Cat. de Segorbe, etc. (Valencia, 1664); VILLANUEVA, Viaje literario, III, IV; FLOREZ, Esp. Sagrada, VIII (Madrid, 1860); LLORENTE, Valencia in Espana sus monumentos: (Barcelona, 1887). RAMON RUIZ AMADO Segovia Segovia DIOCESE OF SEGOVIA (SEGOVIENSIS, SEGOVIAE). Diocese in Spain; bounded on the north by Valladolid, Burgos, and Soria; on the east by Guadalajara; on the south by Madrid; on the west by Avila and Valladolid. It extends through the civil Provinces of Segovia, Valladolid, Burgos, and Avila. The episcopal city has a population of about 15,000. In ancient times this region was within the country of the Arevaci, and, according to Pliny, belonged to the juridical conventus of Clunia in Hispania Carthaginensis. As to the origin of the diocese, the spurious chronicle attributed to Flavius Dexter pretends that its first bishop was Hierotheus, the master of Dionysius the Areopagite, and disciple of St. Paul. This tradition, propagated by false chronicles, has been refuted by a Segovian, the Marqués de Mondejar. It is more probable that Segovia belonged to the Diocese of Palencia until the year 527, when, a certain bishop having been consecrated in violation of the canon law, the metropolitan of Toledo, Montanus, assigned to him for his becoming support the cities of Segovia, Coca, and Britalbo, which he was to keep for life. As Segovia had him for its bishop until his death, which did not take place for some length of time, it then claimed the right to name a successor, a demand favoured by the great size of the Diocese of Palencia. It is certain that, in 589, Petrus signed as Bishop of Segovia in the Third Council of Toledo; in King Gundemar's synod, Minicianus signed (610); in the Fourth to the Eighth Councils of Toledo, Ausericus; in the Eleventh (675), Sinduitus; in the Twelfth to the Fifteenth, Deodatus; in the Sixteenth (693), Decentius. In their conquest of Spain, the Mussulmans took Segovia soon after conquering Toledo, about 714. With this calamity is associated the legend of St. Frutos, the patron of the city, who lived as a solitary in the northern mountains of the province, with his brother and sister, Valentine and Engracia, and received the Segovian fugitives. There is a fissure in the rocks which is called "la Hendidura de San Frutos" (the Gash of St. Frutos), and the legend runs that, as the Saracens were about to pass that spot, the saint went out to meet them and, with his staff, drew a line beyond which they must not come, upon which the mountain opened, making this chasm. The site of this monastic colony of fugitives was granted, after the reconquest, to the monks of Silos (1076), and the priory of San Frutos was founded. To the period of the Reconquest also belongs the tradition of Nuestra Señora de la Fuenciscla, an image of the Blessed Virgin which takes its name from the peak rising above Las Fuentes (Fuenciscla being derived from fons stillans, "dripping well"). A cleric hid this image in one of the vaults of the cathedral, supposed to have been what is now the parish church of San Gil, in which the tombs, according to Mondejar, are those of the ancient bishops. After the Reconquest the image was placed over the door of the old cathedral. An Arabic inscription of 960, cut on a capital, proves that Segovia was at that time subject to Abderramán III; the Mozarabs, however, preserved their religious worship there and for some time had bishops, of whom Ilderedo governed the diocese in 940, as appears in a deed of gift made by him to the Bishop of Léon, which Fray Atanasio de Lobera, in his "History of Léon", testifies to having seen. After that Segovia was, as the Toletan Annals tell us, "deserted for many years". It is beyond question, however, that Christians inhabited it in 1072, when it was laid waste by Alamun, King of Toledo, who, according to the arab historians quoted by Luis de Mármol, made bold to levy war against Sancho II. The final restoration of Segovia took place in 1088; Count Raymond of Burgundy, son-in-law of Alfonso VI, repeopled it with mountaineers of Northern Spain, from Galicia to Rioja. Alfonso VII re-established the episcopal see, the first bishop, Pedro, being consecrated on 25 January, 1120, according to the Toletan Annals, although Pedro had already signed the Council of Oviedo as Bishop of Segovia in 1115. The council placed under his authority the quarter of the city lying between the Gate of St. Andrew and the castle; in 1122 Alfonso I of Aragon made other grants to him, and in 1123 Queen Urraca. gave him the towns and domains of Turégano and Caballar. Callistus II confirmed all this in the Bull of 9 April, 1123, in which the events leading up to the restoration are explained. Alfonso VII was in Segovia on many occasions, on one of which he restored peace between its bishop and the Bishop of Palencia, who had been quarreling about the jurisdiction over certain towns. Pedro was succeeded, on his death in 1148, by Juan, who was soon after promoted to the See of Toledo, and Vicente, who died about the same time as Alfonso, the Emperor. Sancho III, shortly before his death, granted Navarres to Bishop Guillermo (13 July, 1158). In 1161 the Laras took Segovia from Alfonso VIII, then a child of five years, who yielded also the fourth part of the revenues of the cathedral. Bishop Gutierre Giron perished, with the Segovians whom he was leading, in the disastrous battle of Alarcos. In 1192 the fifth Bishop of Segovia from the restoration had been succeeded by Gonzalo; he was followed by Gonzalo Miguel, who lived until 1211. On the re-establishment of the see, attention was naturally turned to the rebuilding of the cathedral. Certain documents of 1136 speak of the Church of S. Maria as in course of being founded and in 1144 it is mentioned as having been founded, from which Diego de Colmenares, the historian of Segovia, infers that it must have been finished at that time. It certainly was not consecrated, however, until 16 July, 1228, by the papal legate, John, Bishop of Sabina. Situated on an esplanade to the east of the castle, it retains only a suggestion of its Byzantine structure, as it was entirely destroyed in the War of the Commons, when the Comuneros used it as a base of attack on the neighbouring castle. The relics and treasures of the basilica were saved in the church of S. Clara, in the Plaza Mayor, to which they were transferred in solemn procession on 2.5 October, 1522. About 1470 Bishop Juan Arias Dávila undertook the construction of a fine cloister, which, in 1524, Juan Campero caused to be removed, stone by stone, to the site of the new cathedral. The structure of the cloister being closely connected with the episcopal dwelling, the same bishop, Arias Dávila transferred the latter to the west of the church and there the bishops continued to reside even after the cathedral was transferred, until, about the year 1750, they moved into the episcopal palace in the Plaza de San Esteban, during the episcopate of Bishop Murillo y Argáiz The older dwelling was not totally demolished until 1816. The old cathedral having been irreparably destroyed, Bishop Fadrique de Portugal selected, as a foundation for the new, the Church of S. Clara, which the nuns had left when they were incorporated with the community of S. Antonio el Real. On 24 May, 1525, Diego de Rivera, Bishop of Segovia, inaugurated the laying of the foundations, and on 8 June solemnly blessed the first stone and, with Gil de Hontaffon as master, began the works of the western side at the spot called Puerta del Perdón (the Gate of Pardon). Hontañón was succeeded, after six years, by his overseer, Garcia Cubillas. On 14 August, 1558, the new church was consecrated, and the mortal remains of Pedro, son of Enrique II, as well as of many prelates, were transferred to it. Not until the entry of Anne of Austria, bride-elect of Philip II, in 1570, were the ruins of the old cathedral razed, so as to clear the way to the castle. In August, 1563, Rodrigo Gil laid the foundations of the main choir. In 1615 the tower burned down the year before, was constructed under the direction of Juan de Magaguren. The baroque stone portal of the north transept was designed in 1620 by Pedro de Brizuela. Francisco de Campo Aguero, and Francisco Viadero executed the sacristy, the sanctuary, the archivium, and the chapter house. The brilliant windows which give its character to this cathedral axe the work of Francisco Herráinz. The style of the structure is pure Gothic, with three naves and lateral chapels. It was consecrated in 1768, and its floor was flagged between 1789 and 1792. The retable, executed by Sabbatini in 1768, at the expense of Carlos III, is out of harmony with the style of the magnificent church. Among the chapels, the last one on the Gospel side, with the "Nuestra Señora de Piedad" of Juan Juní of Valladolid, merits special notice. In the chapel through which access is gained to the cloister is the "Cristo del Consuelo", as well as the tombs of Bishops Raimundo de Losana and Diego de Covarrubias. Segovia has some very old parish churches, which, with their square Romanesque towers, were certain y built before the end of the thirteenth century. A celebrated one is that of San Miguel; its Gothic structure collapsed in 1532, and the rebuilding of it in its present form was completed in 1558. It contains the tomb of the famous Andres Laguna, physician to Julius III and to Charles V. San Estéban, opposite the bishop's palace, has the most beautiful Byzantine tower in Spain. In San Juan de los Caballeros (St. John of the Knights) repose the remains of Diego de Colmenares, the historian of Segovia, who was parish priest of that church, The parish churches of San Gil and San Blas dispute between them the honour of having been the original cathedral. The former was rebuilt in the thirteenth century by Bishop Raimundo de Losana. They are both in ruins. King Juan I instituted in the cathedral of Segovia an order of knighthood, that of the Holy Spirit (1390). The city possesses a famous Roman aqueduct, probably built by Trajan; in the Plaza del Azoguejo its arches are 92 feet in height; it is 3000 (Spanish) feet in length, and has one hundred and seventy arches, thirty-six of which were reconstructed by Juan de Escobedo, a Hieronymite friar (1484-1489). The castle (alcázar) of Segovia, which Alfonso VI caused to be built in 1075, is a remarkable structure. It has a lofty rectangular tower, known as that of Don Juan II, and several other round ones surmounted with high conical roofs. In it Carlos III established the Artillery Academy which remained there until 1862, when a conflagration occurred which compelled its removal to the old Franciscan convent. The seminary, founded by Bishop Antonio Marcos de Llanes (1791), is under the invocation of Sts. Frutos and Ildefonso. In this diocese is the royal estate of San Ildefonso, or La Granja, the summer residence of the kings of Spain, built by Philip V on the site of an ancient hermitage dedicated to S. Ildefonso and an estate (granja) granted by the Catholic monarchs to the Hieronymites of Parral. Part of the royal estate, too, is formed by the collegiate church founded by Philip V and restored by Fernando VII. In addition to authors cited in the body of this article, see also: FLOREZ Espana Sagrada, VIII (Madrid, 1849); CUADRADO, Segovia in Espana sus monumentos (Barcelona, 1884); MADOZ, Dice. geogr., XIV (Madrid, 1849); GEBHARDT, Hist. gen. de Esp. (Barcelona). RAMÒN RUIZ AMADO Louis Gaston de Segur Louis Gaston de Ségur Prelate and French apologist, born 15 April, 1820, in Paris; died 9 June, 1881, in the same city. He was descended on his paternal side form the Marquis of Ségur -- Marshal of France and Minister of Louis XVI, who occupied this position during the participation of France in the war of emancipation of the United States -- from the Comte de Segur, companion of Lafayette in America, and on his maternal side was descended from the Russian Count Rostopchine who burned Moscow in 1812 to wrest it from Napoleon. After his humanities, from a comparative indifference to religion he experienced a remarkable fervour; entering the diplomatic service, he was made attache to the Embassy at Rome in 1842, but the following year he left this post and even gave up painting, for which he had excellent taste and much talent, to enter the Seminary of Saint-Sulpice and to prepare himself for the priesthood, to which he was ordained in 1847. Thenceforth he dedicated himself to the evangelization of the people in Paris; the children, the poor, the imprisoned soldiers to whom he was the volunteer and gratuitous chaplain, occupied his ministry until he was appointed to be auditor of the Rota for France at Rome. he remained in this position for four years, honoured with the affectionate esteem of Pius IX and with the friendship of many personages of the pontifical and diplomatic Court. He united with his judicial functions some political negotiations which Napoleon III had confided to him, and also ministrations to the French soldiers in the garrison of Rome. Attacked with blindness, he was obliged to resign from his duties in 1856; he returned to Paris with the honours and privileges of the episcopate, the title and reality of which his infirmity prevented him from receiving. His life was devoted to his official duties and to religious works. The chief among these was the patronage of young apprentices, the union of workingmen's societies, ecclesiastical vocations and seminaries, military chaplaincies, and the evangelization of the suburbs of Paris. To each of these works he gave unstintedly his time, his care, his preaching, his money, and that of others, of whom he asked it without false pride. Among his undertakings, and one which most occupied him, was the work connected with the St. Francis de Sales Association, for the defence and preservation of the Faith. After founding this devotion he established it in forty dioceses of France in less than a year after its foundation (1859), and was able also to gather and distribute 30,000 francs in alms. Mgr. de Segur worked incessantly for its development. When he died it numbered 1,900,000 associates, collected annually 800,000 francs, and extended its activities and benefits to France, Belgium, Italy, Spain, and even to Canada. Besides his apostolate and ministry he was also engaged in writing. In 1851 he published in a modest form "Réponses aux objections les plus repandues contre la religion"; it met with much success. At the time of his death 700,000 copies had been sold in France and Belgium without counting the many editions in Italian, German, English, Spanish, and even in the Hindu language. After his affliction with blindness his works multiplied noticeably; some were destined to make known or defend Catholic ideas concerning questions which occupied public attention; others to extend or to confirm his apostolate of preaching in forming souls to piety or to the interior life. To the first category belong among others the "Causeries sur le protestantisme" (1898); "le Pape" (1860); "le Denier de Saint Pierre" (1861); "la Divinité de Notre Seigneur Jesus Christ" (1862); "les objections populaires contre Encyclique [Quanta cura]" (1869); "Les Francs-Maçons" (867); "le Pape est infallible" (1870); "l'Ecole sans Dieu" (1873). To the second class belong among others: "les Instructions familières sur tontes les vérités de la religion" (1863); "Notions fundamentales sur la piété (1863); "La piete et la vie intericure" (1864); "Jesus vivant en nous" (of which an Italian translation was put on the Index) (1869); "La piete enseignée aux enfants" (1864). One need not seek in these works vast learning nor didactic discussions. The author did not strive for this; he intended his apologetic books for the people and for all who ignored religion. They were mostly brief pamphlets, vigilant, full of vivacity and spirit, written with a frankness wholly French in a popular style, sprinkled with caustic irony and Parisian pleasantries. In his ascetical works he aimed above all to spread the true principles of Catholic spirituality in opposition to the old traditions of Jansenism and Gallicanism. His zeal was crowned with success, his little books attained numerous editions. Thus at his death there had been sold 44,000 copies of his "Instructions familières", his works "Le Pape", "La Communion", and "La Confession" were issued to the number of hundreds of thousands of copies. His complete works have been edited in ten volumes (Paris, 1876-7); since have appeared "Cent cinquante beux miracles de Notre Dame de Lourdes" (2 vols. Paris, 1882); "Journal d'un voyage en Italie" (Paris, 1822); Lettres de Mgr de Ségur" (2 vols. Paris, 1882). MARQUIS DE SÉGUR, Mgr. de Segur, Sovenirs et recits d'un frere. ANTOINE DEGERT Sophie Rostopchine, Comtesse de Segur Sophie Rostopchine, Comtesse de Ségur Born 1797; died 1874. Her father was General Rostopchine who ordered the city of Moscow to be set on fire after the battle of Borodine (1812) and thus compelled Napoleon to begin his disastrous retreat from Russia. She married Eugène Comte de Ségur, grandson of Louis Philippe de Ségur, and nephew of Philippe Paul de Ségur, one of the most brilliant officers in the imperial army and author of "Histoire de Napoléon et de la grande armée pendant l'année 1812" which had more than fifteen editions and was translated into most of the European languages. Mme. de Ségur was a woman of culture and uncommon literary talent. She contributed a number of stories to the "Bibliothèque Rose", a collection of short novels for young people; among them are "Pauvre Blaise" (Paris, 1862); "Le Général Dourakine" (Paris, 1864); "Un bon petit diable" (Paris, 1865); "Les vacances", (Paris, 1865); "Le mauvais génie" (Paris, 1867). PIERRE MARIQUE Diocese of Sehna Diocese of Sehna (SIHNAH or SEHANENSIS). A Chaldean see, governed by a patriarchal administrator with episcopal rank. It was erected in 1853, its subjects being partly in Persia and partly in Turkey at Suleimanieh. It is likely to be united to the See of Kerkuk. The diocese was in fact administered by the Archbishop of Kerkuk about the middle of the nineteenth century. It contains 700 Catholics, 5 priests, 2 primary schools, and 2 chapels. Sehna or Sinna, the principal town, is in Persia. Revue de l'Orient Chretien, I, 452; Miss. Cath. (Rome, 1907), 874. S. VAILHÉ Johann Gabriel Seidl Johann Gabriel Seidl Poet, author of the present Austrian national hymn, b. at Vienna, 21 June 1804; d. there, 17 July, 1875. The family of Seidl was of Swiss origin, Johann's grandparents having settled in Austria. The poet's father is described as an able lawyer, and his mother as a good housewife. After passing through the gymnasium with the greatest success, their only son attended the university at the age of fifteen to devote the then usual two years to philosophy. On the completion of this period, he applied himself to the study of jurisprudence, but the early death of his father compelled him to support himself and his mother by acting as private tutor. Consequently he exchanged jurisprudence for pedagogy, passed his qualifying examination in this faculty in 1827, and two years later was appointed to the state gymnasium in Cilli. Before moving thither he married Therese Schlesinger, who bore him two children. The laudatory necrologies which a false report of his death evoked both at home and abroad, attracted the attention of the authorities, so that after eleven happy years at Cilli he had to return again to Vienna as custodian of the imperial cabinet of medals and antiques. A little later he was appointed censor of books, an office which he filled until 1848. He was then elected corresponding, and in 1851 regular, member of the Imperial Academy of Sciences. After his version of the Haschka national anthem had been declared the authentic text, honors were heaped on the poet: the knight's cross of the Order of Franz Joseph, medal for art and science, the post of imperial treasurer (1856), and appointment as ministerial counsel (1866). In 1871 he received a pension and was simultaneously invested with the Order of the Iron Crown of the third class; on the occasion of his seventieth birthday, he received the title and character of an aulic councillor. The town of Cilli named him an honorary freeman. Shortly afterwards his health began to fail. His death was characterized by the same piety which had marked his life. In 1892 the municipal council of Vienna dedicated to him an honorary grave in the Zentralfriedhof, and at the centenary of his birth a bust and memorial tablet were unveiled at his former residence in Cilli. Seidl was a very fruitful poet and author, and the enumeration of his works occupies twenty-five pages in Godeke's "Grundriss". Only a few, however, have an interest for modern readers. Of the numerous collections of poems the "Bifolien" are still of interest, but his novels, sixty in number, are long forgotten. For drama he had no talent, however much he strove after the palm of dramatic poetry. His best compositions are his dialectic poems, "Flinserln", of which many have become real folksongs of Austria. His name is immortally linked with his adaptation of the Austrian national anthem. As a scholar Seidl was tirelessly active. Still prized are his collections of legends, and also his contribution to the "Stizungsberichten der kaiserlichen Akademie der Wissenschaften", to scientific, historical, and geographical journals and to the "Zeitschrift fur die österreichischen Gymnasien", founded in 1850. GODEKE, Grundriss, LX (1910), 102-30. The most important literature on Seidl are the writings published on the occasion of the centenary of his birth in Zeitschr. fur die osterreich, Gymnasien and Grillparzerjahrbuch. His complete works have been edited by Max (6 vols. 1871-81), WURZBACH (4 vols., 1904), with biographical introduction, pp. i-lxxx), REKLAM (2 vols., 1906). N. SCHEID Alexander Maximilian Seitz Alexander Maximilian Seitz Painter, b. At Munich, 1811; d. at Rome, 1888. He studied under Cornelius, and two early pictures "Joseph sold by his Brethren", and the "Seven Sleepers" received speedy recognition. Heinrich Hess employed him on the frescoes in the Church of All Saints. After he had painted compositions depicting four of the sacraments, Cornelius took him to Rome. Here Seitz found in Overbeck a man of the same religious opinions, with a style which he at once sought to make his own. He aided Overbeck in carrying out the frescoes of the Evangelists and Apostles at Castel Gandolfo, and at a later date, when Overbeck's strength was no longer equal to the task, Seitz, with the aid of his gifted son, Ludwig Seitz, completed Overbeck's frescoes in the cathedral at Diakovar by filling the gaps with compositions of his own. With the help of his son, Seitz painted a cycle of pictures of saints, for Herder of Freiburg. Besides some secular compositions, as the genre pictures of the life of the common people at Rome, he treated pre-eminently scenes and persons of the Old and New Testaments. His pictures of the "Adoration of the Shepherds", "Christ as the Friend of Children", "Awakening of the Young Man of Naim", "Tribute Money", "Jacob and Esau", and "The Finding of Moses", are entirely in the spirit of Overbeck. A "Mater Amabilis" aroused much admiration; an enthroned Madonna went to England. The "St. Anthony, and St. Benedict", as engraved by the Capuchin Bernardo da Monaco, had a wide popularity. Good pictures also are: "Translation of St. Catherine to Sinai by angels", and especially a round picture of "Rest during the Flight to Egypt". In this three angels worship Christ, who lies with outstretched arms on the lap of the mother, while at some distance is Joseph with the beast of burden. In the Trinità de' Monti at Rome he painted in fresco the return of the prodigal son and Christ with heart aflame. RACZYNSKI, Histoire de l'art moderne en Allemagne, II, III (Paris, 1840); F0RSTER, Gesch. der deutschen Kunst (5 vols., Leipzig, 1860). G. GIETMANN Diocese of Sejny Diocese of Sejny (AUGUSTÓWO; SEJNESIS, or AUGUSTOVIENSIS). A diocese in the northwestern part of Russian Poland near the border of East Prussia, of Russian Poland near the border of East Prussia, German Poland. Its territory formerly belonged to the Diocese of Vilna, but upon the first partition of Poland it fell to Germany. Consequently a separate ecclesiastical jurisdiction was desired, and so Pius VI, on 27 March, 1798, carved out the new diocese and established its see at the Camaldolese monastery of Wigry, a village about ten miles east of the present city of Suwalki. This monastery of Camaldoli was founded under the patronage of King Jagiello in 1418, and the Church of Our Lady, which became the cathedral, is now the parish church of Wigry. The first bishop of the diocese was the celebrated preacher Michael Francis Karpowicz (b. 1744; d. 1805). His successor was John Clement Golaszewski (b. 1748; d. 1820), who enlarged the Wigry cathedral. After the third partition of Poland this territory was ceded to Russia, and in 1818 the Church throughout the Polish kingdom was reorganized. By a Bull of Pius VII Warsaw was made the metropolitan see and the see of Wigry was changed to Augustówo, a city founded in 1561 by King Sigmund Augustus, after who, it was named, which is still the largest place in that section (population 65,690). The new cathedral and chapter there were inaugurated on December 8, 1819. The next bishop, Ignatius Czyzewski, the first to rule the newly named diocese, did not remain at Augustówo, but changed his place of residence in 1823 to Sejny, a town founded in 1522 by King Sigmund I, and which is about twenty miles east of Suwalki, the capital of the district. The succeeding bishop, Nicholas John Manugiewicz, established the diocesan seminary in 1830, and for many years resided sometimes at Augustówo and then at Sejny. His successor was Stanislaus Choromanski, afterwards Archbishop of Warsaw. Then next bishop, Straszynski, made the old Dominican church at Sejny his cathedral and entered it as bishop, 4 February, 1837. He was in frequent collision with the Russian authorities, and on his death in 1847 the see was kept vacant by the Russian Government until 1873. Constantine Lubienski was then made bishop, and on his death in 1869 at Nowgrodzie was succeeded by Bishop Wierbowski. His successor was Anthony Baranowdki, and the present bishop (1911) is Anthony Karas. Sejny has the cathedral church, chapter and consistory, the diocesan seminary and the hospital of St. Simon managed by the Sisters of Charity. The diocese is divided into eleven deaneries and has a Catholic population of 692,250. There are 119 parish churches and 20 subordinate ones, besides 100 chapels and 3 convents. The diocese has 352 secular priests, 4 regulars, 86 seminarians, 24 lay religious, besides 8 nuns and 26 Sisters of Charity. Owing to the Russian regulations against receiving novices and postulants, the regular clergy and monastic institutions are dying out. BATTANDIER, Annuaire Pontificale (Paris, 1911); Slownik Geograficzny, X (Warsaw, 1900). ANDREW SHIPMAN Sekanais Sekanais (Or more properly, Tshé-'kéh-ne, "People on the Rocks", i.e., the Rocky Mountains). A Déné tribe whose habitat is on both sides of the Rockies, from 52° 30' N. lat. By language they are an eastern tribe, and it is not much more than 130 years since a portion of their congeners, having come into possession of fire-arms through the Canadian fur traders, made such reckless use of the same that the westernmost bands had to cross the mountains to get out of their reach. These quondam aggressors originally roamed along the Athabasca and Beaver Rivers, and they are today known under the name of Beavers, claiming now the valley of the Peace between Fort Dunvegan and a point some distance from L. Athabasca. Another split in the Sékanais ranks, which was due to an insignificant incident, brought into existence still another tribe, whose members were admittedly into the Blackfeet Confederacy under the name of Sarcees. The Sékanais proper are not today more than 450; the Beavers, perhaps 550, and the Sarcees, 190. By natural disposition as much as from necessity the Sékanais are inveterate nomads. They have no fixed abodes, and therefore no villages, or even chiefs in the strict sense of the word. The best related among the fathers of families are their only headmen, and their rôle is restricted to directing the movements of their respective bands. Yet the Sékanais are scrupulously honest and moral, though theirs is the only Déné tribe in which polyandry is known to have existed to a degree, they received the Gospel without questioning; but their habitat and environment, with their consequent nomadic habits, have conspired to make the establishment of permanent missions among them difficult. However, most of them are today under the influence of the Catholic priest. Even the Beavers, who are less religiously inclined, have steadfastly resisted the advances of the Protestant minister. MORICE, The Western Dénés their Manners and Customs (Toronto, 1890): IDEM, Notes on the Western Dénés (Toronto, 1892); IDEM, History of the Northern Interior of British Columbia (Toronto, 1904); IDEM, The Great Déné Race (Vienna, in course of publication); PETITOT, Monographie des Déné-Dindjiè A.G. MORICE Seleucians Seleucians A Gnostic sect who are said to have flourished in Galatia. They derived their name from Seleucus, who with certain Hermias is said to have propounded and taught their peculiar heresies. According to Philastrus (Liber Dicersarum Hacreseon, LV) the teaching of these heresies was based on the crudest form of Dualism. While they maintained that God was incorporeal, they asserted that matter was coeternal with Him. They exceeded the usual dualistic tenets in attributing evil to God as well as to matter. In their system the souls of men were not created by God, but were formed from earthly components -- fire and air -- by angels. Christ, they said, did not sit at the right hand of the Father in Heaven because (Psalm xviii, 6) "He hath set his tabernacle in the sun" must be interpreted to mean that Christ left His body in the sun. They did not practise baptism, basing their refusal to do so on the words of John the Baptist (Matt. iii, 11): "He shall baptize you in the Holy Ghost and fire". By hell they understood this present world, while Resurrection they explained as being merely the procreation over death with the expectation of a glorious immortality. The doctrines of Seleucus and his adherents were the source of another series of errors taught by some of their disciples who called themselves Prolinianites or Hermeonites. These latter rejected the dogmas of the Resurrection and Judgment. According to Philastrius they perverted large numbers. It must be said that a great deal of uncertainty exists regarding the history and real cause of the fact that the doctrines of the Seleucians so closely resembled those of Hermogenes, and because Hermogenes is not mentioned by Philastrius, conclude that these two were one and the same heresy. This assumption is plausible but there are vital differences between the teaching of Hermogenes and that of the Seleucians as, for example, on the subject of Christ as Creator which, together with the virgin birth, was admitted by Hermogenes. If any weight is to be attached to a method of chronology which seems rather arbitrary, the date assigned by Philastrius to the Seleucians, viz. After the reign of Decius, would exclude the supposition that he confounded them with the followers of Hermogenes. KETZER-WALCH, Historie (Leipzig, 1767), 1, 584 seq.; HILGENFELD, Die Ketzergeschichte des Urchristentums (Leipzig, 1884). PATRICK J. HEALY Seleucia Pieria Seleucia Pieria Titular metropolis of Syria Prima. The city was founded near the mouth of the Orontes, not far from Mount Casius, by Seleucus Nicator about 300 B.C. According to Pausanias, Damascene, and Malalas, there appears to have been previously another city here, named Palaeopolis. Seleucia was a commercial port of Antioch, Syria, with which it communicated by the Orontes; it was at the same time a naval port. The first colonists were the Greeks of Antigonia in Greece, also some Jews. It was taken and retaken by the Lagidae and the Seleucides until 219, when it again fell into the power of the kings of Syria. Then it obtained its freedom and kept it even to the end of the Roman occupation; it had long enjoyed the right of coinage. Of its famous men, Apollophanes, a physician of Antiochus (third century B.C.), is known, also Firmus who aroused Palmyra and Egypt against Rome in 272 A.D. The harbour was enlarged several times, e.g., under Diocletian and Constantius. Saint Paul and Saint Barnabas stopped at Seleucia (Acts, xiii, 4) but nothing indicates that they made any converts. In the Apocryphal Acts of Saint Ignatius of Antioch, this city is also mentioned. The oldest bishop known is Zenobius, present at Nicaea in 325. There is mention of Eusebius, the Arian, and Bizus in the fourth century, with twelve others found in Le Quien (Oriens Christianus, II, 777-780). In the sixth century the "Notitia episcopatuum" of Antioch, gives Seleucia Pieria as an autocephalous archbishopric, suffragan of Antioch (Echos d'Orient, X 144); the diocese existed until the tenth century, and its boundaries are known (Echos d'Orient, X, 97). For some Latin titularies see Eubel, "Hierarchia catholica medii aevi", I, 468. During the Byzantine occupation from 970, followed soon after by the Frankish ocoupation, Seleucia regained its importance; during the Crusades its port was known by the name of Saint Symeon. The Greek-Arabic schismatic patriarchate of Antioch had since the sixteenth century united the title of Seleucia Pieria to that of Zahleh in Lebanon. The upper city, about eight miles in circumference, is still distinguishable. The site is now occupied by the two villages of Soulidieh and Kaboucie, inhabited by 800 Armenians. The lower city, smaller than the preceding one, was more thickly populated; there arose the village of Meghragagik, inhabited by 150 Ansariehs. Among the curiosities of the village are a necropolis of little interest, some irrigation works, and some fortifications very mueh damaged. ALLEN, Journal of the Geographical Society, XXIII (1855); SMlTH, Dict. of Greek and Roman Geog. (1857), s. v.; AINSWORTH, A Personal Narrative of the Euphrates Expedition, II (London, 1888), 400-404; WADDINGTON, Inscriptions de Grece et d'Asie-Mineure, n. 2714-2719; RITTER, Erdkunde von Asien, VIII, 2-3, 1238-1271; CHESNEY, La baie d'Antioche et les ruines de Sileucie de Pierie in Nouvelles annales des voyages et des sciences geographiques d'Eyries (1839), II, BOURQUENOUD, Memoires sur les ruines de Seleucie de Pierie in Etudes religieuses (1860), 40; CHAPOT in Bulletin de correspondance hellenique, XXVI, 164-175; CHAPOT, Seleucie de Pirrie (Paris, 1907). S. VAILHÉ Seleucia Trachea Seleucia Trachea Metropolitan see of Isauria in the Patriarchate of Antioch. The city was built by Seleucus I, Nicator, King of Syria, about 300 B.C. It is probable that on its site existed one or two towns called Olbia and Hyria, and that Seleucia merely united them, giving them his name. At the same time the inhabitants of Holmi were transported thither (Stephanus Byzantius, s. v.; Strabo, XIV, 670). Under the Romans it was autonomous, eventually becoming the capital of Isauria. A council was held there in 359 which assembled about 160 bishops who declared in favor of the homoiousios and condemned the chief errors of the Anomoeans. St. Hilary of Poitiers assisted at it. Seleucia was famous for the tomb of St. Thecla, a virgin of Iconium, converted by St. Paul, and who died at Seleucia, according to the "Acta Pauli et Theclae", an apocryphal work of the second century. In any case the sanctuary built over this tomb and restored several times, among others by the Emperor Zeno in the fifth century, was one of the most celebrated in the Christian world. Its ruins are called Meriamlik ("Denkschriften der k. Akadem. der Wissenschaft. philos.-histor. Klasse", Vienna, XLIV, 6, 105-08). In the fifth century the imperial governor (comes Isauriae) in residence at Seleucia had two legions at his disposal, the Secunda Isaura and the Tertia Isaura. From this period, and perhaps from the fourth century, dates the Christian necropolis, lying west of the town and containing many tombs of Christian soldiers with inscriptions. According to the "Notitia episcopatuum" of Antioch, in the sixth century Seleucia had twenty-four suffragan sees (Echoes d'Orient, X, 145). About 732 nearly all ecclesiastical Isauria was incorporated with the Patriarchate of Constantinople; henceforth the province figures in the "Notitiae" of Byzantium, but under the name of Pamphylia. In the "Notitiae" of Leo the Wise (c. 900) Seleucia has 22 suffragan bishoprics (Gelzer, "Ungedruckte . . . Texte der Notitiae episcopatuum", 557); in that of Constantine Porphyrogenitus (c. 940) it has 23 ("Georgii Cyprii descriptio orbis romani", ed. Gelzer, 76). In 968 Antioch again fell into the power of the Greeks, and with the Province of Isauria Seleucia was restored to the Patriarchate of Antioch (Gelzer, op. cit., 573). At present the title of Seleucia is borne by the Metropolitan of Tarsus-Adana, dependent on the Patriarch of Antioch. Le Quien (Oriens christ., II, 1012-16) mentions 10 metropolitans of this see, the first of whom, Agapetus, attended the Council of Nicaea in 325; Neonas was at Seleucia in 359; Symposius at Constantinople in 381; Dexianus at Ephesus in 431; Basil, a celebrated orator and writer, whose conduct was rather ambiguous at the Robber Council of Ephesus and at the beginning of the Counci lof Chalcedon in 451; Theodore was at the Fifth (Ecumenical Council im 553; Macrobius at the Sixth Council and the Council in Trullo in 692. Three others are mentioned in "The Sixth Book of the Select Letters of Severus" (ed. Brooks, passim). Several Latin titulars are also known after 1345 (Eubel "Hierarchia catholica medii aevi)", I, 468). Seleucia was captured by the Seljuks in the eleventh century, and later by the Armenians of the Kingdom of Cilicia. At the beginning of the thirteenth century it was in the possession of the Hospitallers, as was also its stronghold. The Caramanian Turks captured it in the second half of the thirteenth century and then the Osmanlis, who still possess it. As Liman-Iskelessi, or Selefke-Iskelessi, it is now a caza in the sandjak of Itch-II and the vilayet of Adana. It has about 3000 inhabitants, half of whom are Greek schismatics. Ruins of the theatre and some temples are to be seen. The stronghold which crowns the mountain is of Armenian origin. SMITH, Dict. of Gr. and Rom. Geog., s. v.; TEXIER, Asie Mineure (Paris, 1862), 724; LANGLOIS, voyage dans la Cilicie (Paris, 1861), 180-92; WADDINGTON, Vogage archeologique en Asie Mineure, 339-41; DUCHESNE in Bulletin de correspondance hellenique, IV, 195-202; CUINET, La Turquie d'Asie, II, 67-9; ALISHAN, Sissouan (Venice, 1899), 328-35. S. VAILHÉ Seleucids Seleucids The name given to the Macedonian dynasty, which was founded by Seleucus, a general under Alexander the Great, and ruled over Syria from 312 B.C. In 321 Seleucus received the satrapy of Babylonia from Antipater, administrator of Alexander's empire. After being temporarily supplanted by Antigonus, he returned to Babylonia after the battle of Gaza (312), from which his rule is dated (the first year of the Seleucid era). SELEUCUS I NICATOR (312-281 B.C.) assumed the title of king in 306. He first subdued Upper Asia as far as the Indus and Jaxartes The battle of Ipsus brought Syria under his dominion; although he had to recognize the supremacy of Egypt over Phoenicia and Palestine. By a victory over Lysimachus he conquered the greater part of Asia Minor (281), but a little later, when he encroached on European territory, he was murdered by Ptolemy Ceraunus. Besides various other cities, Seleucus founded the magnificent residential towns of Seleucia on the Tigris and Antiochia on the Orontes. He was succeeded by his son, ANTIOCHUS I SOTER (281-61), who, through fear of the Parthians, transferred his residence to Antiochia. Under Soter's son, ANTIOCHUS II THEOS (261-46), began the wars with the Ptolemies for the possession of Phoenicia and Palestine. The marriage of Antiochus II to Berenice, daughter of Ptolemy II Philadelphus, brought about a temporary cessation of the struggle; but on Ptolemy's death, Laodice, the first and disowned wife of Antiochus, was recalled and avenged herself by having Antiochus, Berenice, and their child put to death. The son of Antiochus and Laodice, SELEUCUS II CALLINICUS (246-26), succeeded. To avenge the death of his sister and to assure his possession of Syria, King Ptolemy III Euergetes made a successful campaign against Seleucus, advancing victoriously as far as the Euphrates. The eastern provinces passed gradually into the hands of the Parthians, and portions of the western were lost to Attalus II of Pergamum. While in flight after a battle in which he had suffered defeat at the hands of Attalus, Seleucus was killed by a fall from his horse. SELEUCUS III CERAUNUS (226-24), the elder son of Seleucus, succeeded, and on his assassination the younger son ANTIOCHUS III THE GREAT (224-187). To secure possession of Coele-Syria and Palestine this monarch began a war with Ptolemy V; although defeated at Raphia (217), the battle of Paneas (198) resulted in his favor, Palestine thenceforth belonging to the Syrian Empire. Interference in the affairs of the west led to a war with Rome. After the battle of Magnesia (189) the king had to accept harsh conditions and surrender his possessions in Asia Minor north of the Taurus. Antiochus was unable to conquer Parthia, which his father had lost. During an attempt to plunder a temple in Elam, he was slain by the natives. He was succeeded by his elder son, SELEUCUS IV PHILOPATOR (187-75). Seleucus secured the return of his younger brother Antiochus, who lived as a hostage in Rome, by sending his own son Demetrius thither instead. Before Antiochus arrived home, Seleucus had been murdered by his minister Heliodorus; the former was thus able to take possession of the Throne, which really belonged to his nephew Demetrius. ANTIOCHUS IV EPIPHANES (175-64) was an ambitious prince, of a truly despotic nature and fond of display. Entanglements with Egypt gave him the occasion to make repeated successful inroads into that country, and in 168 he might have succeeded in securing possession of it, had not the Romans compelled him to withdraw (embassy of Popilius Laenas). His hostile measures against the Jews, whom he tried to hellenize by sheer force, resulted in the Machabean rising (see MACHABEES, THE). He died at Tabae in Persia, while on a campaign against the Parthians. His son ANTIOCHUS V EUPATOR (164-62) was a minor, and simply a tool in the hands of the imperial administrator Lysias. Both were removed by the son of Seleucus IV, DEMETRIUS I SOTER (162-15), who had previously lived as a hostage at Rome. Alexander Balas, who claimed to be a son of Antiochus IV, rebelled in 151, and Demetrius fell in battle. His son Demetrius continued the war against Alexander Balas (150-45) in union with the Egyptian king Ptolemy VI. Conquered by the latter near Antiochia, Alexander fled to Arabia, and was there treacherously murdered. DEMETRIUS II NICATOR (145-38 and 129-25) found his right to the throne contested by Diodotus (surnamed Tryphon), a general of Balas, in favor of the latter's son Antiochus VI, a minor. Later (141), setting aside his ward, Tryphon strove to secure the throne for himself. When Demetrius II was captured during an expedition against the Parthians and cast into prison, his brother Antiochus continued the war against Tryphon, who, being finally overcome committed suicide (138). ANTIOCHUS VII SIDETES(138-29) was killed during a campaign against the Parthians. Demetrius II, who had been released from captivity during the war, now became king for the second time (129-25). An anti-king in the person of Alexander Zabinas, a supposed son of Alexander Balas, was set up in 128 by the Egyptian king, Ptolemy VII Physcon. Conquered near Damascus, Demetrius had to flee, and was murdered when he attempted to land in Tyre. He was followed by his elder son SELEUCUS V, who, at the instigation of his own mother, was removed shortly after his accession. His younger brother, ANTIOCHUS VIII GRYPUS (125 113) conquered Alexander Zabinas and had him executed (125), but he himself was driven from his throne by his maternal half-brother ANTIOCHUS IX CYZICENUS (113-95), the youngest son of Antiochus VII. Returning, however, after two years, Grypus succeeded in winning for himself a large part of Syria, the king dom being thus divided. On the death of Antiochus VIII (96) his domains and claims were inherited by his elder son SELEUCUS VI. Defeated by Seleucus near Antiochia in 95, Antiochus IX committed suicide to escape imprisonment. However, his son ANTIOCHUS X defeated Seleucus in the same year, and the latter had to flee to Cilicia, where he died. His two brothers ANTIOCHUS XI and Philip continued the war, but were defeated, and during the flight Antiochus XI met death in the waves of the Orontes. PHILIP continued the war, and succeeded in securing possession of at least a portion of Syria, while the fourth son of Antiochus VIII, DEMETRIUS III EUCERUS, was elevated to the rank of king in Damascus by Ptolemy Soter II of Egypt. Antiochus X was finally overcome by the brothers, Philip and Demetrius. Concerning his death we have conflicting reports. According to Appian he was first completely ousted by Tigranes (see below), although he seems to have asserted himself in a portion of Syria. Failing in his design of reconquering Judea, Demetrius endeavoured to supplant his brother Philip, besieging him in Beroea, but was surrounded by the Parthians whom Philip had summoned to his aid, and forced to surrender. He died at the Court of the Parthian king. Philip now marched on Antiochia, secured possession of the city, and thenceforth held sway over Syria (about 88). In Coele-Syria and Damasous, however, appeared a new pretender in his youngest brother, ANTIOCHUS XII DIONYSUS, who made himself king of these parts, but later fell in a campaign against the Nabataeans (about 84). Meanwhile, King Tigranes of Armenia appeared from the north, and in 83 succeeded in possessing himself of the kingdom. After overcoming Tigranes in 69, Lucullus granted the realm to the son of Antiochus X, ANTIOCHUS XIII ASIATICUS, the last of the Seleucids. In 64 Pompey made Syria a Roman province, and Antiochus XIII was murdered a short time afterwards. FLATHE, Gesch. Macedoniens, II (Leipzig, 1834); HOLM, Griechenlands Gesch., IV (Berlin, 1894); NIESE. Gesch. der griech. u. maced. Staaten seit der Schlacht bei Chaeronea (3 parts Gotha, 1893-1903): KUHN, Beitrdge zur Gesch. der Seleuciden (programme of Altkirch in Alsace, 1891); BEVAN, The House of Seleucus (2 vols., London, 1902). Concerning the relations of the Seleucids with the Jews, cf. SCHURER, Gesch. des jud. Volkes im Zeitalter Jesu Christi, I (3rd ed., Leipsig, 1903), 166 sqq. FRANZ SCHUHLEIN Self-Defense Self-Defense Ethically the subject of self-defense regards the right of a private person to employ force against any one who unjustly attacks his life or person, his property or good name. While differing among themselves on some of the more subtle and less practical points comprised in this topic, our moralists may be said to be unanimous on the main principles and their application regarding the right of self-defense. The teaching may be summarized as follows: I. Defense of Life and Person Everyone has the right to defend his life against the attacks of an unjust aggressor. For this end he may employ whatever force is necessary and even take the life of an unjust assailant. As bodily integrity is included in the good of life, it may be defended in the same way as life itself. It must be observed however that no more injury may be inflicted on the assailant than is necessary to defeat his purpose. If, for example, he can be driven off by a call for help or by inflicting a slight wound on him, he may not lawfully be slain. Again the unjust attack must be actually begun, at least morally speaking, not merely planned or intended for some future time or occasion. generally speaking one is not bound to preserve one's own life at the expense of the assailant's; one may, out of charity, forego one's right in the matter. Sometimes, however, one may be bound to defend one's own life to the utmost on account of one's duty of state or other obligations. The life of another person may be defended on the same conditions by us as our own. For since each person has the right to defend his life unjustly attacked, what he can lawfully do through his own efforts he may also do through the agency of others. Sometimes, too, charity, natural affection, or official duty imposed the obligation of defending others. A father ought, for example, to defend the lives of his children; a husband, his wife; and all ought to defend the life of one whose death would be a serious loss to the community. Soldiers, policemen, and private guards hired for that purpose are bound in justice to safeguard the lives of those entrusted to them. II. Defense of Property It is lawful to defend one's material goods even at the expense of the agressor's life; for neither justice nor charity require that one should sacrifice possessions, even though they be of less value than human life in order to preserve the life of a man who wantonly exposes it in order to do an injustice. Here, however,we must recall the principle that in extreme necessity every man has a right to appropriate whatever is necessary to preserve his life. The starving man who snatches a meal is not an unjust agressor; consequently it is not lawful to use force against him. Again, the property which may be defended at the expense of the agressor's life must be of considerable value; for charity forbids that in order to protect ourselves from a trivial loss we should deprive a neighbor of his life. Thefts or robberies, however, of small values are to be considered not in their individual, but in their cummulative, aspect. A thief may be slain in the act of carrying away stolen property provided that it cannot be recovered from him by any other means; if, for example, he can be made to abandon his spoil through fright, then it would not be lawful to shoot him. If he has carried the goods away to safety he cannot then be killed in order to recover them; but the owner may endeavor to take them from him, and if the thief resists with violence he may be killed in self-defense. III. Honor Since it is lawful to take life in the legitimate defense of one's material goods, it is evidently also lawful to do so in defense of chastity which is a good of a much higher order. With regard to honor or reputation, it is not lawful to kill one to prevent an insult or an attack upon our reputation which we beleive he intends, or threatens. Nor may we take a life to avenge an insult already offered. The proceeding would not be defense of our honor or reputation, but revenge. Besides, in the general estimation honor and reputation may be sufficiently protected without taking the life of the offender. Zigliara, Summa Philosophica, III, I, iii; St. Thomas, Summa Theolgica, II-II, Q lxvii, a. 7; Billuart, Cursus Theolgiae: in II-II St. Thomae, d. X, a. V. JAMES J. FOX Jose Selgas y Carrasco José Selgas y Carrasco Poet and novelist, b. at Lorca, Murcia, Spain, 1824; d. at Madrid, 5 Feb., 1882, he received his early training at the Seminary of San Fulgencio; his family being in straitened circumstances, he was obliged to cut short his studies in order to contribute to its support. Going to Madrid, he there occupied minor Government positions, and engaged in journalism. As a staunch Conservative he assailed the Liberals in the articles which he wrote for the periodical "El Padre Cobos" and other newspapers. He acted as secretary for Martinez Campos when the latter was Prime Minister. The Spanish Academy made him one of its members. Selgas belongs among the minor writers. His repute depends upon his lyrics and his short tales rather than upon his more ambitious novels. The best of his verse, which is generally marked by a gentle melancholy, will be found in the two collections, "La Primavera" and "El Estio", both put forth in 1850. After his death there appeared the volume of poems entitled "Flores y Espinas". Of his longer novels there may be mentioned the "Dos Rivales" and "Una Madre", both rather tedious compositions. In his short tales he is most successful when he indulges in the sentimental; he is less attractive when he gives utterance to his pessimistic feeling. At times his sentimentalism and pessimism become even morbid. A number of his journalistic articles have been brought together in several of the volumes of his collected works, as "Hojas sueltas", "Estudios sociales", etc. They illustrate his ultra-Conservativism in politics. Obras completas, ed. DUBRULL (15 vols., Madrid, 1887); GARCIA, La Literatura espanola en el siglo XIX, pt. I, ii. J.D.M. FORD Selge Selge A titular see in Pamphylia Prima, suffragan of Side. Situated in a fertile plain on the south slope of the Taurus, it boasted that it was founded by the diviner Calchas, but in reality was probably a Lacedaemonian colony. Although difficult of access, it became the most populous and powerful of the cities of Pisidia. Its army of 2000 soldiers was in constant strife with the neighboring cities. Greek grammarians connect its name with aselges, which means "licentious"; some think the first letter of the word a negative particle, but others find in it a meaning of reinforcement. When Alexander passed through Pisidia, Selge sought his friendship. In 208 B.C. it was besieged by Achaeus, ally of its rival city of Pednelissus, and forced to pay a heavy war tax. Its coins show it to have flourished under Trajan, but in the fifth century it was only a small city, still capable, however, of repulsing an attack of the Goths. After the new division of the empire it was included in Pamphylia; in the fifth century it was connected, at least ecclesiastically, with Side, metropolis of Pamphylia Prima. In the ninth century it had become an autocephalous archdiocese. Subsequent "Notitiae episcopatuum" do not mention it. Le Quien ("Oriens Christ.", I, 1011) names four of its bishops: Uranion, who must have assisted at the Council of Nicaea in 325, but whose name does not occur in the lists of the Fathers of that council; Nunechius, at the Council of Ephesus in 431; Marcianus at Constantinople in 869; Gregory at the Photian Council of Constantinople in 879. The ruins of Selge are located at the village of Surk in the sandjak of Adalia and the vilayet of Koniah; they include temples, an aqueduct, a portico, a stadium, a theatre, a church, etc. SMITH, Dict. Gr. and Rom. Geog., s. v.; LANCKORONSKI, Les villes de la Pamphlie et de la Pisidie, II (Paris, 1893), 182-195. S. PÉTRIDÈS Selinus Selinus A titular see in Isauria, near the Gulf of Adalia. Selinus, mentioned by Ptolemy, V, 8, 2, Pliny, V, 22, and other ancient geographies, was a port on the east side of Cilicia at the mouth of a river of the same name. Its situation on a steep rock, whence its Greek name, rendered it almost impregnable. The only known fact of its history is that Trajan died there in 117. Then it took the name of Trajanopolis, but the old one prevailed, as is shown by coins and other documents. Later Selinus was joined to Isauria. In 198 Longinus of Selinus, a rebel leader, was taken by Count Driscus and sent to Constantinople. Basil,of Seleucia (Vita S. Theclae, II, 17) said that the city, which was formerly of much importance, lost it from his time to the fifth oentury. Constantine Porphyrogenitus, in the tenth century, called it a small town. To-day it is the little village of Selinti in the vilayet of Adana; there are ruins of a theatre, aqueduct, market-place, bath, etc. Selinus was suffragan of Seleucia Trachaea. Le Quien (Oriens christianus, II, 1019) names four bishops: Neon, present at the council of Constantinople, 381; Alypius, at Ephesus, 431; AElianus, at Chalcedon, 451; Gheon, signer of the letter of the bishops of the province to Emperor Leo, 458. The see is in the Greek "Notitiae Episcopatuum" of the Patriarchate of Antioch from the fifth to the tenth oentury (Vailhé in "Echos d'Orient", X, 95, 145). It was also perhaps an Armenian bishopric until the tenth century. (Alishan, Sissouan, Venice, 1899, p. 60). Eubel (Hierarchia catholica medii aevi, I, 468) names a Latin bishop in 1345. BEAUFORT, Karamania, 186 seq.; SMITH, Dict. Gr. and Rom. Geog., s. v., TOMASCHEK, Zur histor. topogr. von Kleinasien im Mittelalter, 57. S. PÉTRIDÈS Giulio Lorenzo Selvaggio Giulio Lorenzo Selvaggio Canonist and archaeologist, b. at Naples, 10 August, 1728; d. there, November, 1772. He entered the seminary of Naples in 1744, and was ordained priest in 1752. He subsequently devoted himself to the study of history, philosophy, and the Oriental languages. He became censor of books and synodal examiner for the Diocese of Naples, and wrote the notes for the Italian edition of the ecclesiastical history of the Lutheran historian, Mosheim. Appointed professor of canon law in 1764, he published "Institutionum canonicarum libri tres" (Padua, 1770) and conferences in civil law, interesting from the standpoint of contemporary Neapolitan law. Mamachi's work on Christian antiquities being unfinished, Selvaggio resolved to treat the same subject in a smaller work, but he died before finishing it. His friend, Canon Kalephati, continued the publication of the "Antiquitatum eeelesiasticarum institutiones" (6 vols., Naples, 1772-6), prefacing them with a biography of the author: "Commentarius de vita et scriptis J. L. Selvagii". HURTER, Nomenclator, III (Innsbruck, 1895), 172-4. R. MAERE Selymbria Selymbria A titular see in Thracia Prima, suffragan of Heraclea. Selymbria, or Selybria, the city of Selys on the Propontis, was a colony of the Megarians founded before Byzantium. It was the native place of Prodicus, a disciple of Hippocrates; there Xenophon met Medosades, the envoy of Seuthes, whose army later encamped near by. In 410 B.C. Aleibiades, who commanded in the Propontis for the Athenians, was not allowed to enter the town, but the inhabitants paid him a sum of money; somewhat later he captured it by treason and left a garrison there. In 351 B.C., Selymbria was an ally of the Athenians and in 343 was perhaps attacked by Philip. In honor of Eudoxia, wife of the Emperor Arcadius, it was called Eudoxiopolis still its official name in the seventh century, doubtless together with the older one which finally survived. In 805 it was pillaged by the Bulgarian king, Kroum. Michael III constructed a fortress the ruins of which are still existing there. The town is often mentioned by the Byzantine historians; in 1096 Godfrey of Bouillon ravaged the country. Cantacuzenus celebrated the marriage of his daughter Theodora and the sultan Orkhan with great pomp at Selymbria. The Turks captured the town in 1453. It is now Silivri, chief town of a caza in the vilayet of Adrianopolis, containing 8000 inhabitants, Turks and Greeks, mostly farmers or fishermen. In the tenth century it became an autocephalous archbishopric and under Marcus Comnenus a metropolis without suffragan sees. It would be easy, therefore, to add to the list of its bishops given by Le Quien in "Oriens christianus", I, 1137. The oldest known is Theophilus transferred from Apamea (Socrates "Hist. eccl.", VII, xxxvi). We may mention before the Schism: Romanus, 448, 451; Sergius, 80; George, 692; Epiphanius, author of a lost work against the Iconoclasts. Simeon assisted in 879 at the Council of Constantinople which re-established Photius. Under Michael Palaeologus, the Metropolitan of Selymbria, whose name is unknown, was one of the prelates who signed a letter to the pope on the union of the Churches. In 1347 Methodius was one of the signatories at the Council of Constantinople which deposed the patriarch John Calecas, the adversary of the Palamites. The date of Ignatius, who wrote a "Life of Constantine and Helena" is unknown, perhaps about 1431. Among the bishops omitted by Le Quien must be mentioned Philotheus, who lived about 1365, the author of the panegyric on St. Agathonicus, a martyr of Nicomedia who suffered at Selymbria under Maximian, and of the panegyric on Saint (?) Macarius, a monk of Constantinople towards the end of the thirteenth century (Krumbacher, "Gesch. der byzant. Litteratur", Munich, 1897, 205). SMITH, Dict. Gr. and Rom. Geog., s. v.; BOUTYRAS, Dict. of Hist. and Geog. (Greek), VII, 509; TOMASCHEK}, Zur Kunde der Hamus-Halbinsel (Vienna, 1887), 23. S. PÉTRIDÈS Sem (Shem) Sem (Shem) ( Hebrew "name", "fame", "renown"; in Septuagint, Sem; A.V., Shem.) Son of Noe; according to Gen., x, 21, the eldest. His birth and generations are recorded in Gen., v, 31; xi, 10 sqq. (cf. I Par., i, 4, 17 sq.; Luke, iii, 36). He lived to be six hundred years of age. An incident, narrated Gen., ix, 18 sqq., discloses his filial reverence. His reward was a blessing of great import (cf. Ecclus., xlix, 19). Noe's prophetic words (according to Massor. Text), "Blessed be Yahweh, the God of Sem" (for the glory of a nation is its God), designate, in a special manner, Yahweh as the God of Sem and, consequently, Sem as the bearer of the Messianic promises. Having enumerated the Semitic nations, whose habitat extended over the central portions of the then known world (Gen., x, 21-31), the Sacred Writer resumes (xi, 10 sqq.) the genealogy of the descendants of Arphaxad, the direct ancestor of Abraham, David, and Christ. HUMMELAUER, Comment. in Genesim (Paris. 1895), loc. cit., and HAGEN, Lex. Bibl. (Paris, 1905-11), both in Cursus Scripturae Sacrae; STRACK, Genesis (Munich, 1894), loc. cit. in Kurzgef. Kommentar z. d. hl. Schriften Alt. u. N. Test.; HOBERG, Die Genesis (Freiburg, 1908), loc. cit.; MAAS, Christ in Type and Prophecy, I (New York), 212 sq. THOMAS PLASSMANN. Semiarians and Semiarianism Semiarians and Semiarianism A name frequently given to the conservative majority in the East in the fourth century as opposed to the strict Arians. More accurately it is reserved (as by St. Epiphanius, "Hær" lxxiii) for the party of reaction headed by Basil of Ancyra in 358. The greater number of the Eastern bishops, who agreed to the deposition of St. Athanasius at Tyre in 335 and received the Arians to communion at Jerusalem on their repentance, were not Arians, yet they were far from being all orthodox. The dedication Council of Antioch in 341 put forth a creed which was unexceptionable but for its omission of the Nicene "of One Substance". Even disciples of Anius, such as George, Bishop of Laodicea (335-47) and Eustathius of Sebaste (c. 356-80), joined the moderate party, and after the death of Eusebius of Nicomedia, the leaders of the count faction, Ursacius, Valens, and Germinius, were not tied to any formula, for Constantius himself hated Arianism, though he disliked Athanasius yet more. When Marcellus of Ancyra was deposed in 336, he was succeeded by Basil. Marcellus was reinstated by the Council of Sardica and the pope in 343, but Basil was restored in 350 by Constantius, over whom he gained considerable influence. He was the leader of a council at Sirmium in 351 held against Photinus who had been a deacon at Ancyra, and the canons of this synod begin by condemning Arianism though they do not quite come up to the Nicene standard. Basil had afterwards a disputation with the Arian Aëtius. After the defeat of Magnentius at Mursa in 351, Valens, bishop of that city, became the spiritual director of Constantius. In 355 Valens and Ursacius obtained the exile of the Western confessors Eusebius, Lucifer, Liberius, and that of Hilary followed. In 357 they issued the second Creed of Sirmium, or "formula of Hosius", in which homoousios and homoiousios were both rejected. Eudoxius, a violent Arian, seized the See of Antioch, and supported Aëtius and his disciple Eunomius. In the Lent of 358 Basil with many bishops was holding the dedicatory feast of a new church he had built at Ancyra, when he received a letter from George of Laodicea relating how Eudoxius had approved of Aëtius, and begging Macedonius of Constantinople, Basil, and the rest of the assembled bishops to decree the expulsion of Eudoxius and his followers from Antioch, else that great see were lost. In consequence the Synod of Ancyra published a long reply addressed to George and the other bishops of Phoenicia, in which they recite the Creed of Antioch (341), adding explanations against the "unlikeness" of the Son to the Father taught by the Arians (Anomoeans, from anomoios), and showing that the very name of father implies a son of like substance (homoiousios, or homoios kat ousian) Anathematisms are appended in which Anomoeanism is explicitly condemned and the teaching of "likeness of substance" enforced. The nineteenth of these canons forbids the use also of homoousios and tautoousios; this may be an afterthought due to the instance of Macedonius, as Basil does not seem to have insisted on it later. Legates were dispatched to the Count at Sirmium—, Eustathius of Sebaste, an ascetic of no dogmatic principles, Eleusius of Cyzicus, a follower of Macedonius, and Leontius, a priest who was one of the emperor's chaplains. They arrived just in time, for the emperor had been lending his ear to an Eudoxian; but he now veered round, and issued a letter (Sozomen, IV, xiv) declaring the Son to be "like in substance" to the Father, and condemning the Arians of Antioch. According to Sozomen it was at this point that Libenius was released from exile on his signing three fornmulæ combined by Basil; against this story see LIBERIUS, POPE. Basil persuaded Constantius to summon a general council, Ancyra being proposed then Nicomedia; but the latter city was destroyed by an earthquake; Basil, therefore, was again at Sirmium in 359 where the Arianizers had meanwhile regained their footing With Germinius of Sirmium, George of Alexandria, Ursacius and Valens, and Marcus of Arethusa, he held a conference which lasted until night. A confession of faith, ridiculed under the name of the "dated creed", was drawn up by Marcus on 22 May (Hilary, "Fragment. xv"). Arianism was of course rejected, but the homoios kata ten ousian was not admitted, and the expression kata panta homoios, "like in all things", was substituted. Basil was disappointed, and added to his signature the explanation that the words "in all things" mean not only in will, but in existence and being (kata ten hyparxin kai kata to einai). Not content with this, Basil, George of Laodicea, and others published a joint explanation (Epiph., lxxiii, 12-22) that "in all things" must include "substance"; The court party arranged that two councils should be held, at Rimini and Seleucia respectively. At Seleucia (359) the Semiarians were in a majority, being supported by such men as St. Cyril of Jerusalem, his friend Silvanus of Tarsus, and even St. Hilary, but they were unable to obtain their ends. Basil, Silvanus, and Eleusius, therefore, went as envoys to Constantinople, where a council was held (360) which followed Rimini in condemning homoiousios together with homoousios, and allowed homoios alone, without addition. This new phrase was the invention of Acacius of Cæsarea, who now deserted the extremer Arians and became leader of the new "Homoean" party. He procured the exile of Macedonius, Eleusius, Basil, Eustathius, Silvanus, Cyril, and others. Constantius died at the end of 361. Under Julian the exiles returned. Basil was probably dead. Macedonius organized a party which confessed the Son to be kata panta homoios, while it declared the Holy Ghost to be the minister and servant of the Father and a creature. Eleusius joined him, and so did Eustathius for a time. This remnant of the Semiarian party held synods at Zele and elsewhere. The accession of Jovian, who was orthodox, induced the versatile Acacius, with Meletius of Antioch and twenty-five bishops, to accept the Nicene formula, adding an explanation that the Nicene Fathers meant by homoousios merely homoios kat ousian. Thus Acacius had taken up the original formula of the Semiarians. In 365 the Macedonians assembled at Lampsacus under the presidency of Eleusius, and condemned the Councils of Ariminum and Antioch (360), asserting again the likeness in substance. But the threats of the Arian emperor Valens caused Eleusius to sign an Arian creed at Nicomedia in 366. He returned to his diocese full of remorse, and begged for the election of another bishop; but his diocesans refused to let him resign. The West was at peace under Valentinian, so the Semiarians sent envoys to that emperor and to the pope to get help. Liberius refused to see them until they presented him with a confession of faith which included the Nicene formula. He seems to have been unaware that the party now rejected the Divinity of the Holy Ghost; but this was perhaps not true of the envoys Eustathius and Silvanus. On the return of the legates, the documents they brought were received with great joy by a synod at Tyana, which embraced the Nicene faith. But another synod in Caria still refused the homoousion. For the rest of the history of the sect, who are now to be called Macedonians, see PNEUMATOMACHI. In addition to bibliography under ARIANISM and BISHOP EUSEBIUS OF NICOMEDIA, see articles Basilius of Ancyra, Eleusius, Eustathius of Sebaste by VENABLES in Dict .Christ. Biog.; LICHTENSTEIN, Eusebius von Nikomedien (Halle, 1903); LOOFS, Eustathius von Sebaste und die Chronologie der Basilius-Briefe (Halle, 1898). JOHN CHAPMAN. Ecclesiastical Seminary Ecclesiastical Seminary I. TERMINOLOGY The word seminary (Fr. séminaire, Ger. Seminar) is sometimes used, especially in Germany, to designate a group of university students devoted to a special line of work. The same word is often applied in England and the United States to young ladies' academies, Protestant or Catholic. When qualified by the word ecclesiastical, it is reserved to schools instituted, in accordance with a decree of the Council of Trent, for the training of the Catholic diocesan clergy. It differs therefore from the novitiate and the scholasticate where members of religious orders receive their spiritual and intellectual formation. In the ecclesiastical seminary both go together. Hence, a faculty of theology in a university is not a seminary; neither is the word to be applied to the German Konvictus, where ecclesiastical students live together while attending lectures of the faculty of theology in the State universities. An ecclesiastical seminary is diocesan, interdiocesan, provincial, or pontifical, according as it is under the control of the bishop of the diocese, of several bishops who send there their students, of all the bishops of an ecclesiastical province, or of the Holy See. A seminary which receives students from several provinces or from dioceses in various parts of the country is called a central, or a national, seminary. A theological seminary (grand séminaire) provides courses in Holy Scripture, philosophy, theology etc., and gives young men immediate preparation for ordination. A preparatory seminary (petit séminaire) gives only a collegiate course as a preparation for entrance into the theological seminary. The word seminary when used alone designates either a theological seminary or a seminary including both the collegiate and the theological courses. In this connexion it should be noted that the name "college" is sometimes given to institutions which offer no collegiate courses in the usual sense of the term, but receive only ecclesiastics who intend to study philosophy and theology. Such are All Hallows College, Drumcondra, Ireland, the Irish colleges on the Continent, and the various national colleges in Rome (see respective articles). These are in reality seminaries as regards both instruction and discipline. On the other hand there are seminaries which provide undergraduate courses as preparatory to philosophy and theology, thus combining in one institution the work of the petit séminaire and that of the grand séminaire. II. PURPOSE OF SEMINARY EDUCATION A seminary is a school in which priests are trained. A priest is the representative of Christ among men: his mission is to carry on Christ's work for the salvation of souls; in Christ's name and by His power, he teaches men what they ought to believe and what they ought to do: he forgives sins, and offers in sacrifice the Body and Blood of Christ. He is another Christ (sacerdos alter Christus). His training, therefore, must be in harmony with this high office and consequently different in many ways from the preparation for secular professions. He must possess not only a liberal education, but also professional knowledge, and moreover, like an army or navy officer, he needs to acquire the manners and personal habits becoming his calling. To teach candidates for the priesthood what a priest ought to know and to make them what a priest ought to be is the purpose of seminary education; to this twofold end everything in the form of studies and discipline must be directed. III. LIFE IN THE SEMINARY When a boy of intelligence and piety shows an inclination to become a priest, he is sent after graduation from the grammar or high school to pursue a classical course, either in a preparatory seminary or in a Catholic mixed college where lay as well as ecclesiastical students receive a classical education. This course, successfully completed, prepares him for admission into the theological seminary. The year opens with a retreat of eight or ten days, during which by meditations, conferences, visits to the Blessed Sacrament, recitation of the office, consultations with his spiritual director, his mind and heart are brought under the influence of the great truths of religion, so as to make him realize and feel the importance of his seminary training. Then begins the ordinary routine of the seminary, interrupted only by a short recess, usually at the end of the first term, and by the retreats which precede the Christmas and Trinity ordinations. The receptions of Holy orders are the greatest and the most joyful events of the year, for they keep before the mind of the student the goal of all his efforts, the priesthood. During the scholastic year, a day of each week is set apart for a holiday: the morning is devoted to recreation, or to some favourite study; in the afternoon there is usually a walk, and at times the students visit hospitals or other institutions, where they acquire a foretaste and gain some experience of their future work among the sick and the poor. On Sunday they all assist at a solemn High Mass and at Vespers, and in some places they also attend a conference on Holy Scripture. The summer vacation, lasting about three months, is spent either at the seminary villa, as is the general practice in Italy, or at home, as is commonly done in the United States and other countries. The ordinary working day is divided between prayer, study, and recreation. Summer and winter, the student rises at 5 or 5.30 a. m., makes his meditation for a half-hour, hears Mass, and usually receives Communion. Breakfast is about two hours after rising. In the forenoon there are two classes of one hour each, while two hours also are devoted to private study. After dinner there is about an hour of recreation. In the afternoon four hours are divided between class and study, and as a rule another hour of study follows supper. A visit to the Blessed Sacrament, the recitation of the Rosary, and spiritual reading take place in the afternoon or evening; and the day closes with night prayer. Thus the student has devoted about three hours to exercises of piety and nine hours to work. After six years of this mental and moral training in retirement from the world, and in the society of fellow students animated by the same purpose and striving after the same ideals, he is deemed worthy of receiving the honour and capable of bearing the burden of the priesthood: he is an educated Christian gentleman, he possesses professional knowledge, he is ready to live and to work among men as the ambassador of Christ. IV. HISTORY A. Late Origin This system of seminary education, which has now become an essential feature of the Church's life, had its origin only in the sixteenth century in a decree of the Council of Treat. Since Christ's work on earth is to be continued chiefly through diocesan priests, the Apostles and the early popes and bishops always gave special care to the selection and training of the clergy. St. Paul warns Timothy not to impose hands lightly on any man (I Tim., v, 22). In the scanty records of the early Roman pontiffs we invariably read the number of deacons, priests, and bishops whom they ordained. But although the training of the clergy was ever held to be a matter of vital importance, we should look in vain during the first centuries for an organized system of clerical education, just as we should look in vain for the fully-developed theology of St. Thomas. B. Individual Training in Early Times Before St. Augustine no trace can be found of any special institutions for the education of the clergy. Professors and students in the famous Christian schools of Alexandria and Edessa supplied priests and bishops; but these schools were intended for the teaching of catechumens, and for general instruction; they cannot, therefore, be considered as seminaries. The training of priests was personal and practical; boys and young men attached to the service of a church assisted the bishop and the priests in the discharge of their functions, and thus, by the exercise of the duties of the minor orders, they gradually learned to look after the church, to read and explain Holy Scripture, to prepare catechumens for baptism and to administer the sacraments. Some of the greatest bishops of the period had moreover received a liberal education in pagan schools, and before ordination spent some time in retirement, penitential exercises, and meditation on Holy Scripture. C. From St. Augustine to the Foundation of the Universities St. Augustine established near the cathedral, in his own house (in domo ecclesiœ), a monasterium clericorum in which his clergy lived together. He would raise to Holy orders only such as were willing to unite the community life with the exercise of the ministry. In a few years this institution gave ten bishops to various sees in Africa. It was, however, rather a clergy house than a seminary. The example of St. Augustine was soon followed at Milan, Nola, and elsewhere. A council held in 529 at Vaison, in Southern Gaul, exhorted parish priests to adopt a custom already obtaining in Italy, to have, young clerics in their house, and to instruct them with fatherly zeal so as to prepare for themselves worthy successors. Two years later the second Council of Toledo decreed that clerics should be trained by a superior in the house of the Church (in domo Ecclesiœ), under the eye of the bishop. Another Council of Toledo, held in 633, urges that this training be begun early, so that future priests may spend their youth not in unlawful pleasures but under ecclesiastical discipline. Among those cathedral schools, the best known is that established near the Lateran Basilica, where many popes and bishops were educated ab infantia. Besides, not a few monasteries, such as St. Victor in Paris, Le Bec in Normandy, Oxford, and Fulda, educated not only their own subjects, but also aspirants to the secular clergy. D. From the Thirteenth Century to the Council of Trent Out of the local episcopal schools grew the medieval universities, when illustrious teachers attracted to a few cities, e. g. Paris, Bologna, Oxford etc., students from various provinces and even from all parts of Europe. As in these schools theology, philosophy, and canon law held the first rank, a large proportion of the students were ecclesiastics or members of religious orders; deprived of their ablest teachers and most gifted students, the cathedral and monastic schools gradually declined. Still, only about one per cent of the clergy were able to attend university courses. The education of the vast majority, therefore, was more and more neglected, while the privileged few enjoyed indeed the highest intellectual advantages, but received little or no spiritual training. The colleges in which they lived maintained for a while good discipline; but in less than a century the life of ecclesiastical students at the universities was no better than that of the lay students. What was lacking was character-formation and the practical preparation for the ministry. E. The Decree of the Council of Trent After the Reformation the need of a well-trained clergy was more keenly felt. In the work of the commission appointed by the pope to prepare questions to be discussed in the Council of Trent, ecclesiastical education occupies an important place. When the council convened "to extirpate heresy and reform morals", it decreed in its Fifth Session (June, 1546) that provision should be made in every cathedral for the teaching of grammar and Holy Scripture to clerics and poor scholars. The council was interrupted before the question of clerical training could be formally taken up. Meanwhile, St. Ignatius established at Rome (1553) the Collegium Germanicum for the education of German ecclesiastical students. Cardinal Pole, who had witnessed the foundation of the German College and had been a member of the commission to prepare for the Council of Trent, went to England after the death of Henry VIII to re-establish the Catholic religion. In the regulations which he issued in 1556, the word seminary seems to have been used for the first time in its modern sense, to designate a school exclusively devoted to the training of the clergy. After the council reopened, the Fathers resumed the question of clerical training; and after discussing it for about a month, they adopted the decree on the foundation of ecclesiastical seminaries. On 15 July, in the Twenty-third Session, it was solemnly proclaimed in its present form, and has ever since remained the fundamental law of the Church on the education of priests. In substance it is as follows: + (1) Every diocese is bound to support, to rear in piety, and to train in ecclesiastical discipline a certain number of youths, in a college to be chosen by the bishop for that purpose; poor dioceses may combine, large dioceses may have more than one seminary. + (2) In these institutions are to be received boys who are at least twelve years of age, can read and write passably, and by their good disposition give hope that they will persevere in the service of the Church; children of the poor are to be preferred. + (3) Besides the elements of a liberal education [as then understood], the students are to be given professional knowledge to enable them to preach, to conduct Divine worship, and to administer the sacraments. + (4) Seminaries are to be supported by a tax on the income of bishoprics, chapters, abbeys, and other benefices. + (5) In the government of the seminary, the bishop is to be assisted by two commissions of priests, one for spiritual, the other for temporal matters. So well did the Fathers of Trent understand the importance of the decree, so much did they expect from it, that they congratulated one another, and several declared that, had the council done nothing else, this would be more than sufficient reward of all their labours. An historian of the council, Cardinal Pallavicini, does not hesitate to call the institution of seminaries the most important reform enacted by the council. F. Execution of the Decree of Trent in various Countries To provide for the carrying out of this important decree, Pius IV forthwith instituted a commission of cardinals. The following year (April, 1564), he decreed the foundation of the Roman Seminary, which was opened in Feb., 1565, and which for more than three centuries has been a nursery of priests, bishops, cardinals, and popes. St. Charles Borromeo, Cardinal Archbishop of Milan, who had taken a leading part in the work of the Council of Trent, was also most zealous and successful in enforcing its decisions. For his large diocese he established three seminaries: one of them furnished a complete course of ecclesiastical studies; in another, a shorter course was provided, especially for those destined to country parishes; the third was for priests who needed to make up the deficiencies of previous training. For these institutions St. Charles drew up a set of regulations, which have been ever since an inspiration and a model for all founders of seminaries. In other parts of Italy the decree of Trent was gradually put into effect, so that the smallest of the three hundred dioceses had its own complete seminary, including both collegiate and theological departments. In Germany, war and the progress of heresy were serious obstacles to the carrying out of the decree of Trent; still seminaries were founded at Eichstadt (1564), Münster (1610), and Prague (1631). In Portugal the Venerable Bartholomew of the Martyrs, Archbishop of Braga, established a seminary a few months after the close of the Council of Trent. Various attempts by French bishops ended in failure, until St. Vincent de Paul and Father Olier opened seminaries in Paris (1642), and helped to establish them elsewhere in France. A feature of these seminaries and, it is claimed, one of the causes of their success was the separation of theological students from those who were studying the classics, of the theological from the preparatory seminary. In Paris the students of St-Sulpice usually followed lectures at the Sorbonne; some courses given at the seminary completed their intellectual training, while meditation, spiritual conferences, etc. provided for their moral and religious formation. In other places, especially when there was no university, a complete course of instruction was organized in the seminary itself. As there was no Church law requiring students to spend a fixed time in the seminary before ordination, and as the powers of the bishops were hampered by existing customs, some of the clergy, previous to the French Revolution, were not trained in these institutions. In England and Ireland persecution prevented the foundation of seminaries; before the French Revolution priests for the English mission were trained at the English College of Douai. Irish aspirants to the priesthood, leaving Ireland at the peril of their lives, went to the colleges founded for them in Paris, Louvain, and Salamanca by Irish exiles and other generous benefactors, to prepare for a life of self-sacrifice often ending in martyrdom. G. Attempts at Secularization Towards the end of the eighteenth century, the Emperor Joseph II attempted to bring the education of the clergy in Austria, Northern Italy, and the Netherlands under the control of the State. Students were forbidden by law to frequent the German College in Rome; episcopal seminaries were suppressed, and in their place central seminaries were founded at Vienna, Budapest, Pavia, Freiburg, and Louvain, in which all clerical students were forced to receive their education under the control not of the bishops but of the state. Professors and text books were chosen by state officials, who also regulated the discipline. Against this usurpation, protests came not only from the Holy See and the bishops, but also from the people; at Louvain the central seminary was burned to the ground. The scheme had to be abandoned, and the successor of Joseph II allowed the bishops to possess and rule their own seminaries. The tendency to interference, however, remained, and has since shown itself in various German states. In the early years of the nineteenth century the policy of secularization was adopted by the Bavarian Government. Protestants or Free-thinkers were appointed teachers in the faculty of theology and the seminaries; regulations were drawn up for the choice of superiors, discipline, plan of studies, examinations, admission, and dismissal of students. After a long conflict a concordat was signed in 1817, by which the rights of bishops to erect and control seminaries were recognized. The same struggle occurred in other German states. The conflict became specially acute in 1873, when the Prussian Government in the famous May Laws issued a scheme which prescribed a regular course in a gymnasium, three years theology at a state university, and then examination before state inspectors, as essential conditions of appointment to any ecclesiastical position. Education in seminaries might be accepted as equivalent if the bishops submitted the rules to the State for approval. As they refused to comply, the seminaries of Treves, Gnesen-Posen, Strasburg, and others were closed. Negotiations between the Government and the Holy See were opened after the election of Leo XIII. Among the points on which the Church could never yield, the pope laid stress upon the rights of bishops to have seminaries and to control the education of the clergy. The more vexatious measures were abolished, and harmony was restored between Church and State. H. Present Conditions in Germany At present nearly all ecclesiastical students make their college course in a public gymnasium, together with lay students. For the teaching of theology and spiritual formation there are two systems. The first consists of a course of three years in one of the faculties of theology, in the State universities of Bonn, Breslau, Freiburg, Munich, Münster, Tübingen, or Würzburg. The appointment of professors in these faculties is made by the Government but with the approval of the bishops, who can moreover forbid their students to attend the lectures of objectionable teachers. While at the university the students usually live together in a Konvictus under one or two priests, but they enjoy about as much liberty as lay students. After completing their course they spend a year or eighteen months in a practical seminary (priesterseminar), to learn ceremonies, ascetic and pastoral theology, and thus prepare immediately for ordination. For this system, which has many strong advocates, the following advantages are pointed out: it develops intellectual and moral initiative, accustoms the students to live in the world, and gives them the prestige of a university education. Its opponents insist: That it is not in harmony with the decree of Treat and the subsequent instructions of the Holy See, urging bishops to establish seminaries ad mentem concilii Tridentini, where candidates for the priesthood may receive the special education proper to their calling; that, the university professors being irremovable, the bishops have not sufficient control over the orthodoxy of their teaching; that instruction obtained in those faculties lacks unity and co-ordination, some essential points being overlooked, while undue importance is at times attached to matters of little practical utility for the majority of the clergy; that the spiritual training, neglected in the universities, cannot be obtained in the few months spent at the practical seminary. There are regular Tridentine seminaries at Eichstädt, Fulda, Mainz, Metz, and Trier, in which professional instruction and spiritual formation go together. Recently a compromise between the university and the seminary systems of clerical training has been effected in Strasburg. J. Recent Developments and Present Conditions in other Countries (1) France The Revolution swept away the seminaries and the faculty of theology of the Sorbonne where the leaders of the French clergy had been trained. As soon as liberty was restored, one of the first cares of the bishops was to re-establish their seminaries. On account of the lack of thoroughly competent teachers in many places and the urgent need of priests everywhere, only a minimum of knowledge could be exacted. Nor had the short-lived faculty of theology established by the State at the Sorbonne much influence in raising the general standard of clerical studies. During the last thirty years, however, the Catholic institutes of Paris, Lyons, Toulouse, Lille, and Angers have done much to train teachers for theological seminaries, as well as for the petits séminaires. The latter are usually open to all who seek a liberal education, whether they intend to become priests or not; hence, they do not realize the Tridentine ideal. As a result of the Separation Law, the seminaries, even those built by private contributions of Catholics, have been confiscated by the State. In spite of financial difficulties and the falling-off in the number of students, diocesan seminaries are maintained, some with less than a score of students. As to preparatory seminaries, whereas formerly there were several in most dioceses, their number is considerably reduced. (2) England The English College at Douai, suppressed by the French Revolution, was replaced in England by St. Edmund's, Ushaw, and Oscott. These provided a complete course of clerical education, including collegiate and theological studies; none, however, was a seminary in the strict sense of the Council of Trent, for they received lay as well as ecclesiastical students. In the provincial councils of Westminster, the bishops advocated the separation of clerical from lay students as the only remedy against worldliness; they decreed that the foundation of seminaries for the exclusive education of the clergy would contribute powerfully to the increase of religion, and finally they pledged themselves to establish such seminaries. Cardinal Manning founded a separate seminary for the theological students of the Archdiocese of Westminster, and regarded this as the great work of his life. Other bishops followed this example. A seminary in full harmony with the Council of Trent, i. e. exclusively for ecclesiastical students, and destined to provide a complete course of preparation for the priesthood was opened for the Diocese of Southwark. Cardinal Vaughan, who succeeded Cardinal Manning in 1893, had long been of opinion that separate diocesan seminaries were not opportune in England. He advocated a central seminary for the southern dioceses, in which by combining their resources in men and money the bishops could provide excellent teachers, a good library, the emulation which comes with increased number of students, and the stability which would be secured, if the control of one bishop were replaced by that of a board of all the bishops interested. These views being freely expressed in "The Tablet" (London), Dr. Bourne, the future successor of Cardinal Vaughan at Westminster, then rector of the Southwark Seminary, set forth in the same periodical the reasons for separate diocesan seminaries, i. e. the authority of the Council of Trent and of the provincial councils of Westminster, the possibility of giving in most dioceses the elementary yet solid instruction needed for the ministry, and of sending some of the most gifted students to some foreign Catholic university where they would receive higher instruction than could be provided in a central seminary in England. Cardinal Vaughan having secured the approbation and encouragement of Leo XIII for his project determined, together with four other bishops, to send his theological students to Oscott, which thus, from being the diocesan seminary of Birmingham, became in 1897 a central seminary for six dioceses. No change, however, was made in the faculty, and the administration continued in the main to be diocesan. Shortly after the cardinal's death, a theological seminary for the Archdiocese of Westminster was opened in connexion with St. Edmund's College. (3) Ireland Irish colleges on the Continent, which harboured about five hundred students, having been closed by the Revolution, it became necessary to provide in Ireland for the training of the clergy. A college opened at Carlow in 1793 was soon closed through fear of Government prosecution. Re-established later, it now gives a complete course of ecclesiastical training. The foundation of a Catholic college being made legal by an Act of Parliament, Maynooth was opened in 1795 with forty students. It has rapidly developed, especially during the last years of the nineteenth century. The missionary college of All Hallows was founded in 1842, and placed in 1892 under the direction of the Vincentians; it has sent hundreds of priests to Australia, New Zealand, South Africa, and the United States. Besides these and other institutions, most of the dioceses have their preparatory seminaries. There are also some Irish students at Salamanca and at Rome. The Irish College in Paris has been closed in consequence of the Separation Laws in France. (4) Canada The Jesuits established a college at Quebec in 1637. Bishop Laval founded a theological seminary in 1663 and in 1668 a preparatory seminary, the students of which followed the classes of the Jesuit College. When the latter was suppressed after the English conquest, the preparatory seminary became a mixed college. In 1852 the seminary and college of Quebec were raised to the rank of a university, with the title of Laval in honour of the founder. At Montreal a college was founded by the Sulpicians in 1767, a separate theological department was established in 1840, and the seminary of philosophy in 1847. More recently theological seminaries have been opened at Ottawa by the Oblates and at Halifax by the Eudists, and one is being erected at Toronto. Until recently, in several dioceses of Canada, candidates for the priesthood received their training not in seminaries, but in mixed colleges where, after finishing their classical course, they read theology, whilst discharging the duties of prefect or teacher. Upon the advice of the Congregation of the Propaganda, the Provincial Council of Montreal (1895) decreed that ecclesiastics studying for the priesthood in colleges can only be prefects and not teachers; it also decreed that before ordination they must spend three years in a regular seminary. (5) United States In colonial days, Spanish Jesuits and Franciscans laboured in Florida, Louisiana, New Mexico, and California; missionaries from France and Canada were the pioneers in Maine, New York, and the Mississippi Valley; the Maryland missions, under the jurisdiction of the Vicar Apostolic of London, were in charge of English Jesuits. When John Carroll was appointed Bishop of Baltimore, one of his first cares was to provide the means for the training of a native clergy. In England, where he went to receive episcopal consecration, he obtained from a friend a generous gift for his future seminary, and he accepted an offer made to him in London, in the name of Father Emery, superior of St-Sulpice, to send some members of his society to establish a seminary at Baltimore. In his first address to his clergy and people on his return to America, Bishop Carroll mentioned among the duties of his pastoral office the institution of a seminary "for training up ministers for the sanctuary and the services of religion that we may no longer depend on foreign and uncertain coadjutors". The following year (1791) Father Nagot, with three other Sulpicians and four students, reached Baltimore and opened St. Mary's Seminary in the place where it stands to-day. In this first American seminary Bishop Carroll ordained, 25 May, 1793, his first priest, Rev. S. Badin, who for over half a century laboured on the missions of Kentucky. The lack of a sufficient number of ecclesiastical students forced the Sulpicians to receive lay students also, even Protestants, so that St. Mary's became a mixed college and, until the classical department was closed in 1852, had but few seminarians. In order to foster and preserve ecclesiastical vocations, Father Nagot opened (1807) at Pigeon Hill, Pennsylvania, a preparatory seminary which was the following year transferred to Mount St. Mary's, but this institution soon became (like St. Mary's at Baltimore), and has remained to this day (1911), a mixed college with a theological seminary, the students of which help in carrying on the work of the collegiate department. A more successful attempt to have a purely preparatory seminary was made by the Sulpicians in the foundation of St. Charles's College; opened in 1848, it has always been destined exclusively for aspirants to the priesthood. As new dioceses were created, the first care of the bishops was to provide a clergy. Shortly after their consecration, the bishops usually went to Europe to recruit priests, while at home they spared no pains to train a native clergy. Bishop Flaget went to Bardstown in 1811 with three students, the nucleus of St. Thomas's Seminary which for half a century was the nursery of many pioneer priests and bishops of the West. It was closed in 1869. Seminaries were likewise established by: Bishop England at Charleston (1822); Bishop Dubourg at St. Louis (1818); Bishop Fenwick at Cincinnati (1829); Bishop Fenwick at Boston (1829); Bishop Kenrick at Philadelphia (1832); Bishop Dubois at New York (1832); Bishop Blanc at New Orleans (1838); Bishop O'Connor at Pittsburg (1844); Bishop Whelan at Richmond (1842) and Wheeling (1850); Bishop Henni at Milwaukee (1846); Bishop Lefebre at Detroit (1846); Bishop Timon at Buffalo (1847); Bishop Rappe at Cleveland (1849); Bishop Loras at Dubuque (1849). As a rule these seminaries were begun in or near the bishop's house, and often with the bishop as the chief instructor. The more advanced students helped to instruct the others, and all took part in the services of the cathedral. Their education, like that given to priests in the Early Church, was individual and practical; their intellectual training may have been somewhat deficient, but their priestly character was moulded by daily intercourse with the self-sacrificing pioneer bishops and priests. Most of those imperfectly organized seminaries, after doing good service in their day, have long ceased to exist, while a few have been transformed into modern institutions. The diocesan seminary of New York was transferred (1836) from Nyack to Lafargeville, in the Thousand Islands, and later on to Fordham (1840). In 1864 a seminary was opened at Troy for the provinces of New York and Boston; the latter established its own seminary in 1884, and in 1897 the New York seminary was transferred to its present location at Dunwoodie. The theological seminary at Philadelphia, which commenced with five students in the upper rooms of Bishop Kenrick's residence, was after various vicissitudes transferred in 1865 to its actual site at Overbrook, where the preparatory seminary opened at Glen Riddle in 1859 was also located in 1871. The Seminary of St. Francis, Milwaukee, started in 1846 with seven students in a wooden building attached to Bishop Henni's house, was through the efforts of Dr. Salzmann removed to the present building, which was dedicated in 1856. In San Francisco, after several unsuccessful attempts under Bishop Amat and Archbishop Alemany, a preparatory seminary was opened by Archbishop Riordan in 1896; to this was soon added a theological department. The St. Paul Seminary, opened by Archbishop Ireland in 1894-95, has done excellent service in educating priests for many of the western dioceses. Among the leaders in the development of ecclesiastical education in America the late Bishop MacQuaid deserves a prominent place. He was the first president of Seton Hall College (1856), and later on as Bishop of Rochester he established the preparatory Seminary of St. Andrew, 1871, and the theological Seminary of St. Bernard. The latter, which opened in 1893 with thirty-nine students, numbers now over two hundred from various dioceses. The Josephinum, founded at Columbus (1875) and placed under the immediate direction of Propaganda (1892), provides a free and complete course for priests destined for the American missions, especially in German-speaking congregations. The Polish college and seminary at Detroit has been established to meet the special needs of Polish Catholics in the United States. Religious orders had their full share in this growth of seminaries. The Vincentians, who have always considered the training of the clergy as an essential part of their work, opened the seminary at St. Louis (1816) which has been under their care ever since. They also conducted the seminary of New Orleans from 1838 until its suppression. They founded Niagara (1867), which has been raised to the rank of a university and maintains an important theological department. For ten years they were in charge of the seminary at Philadelphia. They have directed the diocesan seminary at Brooklyn from the beginning, and they have recently opened a theological seminary at Denver. The Sulpicians, a society of secular priests founded especially for training the clergy, besides their own theological and preparatory seminary in the Archdiocese of Baltimore, also opened and directed for some years the diocesan seminaries of Boston and New York (Dunwoodie). They have also been in charge of the seminary of San Francisco since its inception. The Benedictines, in keeping with the tradition of their early monastic schools, have trained students for the diocesan priesthood along with the members of their order at St. Vincent's, Pennsylvania (1846), St. Meinrad's, Indiana (1857), and Belmont, North Carolina (1878). The Franciscans have a theological seminary connected with their college at Allegany, New York (1859). The Oblates have recently (1903) opened a theological seminary at San Antonio, Texas. In their colleges all over the country the Jesuit Fathers have given to a large proportion of the American priests their classical training; their Holy Cross College at Worcester has been since 1835 a nursery of the New England clergy. Moreover, not a few American priests have received their theological training from the Jesuits of Innsbruck. The growth of seminaries in America did not until recently keep pace with the need of priests; many have come from Ireland, Germany, France and other countries of Europe, while American students have sought their education in the American colleges founded at Louvain in 1857 and Rome in 1859, or in other institutions on the Continent. About two thousand American priests, moreover, have been educated in the Sulpician Seminary at Montreal. Of late years the need of preparatory seminaries has been more keenly felt, and we find them established in Rochester, Hartford, Chicago, New York, and other dioceses. Some of these are merely day schools and, whilst having certain advantages, fail to effect the separation of aspirants to the priesthood from the world, as contemplated by the Council of Trent. Since 1904 the annual meetings of the seminary department of the Catholic Educational Association have been found to be of great value in raising the standard of ecclesiastical education. Carefully prepared papers have been read and discussed on the various topics of seminary training, such as entrance requirements, discipline, spiritual formation, and the method of teaching the various branches of the seminary curriculum: Holy Scripture, dogmatic and moral theology, natural sciences, and social problems. V. ECCLESIASTICAL LEGISLATION ON SEMINARIES. A. Sources The general laws of the Church on the subject of seminaries are found in the decree of the Council of Trent, and in various documents issued by the Holy See. At no time has the question of clerical training been the object of so much attention or brought forth so many decrees as under Leo XIII and Pius X. Some of their acts refer only to Italian seminaries, others to the whole Church. They will, doubtless, be embodied in the Code of Canon Law now in preparation. Meanwhile, the most important issued before 1908 may be found arranged in logical order in M. Bargilliat's handy little volume "De Institutione Clericorum". In Apostolic letters to the bishops of Prussia (6 Jan., 1886), of Hungary (22 Aug., 1886), of Bavaria (22 Dec., 1887), of Poland (19 March, 1894) of Brazil (18 Sept., 1899), Leo XIII insists on the right and duty of bishops to establish seminaries where future priests may be trained in science and holiness. The Various branches of study in the seminary were the object of special instructions. Thus he prescribed the study of St. Thomas's philosophy ("Æterni Patris", 4 Aug., 1879), encouraged historical research (18 Aug., 1883), gave directions for Biblical studies ("Providentissimus Deus", 18 Nov., 1893), and instituted a special commission to foster them (30 Oct., 1902). Towards the end of his long pontificate he wrote two letters: one to the French bishops, the other to the Italian bishops (8 Sept., 1899 and 8 Dec., 1902), in which the training of the clergy is treated at length. Pius X even more than his predecessor has taken a lively interest in the education of priests. Convinced that the restoration of all things in Christ requires first of all the good training of the clergy, he urged the bishops in his first Encyclical (4 Oct., 1903) to consider the care of their seminary as their first duty. He himself has brought about various reforms in Italy. Ecclesiastical students in Rome must live in a college and before ordination undergo an examination. As many dioceses in Italy cannot support well-equipped seminaries, the Holy Father has suppressed some and united others. A central seminary has been opened at Capua and placed under the direction of the Jesuits; others have been entrusted to the Vincentians. In order to raise the standard of studies a detailed programme has been issued for all Italian seminaries: it prescribes a course of five years in the gymnasium, three years in the lyceum (philosophy), a year of preparation, and four years of study of theology. To this has been added a set of regulations for the discipline and moral training of the students, in which no detail is omitted (10 May, 1907; 18 Jan., 1908). Other acts of Pius X extend not only to Italian but to all seminaries: they relate to the admission of students, to various branches of studies, etc.; they all tend to protect the faith of the students against Modernistic tendencies and to train a more learned and more pious clergy. On the occasion of the golden jubilee of his priesthood the Holy Father addressed to the clergy of the world (4 Aug., 1908) an exhortation which will remain the vade-mecum of seminarians and priests, for it sets forth the ideal priestly life with the means by which it can be attained and preserved. Special regulations for the United States were enacted in the second and third Plenary Councils of Baltimore in 1866 and 1884. These laws of the Church leave undetermined many details of seminary discipline, which are left to the discretion of the bishop. Several methods, all based on the famous "Institutiones" of St. Charles and varying only in non-essential points, have been and are still in force. Among them are those framed by St. Vincent de Paul, Blessed John Eudes, Father Olier, and St. Alphonsus. None of these is imposed by the Church or generally adopted in all its details. B. Foundation of Seminaries The decree of the Council of Trent imposes on every bishop the duty of having a seminary, that is, a school exclusively destined to prepare candidates for the priesthood. It should provide a thorough course of ecclesiastical training, and therefore, according to present discipline, include academic, collegiate, and theological courses. The ideal Tridentine seminary is an institution like Overbrook (Philadelphia) or Menlo Park (San Francisco), where the future priests of the diocese are received from the grammar school and kept until ordination. The Church, however, does not condemn, and Leo XIII has expressly approved the separation of the preparatory from the theological seminary; even in this case they are considered by law as forming but one diocesan institution, under the bishop with the same advisory board. For the foundation and support of the seminary the tax on benefices, authorized by the Council of Trent, is not practicable in America; the bishop has to depend on the generosity of the faithful; he may prescribe an annual collection or fix the amount to be contributed by each parish. Poor dioceses may combine their resources to found an interdiocesan seminary, to be controlled by the several bishops interested. The controversy on the question of central versus diocesan seminaries has never been raised in this country. It belongs only to the Holy See and to the bishop to decide whether it is practicable for a given diocese to have its separate seminary. In the United States the majority of dioceses are now, and many will long remain, incapable of supporting a seminary. Interdiocesan seminaries, such as the Council of Trent recognizes and such as are now being established in Italy, are practically unknown. In their place there are seminaries such as St. Paul, Rochester, New York, founded and controlled by one bishop, but receiving students from other dioceses; and likewise seminaries in charge of religious orders or societies of secular priests, the students of which belong to various dioceses: such are St. Mary's and Mount St. Mary's (Baltimore), St. Vincent's (Pittsburg), Our Lady of Angels (Buffalo), etc. Though such institutions were not contemplated by the Council of Trent, they have the earnest approval of the bishops and of the Holy See. ENGLISH-SPEAKING SEMINARIES THROUGHOUT THE WORLD. T-Theological Seminary; P-Preparatory Seminary; PT-Preparatory and Theological Seminary COUNTRY DIOCESE NAME PLACE IN CHARGE OF TYPE NO. OF STUDENTS Australia Sydney St. Patrick's Ecclesiastical College Manly Diocesan priests PT 80 " " St. Columba's Seminary and Foreign Missionary College Springwood Diocesan priests PT 26 " " Sacred Heart Missionary College Kensington Sacred Heart Fathers PT 30 Belgium Mechlin American College of the Immaculate Conception Louvain Diocesan priests T 100 Canada Halifax Holy Heart Theological Seminary Halifax Eudist Fathers T 38 " Montreal Preparatory Seminary of Ste. ThÈrèse Ste. ThÈrèse Diocesan priests P 330 " " SÈminaire de ThÈologie Montreal Sulpician Fathers T 255 " " SÈminaire de Philosophie Montreal Sulpician Fathers 96 " Ottawa Grand Seminary Ottawa Obl. Mary Immac. T 20 " Quebec Seminary of Quebec (Holy Family) Quebec Diocesan priests PT 650 " St. Boniface Junior Seminary St. Boniface Diocesan priests P 45 " St. Albert Seminary (little) St. Albert Obl. Mary Immac. P 33 Ceylon Kandy Leonianum, for native students Kandy Belgian Jesuits PT 99 England Westminster St. Edmund's College Ware Diocesan priests PT ... " " St. Joseph's College for Foreign Missions Mill Hill Diocesan priests PT ... " Birmingham St. Mary's Seminary Oscott Diocesan priests PT ... " Hexham St. Cuthbert's College Ushaw Diocesan priests PT ... " Leeds St. Joseph's Seminary Leeds Diocesan priests PT ... " Liverpool St. Edward's College Everton Diocesan priests P ... " " St. Joseph's Diocesan College Walthew Park Diocesan priests T ... " Southwark St. John's Diocesan Seminary Wonersh Diocesan priests PT ... India Verapoly St. Joseph's Central Seminary Puttempaly Discalc. Carm. PT 5 Ireland Armagh St. Patrick's College Armagh Vincentians P ... " Meath St. Finian's College Mullingar Diocesan priests P ... " Ardagh St. Mel's College Longford Diocesan priests P ... " Clogher St. Macarten's College Monaghan Diocesan priests P ... " Derry St. Columb's College Derry Diocesan priests P ... " Down and Connor St. Malachy's College Belfast Diocesan priests P ... " Dromore St. Colman's College Newry Diocesan priests P ... " Kilmore St. Patrick's College Cullies Diocesan priests P ... " Raphoe St. Eunan's College Letterkenny Diocesan priests P ... " Dublin St. Patrick's College Maynooth Diocesan priests T ... " " All Hallows Missionary College Drumcondra Vincentians T ... " " Holy Cross College Clonliffe Diocesan priests PT ... " Kildare and Leighlin St. Patrick's College Carlow Diocesan priests T ... " Ferns St. Peter's College Wexford Diocesan Priests PT ... " Ossory St. Kieran's College Kilkenny Diocesan priests PT ... " Cashel St. Patrick's College Thurles Diocesan priests T ... " Cloyne St. Colman's College Fermoy Diocesan priests P ... " Cork St. Finnbar's College Cork Diocesan priests P ... " " St. Joseph's Apostolical College for African Foreign Missions Cork Diocesan priests P ... " Kerry St. Brendan's College Killarney Diocesan priests P ... " Killaloe St. Flannan's College Ennis Diocesan priests P ... " Limerick St. Munchin's College Limerick Diocesan priests P ... " Waterford and Lismore St. John's College Mount Melleray Seminary Waterford Cappoquin Diocesan priests Cistercians P ... " Tuam St. Jarlath's College Tuam Diocesan priests P ... " Achonry St. Nathy's College Ballagadereen Diocesan priests P ... " Clonfert St. Joseph's College Ballinasloe Diocesan priests P ... " Elphin College of the Immaculate Conception Sligo Diocesan priests P ... " Killala St. Muredach's College Ballina Diocesan priests P ... Italy Rome Collège Canadien Rome Sulpicians T 22 " " English College and Collegio Beda Rome Diocesan priests T ... " " Irish College Rome Diocesan priests T ... " " Scots College Rome Diocesan priests T 33 New Zealand Wellington St. Patrick's College Wellington Marist Fathers PT 140 " Dunedin Holy Cross College Mossgiel Diocesan priests PT ... Portugal Lisbon SS. Peter and Paul's College (English) Lisbon Diocesan priests T ... Scotland Aberdeen St. Mary's College Blairs Diocesan priests PT 80 " Glasgow St. Peter's College New Kilpatrick Diocesan priests PT 32 Spain Salamanca Irish College Salamanca Diocesan priests T ... " Valladolid St. Alban's College (English) Valladolid Diocesan priests T ... " " Scots College Valladolid Diocesan priests T ... Straits Settlements Malacca General College for Native Clergy Pulo Penang Paris Soc. Foreign Missions PT ... United States Baltimore St. Mary's Seminary Baltimore Sulpicians T 250 " " Mount St. Mary's Seminary Emmitsburg Diocesan priests T 60 " " St. Charles College Ellicott City Sulpicians P 210 " Boston St. John's Seminary Boston Diocesan priests T 100 " Chicago Cathedral College Chicago Diocesan priests P 190 " Cincinnati Mount St. Mary's Seminary Cedar Point Diocesan priests T 120 " Milwaukee St. Francis's Seminary Milwaukee Diocesan priests PT 244 " New Orleans St. Joseph's Seminary St. Benedict Benedictines P ... " New York St. Joseph's Seminary Dunwoodie Diocesan priests T 170 " " Cathedral College New York Diocesan priests P 234 " Philadelphia St. Charles Borromeo Philadelphia Diocesan priests PT 150 " St. Louis The Kenrick Seminary St. Louis Vincentians T 100 " " St. Louis Preparatory Seminary St. Louis Vincentians P 65 " San Francisco St. Patrick's Seminary Menlo Park Sulpicians PT 85 " Brooklyn St. John's Seminary Brooklyn Vincentians T 72 " Buffalo Seminary of Our Lady of Angels Niagara Falls Vincentians T 90 " " St. Bonaventure's Seminary Allegany Franciscans T 75 " Cleveland St. Mary's Seminary Cleveland Diocesan priests T 42 " Columbus Josephinum Columbus Diocesan priests PT 175 " Detroit Sts. Cyril and Methodius's Seminary Orchard Lake Diocesan priests T 104 " Grand Rapids St. Joseph's Preparatory Seminary Grand Rapids Diocesan priests P ... " Hartford St. Thomas's Seminary Hartford Diocesan priests P 97 " Indianapolis St. Meinrad's Ecclesiastical Seminary (Polish) St. Meinrad Benedictines T 71 " " St. Meinrad's College St. Meinrad Benedictines P 100 " Kansas City St. John's Catholic Seminary Kansas City Diocesan priests P 18 " Newark Immaculate Conception Theological Seminary South Orange Diocesan priests T 44 " Pittsburg St. Vincent's Seminary (Seton Hall) Beatty Benedictines T ... " Rochester St. Bernard's Seminary Rochester Diocesan priests T 233 " " St. Andrew Rochester Diocesan priests P 80 " San Antonio San Antonio Theological Seminary San Antonio Obl. Mary Immac. T ... " North Carolina St. Mary's Seminary Belmont Benedictines T 17 C. Obligation of Seminary Training A student could obtain all the knowledge necessary for a priest by following classes in a college and lectures in a university, without living in the seminary; but since the Council of Trent, the sovereign pontiffs and the bishops have constantly endeavoured to have candidates for the priesthood spend some time in a seminary so as to acquire, along with knowledge, habits of piety and self-discipline. They have felt that the purpose of the Tridentine Decree would be defeated if residence in the seminary were left to the option of the students. It is the desire of the Holy See, based on the Council of Trent and repeatedly expressed, especially by Leo XIII and Pius X, that future priests be trained from early years apart from lay students. The same idea is enforced by the third Plenary Council of Baltimore, when it declares that the custom which obtains in some parts of the country of having aspirants to the priesthood take their classical course in a mixed college is not in perfect harmony with the mind of the Church, and when it urges the foundation of a preparatory seminary in every diocese or at least in every province (nos. 139, 153). Where this decree cannot be carried out, colleges receiving young men who study for the priesthood must strictly observe the regulations prescribed for preparatory seminaries, relating to discipline, religious instruction, and the programme of studies (ibid., no. 153). With still greater insistence does the Church demand residence in a seminary from the students of theology, even if they follow the lectures of a Catholic university. Thus Pius X has ordered all ecclesiastical students in Rome to live in one of the colleges established for them; a similar instruction has been issued for the ecclesiastical students at Fribourg. The Council of Baltimore required all aspirants to the priesthood to go through the six years of training prescribed for all American seminaries (no. 155). The bishop can dispense in rare cases, and for grave reasons. D. External Government of Seminaries All matters referring to seminaries are under the supreme direction of the Consistorial Congregation in Rome. Diocesan seminaries are controlled by the bishop, who appoints and removes professors, determines in detail the regulations to be followed, and watches over the temporal administration, studies, discipline, and piety. Nothing of importance can be done without his advice and consent; to him belongs the final decision on the admission and dismissal of students, as well as on their call to orders. In provincial or interdiocesan seminaries this power is vested in the board of interested bishops. For diocesan seminaries, the bishop is bound by the common law of the Church to seek, though not bound to follow, in matters of temporal administration the advice of a commission composed of two canons of the cathedral (one chosen by himself, the other by the chapter) and of two other priests of the episcopal city, one chosen also by the bishop, the other by the clergy. For spiritual matters the advice of two canons chosen by the bishop is likewise necessary. In the United States the bishop must have in the management of his seminary at least one adviser for spiritual matters, and another for temporal matters; both are chosen by himself with the advice of the diocesan consultors (Council of Baltimore, no. 180). Although no text of ecclesiastical law forbids the bishop to entrust the direction of his seminary to a religions order or congregation, this cannot be done without the approval of the Holy See; for the bishop has no power to give up for himself and his successors the right to appoint the rector and teachers; neither can he set aside the law of the Council of Trent, requiring the advice of consultors in the management of the seminaries, while religious congregations in taking charge of a seminary assume the appointment of the faculty, and in governing it do not admit the interference of a diocesan commission. Several religious orders or societies, however (Eudists, Lazarists, Marists, Oratorians, Sulpicians), have a general permission from the Holy See to accept the seminaries entrusted to them. A contract between the bishop and the society determines the conditions under which the seminary is accepted and must be governed (Council of Baltimore, no. 180). E. Internal Administration of Seminaries Two systems prevail. In one the management of the seminary is in the hands of the rector, who alone under the bishop governs the seminary, calls to orders, admits and dismisses the students; a treasurer has full charge of temporal matters, while to a spiritual director is entrusted the formation of the students in piety. The professors are merely teachers. In the other system, all the professors have a share in the administration of the seminary; and all important matters are decided by a vote of the faculty. The professors are spiritual directors and confessors of the students. Of course, they have no voice in the faculty meetings when one of their penitents is concerned. A Decree of the Holy Office (5 July, 1899) forbids superiors of seminaries and colleges in Rome to hear the confessions of their students. With the special organization of those colleges, such a practice could easily interfere with the liberty which the Church assures to all in the sacred tribunal. Although this decree has not been officially extended beyond those colleges, its spirit should be observed in others similarly organized. F. Admission and Dismissal of Students "Let those be received", says the Council of Trent, "who having been born in lawful wedlock, have at least attained their twelfth year, are able to read and write passably, and whose naturally good disposition gives token that they will always continue in the service of the Church." It is the wish of the council that the children of the poor should be preferred. To-day an ordinary grammar school instruction is required for admission into the preparatory seminaries. As regards vocation, all that can be expected is not indeed certainty, but probability. Still, preparatory seminaries must be maintained in their proper spirit, and receive only candidates for the priesthood. Parents and parish priests are urged to encourage and to help boys who by their intelligence and piety give hope that they are called to the priesthood (Council of Baltimore, no. 136). No one should be admitted to a theological seminary unless he has completed a six-year collegiate course, and passed a successful examination (ibid., nos. 145, 152). A student from another diocese cannot be received without first obtaining information from his bishop. 1f it appears that he was dismissed from the seminary (as unfit for the priesthood) he should not be admitted at all (Congregation of the Council, 22 Dec., 1905). Dismissal from the seminary means no more than that the student is not considered fit for the priesthood; it does not necessarily reflect on his character as a Christian layman. G. Intellectual Training In the preparatory seminary the aspirant to the priesthood follows the ordinary academic and collegiate course for six years; he studies Christian doctrine, Latin and Greek, English and at least one other modern language, rhetoric and elocution, history and geography, mathematics and natural sciences, Gregorian Chant and bookkeeping (Council of Baltimore, nos. 145, 151). Catholic colleges with a course of eight years, four years academic and four years collegiate, teach philosophy and science in the junior and senior years; but as a rule this is not accepted by seminaries as the equivalent of two years of philosophy. The Council of Baltimore requires ecclesiastical students to spend six years in the theological seminary. There they receive a special moral training which cannot be given in a mixed college, and they are taught philosophy with a view to the study of theology. In the theological seminary two years are devoted to the study of philosophy, Scripture, Church history, and natural sciences in their relation to religion. During the last four years the course of study includes Holy Scripture, with Greek and Hebrew, apologetics, dogmatic, moral, and pastoral theology, Church history, and, in some institutions, liturgy and canon law. The courses given in these various branches have a twofold purpose: to equip every student with the knowledge necessary for the discharge of the ordinary functions of the ministry; and to give brighter students the foundation of more scientific work, to be pursued in a university. The seminary trains general practitioners, the university forms specialists; the seminary gives the elements of all ecclesiastical science, the university provides a thorough treatment of some special questions. In Rome ecclesiastical students from various colleges follow a course of lectures at the Gregorian University, the Dominican College, the Propaganda, or the Roman Seminary; these are supplemented by repetitions in the colleges (see ROMAN COLLEGES). There are likewise ecclesiastical students preparing for the priesthood who follow the courses of theology in the Universities of Louvain and Fribourg, and in the theological faculties of the German universities. In the Catholic University at Washington there is only a post-graduate course of sacred sciences. The vast majority of the clergy in nearly all countries receive their education in seminaries, and only at the end of the regular course are some of the best gifted sent to a Catholic university to pursue higher studies, which lead to the degrees of licentiate and doctor. Leo XIII and Pius X, in their letters to bishops in various parts of the world and in their Decrees regarding seminaries, insist that ecclesiastical studies be in harmony with the needs of our times, but free from all dangerous novelties, especially from the errors condemned under the name of Modernism. Various means have been taken to secure the perfect orthodoxy of both the professors and the students. H. Moral and Spiritual Training Unlike most of the professional schools (law, medicine etc.) which give only knowledge, the seminary aims at training the will. Like West Point and the Naval Academy it subjects the student to a system of discipline by which he may gradually acquire habits becoming his profession. In a priest, holiness of life is not less essential than professional science. In order to discharge with success the functions of his ministry, he must be a gentleman, a true Christian, and moreover capable of bearing the special obligations of the priesthood. "In order to restore in the world the reign of Jesus Christ", writes Pius X (5 May, 1904), "nothing is as necessary as the holiness of the clergy." Hence, in his first Encyclical he warns the bishops that their first care, to which every other must yield, ought to be "to form Christ in those who are to form Christ in others" (3 Oct., 1903). Seminarians are to learn the sacerdotal virtues first of all by the example of their teachers. Hence the sovereign pontiffs and various councils frequently insist on the qualifications of those who are chosen to train priests. They should be "conspicuous for ability, learning, piety, seriousness of life. They should devote their life to study, bear cheerfully the burden of seminary rule and of a busy life; by word and example teach the students the observance of seminary discipline, humility, unworldliness, love of work and retirement, and fidelity to prayer" (Council of Baltimore, no. 159). Another powerful means of training seminarians in Christian virtue is the seminary discipline. The student is separated from the world and subjected to a rule of life which, leaving nothing to caprice, determines what he has to do at every moment of the day. Classes, studies, exercises of piety follow one another at regular intervals, and punctual attendance is expected of all. Fidelity to seminary rules, extending over several years, prompted by a sense of duty, and inspired by the love of God, cannot fail to produce habits of regularity, self-control, and self-sacrifice. Instructions on Christian perfection, on the dignity and duties of the priesthood are daily given in spiritual conferences and readings. These are supplemented by retreats, which take place in the beginning of the year and before ordinations, and by private consultations of each student with his spiritual director. Even more efficacious than instruction and discipline is the direct intercourse of the soul with God in prayer, meditation, and the reception of the sacraments. Nowhere, perhaps, has the Decree of Pius X on frequent communion produced more abundant fruit than in seminaries. The students gladly avail themselves of the special encouragement given to them to receive Our Lord daily. By this close communion with our great High Priest, even more than by their willing acceptance of all the restraints of seminary life, they gradually become worthy of the mission conferred upon them by ordination. Thus the seminary becomes a nursery of faithful representatives of Our Lord for the salvation of men; they go forth, the light of the world and the salt of the earth. History fully bears out the words of the learned historian and great bishop, Hefele: "If the Catholic world has had for the last three hundred years a more learned, a more moral, a more pious clergy than that which existed in almost every country at the time of the so-called Reformation, and whose tepidity and faithlessness contributed largely to the growth of the schism, it is wholly due to this decree of the Council of Trent, and to it we in this age owe our thanks" ("Tübinger Quartalschrift", no. 1, p. 24). I, Special treatises: — POÜAN, De Seminario Clericorum (Tournai, 1874); THEMISTOR, Bildung und Erziehung der Geistlichen (Cologne, 1884); Fr. tr., L'Instruction et l'Education du Clergé (Treves, 1884); SIEBENGARTNER, Schriften und Einrichtungen zur Bildung der Geistlichen (Freiburg, 1902); MICHELETTI, De Regimine Ecclesiastico, I (1909), ii; IDEM, De Institutione Clericorum in Sacris Seminariis (s. d.); IDEM, De Ratione Studiorum in Sacris Seminariis; IDEM, De Ratione Pietatis in Sacris Seminariis; IDEM, De Ratione Disciplinœ in Sacris Seminariis; IDEM, De Rectore Seminariorum clericalium IDEM, De Moderatore Spiritus Seminariorum clericalium; BRUSCHELLI, Su lo Stato dei Seminari delle minori diocesi d'Italia (Rome, 1905); FALCONE, Per la Riforma dei Seminari in Italia (Rome, 1906); ICARD, Traditions de la Compagnie de St-Sulpice pour la Direction des Grands Séminaires (2nd ed., Paris, 1891); HOGAN, Clerical Studies (Boston, 1898); SMITH, Our Seminaries (New York, 1896), new ed. under the title The Training of a Priest (1908). II. History of ecclesiastical education: — THOMASSIN, Ancienne et Nouvelle Discipline de l'Eglise (Bar-le-Duc, 1864); THEINER, Histoire des Institutions d'Education Ecclésiastique (Paris, 1841); MARCAULT, Essai Historique sur l'Education des Clercs (Paris, 1904); MCCAFFREY, History of the Catholic Church in the Nineteenth Century, II (Dublin and St. Louis, 1909), ii; see also Lives of St. Charles Borromeo, St. Bartholomew of the Martyrs, St. Vincent de Paul, Father Olier, St. John Baptist de Rossi SNEAD-COX, Life of Cardinal Vaughan (London, 1910), I, iv, II, ii. III. General laws of the Church on seminaries; (a) Sources: — Decret. Conc. Trid., Sess. XXIII, cap. xviii, De Ref.; Acta Leonis XIII (Rome, 1905); Acta Pii X in Acta S. Sedis and since 1909 in Acta apud Apost. Sedem. (b) Treatises: — WERNZ, Jus Decretalium, vol. III, tit. III, 5; BARGILLIAT, Prœlectiones Juris Canonici (25th ed., Paris, 1909), vol. I, tract. III, cap. i; IDEM, De Institutione clericorum (Paris 1908); GIGNAC, Compendium Juris Canonici (Quebec, 1903), vol. II, tit. V, c. ii. IV. American seminaries: — Decreta Concilii Balt., II, tit, III, c. vii; Decreta Concilii Balt., III, tit. V; SHEA, History of the Catholic Church in the United States, II-IV; St. Mary's Seminary, Memorial Volume (Baltimore, 1891); Historical Sketch of the Philadelphia Theological Seminary (Philadelphia, 1891); HOWLETT, St. Thomas's Seminary (Bardstown) (St. Louis, 1906); Souvenir of the Golden Jubilee of St. Francis's Seminary (Milwaukee, 1906); Souvenir of the Blessing of the Corner Stone of St, Joseph's Seminary (New York, 1891); A History of the Mountain (Mount St. Mary's 1911); BRANN, History of the American College, Rome (New York, 1910); Catalogues of various seminaries, American Ecclesiastical Review, where may be found the Acts of the Holy See, historical sketches of some seminaries, and articles on intellectual and moral training of seminarians; Proceedings of the Cath. Educ. Association (Columbus, 1904-); see AMERICAN COLLEGE, THE, AT' LOUVAIN; AMERICAN COLLEGE, THE, IN ROME; and other special articles. A. VIÉBAN Semipelagianism Semipelagianism A doctrine of grace advocated by monks of Southern Gaul at and around Marseilles after 428. It aimed at a compromise between the two extremes of Pelagianism and Augustinism, and was condemned as heresy at the Œcumenical Council of Orange in 529 after disputes extending over more than a hundred years. The name Semipelagianism was unknown both in Christian antiquity and throughout the Middle Ages; during these periods it was customary to designate the views of the Massilians simply as the "relics of the Pelagians" (reliquiœ Pelagianorum), an expression found already in St. Augustine (Ep. ccxxv, n. 7, in P. L., XXXIII, 1006). The most recent investigations show that the word was coined between 1590 and 1600 in connexion with Molina's doctrine of grace, in which the opponents of this theologian believed they saw a close resemblance to the heresy of the monks of Marseilles (cf. "Revue des sciences phios. et théol.", 1907, pp. 506 sqq.). After this confusion had been exposed as an error, the term Semipelagianism was retained in learned circles as an apt designation for the early heresy only. I. ORIGIN OF SEMIPELAGIANISM (a.d. 420-30) In opposition to Pelagianism, it was maintained at the General Council of Carthage in 418 as a principle of faith that Christian grace is absolutely necessary for the correct knowledge and performance of good, and that perfect sinlessness is impossible on earth even for the justified. Since these declarations coincided only with a portion of St. Augustine's doctrine of grace, the anti-Pelagians could without reproof continue their opposition to other points in the teaching of the African Doctor. This opposition Augustine was soon to encounter in his immediate neighbourhood. In 420 he found himself compelled to direct to a certain Vitalis of Carthage, who was an opponent of Pelagius and recognized the Synod of Carthage (418), paternal instructions concerning the necessity of grace at the very beginning of the assent of the will in faith and concerning the absolute gratuity of grace (Ep. ccxvii in P. L., XXXIII, 978 sqq.). As is clear from the tenor of this writing, Vitalis was of the opinion that the beginning of faith springs from the free will of nature, and that the essence of "prevenient grace" consists in the preaching of the Christian doctrine of salvation. On the basis of such faith man, as Vitalis held, attains justification before God. This view was entirely "Semipelagian". To controvert it, Augustine pointed out that the grace preceding faith must be an interior enlightenment and strengthening, and that the preaching of the Word of God could not, unassisted, accomplish this; consequently the implanting of grace in the soul by God is necessary as a preliminary condition for the production of real faith, since otherwise the customary prayer of the Church for the grace of conversion for unbelievers would be superfluous. Augustine also introduces his view of an absolute predestination of the elect, without however especially emphasizing it, by remarking: "Cum tam multi salvi non fiant, non quia ipsi, sed quia Deus non vult" (Since so many are not saved, not because they themselves do not will it, but because God does not will it). Vitalis seems to have acquiesced and to have disclaimed the "error of Pelagius". The second dispute, which broke out within the walls of the African monastery of Hadrumetum in 424, was not so easily settled. A monk named Florus, a friend of St. Augustine, had while on a journey sent to his fellow-monks a copy of the long epistle which Augustine had addressed in 418 to the Roman priest, afterwards Pope Pope Sixtus III (Ep. cxciv in P. L., XXXIII, 874 sqq.). In this epistle all merit before the reception of grace was denied, faith represented as the most gratuitous gift of God, and absolute predestination to grace and glory defended. Aroused to great anger by this letter, "more than five monks" inflamed their companions to such an extent that the tumult seemed destined to overwhelm the good abbot, Valentinus. On his return, Florus was loaded with the most violent reproaches for sending such a present, and he and the majority, who were followers of Augustine, were accused of maintaining that free will was no longer of any account, that on the last day all would not be judged according to their works, and that monastic discipline and correction (correptio) were valueless. Informed of the outbreak of this unrest by two young monks, Cresconius and Felix, Augustine sent to the monastery in 426 or 427 the work, "De gratia et libero arbitrio" (P. L., XLIV, 881 sqq.), in which he maintains that the efficacy of Divine grace impairs neither the freedom of the human will nor the meritoriousness of good works, but that it is grace which causes the merits in us. The work exercised a calming influence on the heated spirits of Hadrumetum. Apprised of the good effect of this book by Florus himself, Augustine dedicated to the abbot and his monks a second doctrinal writing, "De correptione et gratia" (P. L., XLIV, 915 sqq.), in which he explains in the clearest fashion his views upon grace. He informed the monks that correction is by no means superfluous, since it is the means by which God works. As for the freedom to sin, it is in reality not freedom, but slavery of the will. True freedom of the will is that effected by grace, since it makes the will free from the slavery of sin. Final perseverance is likewise a gift of grace, inasmuch as he to whom God has granted it will infallibly persevere. Thus, the number of those predestined to heaven from eternity is so determined and certain that "no one is added or subtracted". This second work seems to have been also received approvingly by the mollified monks; not so by subsequent ages, since this ominous book, together with other utterances, has given occasion to the most violent controversies concerning the efficacy of grace and predestination. All advocates of heretical predestinarianism, from Lucidus and Gottschalk to Calvin, have appealed to Augustine as their crown-witness, while Catholic theologians see in Augustine's teaching at most only a predestination to glory, with which the later "negative reprobation" to hell is parallel. Augustine is entirely free from Calvin's idea that God positively predestined the damned to hell or to sin. Many historians of dogma (Harnack, Loofs, Rottmanner, etc.) have passed a somewhat different censure on the work, maintaining that the Doctor of Hippo, his rigorism increasing with his age, has here expressed most clearly the notion of "irresistible grace" (gratia irresistibilis), on which Jansenism later erected, as is known, its entire heretical system of grace. As the clearest and strongest proof of this contention, the following passage (De correptione et gratia, xxxviii) is cited: "Subventum est igitur infirmitati voluntatis humanæ, ut divina gratia indeclinabiliter et insuperabiliter ageretur et ideo, quamvis infirma, non tamen deficeret neque adversitate aliqua vincerctur." Is this not clearly the "inevitable and unconquerable grace" of Jansenism? The mere analysis of the text informs us better. The antithesis and the position of the words do not allow us to refer the terms "inevitably and unconquerably" to the grace as such, they must be referred to the "human will" which, in spite of its infirmity, is, by grace, made "unyielding and unconquerable" against the temptation to sin. Again the very easily misunderstood term ageretur is not to be explained as "coercion against one's will" but as "infallible guidance", which does not exclude the continuation of freedom of will (cf. Mausbach, "Die Ethik des hl. Augustins", II, Freiburg, 1909, p. 35). The monks of Southern Gaul, who dwelt in peace at Marseilles and on the neighbouring island of Lerinum (Lérins), read the above-cited and other passages of Augustine with other and more critical eyes than the monks at Hadrumetum. Abbot John Cassian of the monastery of St. Victor at Marseilles, a celebrated and holy man, was, together with his fellow-monks, especially repelled by the arguments of St. Augustine. The Massilians, as they were called, were known throughout the Christian world as holy and virtuous men, conspicuous for their learning and asceticism. They had heartily acquiesced in the condemnation of Pelagianism by the Synod of Carthage (418) and the "Tractoria" of Pope Zosimus (418), and also in the doctrines of original sin and grace. They were, however, convinced that Augustine in his teaching concerning the necessity and gratuity especially of prevenient grace (gratia prœcedens seu prœveniens) far overshot the mark. Cassian had a little earlier expressed his views concerning the relation of grace and freedom in his "Conferences" (Collatio xxiv in P. L., XLIX, 477 sqq.). As a man of Eastern training and a trusted disciple of St. John Chrysostom, he had taught that the free will was to be accorded somewhat more initiative than he was accustomed to find in the writings of Augustine. With unmistakable reference to Hippo, he had endeavoured in his thirteenth conference to demonstrate from Biblical examples that God frequently awaits the good impulses of the natural will before coming to its assistance with His supernatural grace; while the grace often preceded the will, as in the case of Matthew and Peter, on the other hand the will frequently preceded the grace, as in the case of Zacchæus and the Good Thief on the cross. This view was no longer Augustinian; it was really "half Pelagianisin". To such a man and his adherents, among whom the monk Hilarius (already appointed Bishop of Arles in 428) was conspicuous, the last writings from Africa must have appeared a masked reproof and a downright contradiction. Thus, from being half friendly, the Massilians developed into determined opponents of Augustine. Testimony as to this change of feeling is supplied by two non-partisan laymen, Prosper of Aquitaine and a certain Hilarius, both of whom in their enthusiasm for the newly-blossoming monastic life voluntarily shared in the daily duties of the monks. In two distinct writings (St. Augustine, Epp. ccxxv-xxvi in P. L., XXXIII, 1002-12) they gave Augustine a strictly matter-of-fact report of the theological views of the Massilians. They sketched in the main the following picture, which we complete from other sources: 1. In distinguishing between the beginning of faith (initium fidei) and the increase of faith (augmentum fidei), one may refer the former to the power of the free will, while the faith itself and its increase is absolutely dependent upon God; 2. the gratuity of grace is to be maintained against Pelagius in so far as every strictly natural merit is excluded; this, however, does not prevent nature and its works from having a certain claim to grace; 3. as regards final perseverance in particular, it must not be regarded as a special gift of grace, since the justified man may of his own strength persevere to the end; 4. the granting or withholding of baptismal grace in the case of children depends on the Divine prescience of their future conditioned merits or misdeeds. This fourth statement, which is of a highly absurd nature, has never been condemned as heresy; the three other propositions contain the whole essence of Semipelagianism. The aged Augustine gathered all his remaining strength to prevent the revival of Pelagianism which had then been hardly overcome. He addressed (428 or 429) to Prosper and Hilarius the two works "De prædestinatione sanctorum" (P. L., XLIV, 959 sqq.) and "De dono perseverantiæ" (P. L., XLIV, 993 sqq.). In refuting their errors, Augustine treats his opponents as erring friends, not as heretics, and humbly adds that, before his episcopal consecration (about 396), he himself had been caught in a "similar error", until a passage in the writings of St. Paul (I Cor., iv, 7) had opened his eyes, "thinking that the faith, by which we believe in God, is not the gift of God, but is in us of ourselves, and that through it we obtain the gifts whereby we may live temperately, justly, and piously in this world" (De prædest. sanct., iii, 7). The Massilians, however, remained unappeased, the last writings of Augustine making no impression upon them. Offended at this obstinacy, Prosper believed the time had arrived for public polemics. He first described the new state of the question in a letter to a certain Rufinus (Prosper Aquit., "Ep. ad Rufinum de gratia et libero arbitrio", in P. L., XLI 77 sqq.), lashed in a poem of some thousand hexameters (Peri achariston, "hoc est de ingratis", in P.L., LI, 91 sqq.) the ingratitude of the "enemies of grace", and directed against an unnamed assailant — perhaps Cassian himself — his "Epigrammata in obtrectatorem Augustini" (P. L., XLI, 149 sqq.), written in clegiacs. At the time of the composition of this poem (429-30), Augustine was still alive. II. THE CULMINATION OF SEMIPELAGIANISM (430-519) On 29 Aug., 430, while the Vandals were besieging his episcopal city, St. Augustine died. As his sole champions, he left his disciples, Prosper and Hilarius, on the scene of conflict in Southern Gaul. Prosper, rightly known as his "best disciple", alone engaged in writing, and, immersed as he was in the rich and almost inexhaustible mind of the greatest of all the Doctors of the Church, he subsequently devoted the utmost pains to soften down with noble tact the roughness and abruptness of many of his master's propositions. Filled with the conviction that they could not successfully engage such learned and respected opponents, Prosper and Hilary journeyed to Rome about 431 to urge Pope Celestine I to take official steps against the Semipelagians. Without issuing any definitive decision, the pope contented himself with an exhortation to the bishops of Gaul (P. L., L, 528 sqq.), protecting the memory of Augustine from calumniation and imposing silence on the innovators. On his return Prosper could claim henceforth to be engaging in the conflict "in virtue of the authority of the Apostolic See" (cf. P. L., LI, 178: "ex auctoritate apostolicæ sedis). His war was "pro Augustino", and in every direction he fought on his behalf. Thus, about 431-32, he repelled the "calumnies of the Gauls" against Augustine in his "Responsiones ad capitula objectionum Gallorum" (P. L., LI, 155 sqq.), defended temperately in his "Responsiones ad capitula objectionum Vincentianarum" (P. L., LI 177 sqq.), the Augustinian teaching concerning predestination, and finally, in his "Responsiones ad excerpta Genuensium (P. L., LI, 187 sqq.), explained the sense of excerpts which two priests of Genoa had collected from the writings of Augustine concerning predestination, and had forwarded to Prosper for interpretation. About 433 (434) he even ventured to attack Cassian himself, the soul and head of the whole movement, in his book, "De gratia et libero arbitrio contra Collatorem" (P. L., LI, 213 sqq.). The already delicate situation was thereby embittered, notwithstanding the friendly concluding sentences of the work. Of Hilary, Prosper's friend, we hear nothing more. Prosper himself must have regarded the fight as hopeless for the time being, since in 434 — according to Loofs; other historians give the year 440 — he shook the dust of Gaul from his feet and left the land to its fate. Settling at Rome in the papal chancery, he took no further part directly in the controversy, although even here he never wearied propagating Augustine's doctrine concerning grace, publishing several treatises to spread and defend it. The Massilians now took the field, confident of victory. One of their greatest leaders, the celebrated Vincent of Lérins, under the pseudonym of Peregrinus made in 434 concealed attacks on Augustine in his classical and otherwise excellent work, "Commonitorium pro catholicæ fidei veritate" (P. L., L, 637 sqq), and in individual passages frankly espoused Semipelagianism. This booklet should probably be regarded as simply a "polemical treatise against Augustine". That Semipelagianism remained the prevailing tendency in Gaul during the following period, is proved by Arnobius the Younger, so called in contrast to Arnobius the Elder of Sicca (about 303). A Gaul by birth, and skilled in exegesis, Arnobius wrote about 460 extensive explanations of the Psalms ("Commentarii in Psalmos" in P. L., LIII, 327 sqq.) with a tendency towards allegorizing and open tilts at Augustine's doctrine of grace. Of his personal life nothing is known to us. Certain works from other pens have been wrongly ascribed to him. Thus, the collection of scholia ("Adnotationes ad quædam evangeliorum loca" in P. L., LIII, 569 sqq.), formerly attributed to him, must be referred to the pre-Constantine period, as B. Grundl has recently proved (cf. "Theol. Quartalschr.", Tübingen, 1897, 555 sqq.). Likewise, the work "Conflictus Arnobii catholici cum Serapione Ægyptio" (P. L., LIII, 239 sqq.) cannot have been written by our Arnobius, inasmuch as it is entirely Augustinian in spirit. When Bäumer wished to assign the authorship to Faustus of Riez ("Katholik" II, Mainz, 1887, pp. 398 sqq.), he overlooked the fact that Faustus also was a Semipelagian (see below), and that, in any case, so dilettante a writing as the above could not be ascribed to the learned Bishop of Riez. The true author is to be sought in Italy, not in Gaul. His chief object is to prove against Monophysitism, in the form of a disputation, the agreement in faith between Rome and the Greek champions of Orthodoxy, Athanasius and Cyril of Alexandria. Naturally Arnobius overcomes the Egyptian Serapion. One can therefore scarcely err in regarding the "Catholic Arnobius" as an obscure monk living in Rome. Until recent times the authorship of the work called the "Liber prædestinatus" was also commonly ascribed to our Arnobius. The sub-title reads: "Prædestinatorum hæresis et libri S. Angustino temere adscripti refutatio" (P. L., LIII, 587 sqq.). Dating from the fifth century and divided into three parts, this work, which was first published by J. Sirmond in 1643, attempts under the mask of ecclesiastical authority to refute Augustine's doctrine of grace together with the heretical Predestinarianism of pseudo-Augustine. As the third part is not merely Semipelagianism but undisguised Pelagianism, von Schubert has of late rightly concluded ("Der sog. Prædestinatus, ein Beitrag zur Gesch. des Pelagianismus", Leipzig, 1903) that the author wrote about 440 in Italy, perhaps at Rome itself, and was one of the associates of Julian of Eclanum (for further particulars see PREDESTINARIANISM). The most important representative of Semipelagianism after Cassian was undoubtedly the celebrated Bishop Faustus of Riez. When the Gallic priest Lucidus had drawn on himself, on account of his heretical predestinationism, the condemnation of two synods (Arles, 473; Lyons 474), Faustus was commissioned by the assembled bishops to write a scientific refutation of the condemned heresy; hence his work, "De gratia libri II" (P. L., LVIII, 783 sqq.). Agreeing neither with the "pestifer doctor Pelagius" nor with the "error prædestinationis" of Lucidus, he resolutely adopted the standpoint of John Cassian. Like him, he denied the necessity of prevenient grace at the beginning of justification, and compares the will to a "small hook" (quædam voluntatis ansula) which reaches out and seizes grace. Of predestination to heaven and final perseverance as a "special grace" (gratia specialis, personalis) he will not hear. That he sincerely believed that by these propositions he was condemning not a dogma of the Church, but the false private views of St. Augustine, is as certain in his case as in that of his predecessors Cassian and Hilary of Arles (see above). Consequently, their objectively reprehensible but subjectively excusable action has not prevented France from honouring these three men as Saints even to this day. The later Massilians were as little conscious as the earlier that they had strayed from the straight line of orthodoxy, and the infallible authority of the Church had not yet given a decision. One should, however, speak only of a predominance, and not of a supremacy, of Semipelagianism at this period. In proof of this statement we may cite two anonymous writings, which appeared most probably in Gaul itself. About 430 an unknown writer, recognized by Pope Gelasius as "probatus ecclesiæ magister", composed the epoch-making work, "De vocatione omnium gentium" (P. L., LI, 647 sq.). It is an honest and skilful attempt to soften down the contradictions and to facilitate the passage from Semipelagianism to a moderate Augustinism. To harmonize the universality of the will of redemption with restricted predestination, the anonymous author distinguishes between the general provision of grace (benignitas generalis) which excludes no one, and the special care of God (gratia specialis), which is given only to the elect. As suggestions towards this distinction are already found in St. Augustine, we may say that this work stands on Augustinian ground (cf. Loofs, "Dogmengesch.", 4th ed., Leipzig, 1906, p. 391). Another anonymous writing dating from the middle of the fifth century, reckoned among the works of Augustine, and edited by the Academy of Vienna, bears the title: "Hypomnesticon contra Pelagianos et Cœlestianos" (Corpus scriptor. ecclesiast. latin., X, 1611 sqq.). It contains a refutation of Semipelagianism, as it condemns the foundation of predestination on the "faith foreseen" by God (fides prœvisa). But it also sharply challenges the irresistibility of grace and predestination to hell. As the ground for eternal damnation the Divine foresight of sin is given, although the author cannot help seeing that eternal punishment as the consequence of sin is settled from all eternity. A third work deserves special attention, inasmuch as it reflects the views of Rome towards the end of the fifth century; it is entitled: "Indiculus seu præteritorum Sedis Apostolicæ episcoporum auctoritates" (in Denzinger-Bannwart, "Enchiridion", Freiburg, 1908, nn. 129-42), and emphasizes in twelve chapters the powerlessness of man to raise himself, the absolute necessity of grace for all salutary works, and the special grace-character of final perseverance. The "deeper and more difficult questions" concerning grace, as they emerged in the course of the discussion, were passed over as superfluous. The Augustinian standpoint of the compiler is as unmistakable as the anti-Semipelagian tendency of the whole work. Regarded in earlier times and to some extent even to-day as a papal instruction sent by Celestine I to the bishops of Gaul together with the document mentioned above, this appendix, or "indiculus" is now considered unauthentic and its origin referred to the end of the fifth century. It is certain that about a.d. 500 this work was recognized as the official expression of the views of the Apostolic See. III. DECLINE AND END OF SEMIPELAGIANISM (519-30) Not at Rome or in Gaul, but after a roundabout passage through Constantinople, the Semipelagian strife was to break out with new violence. It happened in this wise: In 519, Scythian monks under Johannes Maxentius who was versed in Latin literature, appeared at Constantinople with the intention of having inserted in the symbol of the Council of Chalcedon (451) the Christological formula, "Unus de s. Trinitate in carne crucifixus est", in view of the Theopaschite quarrel, which was then raging. In this clause the fanatical monks saw the "standard of orthodoxy", and regarded the solemn reception of the same into the symbol as the most efficacious means of overthrowing Monophysitism. With their untimely proposition they importuned even the papal legates, who were entrusted with the negotiations for the re-establishment of official relations between Rome and Byzantium. When Bishop Possessor from Africa approached the hesitating legates with quotations from the works of the recently-deceased Faustus of Riez, Maxentius did not hesitate to denounce Possessor and his abettors curtly as "partisans of Pelagius" (sectatores Pelagii; cf. Maxentius, "Ep. ad legatos" in P. G., LXXXVI, 85). Thus the question of the orthodoxy of Faustus suddenly arose, and simultaneously that of Semipelagianism in general; henceforth, the conflict never abated until its final settlement. As no decision could be reached without the concurrence of Rome, Maxentius started for Rome in June, 519, with several fellow-monks to lay their petition before Pope Hormisdas. During their fourteen months' residence at Rome they left no means untried to induce the pope to recognize the Christological formula and to condemn Faustus. Hormisdas, however, refused to yield to either request. On the contrary, in a reply to Bishop Possessor of 20 Aug., 520, he complains bitterly of the tactless and fanatical conduct of the Scythian monks at Rome (cf. A. Thiel, "Epistolæ Romanor. Pontif. genuinæ", I, Braunsberg, 1868, 929). As for Faustus, Hormisdas declares in the same letter that his works certainly contain much that is distorted (incongrua) and is, moreover, not included among the recognized writings of the Fathers. The sound doctrine on grace and freedom could be taken from the writings of St. Augustine. This evasive answer of the pope, showing no inclination to meet their wishes, was far from pleasing to Maxentius and his companions. Turning elsewhere for support Maxentius formed a league of the African bishops, who, in consequence of the Vandal persecution of the Catholics under King Thrasamund (496-523), were living in exile on the Island of Sardinia. Fulgentius of Ruspe, the most learned of the exiles, inquired into the matter on behalf of his fellow-bishops. In a long epistle (Fulgentius, Ep. xvii, "De incarnatione et gratia", in P. L., LXV, 451 sqq.), he gratified the Scythian monks by approving the orthodoxy of the Christological formula and the condemnation of Faustus of Riez. Unfortunately his polemical work in seven books against Faustus is lost, but in his numerous writings, which he composed partly during his exile in Sardinia and partly after his return to Africa, there breathes a spirit so truly Augustinian that he has been rightly called the "epitomized Augustine". The blow dealt to Faustus had its effect both in Gaul and at Rome. Bishop Cæsarius of Arles, although a pupil of Lérins, subscribed to the Augustinian doctrine of grace, and his views were shared by many of the Gallic episcopate. Other bishops were indeed still inclined towards Semipelagianism. At a Synod of Valence (528 or 529) Cæsarius was attacked on account of his teaching, but was able to reply effectively. Having been assured of the "authority and support of the Apostolic See", he summoned on 3 July, 529, the sharers of his views to the Second Synod of Orange, which condemned Semipelagianism as heresy. In twenty-five canons the entire powerlessness of nature for good, the absolute necessity of prevenient grace for salutary acts, especially for the beginning of faith, the absolute gratuity of the first grace and of final perseverance, were defined, while in the epilogue the predestination of the will to evil was branded as heresy (cf. Denzinger-Bannwart, nn. 174-200). As Pope Boniface II solemnly ratified the decrees in the following year (530), the Synod of Orange was raised to the rank of an œcumenical council. It was the final triumph of the dead Augustine, the "Doctor of Grace". SUAREZ, Proleg. de gratia, V, v, Sqq.; ELEUTHERIUS (LIVINUS MEYER), De Pelagianis et Semipelag. erroribus (Antwerp, 1705); GEFFKEN, Historia semipelagianismi (Göttingen, 1826); WIGGERS, Gesch. des Pelagianismus (Hamburg, 1835); KOCH, Der hl. Faustus v. Riez (Stuttgart, 1893); ARNOLD, Cäsarius von Arelate (Leipzig, 1894); HOCH, Die Lehre des Joh. Cassian von Natur u. Gnade (Freiburg, 1895); SUBLET, Le semipélagianisme des origines dans ses rapports avec Augustin, le pélagianisme et l'église (Namur, 1897); WÖRTER, Beitrage zur Dogmengesch. des Semipelagianismus (Paderborn, 1898); IDEM, Zur Dogmengesch. des Semipelagianismus (Münster, 1900); HEFELE-LECLERCQ, Hist. des conciles, II (Paris, 1908); TIXERONT, Hist. des dogmes, II (2nd ed., Paris, 1909); HARNACK, Dogmengesch., III (4th ed., Freiburg, 1910). On questions of literary history see BARDENHEWER, Patrologie (3rd ed., Freiburg, 1910), passim, tr. SHAHAN (St. Louis, 1908); on the Middle Ages cf. MINGES, Die Gnadenlehre des Duns Scotus auf ihren angeblichen Pelagianismus u. Semipelag. geprüft (Münster, 1906); on the internal development of Augustine's teaching Consult WEINAND, Die Gottesidee der Grundzug der Weltanschauung des hl. Augustinus (Paderborn, 1910). J. POHLE Semites Semites The term Semites is applied to a group of peoples closely related in language, whose habitat is Asia and partly Africa. The expression is derived from the Biblical table of nations (Genesis 10), in which most of these peoples are recorded as descendants of Noah's son Sem. The term Semite was proposed at first for the languages related to the Hebrew by Ludwig Schlözer, in Eichhorn's "Repertorium", vol. VIII (Leipzig, 1781), p. 161. Through Eichhorn the name then came into general usage (cf. his "Einleitung in das Alte Testament" (Leipzig, 1787), I, p. 45. In his "Gesch. der neuen Sprachenkunde", pt. I (Göttingen, 1807) it had already become a fixed technical term. Since then the name has been generally adopted, except that modern science uses it in a somewhat wider sense to include all those Peoples who are either demonstrably of Semitic origin, or who appear in history as completely Semitized. CLASSIFICATION In historic times all Western Asia (see below), with the exception of the peninsula of Asia Minor, was Semitic. From the philological point of view the Semitic peoples are divided into four chief Babylonian-Assyrian Semites (East Semites), Chanaanitic Semites, (West Semites), Aramaic Semites (North Semites), and Arabian Semites (South Semites). The last-named group is divided into North and South Arabians, of which last the Abyssinians are a branch. The first three groups are usually termed North Semites, in contrast to the Arabian group, or South Semites. But the classification of the Babylonian with the Aramaic and Chanaanitic Semites is not permissible from the philological point of view. TERRITORY The great mountain-chains which begin at the Syro-Cilician boundary, and then curving towards the south-west extend to the Persian Gulf, separate on the north and east the territory of the Semites from that of the other peoples of Western Asia. It includes the Syro-Arabian plain with the civilized countries extending to the east and west and the Arabian Peninsula which joins it on the south. The lowlands to the east are formed by the Euphrates and the Tigris, and include the homes of two very ancient civilizations, in the north the rather undulating Mesopotamia, in the south the low Babylonian plain; the land extending to the west from the lower Euphrates is called Chaldea. These are the territories of the East Semitic tribes and states. On the west lies Northern Syria, then the Lebanon Mountains with the intervening Coelo-Syria, the oasis of Damascus, the seat of an ancient culture, the Hauran, and in the the midst of the desert the oasis of Palmyra (Tadmor). These territories were at a later period occupied principally by Aramaic tribes. The territory on the coast extending westwards from Lebanon, and Palestine, which joins it on the south, are the principal seats of the Chanaanitic Semites. The mountainous country to the east of Arabia and the Sinaitic peninsula extending to the west of Arabia, belong to Arabia proper, the territory of the South Semites. ORIGINAL HOME The tribes which inhabited these territories, and to some extent still inhabit them, show in language, traits, and character a sharply characterized individuality which separates them distinctly from other peoples. Their languages axe closely related to one another, not being almost independent branches of language, like the great groups of Indo-Germanic languages, but rather dialects of a single linguistic group. Physically, also, the Semitic form it is found in Arabia. Here also the phonetics and partly also the grammatical structure of the Semitic language, are most purely, as the vocabulary is most completely, preserved. From these as well as from other circumstances the conclusion has been drawn that Arabia should be considered the original home of the Semitic peoples. All the racial peculiarities of the Semites are best explained from the character of a desert people. All Semites settled in civilized lands are, therefore, to be considered offshoots of the desert tribes, which were detached one after the other from the parent stem. This pressing forward towards civilized lands was a continuous movement, often in a slow development lasting through centuries but often also in mighty and sudden invasions, the last of which appears in that of the Arabs of Islam. The further question as to how the original ancestors of the Semites came to Arabia, is for the present beyond historical knowledge. EAST SEMITES The first emigrants from Arabia who succeeded in acquiring new landed possessions were the Semitic Babylonians. In Babylonia the invaders proceeded to adopt the highly-developed civilization of an ancient non-Semitic people, the Sumerians, and with it the cuneiform alphabets which the latter had invented. When this invasion occurred is not known; but that it was accomplished in several stages, and after temporary settlements on the borders, is unquestionable. By 3000 B.C. the dominion of the Semites in Babylonia was an accomplished fact. Ethnologically considered, the Babylonians are a mixed people, composed partly of the Sumerian and the most ancient Semitic emigrants, partly also of the continuously invading West Semites, and further more of Kassites and other people, all of whom were amalgamated. The principal seat of the Semitic element was in the north, in the land of Accad, while in the south the Sumerians were most numerous. Under Sargon and Naram-Sin was completed the amalgamation of the Sumerian and the Accadian (Semitic) civilization, which in the age of Hammurabi appears as an accomplished fact. The mighty expansion of the kingdom to the Mediterranean naturally resulted in the wide extension of the Sumerian-Accadian civilization, and for a millennium and a half Babel was the intellectual centre of Western Asia. As is proved by the Tel-el-Amarna letters, the Babylonian language and script were known in Western Asia as well as in Egypt and Cyprus, at least at the courts of the rulers. At an early period the Semites must have invaded the mountainous territory to the east of Babylonia. Not until about 2300 B.C. do we find a foreign element in Elam. Before this time, according to inscriptions which have been found, Babylonian Semites lived there. On the Accadian border dwelt the Semitic tribes of Mesopotamia, which are included under the general term Subari. The centre of this region is desert, but on the banks of the Euphrates, Chaboras, and Tigris are strips of land capable of cultivation, upon which at an early period Semitic settlements were established for the most part probably under local dynasties. The Subari include also the Assyrians, who founded on the right bank of the Tigris — between the mouths of the two Zab rivers a city which bore the same name as the race and its god. All these tribes and states were under the influence of Babylonia and its civilization, and Babylonian-Semitic was their official and literary language. But while in Babylonia the Semitic element was amalgamated with different strata of the original population, in Mesopotamia the Semitic type was more purely preserved. Briefly recapitulating the political history of the Eastern Semites, we may distinguish four periods. The first includes essentially the fortunes of the ancient Babylonian realm; the second witnesses the predominance of Assur, involved in constant struggles with Babylonia, which still maintained its independence. During the third period Amur, after the overthrow of Babylonia, achievers the summit of its power; this is followed, after the destruction of Nineveh, by the short prosperity of the new Babylonian Kingdom under the rule of the Chaldeans. This power, and with it the entire dominion of the Semites in south-western Asia, was overthrown by the Persians. CHANAANITIC SEMITES This designation was chosen because the races belonging to this group can best be studied in the land of Chanaan. They represent a second wave of emigration into civilized territory. About the middle of the third millennium before Christ they were a race of nomads in a state of transition to settled life, whose invasions were directed against the East as well as the West. About this time there constantly appear in Babylonia the names of gods, rulers, and other persons of a distinctly Chanaanitic character. To these belongs the so called first Babylonian dynasty, the most celebrated representative of which is Hammurabi. Its rule probably denotes the high tide of that new invasion of Babylonia, which also strongly influenced Assyria. In time the new stratum was absorbed by the existing population, and thereby became a part of Babylonian Semitism. Through the same invasion the civilized territory of the West received a new population, and even Egypt was affected. For the Hyksos (shepherd kings) are in the main only the last offshoot of that Chanaanitic invasion, and in their rulers we see a similar phenomenon as that of the Chanaanitic dynasty of Babylonia. As regards the Semites in Chanaan itself, the earliest wave of the invasion, which in consequence of subsequent pressure was ultimately pushed forward to the coast, is known to us under the name of the Phoenicians. A picture of the conditions of the races and principalities of Palestine in the fifteenth century B.C. is given in the Tel-el-Amarna letters. In them we find a series of Chanaanitic glosses, which show that even at that time the most important of those characteristic peculiarities had been developed, which gave their distinctive character to the best known Chanaanitic dialects, the Phoenician and the Hebrew. Further examples of Chanaanitic language of the second millennium, especially as regards the vocabulary, are the Semitic glosses in the Egyptian. To the Chanaanitic races settled in Palestine belong also the Hebrew immigrants under Abraham, from whom again the Moabites and Ammonites separated. A people closely related to the Hebrews were also the Edomites in the Seir mountains, who later appear under the name of Idumaeans in Southern Judea. These mountains had before them been settled by the Horities who were partly expelled, partly absorbed by the Edomites. A last wave of the immigration into Chanaan are the Israelites, descendants of the Hebrews, who after centuries of residence in Egypt, and after forty years of nomadic life in the desert, returned to the land of their fathers, of which they took possession after long and weary struggles. That the influence of Chanaanitic Semitism extended far into the North is proved by the two Zendsirli inscriptions: the so-called Hadad inscription of the ninth century, and the Panammu inscription of the eighth century, the language of which shows a Chanaanitic character with Aramaic intermixture. On the other hand, the so-called building inscription of Bir-Rokeb, dating from the last third of the eighth century, is purely Aramaic — a proof that the Aramaization of Northern Syria was in full progress. ARAMAIC SEMITES These represent a third wave of Semitic immigration. In cuneiform inscriptions dating from the beginning of the fourteenth century B.C. They are mentioned as Ahlami. Their expansion probably took place within the fifteenth and fourteenth centuries B.C. from the plain between the mouth of the Euphrates and the mountains of Edom. As early as the reign of Salmanasar I (1300) they had pressed far into Mesopotamia and become a public scourge, in consequence of which the stream of immigration could not longer be restrained. During the new expansion of Assyrian power under Tiglath-Pileser I (1118-1093 B.C.) his reports enumerate victories over the Aramaeans. Their further advance into the territory of the Euphrates and towards Syria took place about 1100-1000 B.C. By then ninth century all Syria was Aramiaicized; many small states were formed, principally successors of the Hittite Kingdom. The most important Arammaean principality was that of Damascus, which was destroyed by Tiglath-Pileser III in 732. In like manner the remaining Aramaic states succumbed. A new rebellion was suppressed by Sargon, and with this the rule of the Aramaeans in Syria ended. In the meanwhile, the Aramaean element in Mesopotamia was constantly growing stronger. At the beginning of the ninth century we hear of a number of small Aramaic states or Bedouin territories there. They were subdued under Assurnasirpal (Asshur-nasir-pal) III (884-860), and the independence of their princes was destroyed by his successor Salmanasar (Shalmaneser) II. Nevertheless, the immigration continued. In the struggles of Assyria the Aramaeans of Mesopotamia always made common cause with its enemies and even under Assurbanipal they were allied with his opponents. From this time we hear nothing more of them. They were probably absorbed by the remaining population. Their language alone, which the Arammans in consequence of their numerical superiority forced upon these countries, survived in the sphere of the North Semitic civilization, and was not obliterated until the Islam's conquest. The potent Arabic displaced the Aramaic dialects with the exception of a few remnants. Since the second half of the eighth century the use of Aramaic as a language of intercourse can be proved in Assyria, and about the same time it certainly prevailed in Babylonia among the commercial classes of the population. In the West also their language extended in a southerly direction as far as Northern Arabia. For Aramaic had become the general language of commerce, which the Semitic peoples of Western Asia found themselves compelled to adopt in their commercial, cultural, and political relations. The Aramaic elements of the population were absorbed by the other peoples of the existing civilized lands. They developed a distinct nationality in Damascus. In Mesopotamia itself, in the neighbourhood of Edessa, Mardin, and Nisibis, Aramaic individuality was long preserved. But the culture of this country was afterwards strongly permeated by Hellenism. One of the last political formations of the Aramaeans is found in Palmyra, which in the first century B.C. became the centre of a flourishing state under Arabian princes. It flourished until the ambitious design of Odenathus and Zenobia to play the leading part in the East caused its destruction by the Romans. A small fragment of Aramaic-speaking population may be still found in Ma'lula and two other villages of the Anti-Lebanon. So-called New Syrian dialects, descendants of the East Aramaic, are spoken in Tur'Abdin in Mesopotamia, to the east and north of Mosul, and in the neighbouring mountains of Kurdistan, as well as on the west shore of Lake Urmia. Of these Aramaic-speaking Christians a part lives on what was clearly ancient Aramaic territory; but for those on Lake Urmia we must assume a later immigration. Nestorian bishops of Urmia are mentioned as early as A.D. 1111. ARABIC-ABYSSINIAN SEMITES A. Arabs The most powerful branch of the Semitic group of peoples, are indigenous to Central and Northern Arabia, where even to-day the original character is most purely preserved. At an early period they pressed forward into the neighbouring territories, partly to the North and partly to the South. In accordance with linguistic differences they are divided into North and South Arabians. Northern Arabia is composed partly of plains and deserts, and is, therefore, generally speaking, the home of wandering tribes of Bedouins. The South, on the other hand, is fertile and suitable for a settled population. For this reason we find here at an early date political organizations, and the sites of ruins and inscriptions bear witness to the high culture which once prevailed. The natural richness of the country and its favourable situation on the seacoast made the South Arabians at an early period an important commercial people. In the fertile lowlands of the South Arabian Djôf the Kingdom of Ma'in (Minaeans) flourished. It is generally dated as early as the middle of the second millennium before Christ, although for the present it is better to maintain a somewhat sceptical attitude as regards this hypothesis. At all events, the Minaeans, at an early period, probably avoiding the desert by a journey along the eastern coast, emigrated from North-eastern Arabia. To the south and south-east of the Minaeans were the Katabans and the Hadramotites, who were cognate in language and who stood in active commercial relations with Ma'in, under whose political protectorate they seem to have lived. The spirit of enterprise of this kingdom is shown by the foundation of a commercial colony in the north-western part of the peninsula in the neighbourhood of the Gulf of Akabah, viz., Ma'in-Mussran (Mizraimitic, Egypt Ma'in). The downfall of the Ma'in kingdom was, according to the usual assumption, connected with the rise of the Sabaean kingdom. The Sabaeans had likewise emigrated from the North, and in constant struggles had gradually spread their dominion over almost all Southern Arabia. Their capital was Ma'rib. Their numerous monuments and inscriptions extend from about 700 B.C. until almost the time of Mohammed. At the height of its power, Saba received a heavy blow by the loss of the monopoly of the carrying trade between India and the northern regions, when the Ptolemies entered into direct trade relations with India. Still the Sabaean Kingdom maintained itself, with varying fortune, until about A.D. 300. After its fall the once powerful Yeman was constantly under foreign domination, at last under Persian. Ultimately, Southern Arabia was drawn into the circle of Islam. Its characteristic language was replaced by the Northern Arabic, and in only a few localities of the southern coast are remnants of it to be found: the so-called Mahri in Mahraland and the Socotri on the Island of Socotra. Northern Arabia had in the meanwhile followed its own path. To the east of Mussran to far into the Syrian desert we hear of the activity of the Aribi (at first in the ninth century B.C.), from whom the entire peninsula finally received its name. Assurbanibal, especially, boasts of important victories over them in his struggles with them for the mastery of Edom, Moab, and the Hauran (c. 650). Some of the tribes possessed the germs of political organization, as is shown in their government by kings and even queens. While these ancient Aribi for the most part constituted nomadic tribes, certain of their descendants became settled and achieved a high culture. Thus, about B.C. 200 we hear of the realm of the Nabataeans in the former territory of the Edomites. From their cliff-town of Petra they gradually spread their dominion over North-western Arabia, Moab, the Hauran, and temporarily even over Damascus. Their prosperity was chiefly due to their carrying trade between Southern Arabia and Mediterranean lands. The language of their inscriptions and coins is Aramaic, but the names inscribed upon them are Arabic. In A.D. 106 the Nabataean Kingdom became a Roman province. Its annexation caused the prosperity of the above-mentioned Palmyra, whose aristocracy and dynasty were likewise descended from the Aribi. Subsequent to these many other small Arabian principalities developed on the boundary between civilized lands and the desert; but they were for the most part of short duration. Of greatest importance were two which stood respectively under the protection of the Byzantine Empire and the Persian Kingdom as buffer states of those great powers against the sons of the desert: the realm of the Ghassanites in the Hauran, and that of the Lahmites, the centre of which was Hira, to the south of Babylon. In the second half of the sixth century A.D., when Southern Arabia had outlived its political existence, Northern Arabia had not yet found a way to political union, and the entire peninsula threatened to become a battle-ground of Persian and Byzantine interests. In one district alone, the centre of which was Mecca, did pure Arabism maintain an independent position. In this City, A.D. 570, Mohammed was born, the man who was destined to put into motion the last and most permanent of the movements which issued from Arabia. And so in the seventh century another evolution of Semitism took place, which in the victorious power of its attack and in its mighty expansion surpassed all that had gone before; the offshoots of which pressed forward to the Atlantic Ocean and into Europe itself. B. Abyssinians At an early epoch South Arabian tribes emigrated to the opposite African coast, where Sabaean trade colonies had probably existed for a long time. As early as the first century A.D. we find in the north of the Abyssinian mountain — lands the Semitic realm of Aksum. The conquerors brought with them South Arabian letters and language, which in their new home gradually attained an individual character. From this language, the Ge'ez, wrongly called Ethiopian, two daughter-languages are descended, Tigré and Tigriña. The confusion of this kingdom with Ethiopia probably owes its origin to the fact that the Semite emigrants adopted this name from the Graeco-Egyptian sailors, at a time when the Kingdom of Meroë was still in some repute. And so they called their kingdom Yteyopeya. From Aksum as a base they gradually extended their dominion over all Abyssinia, the northern population of which today shows a purer Semitic type, while the southern is strongly mixed with Hamitic elements. At an early date the south must have been settled by Semites, who spoke a language related to Ge'ez, which was afterwards to a great extent influenced by the languages of the native population, particularly by the Agau dialects. A descendant of this language is the Amharic, the present language of intercourse in Abyssinia itself and far beyond its boundaries. See the articles on the separate titles treated above; also MASPERO, Histoire ancienne, des peuples de l'Orient classique (1895); MEYER, Gesch. des Altertums, I (1909), extending to the sixteenth century B.C.; BARTON, Sketch of Semitic Origins (New York, 1902). F. SCHÜHLEIN Semitic Epigraphy Semitic Epigraphy Semitic epigraphy is a new science, dating only from the past fifty years. At the beginning of the eighteenth century European scholars sought in vain to decipher two Palmyran inscriptions which had been discovered at Rome. At the end of the century Swinton in England and the Abbé Barthélemy in France succeeded in reconstructing the alphabet with the assistance of thirteen new bilingual texts copied at Palmyra by Wood. Thenceforth it was evident of what assistance inscriptions would be to the philological and historical knowledge of the ancient Orient. They are, moreover, of great utility in Biblical criticism. The true founder of this science was W. Gesenius, who collected and commentated all the Phoenician inscriptions then known in his remarkable work "Scripturae linguaeque Phoeniciae monumenta" (Leipzig, 1837). Since then attention has been devoted to the research of epigraphical monuments and the most eminent Orientalists are successfully applying themselves to deciphering and explaining them. In 1867 the Académie des Inscriptions et Belles-Lettres of Paris undertook the publication of a "Corpus inscriptionum semiticarum", in which the monuments should be collected, translated and reproduced in facsimile by the most perfect processes. The publication, made with all desirable care, is regularly continued, despite the enormous expenses it involves. To afford an idea of Semitic epigraphy we shall follow the plan adopted in this work, which does not treat of numerous inscriptions in cuneiform characters, these falling within the province of the Assyriologist. We shall begin with the branches which belong to the group of North Semitic languages. NORTH SEMITIC LANGUAGES I. Phoenician Inscriptions These are numerous and important, since on the one hand this great nation of navigators has not left us any other monuments of its language, and on the other hand the alphabet of these inscriptions is the prototype of all the Semitic, Greek, and Latin alphabets. A. Phoenician Inscriptions The Phoenician inscriptions properly so-called, i.e. those found in Phoenicia, are neither the most numerous nor the most ancient. The longest, such as that of the sarcophagus of King Eshmunazar (at the Louvre) and those of the foundations of the temple of Eshmûn at Sidon, date only from the Ptolemaic period. The stela of Jehumelek, King of Gebal (Biblos), now at Paris, dates from the fourth or fifth century of our own era. Another found at Hassanbeyli, dates from the seventh century. Several seals and carved stones are also of great antiquity; but the oldest of all inscriptions is a mutilated bronze tablet (now in the Louvre), discovered in 1877 in the Island of Cyprus and which bears a dedication to the god Baal of Lebanon; it belongs to at least the ninth century B.C. The different colonies founded by the Phoenicians have furnished several hundreds of inscriptions, discovered in Cyprus, Sicily, Sardinia, Malta, etc. Most of them are older than those of Phoenicia; that of Nola (Sardinia,) dates from the eighth century. They are generally funeral or religious texts, except those of Cyprus, which furnish historical documents. B. Punic Inscriptions This name is given to numerous Phoenician inscriptions found in North Africa and especially in the ruins of Carthage. They are more than 3000 in number. If we except several hundred consisting of religious texts (temple dedications, tariffs for sacrifices, etc.) or epitaphs of great persons (suffetes, priests, etc.) all others are votive offerings to the goddess Tanit or god Baal-Hammon, and give no information save the name of the one offering the little stone stella on which the dedication is inscribed. C. Neo-punic Inscriptions These are distinguished by the more cursive form of the writing and also by the language: they are of greater philological interest, some of the letters performing the office of vowels. Their contents are the same as those of the other document: historical inscriptions (such as that of Micipsa), dedications of monuments, epitaphs, votive offerings, and religious consecrations. They are derived for the most part from the vicinity of Constantine and from Tunis, some are from Sardinia and Sicily. About 200 are known, belonging to the period between the fall of Carthage and the end of the first century of the Christian era. II. Aramaic Inscriptions A. Ancient Aramaic The most ancient monuments of western Aramaic which have reached us are a small number of lapidary inscriptions. The most important come from Northern Syria; these are: the inscription of Hadad (eighth century, thirty-four lines), those of Panamu (twenty-three lines) and of Barekub (twenty lines), kings of Sam'al, contemporaries of Theglathphalasar III; they were discovered at Zingerli and are in the Berlin Museum. Two stelae found at Nerab in 1891 are now in the Louvre; in 1908 a mutilated stela (thirty-five lines) erected by Zakir, King of Hamath, a contemporary of, Joas, King of Israel (eighth century), was discovered. Inscriptions of the fourth and fifth centuries B.C. have been discovered in Cilicia and Syria. Those of Arabissos in Cappadocia belong only to the second century. The great stela of the Louvre found at Teima in Arabia has twenty-three lines of writing; it belongs to the fifth century. Other inscriptions, most of them in the British Museum, are of Egyptian origin; that found at Sakkara dates from 482, another found at Assouan, from 458. Besides these large monuments there is a series of smaller ones, such as cylinders, weights, seals, several of which are contemporary with the oldest inscriptions. B. Papyrus and Ostraka Directly connected with inscriptions through language and period are the Aramaic texts written on papyrus and discovered in Egypt. Nearly all of them proceed from the Jewish military colony established in the Island of Elephantine (Philoe). Four large sheets in the Museum of Cairo, found in 1904, contain about 240 lines of writing, well preserved. The documents (sale, gift, release, marriage contract, etc.) proceed from the same Jewish family and are dated (471-411 B.C.). Other leaves, in greater number but less complete, belong to the Museum of Berlin and have just been published (1911) by M. Sachau. The first three concerning the worship and the sanctuary of Jahweh at Elephantine are of great interest to Biblical study. There are besides letters, accounts, lists of colonists, and what would not be looked for, fragments of the history of the sage Ahikar and a partial translation of the celebrated inscription of Darius, graven in cuneiform characters on the rocks of Behistoum in Persia. Elephantine has furnished also a large number of fragments of pottery, commonly called ostraka, bearing inscriptions in ink, of the same date as the papyri. Several hundred are preserved in the collection of the "Corpus I.S." at Paris. Thanks to all these documents we are at present able to form a more or less exact idea of the Aramaic language in the period prior to the Scriptural Books of Esdras and Daniel. C. Nabatean Inscriptions Those hitherto discovered are about 400 in number, apart from the Sinaitic inscriptions. Most of them have been found at Bostra and in the neighboring regions, at Petra, the capital of the Nabatean kingdom, even in Arabia, at Teima and especially at Hegra and its neighborhood. But the Nabateans, like all merchant peoples, left traces outside their own country, and inscriptions have been found in Egypt, Phoenicia, and in Italy at Pozzuoli and Rome, where their colony had a temple. The rocks of Sinai bear numerous and celebrated inscriptions, which the tradition of the Alexandrine Jews, as reported by Cosmas Indicopleustes, regarded as Hebrew and as dating from the time of Moses. Forster in his famous books published at London (1851, 1856) endeavoured to explain them in this sense and his ridiculously audacious attempt was repeated by Sharpe ("Hebrew Inscriptions from Mount Sinai", London, 1875). As early as 1840 F. Beer had established that they were Nabatean inscriptions, which is undoubtedly true. Some of them are dated, the oldest from the year 150 of our era, the most recent from 252; all the others date from about these two years. As a general rule they consist only of proper names accompanied by a religious formula. About 2000 of them have been published in the "Corpus". With the aid of inscriptions and coins it has been possible to reconstruct an almost uninterrupted series of the kings of Nabatene, from Obodas I (90 B.C.) to Maliku III (A.D. 106, the date of the Roman conquest). D. Palmyran Inscriptions The oldest is dated from the year 9 B.C., the most recent from A.D. 271, the others range themselves in the intervening space of time. About 500 are known to us. Many are bilingual, Greek and Palmyran. The longest and most curious (at the Hermitage Museum, St. Petersburg) is a customs tariff drawn up in Greek and Palmyran and promulgated by the local Senate in 137. The others are: honorary inscriptions carved on the base of statues erected in honour of princes and the leaders of caravans who had successfully conducted great commercial expeditions; religious inscriptions: dedications of temples, columns, votive altars, etc.; very numerous funeral inscriptions carved on the doors of tombs or beside the bust of the dead carved in relief. Many of these monuments, discovered at Palmyra itself, are now scattered throughout the museums of Europe and America. As a whole they furnish very valuable information concerning the religion, history and the civilization of the Palmyrans. Inscriptions have also been found in the vicinity of the Palmyra or in distant countries whither the Palmyrans went either for commerce or as archers in the Roman armies. This explains the presence of Palmyran inscriptions in Egypt, Algeria, Rome, Hungary, and England. E. Syriac Inscriptions Few belonging to the pagan period remain. The oldest is probably that of a queen (Helen of Adiabene, first century), carved discovers at Jerusalem in the so-called Tomb of the Kings. The others come for the most part from Edessa or its environs. Some funeral inscriptions are in mosaic and accompany portraits of the dead. Those of the Christian period, recovered throughout Syria and Mesopotamia, consist chiefly of dedications of churches or convents, and of epitaphs. One of the most interesting dedications (in the Museum of Brussels) comes from Zebed, south-east of Aleppo; it is trilingual, Syriac, Greek, and Arabic. Hundreds of funeral inscriptions have been discovered in the Nestorian cemeteries of Semirjetschie, north of Kashgar; they are mingled with Turkish and Mongolian names and date from the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries. The most celebrated Syriac inscription is that of the stela of Si-ngan-fou, the authenticity of which no one now dreams of contesting. It is dated 781, and recalls the introduction into China of Christianity, at that time very flourishing. The inscriptions on the coins of the kings of Edessa make it possible to fix the chronology of these princes. F. Mandaite Inscriptions The oldest and longest (278 lines) is on a leaden tablet preserved in the British Museum; the others (about 50) are engraved or painted in ink on large terracotta vessels, found chiefly at Khouabir in Lower Babylonia. All these inscriptions consist of incantation formulae against evil spirits. They date from the period of the Sassanid Kings. III. Hebrew Inscriptions A. Those which are of real philological or historical interest for their contents or antiquity are but few in number. The inscriptions found in the Jewish catacombs of Rome and Venoza, Italy (fourth-fifth century of our era), and those carved on tablets found in Babylonia (same period) are of only secondary interest. Much more important are those which have been collected in Palestine, among which are several dedications of synagogues of the first centuries of the Christian era, dedications of tombs somewhat prior to our era, epitaphs graven on small stone coffers, called ossuaries which mostly belong to the first century of our era. Lapidary inscriptions have been found at Gezer, one fixing the limits of the city, the other containing a fragment of a calendar which may date from the ninth century B.C.; it was discovered in 1908. There have been found about a hundred archaic signets belonging to the period of the Kings of Juda and Israel. But the two most celebrated Hebrew inscriptions are that of the aqueduct of Siloe at Jerusalem and the famous stela of the Moabite King Mesa, found at Dhiban beyond the Jordan. The inscription of Siloe, discovered in 1880 and later taken to Constantinople, was graven on the rock to commemorate the opening of the subterranean aqueduct which King Ezechias (720-691) had constructed in order to bring the waters of the fountain into the city. The stela of King Mesa relates how this prince, a tributary of Israel, made himself independent during the reign of Ahab (875-853). From a palaeographic and historical standpoint this inscription (now at, the Louvre) is the most valuable monument of Semitic epigraphy. B. Samaritan Inscriptions These are few in number and of more or less recent date; they have been discovered in Palestine and Damascus. Save that in the Church of the Holy Sepulchre at Bologna, which remains an enigma, they consist of quotations from the Pentateuch. The next section of this article will deal with inscriptions which belong to the South Semitic languages. SOUTH SEMITIC LANGUAGES I. Himyarite Inscriptions A. Minean and Sabean Inscriptions The generic term Himyarite designates the proto-Arabic monumental inscriptions which have been discovered, especially in the past half-century, in the south of the Arabian peninsula. The Mineans and Sabeans are the tribes whose dialect seems to have predominated. The appearance of the writings remotely derived from the Phoenician, the large number of documents (2000 inscriptions and 400 coins), the length of the texts (often twenty to thirty lines), and especially the unwonted abundance of historical details endow this epigraphy with a special and long unsuspected character. It supplements the deficient information of ancient authors and enables us to reach a more or less exact knowledge of the social condition and religion of the tribes which occupied these regions during the two or three centuries prior to the Islamite movement. There have already been recovered the names of more than fifty kings or princes of these tribes. B. Lihyanite Inscriptions Specimens of an alphabet, derived from the Himyarite but more cursive, are found in numerous graffiti on rocks or single stones throughout the Arabian peninsula. They emanate from nomadic tribes who wrote their names at different migrations. These inscriptions are called Tamudean or Lihyanite from the names of their authors. C. Safaidic Inscriptions These derive their name from the Safâ, a desert and volcanic region north-east of Bosra, where they abound (more than a thousand). Their origin is the same as that of the above, but the alphabet is slightly different. They are short graffiti similar to the Nabatean inscriptions of Sinai. They seem to have been written in the second to fourth century of our era, like the Lihyanite inscriptions. D. Ethiopian Inscriptions These are still fewer in number and all posterior to the conversion of Ethiopia to Christianity. The royal inscriptions found at Aksum (fifth-sixth century) contain valuable historical details. The writing is similar to that still in use, a derivative of the Himyarite. II. Arabic Inscriptions These are very numerous, but the most recent are of little interest. The most ancient, however, are a most useful contribution to history. The oldest (found at Nemara in the Hauran, now at the Louvre) is written in Nabatean characters. It dates from A.D. 328. There are a few of the period prior to Islam. Those which were written in the first centuries of the Mussulman invasion are in monumental letters called Cufic (from the name of the town of Cufa in Babylonia). They have been found on the mosques, tombs, public buildings, various articles of furniture, dishes, lamps, swords, etc. Arabic letters and inscriptions are often intertwined so as to form decorative motifs, which makes reading of them difficult. It will be readily perceived that a collection of the numerous inscriptions on the monuments erected by the Arabs in the conquered countries would be of great service in arranging or completing the details of their history; hence the Academy of Inscriptions has decided to add this collection to the "Corpus", which was at first intended to comprise only the texts prior to Islam. An almost complete bibliography down to 1898 (1234 articles) for North Semitic epigraphy will be found in LIDZBARSKI, Handbuch. There is no similar work for the South Semitic epigraphy. Corpus inscriptionum semiticarum (Paris, 1881-); CHWOLSON, Corpus inscrip. hebr. (St. Petersburg, 1882); VOGÜÉ, Syrie centrale (Paris, 1868); SACHAU, Papyrus und Ostraka (Berlin, 1911); LITTMANN, Semitic Inscriptions (New York, 1904); POGNON, Inscriptions séitiques (Paris, 1907); CHWOLSON, Gräbinschriften aus Semirjetschie (St. Petersburg, 1886); HELLER, Die nestorianische Denkmal zu Si-nagan-fu (Budapest, 1897); POGNON, Coupes mandaïtes (Paris, 1899); LITTMANN, Zamudenische Inschr. Epigraphische Denkmaler aus Abessinien (Vienna, 1894); VAN BERCHEM, Corpus inscrip. arabicarum (Paris, 1894). For the study of inscriptions see LIDZABARSKI, handbuch der norsemitischen Epigraphik (Weimar, 1989), an excellent manual; IDEM, Altsemitische Texte (Giessen, 1907); COOKE, North-Semitic Inscriptions (Oxford, 1903); Clermont-Ganneau, Etudes d'archéol. or. (Paris, 1895); Recueil d'archéol. or. I-VIII (Paris, 1880-1911); LIDZBARSKI, Ephermeris für semit. Epigraphik, I-III (Giessen, 1901-11). B. CHABOT Ignaz Philipp Semmelweis Ignaz Philipp Semmelweis Physician and discoverer of the cause of puerperal fever, b. Ofen (Buda), 1 July, 1818; d. at Vienna, 13 August, 1865. The son of a German merchant, he became a medical student at Vienna in 1837, and after he had taken a philosophical course at Pesth, continued his medical studies there, obtaining his degree in medicine at Vienna on 21 April, 1844, as obstetrician on 1 August, 1844, and as surgeon on 30 November, 1845. On 27 February, 1846, he was made assistant at the first obstretrical clinic of Vienna, and on 10 October, 1850, lecturer on obstetrics. A few days after this appointment, for reasons unknown, he removed to Pesth where he was made head physician at the hospital of St. Roch on 20 March, 1851, and on 18 July, 1852, was appointed regular professor of theoretical and practical obstetrics. Early in 1865 the first signs of mental trouble appeared, and on 31 July he was taken to the public insane asylum near Vienna where he died from blood-poisoning. At the end of May, 1847, Semmelweis made the assertion that the terrible endemic at the Vienna hospital among lying-in women was caused by infection from the examining physicians, who had previously made pathological dissections, or who had come into contact with dead bodies without thorough cleansing afterwards. After Semmelweis had introduced the practice of washing the hands with a solution of chloride of lime before the examination of lying-in women, the mortality sank from 18 percent to 2.45 percent. He also soon formed the opinion that not only infection from septic virus caused puerperal fever but that it also came from other causes of putridity. His dislike of public speaking or of writing was probably the cause why the recognition he deserved was so long in coming and why his views were misunderstood. Many scholars, among them the doctors of the Academy of Paris and even Rudolph Virchow at Berlin, regarded him unfavourably. The petty persecution and malice of his opponents excited in Semmelweis a sensitiveness that increased from year to year. The first account of his discovery was published by Professor Ferdinand Hebra in December, 1847, in the journal of the Imperial and Royal Society of Physicians of Vienna (December, 1847), followed by a supplementary statement from the same physician in April, 1848. In October, 1849, Professor Josef Skoda delivered an address upon the same subject in the Imperial and Royal Academy of Sciences. Unfortunately, Semmelweis had neglected to correct the papers of these friends of his, and thus failed to make known their mistakes, so that the inference might be drawn that only infection from septic virus caused puerperal fever. It was not until 15 May, 1850, that Semmelweis could bring himself to give a lecture upon his discovery before the Society of Physicians; this address was followed by a second on 18 June, 1850. The medical press noticed these lectures only in a very unsatisfactory manner. In 1861 he published his work: "Die Aetiologie, der Begriff und die Prophylaxis des Kindbettfiebers" (Vienna), in which he bitterly attacked his supposed and real opponents. It was not until after his death that Semmelweis found full recognition as the predecessor of Lister and the pioneer in antiseptic treatment. Besides the above he wrote: "Zwei offene Briefe an Dr. Josef Späth und Hofrat Dr. Friedrich Wilhelm Scanzoni" (Pesth, 1861); "Offener Brief an sämtliche Professoren der Geburtshiefe" (Ofen, 1862). HEGAR, Ignaz Philipp Semmelweis (Freiburg, 1862); GROSSE, Ignaz Philipp Semmelweis (Leipzig and Vienna, 1898); SCHÜRER VON WALDHEIM, Ignaz Philipp Semmelweis (Vienna, 1905). LEOPOLD SENFELDER Raphael Semmes Raphael Semmes Naval officer, b. in Charles County, Maryland, U.S.A., 27 September, 1809; d. at Point Clear, Alabama, 26 August, 1877. His family were descendants from one of the original Catholic colonists of Maryland, from which state he was appointed a midshipman in the U.S. Navy 1 April, 1826. He served until 1832, when he was given leave of absence extending until July, 1835, during which time he studied law and was admitted to practice. Rejoining the navy, he served with distinction, attaining the rank of commander, until the outbreak of the Civil War, when he resigned and cast his lot with the seceding state of Alabama, of which he became a citizen in 1841. He was appointed commander in the Confederate States Navy, 25 March 1861; Captain, 21 August, 1862; Rear-Admiral, 10 February, 1865; and retired to civil life after the surrender of the forces under General J. E. Johnston at Greensboro, North Carolina, 26 April, 1865. As commander of the Confederate privateer Sumter he destroyed, during six months in 1861, eighteen ships, and the next year, taking command of the Alabama, he began the famous cruise during which he captured sixty-nine vessels and inflicted a blow on the sea-carrying trade of the United States from which it has not yet recovered. After the Alabama was sunk off the French coast by the Kearsarge, 19 June, 1864, he escaped to England, whence he later returned to Virginia and was engaged in the defenses about Richmond. At the end of the war he went to his home in Mobile, Alabama, and opened a law office. He also edited a paper, and for a time was a professor in the Louisiana Military Institute. His destruction of the mercantile marine during his cruise in the privateer Alabama so embittered northern public opinion against him that, although he was pardoned with other prominent Confederate leaders under the amnesty proclamation of President Johnson, his political disabilities were never removed. He was the author of "Service Afloat and Ashore During the Mexican War" (1851); "The Campaign of General Scott in the Valley of Mexico" (1852); "The Cruise of the Alabama and Sumter" (1864); and "Memoirs of Services Afloat during the War between the States" (1869). FUREY in U. S. Hist. Soc. Records and Studies (New York, 1911); Morning Star (New Orleans), files; Nat. Cyclo. Am. Biog., s. v. THOMAS F. MEEHAN Balthasar Sena Balthasar Seña Indian missionary and philologist, b. at Barcelona, Spain, about 1590; d. at Guarambare, Paraguay, 19 July, 1614. He entered the Jesuit novitiate at Tarragona, Aragon, in 1608. Before completing his studies he volunteered for the Guarani missions of Paraguay, and sailed from Lisbon in company with the veteran missionary, Father Juan Romero, in 1610, continuing his studies on the voyage. The rest of his life was spent at the Guarani mission town of Guarambare or with the uncivilized cognate tribe of Itatines, whose language he studied and reduced to dictionary form. He was distinguished and beloved among the Indians for his virtues and for his courage in defense of the natives against the slave-dealers, declining offered preferment at Sante Fe in order to remain with his mission work. After ministering without fear to the sick throughout a contagious epidemic, he was himself seized by a fever, for which no medicine could be procured, and succumbed to it after intense suffering. His remains were afterwards taken up and reinterred at the Jesuit college at Asuncion. LOZANO, Hist. de la Comp. de J. en Paraguay, II (Madrid, 1754-5). JAMES MOONEY St. Senan St. Senan Bishop and confessor, b. at Magh Lacha, Kilrush, Co. Clare, c. 488; d. 1 March, 560, his parents being Erean and Comgella. His birth was prophetically announced by St. Patrick on his visit to the Hy Fidhgent (Co. Limerick), and as a boy he was placed under the guidance of a saintly abbot called Cassidan, finishing his studies under St. Naul) at Kilmanagh, Co. Kilkenny. He commenced his missionary career by founding a church near Enniscorthy, in 510 (or 512), and the parish is still known as Templeshannon (Teampul Senain). He then visited Menevia, Rome, and Tours, and returned to Ireland in 520. Having founded churches at Inniscarra (Co. Cork), at Inisluinghe, at Deer Island, Inismore, and Mutton Island, he finally settled at Iniscathay, or Scattery Island, Co. Clare. He was visited by St. Ciaran and St. Brendan, and other holy men, who had heard of his sanctity and miracles. Scattery Island became not only a famous abbey but the seat of a bishopric with St. Senan as its first bishop. This event may be dated as about the year 535 or 540, and St. Senan's jurisdiction extended over the existing Baronies of Moyarta and Clonderalaw in Thomond, the Barony of Connelo in Limerick, and a small portion of Kerry from the Feal to the Atlantic. The legend of "St. Senanus and the Lady", as told in Tom Moore's lyric, is founded on the fact that no woman was allowed to enter Scattery Island; not even St. Cannera was permitted to land there, yet St. Senan founded two convents for nuns, and was actually on a visit to one of them when he died. He was buried in the abbey church of Iniscathay on 8 March, on which day his feast is observed. The Diocese of Inniscathy continued till the year 1189, when it was suppressed. It was, however, restored by Pope Innocent VI, and continued as a separate see under Bishop Thomas (1358-68). In 1378 its possessions were divided, and the island remained a portion of Killaloe, being subsequently merged into the parish of Kilrush. One of the earliest references to the Round Tower of Inniscathay is in the Irish life of St. Senan. COLGAN, Acta Sanct. Hib. (LOUVAIN, 1645); ARCHDALL, Mon. Hib. (new ed., Dublin, 1873): O'HANLON, Lives of the Irish Saints, IV (Dublin, s. d.); FROST, Hist. of Co. Clare (Dublin 1893); BEGLEY, Diocese of Limerick (Dublin, 1906). W.H. GRATTAN-FLOOD Jose Francisco de Paula Senan José Francisco de Paula Señan Born at Barcelona, Spain, 3 March, 1760; died at Mission San Buenaventura on 24 Aug., 1823; entered the Franciscan Order in 1774. In 1784 he was incorporated in the missionary college of San Fernando in the City of Mexico, and im 1787 sent to California. He was there assigned to the Mission of San Carlos and remained until 1795, when he retired to Mexico and reported the missionary conditions in the territory to the viceroy. In 1798 he returned to California, and was stationed at Mission San Buenaventura until his death. From July, 1812, till the end of 1815 Señan held the office of presidente of the missions. In October, 1819, he was reappointed and continued in office until he died. As presidente he was also vicar forane to the Bishop of Sonora for Upper California. A month before his death he moreover received the appointment of vice-commissary prefect. Señan was familiar with the language of the Indians, and his reports and mission entries are distinguished by their exactness and beauty of penmanship. Though a very zealous missionary, Señan loved a retired life. He disliked to hold office or give orders; for this reason he was sometimes nicknamed Padre Calma. The commissary-general of the Indies directed him to write a history of the missions, and Señan in 1819 promised to comply; but he left no papers on the subject. His remains were interred in the church of San Buenaventura Mission. Santa Barbara Archives; Mission Records of San Buenaventura; ENGELHARDT, The Franciscans in California (Harbor Springs, Mich, 1897); BANCROFT, California, II (San Francisco, 1886); Missions and Missionaries of California, II (San Francisco, 1912). ZEPHYRIN ENGELHARDT Senanque Sénanque Cistercian monastery and cradle of the modern Cistereians of the Immaculate Conception, situated on the rivulet Sénancole, Diocese of Avignon, was founded, with the concurrence of St. Bernard, by Alfant, Bishop of Cavaillon, and Raymond Berenger II, Count of Provence. The original community came from the Cistercian abbey of Mazan, in 1148, under Peter, their first abbot. In the beginning their poverty was extreme, until the Lords of Simiane became their benefactors, and built, with the assistance of the neighboring nobility, a spacious monastery according to the rule of Cîteaux. The attraction of, St. Bernard's name drew numerous postulants to the new foundation, so that in a short time the community numbered more than one hundred members, enabling them, in 1152, to found the monastery of Chambons, in the Diocese of Viviers. Little by little however, it suffered the fate of so many abbeys of those times, and weakened in fervour and numbers; after it had been governed by thirty regular abbots, It fell in commendam in 1509; having, at that time, not more than a dozen members. When suppressed by the Revolution, 1791, there was but one monk remaining of the whole community. In 1854 Abbé Barnouin, of the Diocese of Avignon, bought the abbey, which was in a state of perfect preservation, and established a community there. The object of the founder was to institute a medium regime more severe than the common, but less strict than the Reform of La Trappe. After a short time in the Novitiate of Sta. Croce in Gerusalemme (Rome), having obtained approbation for his monastery, Abbé Barnouin was professed in 1857, taking the name of "Mary Bernard". A new decree, in 1867, erected the house into a particular congregation affiliated to the Cistercians of the Common Observance, under the title "Congregation of the Cistercians of the Immaculate Conception of N. D. de Sénanque", with a vicar general, elected for six years, at their head. Dom M. Bernard, the founder, first filled this office (1868). After establishing several other subordinate monasteries, he began the restoration of the celebrated Abbey of Lérins, and was authorized to make his residence there. His successors followed him in this, until compelled by the persecutions of 1902, to leave the country, transferring the community to N. D. du Suffrage, Province of Lérida, Spain, where they are now established. MANRIQUE, Annales Cistercienses (Lyons, 1642-59); JONGELINUS, Notita abbatiarum ordinis cisterciensis (Cologne, 1640); Gallia Christiana, I; BESSE, Abbages et prieures de l'ancienne France (Paris, 1909); MOYNE, L'abbaye de Senanque (Avignon, 1857); L'ile et l'abbaye de Lerins (Lerins, 1895), by a monk of Lerins; MORIS, L'Abbaye de Lerins (Paris, 1909); REDON, Le Revme. Dom Mari Bernard, fondateur et premier vicaire gen. des Cisterciens de Senanque (Lerins, 1904); CAPELLE, Le Pere Jean, Abbe de Fontfroide (Paris, 1903); Catalogus personarum religiosarum s. ordinis cisterciensis (ROME, 1906). EDMOND M. OBRECHT Seneca Indians Seneca Indians The westernmost and largest of the five tribes of the celebrated Iroquois Confederacy of central and western New York, being nearly equal in population to all the other four together. This preponderance, however, was due largely to the wholesale incorporation of captives in the early tribal wars, as indicated by the fact that in the ancient council of the confederacy the Seneca were represented by only eight of the fifty chiefs. They called themselves Djionoñdowaneñronoñ, "People of the Great Mountain", approximated by the French as Tsonontouan, from their principal village of that name, probably near the present Naples in Ontario County. The name Seneca, by which they were commonly known to the English, is according to Hewitt, our best authority, a corrupted form of an Algonquian term originally applied to the Oneida, and signifying "[people of] the place of the stone". The Seneca held the western frontier or "door" of the confederacy, their original territory lying between Seneca Lake and Genesee River, with four principal villages. By conquest and absorption of the Neutrals in 1651 and the Erie in 1656 they acquired possession of the country westward to Niagara River and Lake Erie and correspondingly increased their own strength. In 1656 one of their four towns was made up entirely of captives. More than a century later they had some thirty villages, including several on the upper Allegany. They took a prominent part in all the tribal and colonial wars waged by the confederacy up to the close of the Revolution, taking sides like the other allied tribes almost uniformly for the English, first against the French and later against the Americans. The single exception was in 1763 when they suddenly rose against the English troops newly established in their territory, surprising and destroying two entire detachments. Their country was wasted in 1687 by Denonville and again in 1779 by the American General Sullivan, who destroyed nearly every village, cornfield, and orchard in their country, thus compelling them to peace. As a tribe they did not fly to Canada, as did the Mohawk and Cayuga in the English alliance, but remained in their own country, where they still reside on three reservations, Allegany, Cattaraugus, and Tonawanda, with a total population of 2735. About 220 more are, with others of the Six Nations, on the Grand River in Canada, while another 380 of a mixed band, formerly resident in Ohio and known as "Seneca of Sandusky", are now settled in north-eastern Oklahoma. These last appear to be really the descendants of early captives incorporated by the Seneca. The Seneca proportion among the 4000 or more Catholic Iroquois of the mission colonies of Caughnawaga, St. Regis, and Lake of Two Mountains, in Canada and northern New York, cannot be estimated, but is probably relatively less than that of the other tribes. The Seneca came later under Catholic influence than the other Iroquois. The first converts of their tribe were instructed by the Jesuit Fathers Ménard and Chaumonot, while on a journey to the Iroquois country in 1654. Two years later, on their own invitation, Father Chaumonot visited their country and was well received, organizing a temporary mission among the numerous Christian Huron captives. In 1663 a Seneca chief was baptized at Montreal, and shortly afterwards the tribe, which had been for several years at war with the French, asked for peace and missionary teachers. In November, 1668, Father Jacques Fremin dedicated the first mission chapel among the Seneca under the invocation of St. Michael, at Gandougarae (Kanagaro). In the next year Father Julien Garnier established Conception mission at Gandachiragou and began a dictionary of the language. In 1670 a third mission, dedicated to St. James, was begun by Father Pierre Raffeix in another town of the tribe. For a few years the missions flourished, in spite of more or less dangerous opposition from the heathen party, until the increasing drunkenness of the Iroquois towns and growing hostility towards the French (which latter was instigated by the English colonial Government) led to the determination to draw off the Christian Iroquois from the rest and colonize them in new mission towns along the St. Lawrence. As a result, several Christian Iroquois colonies were established, the earliest and most important being that now known as Caughnawaga, originally founded at Laprairie in 1669. Very few Christians were thus left among the confederates, but the missionaries remained among the Seneca until the eve of another general Iroquois war, in 1683, when they were ordered out by the hostiles. The leading event of this war was Denonville's invasion of the Seneca country in 1687. No Catholic work was subsequently attempted in the tribe, with the exception of a visit, in 1751, by the Sulpician Father Picquet, who drew off a number to his mission at Ogdensburg. The few Seneca on the Six Nations reserve in Ontario are under Episcopalian influence. The Christian portion of those in New York are chiefly of the Congregational denomination, principally owing to the devoted efforts of the Reverend Asher Wright, who laboured among them over forty years (1831-75) until his death, mastering the language, in which he published a number of religious and educational works. The body of the tribe is still attached to its primitive paganism. A few of those in Oklahoma are connected with the Catholic mission of St. Mary's at Quapaw. See bibliography under IROQUOIS, particularly Jesuit Relations and SHEA, History of the Catholic Missions. JAMES MOONEY Aloys Senefelder Aloys Senefelder Principally known as the inventor of lithography, b. at Prague, 6 Nov., 1771; d. at Munich, 26 February, 1834. His father, an actor at the Royal Theatre of Munich, was playing at Prague at the time of the birth of his son. The young Senefelder studied at Munich, and received a scholarship of 120 florins a year for his diligence, which enabled him to study jurisprudence at Ingolstadt. The death of his father in 1791 forced him to cease his studies in order to help support his mother and a family of eight sisters and brothers. After attempting to become an actor, he took up dramatic writing, at which he was at first fairly successful. Because of difficulty in finding a publisher, he tried to devise means for printing his productions himself, and began a series of experiments with etching and copper-plates until he discovered, in 1796, that Kilheim lime-stone could be used for the purpose. He soon found that etching was not necessary, owing to the fact that grease and water do not mix. By his method the marking is done upon the stone with a greasy composition of soap, wax, and lamp-blark, and then the plate is washed over with water, which soaks into the unmarked parts of the stone. The printing ink is I then applied and | adheres only to the marked places, while the water protects the rest of the plate; a number of impressions can then be obtained. This process he called "chemical" printing. The numerous improvements and developments of the art made by him were rewarded in later years by the gold medal of the "Society of Encouragement" of England, the highest medal of the "Polytechnische Verein fur Baiern", the gold honorary medal of the order for Civilverdienst of the Bavarian Crown, and various other prizes. In spite of great financial difficulties, continued discouragement, and repeated disappointments, he remained unselfishly devoted to high ideals. In his autobiography (introduction to "Lehrbuch") he expresses the desire that his invention "may bring to mankind manifold benefits and may tend to raise it upon a nobler plane, but may never be misused for an evil purpose. May the Almighty grant this! Then blessed be the hour in which I made my invention!" His principal publication was "Vollstandiges Lehrbuch der Steindruckerei" (Munich and Vienna, 1818). This was translated into French (Paris, 1819), English (London, 1819), and Italian (Naples, 1824). ENGELMANN, Lithographie (Leipsig, 1843); NAGLER, Aloys Senefelder and Simon Schmidt als Rivalen (Munich, 1862); SCHLOTKE, Senefelder Album (Hamburg, l871); PFEILSCHMIDT, Aloys Senefelder (Dresden, 1877); RICHMOND, Grammar of Lithography (London, 1885); HOLLAND, Allg. Deutsche Biogr. XXXIV (Leipzig, 1892), 8-23: PENNELL, Lithography and Lithographers (London, 1900); CUMMINGS, Handbook of Lithography (New York, 1904). WILLIAM FOX Senegambia Senegambia (SENEGAMBLE). Vicariate Apostolic, to which is joined the Prefecture Apostolic of Senegal (Senegalensis), both in French West Africa. A trading settlement established in this region in the fourteenth century by the Norman Jehan Prunaut was brought to an end by the troubles of the Hundred Years' War. Portuguese caravels first appeared off Gambia and Sierra Leone in 1432, and in 1446 occurred the first sale of the natives of these regions in the public market of Lagos, Portugal. So great were the profits of the traffic thus inaugurated that the English were determined to share them and in 1558 the Royal Chartered Company was organized, the major share of the gains going to Queen Elizabeth. The Dutch followed in 1617. Then the French under Cousin renewed their commercial relations with the country, but they also planted the Cross in the territory of which they took possession and erected a chapel. In 1637 the recently-founded Congregation of Propaganda sent a company of Norman Capuchins to "Old Guinea", others soon following, but the Dutch poisoned one of the missionaries and expelled the others. War broke out between France and Holland in 1672, and Admiral d'Estrées captured all the trading-posts of Senegal. The Dominicans thereupon entered the country under French protection and in 1686 the Franciscan Observants also began mission work there. Temporal affairs especially under the direction of the devout André Brüe, head of the Company of Senegal, were admirably administered at this period, but the religious welfare of the natives was wholly neglected. In 1758 the towns of St. Louis and Gorée were captured by the British, Gorée alone being restored to France by the Treaty of Paris in 1763, in which year Senegal was made a prefecture Apostolic. Despite the promises made by the British Government on the occasion of the treaty, the Catholics of St. Louis were hindered in the practice of their religion. Although they were allowed to assemble, the British governor would not permit them to have either church or priest. Père Bertout, a member of the Congregation of the Holy Ghost, to whose initiative after the Revolutionary period was due the re-establishment of his order and to whom Propaganda confided the religious interests of numerous French colonies, was, in April, 1778, shipwrecked off the African coast, with his companion, Père de Glicourt. They were taken captive by Moors and carried to St. Louis, where the governor reluctantly ransomed them, and for a time they were able to labour zealously and with success among the Catholic population. But they were soon despatched to Goree, whence they returned to France, and sought an immediate audience with the Minister of Marine, in which they described the disabilities of the Catholics of St. Louis. The result was the sending of a French fleet under the command of Comte du Vaudreuil and on 28 January, 1779, the French Protectorate was restored; Père de Glicourt returned as Prefect Apostolic of Senegal, making his residence at St. Louis, while his companion Père Séveno went to Goree. Despite the favourable auspices under which it was now placed, the mission had to pass through many years of hardships, owing to poverty, disputes between the prefects Apostolic and the governors, and mistakes in the ecclesiastical administration. Although in 1821, under the administration of Mgr Baradère, the construction of the churches of Gorée and St. Louis was favourably begun, in 1822 there was not a priest in Senegal. But the Sisters of St. Joseph of Cluny had arrived in 1819 and in 1822, their foundress, Mère Javouhey, went in person to establish a house at Goree. In 1841 the Brothers of Ploërmel were sent to the Mission. On the appointment of Père Jacob Libermann to the post of prefect Apostolic, a radical change took place, not only in the reorganization of the colonial clergy but also in the intercourse between the civil and ecclesiastical powers, while the movement was inaugurated for the emancipation and moral regeneration of the slaves. When the emancipation decree of the provisional Government was published, 27 April, 1848, 9800 slaves and 550 engagés were freed in St. Louis and Gorée alone and were assembled by the vice-prefect Apostolic for a solemn Te Deum. In accordance with the plan of reorganization recommended by Père Libermann the Vicariate Apostolic of the Two Guineas and Senegambia was erected 22 Sept., 1846, consisting of the territory between the Prefecture of Senegal and the Diocese of Loanda. The religious service of the country was confided to the Fathers of the Congregation of the Holy Ghost, the first titular being Mgr Benoît Truffet, who reached Goree, 9 April, 1847. He died on 19 November following, and was succeeded by Père Bessieux who proceeded to Gaboon, which he had already evangelized, leaving his coadJutor, Mgr Kobès, at Dakar, since 1895 the official seat of the Government of Freneh West Africa. Mgr Kobès may be considered the real founder of the Mission of Senegambia, becoming viecr Apostolic when in 1863 it was separated from the Two Guineas. He increased the establishments of the Sisters of St. Joseph and invited to Dakar the Sisters of the Immaculate Conception, founded at Castres in 1836 by Mere Marie de Villeneuve. Encouraged by him, Père Barbier founded at Dakar (24 May, 1858) the Daughters of the Holy Heart of Mary, composed of native women, who have rendered inestimable services among Europeans as well as among their own race. A seminary for native clergy was inaugurated and is now situated at Ngasobil. Mgr Kobès made an energetic attempt to establish the cotton industry among the natives, but a series of locust plagues caused it to be abandoned. Mgr Kobès died 11 Oct., 1872, and was succeeded by Mgr Duret, who had been Prefect Apostolic of Senegal and now united both jurisdictions. At his death (29 Dec., 1875) he was succeeded by Mgr. Dubain (1876-83), who fixed his residence at Dakar, which has since remained the residence of the vicars Apostolic. Chief among his mission foundations was that at the ancient trading-post of Rufisque (1878). His successors were Mgr Riehl (1884-86), Mgr Picarda (1887-89), Mgr Barthel (1889-99), Mgr Buleon (1899-1900), Mgr Kunemann (1900-08). The present vicar Apostolic is Mgr Jalabert, titular Bishop of Telepe. In the Vicariate Apostolic of Senegambia there are 5,000,000 inhabitants, of whom 19,000 are Catholics, 2740 of this number belonging to Senegal. There are 39 European priests, 6 native priests, 53 brothers 106 sisters, 16 churches or chapels and 15 stations, 24 schools for boys, 16 schools for girls, 4 agricultural societies, 15 dispensaries, 7 hospitals or infirmaries In Senegal there are churches at St. Louis and Goree, and 50 stations where the natives are taught. Civilly Senegal forms a separate colony while Senegambia belongs to that of Upper Senegambia and the Niger, formed 8 April, 1904, by the Anglo-French convention. BOILAT, Esquisses senegalaises (Paris, 1853); PITRA, Vie du P. Libermann (Paris, l855); A. BARTHELEMY, Guide du voyageur dans la Senegambie francaise (Bordeaux, 1883); DELAPLACE, Vie de la Rev. Mere Javouhey (Paris, 1886); Bulletin de la Cong. du Saint Esprit (Paris); FAIDHERBE, Senegal et Soudan (Paris, 1883); LE ROY in PIOLET, Missions Catholiques (Paris, 1902); Missiones Cathollicae (Rome, 1907); BATTANDIER, Ann. pont. (Paris, 1911). BLANCHE M. KELLY Sens Sens ( Senonis) Archdiocese comprising the Department of the Yonne. It was suppressed by the Concordat of 1802 which annexed to the Diocese of Troyes the Dioceses of Sens and Auxerre and by a somewhat complex combination gave the title of Bishop of Auxerre to the bishops of Troyes, and the purely honorary title of Archbishop of Sens to the Archbishop of Paris, otherwise deprived of all real jurisdiction over Sens. The Concordat of 1817 reestablished the Archdiocese of Sens and the Diocese of Auxerre, but this arrangement did not last. The law of July, 1821, the pontifical Brief of 4 Sept., 1821, the royal ordinance of 19 October, 1821, suppressed the Diocese of Auxerre and gave to the Archdiocese of Sens as territory all the Department of the Yonne, and as suffragan the Dioceses of Troyes, Nevers, and Moulins. A papal Brief of 3 June, 1823, gave to the Archbishop of Sens the title of Bishop of Auxerre. DIOCESE OF SENS The history of the religious beginnings of the Church of Sens dates from Sts. Savinian and Potentian, and through some connecting legends also has to do with the Dioceses of Chartres, Troyes, and Orléans. Gregory of Tours is silent with regard to Sts. Savinian and Potentian, the founders of the See of Sens; the Hieronymian Martyrology which was revised somewhat before 600 at Auxerre or Autun, ignores them. The cities of Chartres and Troyes have nothing relative to these saints in their local liturgy prior to the twelfth century, and that of Orléans nothing prior to the fifteenth, which recalls the preaching of Altinus, Eodaldus, and Serotinus, the companions of Sts. Savinian and Potentian. Previous to the ninth century there was in the cemetery near the monastery of Pierre le Vif at Sens a group of tombs among which have been recognized those of the first bishops of Sens. In 847 the solemn transfer of their bodies to the church of St-Pierre le Vif originated great popular devotion towards Sts. Savinian and Potentian. In 848 Wandelbert of Prüm named them the first patrons of the church of Sens. Ado, in his martyrology published shortly afterwards, speaks of them as envoys of the Apostles and as martyrs. The martyrology of Usuardus, about 875, indicates them as envoys of the "Roman pontiff" and as martyrs. In the middle of the tenth century the relics of these two saints were hidden in a subterranean vault of the Abbey of St-Pierre le Vif to escape the pillage of the Hungarians, but in 1031 they were placed in a beautiful reliquary executed by the monk Odoranne. This monk, in a chronicle published about 1045, speaks of Altinus, Eodaldus, and Serotinus as the apostolic companions of Savinian and Potentian, but does not regard them as having been sent by St. Peter. In a document which, according to the Abbé Bouvier, dates from the end of the sixth century or the beginning of the seventh, but which, according to Mgr Duchesne was written in 1046 and 1079 under the inspiration of Gerbert, Abbot of St-Pierre le Vif, is developed for the first time a vast legend which traces to Sts. Savinian and Potentian and their companions the evangelization of the churches of Orléans, Chartres, and Troyes; this document Mgr Duchesne calls the Gerbertine legend. After some uncertainties and hesitations this legend became definitely fixed in the chronicle of Clarius, compiled about 1120. It impossible that the Christian Faith was preached at Sens in the second century, but we know from Sidonius Apollinaris that in 475 the Church of Sens had its thirteenth bishop, and the list of bishops does not permit the supposition that the episcopal see existed prior to the second half of the third century or the beginning of the fourth. Among the bishops of Sens in the fourth century may be mentioned: St. Severinus, present at the Council of Sardica in 344; St. Ursicinus (356-87), exiled to Phrygia under Constantius through the influence of the Arians, visited by St. Hilary on his return to Sens after three years of exile, and who about 386 founded at Sens the monastery of Sts. Gervasius and Protasius. In the fifth century: St. Ambrose (d. about 460); St. Agroecius (Agrice), bishop about 475; St. Heraclius (487-515), founder of the monastery of St. John the Evangelist at Sens. In the sixth century: St. Paul (515-25); St. Leo (530-41), who sent St. Aspais to evangelize Melun; St. Arthemius, present at the councils of 581 and 585, who admitted to public penance the Spaniard, St. Bond, and of, a criminal made a holy hermit. In the seventh century: St. Lupus (Lou, or Leu), b. about 573, bishop approximately between 609 and 623, son of Blessed Betto, of the royal house of Burgundy, and of Ste-Austregilde, founder of the monastery of Ste-Colombe and perhaps also of the monastery of Ferrières in the Gatinais, which some historians, trusting to an apocryphal charter, believed to have been founded under Clovis; he secured from the king authorization to coin money in his diocese; St. Annobertus (about 639); St. Gondelbertus (about 642-3), whose episcopate is only proved by the traditions of the Vosgian monastery of Senones, which traditions date from the eleventh century; St. Arnoul (654-7); St. Emmon (658-75), who about the end of 668 received the monk Hadrian, sent to England with Archbishop Theodore: perhaps St. Amé (about 676), exiled to Péronne by Ebroin, and whose name is suppressed by Mgr Duchesne as having been interpolated in the episcopal lists in the tenth century; St. Vulfran (692-5), a monk of Fontenelle, who soon left the See of Sens to evangelize Frisia and died at Fontenelle before 704; St. Gerie, bishop about 696. In the eighth century: St. Ebbo, at first Abbot of St-Pierre le Vif, bishop before 711, and who in 731 placed himself at the head of his people to compel the Saracens to raise the siege of Sens; and his successor St. Merulf. In the ninth century great bishops occupied the See of Sens: Magnus, former chaplain of Charlemagne, bishop before 802, author of a sort of hand book of legislation of which he made use when he journeyed as missus dominicus, or royal agent for Charlemagne, died after 817; Jeremias, ambassador at Rome of Louis the Pious in the affair of the Iconoclasts, died in 828; St. Alderic (829-36), former Abbot of Ferrières, and consecrated Abbot of St. Maur des Fosses at Paris in 832; Vénilon (837-65) anointed Charles the Bald, 6 June, 843, in the cathedral of Orléans, to the detriment of the privileges of the See of Reims; his chorepiscopus, or auxiliary bishop, was Andrade, author of numerous theological writings, among others of the poem "De Fonte Vitae" dedicated to Hinemar, and of the "Book of Revelations", by which he sought to put an end to the divisions between the sons of Louis the Pious. In 859 Charles the Bald accused Vénilon before the Council of Savonnières of having betrayed him; the matter righted itself, but opinion continued to hold Vénilon guilty and the name of the traitor Ganelon, which occurs in the "Chanson de Roland" is but a popular corruption of the name Vénilon. Ansegisus (871-83), at the death of Louis II, Emperor of Italy, negotiated at Rome for Charles the Bald and brought thence the letter of John VIII inviting Charles to come and receive the imperial crown. He himself was named by John VIII primate of the Gauls and Germania and vicar of the Holy See for France and Germany, and at the Council of Ponthion was solemnly installed above the other metropolitans despite the opposition of Hincmar; in 880 he anointed Louis III and Carloman in the abbey of Ferrières. It was doubtless in the time of Ansegisus, while the See of Sens exercised a real primacy, that a cleric of his church compiled the historical work known as the "Ecclesiastical Annals of Sens" or "Gestes des Archevêques de Sens", an attempt to write the history of the first two French dynasties. Vaulter (887-923) anointed King Eudes in 888, King Robert in July, 922, and King Raoul, 13 July, 923, in the Church of St-Médard at Soissons; he doubtless inherited from his uncle Vaultier, Bishop of Orléans, a superb Sacramentary composed between 855 and 873 for the Abbey of St-Amand at Puelle. This Sacramentary, which he gave to the church of Sens, forms one of the most curious monuments of Carlovingian art and is now in the library of Stockholm. Among the bishops of Sens may also be mentioned: St. Anastasius (967-76 Sevinus (976-99), who presided at the Council of St-Basle and brought upon himself the disfavour of Hugh Capet by his opposition to the deposition of Arnoul; Gelduinus (1032-49), deposed for simony by Leo IX at the of the Council of Reims. The second half of the eleventh century was fatal to the Diocese of Sens. Under the episcopate of Richerius (1062-96), Urban II withdrew primatial authority from the See of Sens to confer it on that of Lyons, and Richerius died without having accepted this decision; his successor Daimbert (1098-1122) was consecrated at Rome in March, 1098, only after having given assurance that he recognized the primacy of Lyons. Bishop Henri Sanglier (1122-42), caused the condemnation by a council in 1140 of certain propositions of Abelard. The see regained great prestige under Hugues de Toucy (1142-68), who at Orléans in 1152 crowned Constance, wife of King Louis VII, despite the protests of the Archbishop of Reims, and under whose episcopate Alexander III, driven from Rome, installed the pontifical Court at Sens for eighteen months after having taken the advice of the bishops. Among later bishops of Sens were: Guillaume aux Blanches Mains (1168-76), son of Thibaud IV, Count of Champagne, uncle of Philip Augustus, and first cousin of Henry II, who in 1172 in the name of Alexander III placed the Kingdom of England under an interdict and in 1176 became Archbishop of Reims; Michael of Corbeil (1194-9), who combated the Manichaean sect of "Publicans"; Peter of Corbeil (1200-22), who had been professor of theology of Innocent III; Pierre Roger (1329-30), later Clement VI; Guillaume de Brosse (1330-8), who erected at one of the doorways of the cathedral of Sens an equestrian statue of Philip VI of Valois to perpetuate the remembrance of the victory won by the clergy over the pretentions of the legist Pierre de Cugnières; Guillaume de Melun (1344-75), who together with King John II was taken prisoner by the English at the battle of Poitiers in 1356; Guy de Roye (1385-90); Henri de Savoisy (1418-22), who at Troyes in 1420 blessed the marriage of Henry VI of England with Catherine of France; Etienne Tristan de Salazar (1475-1519), who concluded the first treaty of alliance between France and the Swiss; Antoine Duprat (q.v.) 1525-35, made cardinal in 1527; Louis de Bourbon Vende (1535-57), cardinal, from 1517; Jean Bertrandi (1557-60), cardinal in 1559; Louis de Lorraine (1560-2), Cardinal de Guise from 1553; Nicolas de Pellevé (1562-92), cardinal from 1570; Cardinal du Perron (1606-18); Languet de Gergy (730-53), first biographer of Marie Alacoque and member of the French Academy; Paul d'Albert (1753-88), Cardinal de Luynes after 1756 and member of the French Academy; Loménie de Brienne (1788-93), minister of Louis XVI, cardinal in 1788, and who during the Revolution swore to the civil constitution of the clergy but refused to consecrate the first constitutional bishops, returned to the pope his cardinal's hat, refused to become constitutional Bishop of Toulouse, was twice imprisoned by the Jacobins of Sens and died in prison of apoplexy; Anne, Cardinal de la Fare (1821-9), Victor Felix Bernadou (1867-91), cardinal in 1886. The Archdiocese of Sens, which perhaps became a metropolitan see at the middle of the fifth century, until 1622 numbered seven suffragans: Chartres, Auxerre, Meaux, Paris, Orléans, Nevers, and Troyes; the Diocese of Bethléem at Clamecy (see NEVERS; was also dependent on the metropolitan See of Sens. In 1622 Paris having been raised to a metropolitan see, the Sees of Chartres, Orléans and Meaux were separated from the Archdiocese of Sens. As indemnity the abbey of Mont Saint-Martin in the Diocese of Cambrai was united to the archiepiscopal revenue. II. DIOCESE OF AUXERRE The "Gestes des évêques d'Auxerre", written about 875 by the canons Rainogala and Alagus, and continued later down to 1278, gives a list of bishops which, save for one detail, Mgr Duchesene regards as accurate; but the chronological data of the Gestes" seem to him to be very arbitrary for the period prior to the seventh century. No other church of France glories in a similar list of bishops honoured as saints; already in the Middle Ages this multiplicity of saints was remarkable. St. Peregrinus (Pélérin) was the founder of the see; according to the legend, he was sent by Situs II and was martyred under Diocletian in 303 or 304. After him are mentioned without the possibility of certainly fixing their dates: St Marcellianus, Valerianus, St. Helladius, St. Amator (d. 418), who had been ordained deacon and tonsured by St. Helladius and who thus affords the earliest example of ecclesiastical tonsure mentioned in the religious history of France; the illustrious St. Germain d'Auxerre (q. v.; 418-48); St. Elladius; St. Fratemus; St. Censurius, to whom about 475 the priest Constantius sent the Life of St. Germain; St. Ursus; St. Theodosius, who assisted in 511 at the Council of Orléans; St. Gregorius; St. Optatus; St. Droctoaldus; St. Eleutherius, who assisted at four Councils of Orléans between 533 and 549; St. Romanus; St. Actherius; St. Aunacharius (Aunaire; 573-605), uncle of St. Lupus, Archbishop of Sens; St. Desiderius (Didier); St. Palladius, who assisted at several councils in 627, 650, and 654; St. Vigilius, who was assassinated about 684, doubtless at the instigation of Gilmer, son of Waraton, mayor of the palace; St. Tetricius (692-707); Venerable Aidulf (perhaps 751-66); Venerable Maurin (perhaps 766-94); Blessed Aaron (perhaps 794-807); Blessed Angelelmus (807-28); St. Heribaldus (829-57), first chaplain of Louis the Pious, and several times given ambassadorial charges; St. Abbo (857-69); Blessed Christian (860-71); Ven. Wibaldus (879-87), Ven. Herifridus (Herfroy; 887-909); St. Géran (909-14); St. Betto (933-61); Ven. Guy (933961); Bl. John (997-998); Ven. Humbaud (1095-1114), drowned on the way to Jerusalem; St. Hugues de Montaigu (1116-1136), a friend of St. Bernard; Bl. Hugues de Mâcon (1137-51), Abbot of Pontigny, often charged by Eugene III with adjusting differences and re-establishing order in monasteries; Ven. Alanus (1152-67), author of a life of St. Bernard; Ven. Guillaume de Toucy (1167-81), the first French bishop who went to Rome to acknowledge the authority of Alexander III. Among later bishops may be mentioned: Hugues de Noyers (1183-1206), known as the "hammer of heretics" for the vigour with which he sought out in his diocese the sects of the Albigenses and the "Caputiés"; Guillaume de Seignelay (1207-20), who took part in the war against the Albigenses and in 1230 became the Archbishop of Paris; Ven. Bernard de Sully (1234-44); Guy de Mello (1247-70), who was Apostolic delegate in the crusade of Charles of Anjou against Manfred; Pierre de Mornay (1296-1306), who negotiated between Boniface VIII and Philippe le Bel and in 1304 became chancellor of France; Pierre de Cros (1349-51), cardinal in 1350; Philippe de Lenoncourt (1560-62), cardinal in 1586; Philibert Babou de la Bourdaisière (1562-70), cardinal in 1561; the Hellenist Jacques Amyot (1571-93), translator of the works of Plutarch and Diodorus Siculus, tutor of Charles IX, grand almoner of Charles IX and Henry III; Charles de Caylus (1704-54), who made his diocese a centre of Jansenism and whose works in four volumes were condemned by Rome in 1754. The Cathedral of St-Etienne of Sens, founded in 972 and rebuilt under Louis VII and Philip Augustus, is regarded by several archaeologists as the most ancient of pointed style churches. When in 1241 the Dominicans brought to Sens the Crown of Thorns which St. Louis had obtained from Baldwin II, the king went at the head of a procession to within five leagues of Sens, took the relic, and with his brother Robert entered the city barefoot and deposited the relic in the metropolitan church until the Sainte Chapelle of Paris was built to receive it. The cathedral of Auxerre, completed in 1178, contains numerous sculptures in the Byzantine style. The Dioceses of Sens and Auxerre contained illustrious Abbeys; for that of Ferrières, located in a region which now depends on the Diocese of Orléans, see FERRIERES. The Abbey of St-Pierre le Vif dates from the sixth century, but M. Maurice Prou has proved that the diploma of Clovis and the testament of "Queen" Théodechilde, in the archives of the monastery, lack authenticity. The Théodechilde who founded the monastery was not the daughter of Clovis but his granddaughter, the daughter of Thierry first king of Austrasia. The schools instituted by Rainard, Abbot of St-Pierre le Vif, were celebrated during the Middle Ages. The Abbey of St. Columba, the great primitive saint of the City of Lyons, was founded about 590. Her "Passion" dates beyond doubt from the end of the sixth century, in the time of Bishop St. Loup, who translated the relics of St. Columba to the monastery church. It is probable that her martyrdom took place in the time of Aurelian. Her cultus was widespread, extending to Rimini, Barcelona, and Cordova. The Acts of the martyrdom of Sts. Sanctian, Augustine, and Beata, companions of St. Columba, seem to date from the end of eighth century or the beginning of the ninth century. In the Abbey of St. Columba, whose third church was consecrated 26 April, 1164, by Alexander III, were buried Raoul, King of France, and Richard, Duke of Burgundy. The Abbey of St. Germain d'Auxerre, founded in 422 by the bishop St. Germain, in honour of St. Maurice, took the name of St. Germain when it was rebuilt by Queen Clotilde about 500. In 850 Abbot Conrad, brother-in-law of Louis the Pious, had crypts built in the monastery in which were deposited many bodies of saints. Urban V was Abbot of St-Germain before becoming pope; King Charles VI of France did not disdain the honour of seeing his name inscribed among those of the monks. The crypts were ravaged by the Calvinists in 1567. The abbey followed the Benedictine rule; it was twice reformed, from 995-9 by St. Mayeul of Cluny and his disciple Heldric, and in 1029 by the Benedictines of St-Maur. The Abbey of St-Edmond of Pontigny, the second daughter of Cîteaux, was founded in 1114 by Thibaud IV the Great, Count of Champagne. Hugh, Count of Mâcon, one of the first thirty companions of St. Bernard, was the first abbot. Louis VII, King of France, was its benefactor. St. Thomas à Becket took refuge at Pontigny before seeking shelter at St. Columba's at Sens. In the thirteenth century Stephen Langton and later St. Edmund, Archbishop of Canterbury, also found refuge at Pontigny. The Benedictine Abbey of St-Michel at Tonnerre was founded about 800 on the site of a hermitage dating from the time of Clovis I; it was restored about 980 by Milo, Count of Tonnerre. In the fifteenth century Cardinal Alanus, legate of Callistus III, numbered it among the twelve most illustrious abbeys of Gaul. The arrondissement of Avallon, now in the Diocese of Sens, and formerly dependent on the Diocese of Autun, possessed the celebrated monastery of Vézelay. It was founded about 860 under the protection of Christ and the Blessed Virgin by Gerard, Count of Roussillon and his wife, Bertha; Gerard declared the territory free and dependent only on the pope. Nicholas I in 867 and Charles the Bald in 868 confirmed the donation. Eudes, the first abbot, offered hospitality to John VIII, who in, 879 consecrated the first church of the monastery. The Norman invasions laid waste the monastery, but it was restored under Abbot Geoffrey, installed in 1037. Under this abbot the cultus of St. Magdalen appeared for the first time at Vézelay; a letter of Leo IX (1050) shows that the name of St. Magdalen was part of the official title of the abbey. Mgr Duchesne has shown that the monks of Vézelay, at this date, constructed a first account according to which the tombs of Sts. Maximinus and Magdalen, at St-Maximin in Provence, had been opened and their bodies removed to Vézelay; shortly afterwards a second account relates that there was taken away only the body of St. Magdalen. For two centuries the account of the monks of Vézelay was accepted; Bulls of Lucius III, Urban III, and Clement III confirmed the statement that they possessed the body of St. Magdalen. The tomb of the saint was visited in the twelfth century by a host of illustrious pilgrims; "All France", writes Hugh of Poitiers, seems to go to the solemnities of the Magdalen." In 1096 Abbot Artaud, who was later assassinated, had begun the construction of the Basilica of the Madeleine, which was dedicated in 1104 by Paschal II; his successor, Renaud de Semur, later Archbishop of Lyons, completed it, raised it from its ruins after the great fire of July, 1120, and also built the abbatial chateau. Alberic, a monk of Cluny, named abbot by Innocent II, built in front of the portal the narthex, or church of the catechumens, the doorways of which have marvelously wrought archivolts and which was blessed by Innocent II in 1132 during his sojourn at Vézelay; he died a cardinal and Archbishop of Ostia. Under Abbot Pontius of Montboisier (d. 1161), a former monk of Cluny, Vézelay emancipated itself from Cluniac rule, declared its autonomy as against the claims of the bishops of Autun, and victoriously resisted the encroachments of the counts of Nevers. The second crusade was preached in 1146 by St. Bernard in the abbatial chateau amid such enthusiasm that the assistants tore their garments to make crosses and distribute them to the crowd. Guillaume IV of Nevers sought to be revenged on the monks of Vézelay, and his provost, Léthard, defying excommunication, forced the monks to take flight, but in 1166 Louis arranged a peace between the Comte de Nevers and Abbot Guillaume de Mello. On Pentecost, 1166, St. Thomas á Becket from the pulpit of Vézelay pronounced excommunication against the clerics who, to gratify King Henry II had violated the rights of the Church. Louis VII came himself to Vézelay at epiphany, 1167, to celebrate the reconciliation between the monks of Vézelay and Count Guillaume IV, and in expiation of his crimes Guillaume IV set out for the Holy Land where he died in 1168. Under the rule of Abbot Girard d'Arcy (1171-96), Philip Augustus and Richard Coeur de Lion met at Vézelay in July, 1190, to arrange for the Third Crusade. In place of the Romanesque apse burnt in 1165, Girard had built the choir today admired as one of the most beautiful specimens of Burgundian architecture and falsely attributed to Abbot Hugh, his successor. St. Louis came to Vézelay in 1267 for a solemn feast organized by the monks for the recognition of the relics of St. Mary Magdalen and at which Simon de Brion, the future Martin IV, represented the Holy See as legate; St. Louis returned here in 1270 on his way to the crusade. This benevolence of the kings of France and the constant menace which the abbey endured from the counts of Nevers led the monks of Vézelay and the pope to accept the act whereby Philip the Bold in 1280 declared himself protector and guardian of the Abbey. Hugues de Maison-Comte, who became abbot in 1352 and was taken prisoner with John II of France at the battle of Poitiers, occupied himself after two years of captivity in England with fortifying the monastery against an English attack; he rendered it impregnable and in gratitude Charles V made him a member of the royal council. The claims put forth by the Dominicans of Provence, beginning in 1279, that they possessed the body of St. Mary Magdalen injured the prestige of Vézelay during the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries. In 1538 a Bull of secularization sought from Paul III by Francis I and the monks themselves transformed the abbey into a simple collegiate church. Odet de Chatillon, brother of Coligny and Abbot of Vézelay, subsequently became a Calvinist. The Huguenot masters of Vézelay converted the Madeleine into a storehouse and stable and burned the relics. During the Revolution the ancient monastery buildings were sold at auction. In 1876 the future Cardinal Bernadou, Archbishop of Sens, determined to restore the pilgrimage of St. Mary Magdalen at Vézelay and brought thither a relic of the saint which Martin IV had given to the Chapter of Sens in 1281. A certain number of saints are honoured with a special cultus or are connected with the history of the diocese: St. Jovinian, martyr, lector of the church of Auxerre (third century); Sts. Sanctian, Augustine, Felix, Aubert, and Beata, Spaniards, martyred at Sens; St. Sidronius (Sidioine), possibly martyred under Aurelian, whose martyrdom is considered by the Bollandists as very doubtful; St. Justus, martyr, b. at Auxerre about the end of the third century; Sts. Magnentia and Maxima, virgins consecrated by St. Germain (fifth century); St. Mamertinus, Abbot of St-Germain (fifth century); the priest St. Marien (sixth century); St. Romain, d. at the beginning of the sixth century in the monastery, which he founded in Auxerre, and in which St. Maurus learned through a vision of the death of St. Benedict; St. Severin, d. at Château Landon, Diocese of Sens (506); St. Eligius (5659), who' administered the monastery of St. Columba before becoming Bishop of Noyon; St. Mathurin, a priest of Sens, d. 688; St. Paternus, a Benedictine, native of Coutances, monk at St. Pierre le Vif, and assassinated at Sergines (eighth century); St. Robert, Abbot of Tonnerre, founder of the Abbey, of Molesmes and of the Order of Cîteaux (1018-1110); St. Thierry, Bishop of Orléans, reared at the monastery of St-Pierre le Vif, and d. in 1027 at Tonnerre; Bl. Alpaide, of Tonnerre (end of twelfth century); St. Guillaume, Archbishop of Bourges, previously a monk at Pontigny (d. in 1209). Jean Lebeuf (1687-1760), who in 1743 wrote the "Memoires contenant l'histoire ecelésiastique et civile d' Auxerre", was a member of the Academy of Inscriptions. The chief pilgrimages of the Diocese of Sens are: Notre Dame de Bellevue at Tronchoy; Notre Dame de Champrond at Vinneuf; the tomb of St. Columba at Sens; the altar of Sts. Savinian and Potentian at Sens, which according to legend is the stone on which St. Savinian fell. Before the application of the Associations' Law of 1901, there were in the Diocese of Sens: Augustinians of the Assumption; Lazarists; Oblates of St. Francis de Sales; Missionaries of the Sacred Heart of Jesus and of the Immaculate Heart of Mary, founded in 1843 by Fr. Muard (1809-54), with mother-house at Pontigny; and Benedictines of the Sacred Heart of Jesus and of the Immaculate Heart of Mary founded at "La Pierre qui Vire" by the same Fr. Muard. Two congregations of women originated in the diocese: the Sisters of Providence founded in 1818 with mother-house at Sens; the Sisters of the Holy Childhood founded in 1838 by Abbé Grapinet with mother-house at Ste-Colombe. At the end of the nineteenth century the religious congregations directed in the Diocese of Sens: 53 infant schools, 4 orphanages for boys, 8 orphanages for girls, 2 workrooms, 2 organizations of rescue, 5 houses of religious for the care of the sick in their homes, 16 hospitals or infirmaries. In 1905 (end of the period of the Concordat) the diocese numbered 334,656 inhabitants, 49 parishes, 440 filial churches, and 4 vicariates remunerated by the State. Gallia Christiana (nova), XII (1770), 1-107, instr. 1-98; FISQUET, France Pontificate: Sens et Auxerre (Paris, 1866); DUCHESNE, Fastes épiscopaux, II, 389-418, 427-46; MÉMAIN, L'Apostolate de Saint Savinien, (Paris, 1888); BLONDEL, L'Apostolicité de l'eglise de Sens (Sens, 1902); BOUVIER, Histoire de I'église de I'ancien archidiocèse de Sens, I (Paris, 1906); QUESVERS AND STEIN, Inscriptions de l'ancien diocese de Sens (Paris, 1904); LONGNON, Pouillés la province de Sens (Paris, 1904); VAUDIN, La cathédrale de Sens (Paris, 1882); JULLIOT, Armorial des archevêques de Sens (Sens, 1862); ASPINALL, Les écoles épiscopales monastiques d'l'ancienne province de Sens (Paris, 1904); CHÉREST, Études historique sur Vézelay (Auxerre, 1868); GALLY, Vézelay monastique, (Tonnerre, 1888) GEORGES GOYAU Councils of Sens Councils of Sens A number of councils were held at Sens. The first, about 600 or 601, in conformity with the instructions of St. Gregory the Great, especially advised warfare against simony. St. Columbanus refused to attend it because the question of the date of Easter, which was to be dealt with, was dividing Franks and Bretons. A series of councils, most of them concerned with the privileges of the Abbey of St. Pierre-le-Vif, were held in 657, 669 or 670, 846, 850, 852, 853, 862, 980, 986, 996, 1048, 1071, and 1080. The council of 1140, according to the terms of the letter issued by Archbishop Henri Sanglier, seems to have had no object but to impart solemnity to the exposition of the relics with which he enriched the cathedral; but the chief work of this council, which included representatives from the Provinces of Sens and Reims, and at which St. Bernard assisted, was the condemnation of Abelard's doctrine. The latter having declared that he appealed from the council to Rome, the bishops of both provinces, in two letters to Innocent II, insisted that the condemnation be confirmed. Dr. Martin Deutsch has placed this council in 1141, but the Abbé Vacandard has proved by the letter from Peter the Venerable to Héloïse, by the "Continuatio Praemonstratensis", the "Continuatio Valcellensis", and the list of the priors of Clairvaux, that the date 1140, given by Baronius, is correct. The council of 1198 was concerned with the Manichaean sect of Poplicani spread throughout Nivernais, to which the dean of Nevers and the Abbot of St-Martin de Nevers were said to have belonged. After the council Innocent III charged his legate, Peter of Capua, and Eudes de Sully, Bishop of Paris, with an investigation. Councils were also held in 1216, 1224 (for the condemnation of a book by Scotus Eriugena), 1239, 1252, 1253, 1269, 1280, 1315, 1320, 1460, 1485; most of them for disciplinary measures GOUYER, Quelques mots sur la date et l'objet du premier concile de Sens in Bulletin de la societe archeologique de Sens (1877); DEUTSCH, Die Synode von Sens 1141 u. die Verurteilung Aballards, eine kirchengesch. Untersuchung (Berlin, 1880); VACANDARD, La date du concile de Sens 1140 in Revue des questions historiques, L (Paris, 1891), 235-45. GEORGES GOYAU Sentence Sentence (Latin sententia, judgment). In canon law, the decision of the court upon any issue brought before it. A sentence is definitive or interlocutory. It is definitive or final, when it defines the principal question in controversy. A definitive sentence is absolutory, if it acquits the accused; condemnatory, if it declares him guilty; declaratory, if it assert that the accused committed a crime, the penalty of which is incurred ipso facto. An interlocutory sentence is pronounced during the course of a trial to settle some incidental point arising. It is of two kinds: merely interlocutory; or having the force of a definitive sentence, affecting the main cause at issue, e.g., a declaration that the court is incompetent. A final sentence must be definitive, unconditional, given by the judge in court, in the presence of the parties concerned or their agents, in writing or dictated to the clerk to be inserted in the minutes of the trial; it must be in keeping with the charge or complaint, stating, if condemnatory, the sanction of law for the punishment imposed and once pronounced, it cannot be revoked by the same court. Interlocutory sentences are given without special formalities, and if merely interlocutory may be revoked by the judge who issues them. (See APPEALS.) Decretals, II, 27; Commentaries on same; TAUNTON, The Law of the Church, s. v.; DROSTE-MESSMER, Canonical Procedure, etc. ANDREW B. MEEHAN Notre-Dame de Saint-Lieu Sept-Fons Notre-Dame de Saint-Lieu Sept-Fons Located in the Diocese of Moulins in France, it was founded (1132) by Guichard and Guillaume de Bourbon, of the family de Bourbon-Lancy, which gave kings to France, Italy, and Spain; this gave rise to the name "Royal Abbey". Thanks to the liberality of the founders, and to the energy of the abbot and community, the church was soon completed and dedicated to the Blessed Virgin; the monastery, with all the regular structures prescribed by the rule, was completed at the same time. After exhibiting generosity at the beginning, their founders and friends seem to have neglected them, for the monks found the burden of poverty so heavy, that they were even compelled to sell parts of the lands to supply the necessities of life. Until the Reform of 1663, the number of religious never exceeded 15. They were much encouraged, in their early days of trial, by a visit of St Bernard (1138). At first the monastery was only known under the name of "Notre-Dame de Saint-Lieu"; it was only after a century that "Sept-Fons" was added, derived either from seven fountains or from seven canals leading water to, the Abbey. Adrian III took the monastery under his protection in 1158; and Alexander III ratified the foundation by Bull in 1164. After the middle of the fifteenth century the incessant wars did not spare the abbey; frequently the religious were forced to leave it and see it despoiled of its goods, and its buildings demolished. Inevitably, under such circumstances, relaxation entered the monastery. In 1656 Eustache de Beaufort, at the age of 20 years, was made abbot. For the first seven years there was no improvement; but after that time he resolved on a complete change. His religious—there were then but four—refusing to accept the new rule, were each granted a pension and dismissed. It was not long before a number of novices presented themselves for admission. They were sent to La Trappe, to make their novitiate under the Abbot de Rancé. Dom Eustache also visited the celebrated reformer for counsel and advice, in 1667. After this, with the royal aid, Sept-Fons was rebuilt on a grander scale, and prosperity continued until the monastery was confiscated at the Revolution, 1791. In 1845, when the Trappists of the Abbaye du Gard were obliged to abandon their monastery, their Abbot, Dom Stanislaus, purchased the ruins of the ancient Abbey of Sept-Fons, removed his community thither, and rebuilt the church and regular structures. In 1847 he was elected vicar-general of the Congregation of the Ancient Reform of Our Lady of La Trappe, which followed the constitutions of the Abbot de Rancé. In 1892, when the three congregations were united in one order, the then Abbot of Sept-Fons, Dom Sebastian Wyart, was elected first abbot-general, and, a little later, Abbot of Cîteaux. Its most noted foundations are N.-D. de la Consolation near Peking, China, and N.-D. de Maristella Estado de S. Paulo, Brazil. Sept-Fons, ou les Trappistes de N. D. de Saint Lieu (Moulins, 1846); La Trappe, by a Sept-Fons Trappist (Paris, 1870); Sept-Fons, impressions et souvenirs par un ami de ce monastere (Dijon, 1895); MAUPERTUY, Histoire de la reforme de l'Abbage de Sept-Fons (Paris, 1702); MANRIQUE, Annales cisterciences (Lyons, 1642); Gallia christsana, IV; HUGHES, Annales d'Aiguebelle (Valence, 1863); TALLON, Notices sur les monasteres de l'ordre de la Trappe (Paris, l855); PFANNENSCHMIDT, Illustrierte Gesch. der Trappisten (Paderborn, 1873); URBAIN, Memoires manuscrits sur N. D. du Gard et N. D. de Sept-Fons (1910); Decretum apostolicum quo instututae sunt duae congregationes B. M. de Trappa in Gallia (1847). EDMOND M. OBRECHT Septimius Severus Septimius Severus Founder of the African dynasty of Roman emperors, b. at Leptis Magna in Africa, 11 April, 146; d. at York, England, 4 February, 211. Severus came from a family that had become Roman citizens. In his career as an official at Rome and in the provinces he had been favored by the Emperor Marcus Aurelius. In the reign of Commodus he was appointed legate of the fourth legion on the Euphrates; this gave him the opportunity to become acquainted with affairs in the East. He married Julia Domna, a member of a priestly family of Emesa, who was the mother of Caracalla and Geta. When the Emperor Pertinax was killed by the mutinous soldiers at Rome, Severus, who was then governor of Upper Pannonia, was proclaimed emperor at Carnuntium by the legions on the Danube. The fact that the leaders of the troops in the eastern and western parts of the empire were at once ready to follow him is evidence that Severus himself had shared in the conspiracy against the dead emperor. Severus had clear political vision, still he cared nothing for the interests of Rome and Italy. He nourished within himself the Punic hatred of the Roman spirit and instinct and furthered the provincials in every way. He was revengeful and cruel towards his opponents, and was influenced by a blindly superstitious belief in his destiny as written in the stars. With iron will he labored to reorganize the Roman Empire on the model of an Oriental despotism. The troops in the East had proclaimed as emperor the capable governor of Syria, Pescennius Niger; the legions in Britain, the governor Clodius Albinus. On the other hand the soldiers in Italy and the senators came over to the side of Severus; Julianus, the prefect of the Pretorian Guard, was executed. Severus rested his power mainly upon the legions of barbarian troops; he immortalized them upon the coinage, granted them, besides large gifts of money and the right of marriage, a great number of privileges in the military and civil service, so that gradually the races living on the borders were able to force Rome to do their will. The Pretorian Guard was made into a troop of picked men from the provinces; in the first years of the emperor's reign their commander was the shrewd Caius Fulvius Plautianus, who exerted a great influence over Severus. After making careful preparation for the decisive struggle, and having secured his opponent in Britain by the bestowal of the title of Caesar, Severus entered upon a campaign against his dangerous rival Niger. He defeated Niger's subordinate Ascellius AEmilius at Cyzicus and Niger himself at Issus. He then advanced into Mesopotamia, established the new Province of Osrhoene and the new legion called the Parthian. He divided several old provinces into smaller administrative districts. After this, while at Antioch, he declared war against Albinus and returned to Europe by forced marches. In 197 the decisive battle was fought with Albinus near Lyons in Gaul. Albinus had under him the legions of Britain, Gaul, Germany, and Spain, yet in spite of severe losses Severus was the conqueror. Albinus was killed, his adherents were utterly destroyed in a bloody civil war, and their property was confiscated for the emperor. The common soldiers received the right of entering the Senate and the equestrian order. For the greater security of the imperial power the Parthian legion was garrisoned upon Mount Alba near Rome. Severus went to Asia a second time, traversed the countries on the Euphrates and Tigris, strengthened the Roman supremacy, and gave the natives equal rights with the Italians. He then went to Egypt where he granted the City of Alexandria the privilege of self-government. During the reign of Severus the fifth persecution of the Christians broke out. He forbade conversion to Judaism and to Christianity. The persecution raged especially in Syria and Africa. In 203 Saints Perpetua and Felicitas and their companions suffered martyrdom at Carthage. The emperor returned to Rome for the celebration of the tenth year of his reign, erected the triumphal arch that still exists, and strengthened his hold on his hordes of mercenaries by constant gifts of money and the bestowal of favors detrimental to military discipline. The Senate was replaced by the Consistorium principis, one of the members of which was the celebrated jurist Papinian. Although he had suffered for years from rheumatic gout, Severus went to Britain, where trouble had broken out, in order to give occupation to his sons, who were at deadly enmity with each other. He restored Hadrian's Wall, and strengthened again the Roman power in Britain. SCHILLER. Gesch. der rom. Kaiserzeit, I (Gotha, 1883); REVILLE, La religion a Rome sous les Sereres (Paris, 1886); NEUMANN, Der romische Staat und die allgemeine Kirche, I (Leipzig, 1890); DE CAVALIERI, La Passio SS. Perpetuae et Felicitatis (Rome, 1896); VON DOMASZEWSKI, Gesch. der romischen Kaiser (Leipzig, 1909); DURUY, Hist. of Rome, tr. RIPLEY (Boston, 1894). KARL HOEBER Septuagesima Septuagesima (Lat. septuagesima, the seventieth). Septuagesima is the ninth Sunday before Easter, the third before Lent known among the Greeks as "Sunday of the Prodigal" from the Gospel, Luke, xv, which they read on this day, called also Dominica Circumdederunt by the Latins, from the first word of the Introit of the Mass. In liturgical literature the name "Septuagesima" occurs for the first time in the Gelasian Sacramentary. Why the day (or the week, or the period) has the name Septuagesima, and the next Sunday Sexagesima, etc., is a matter of dispute among writers. It is certainly not the seventieth day before Easter, still less is the next Sunday the sixtieth, fiftieth, etc. Amularius, "De eccl. Off.", I, I, would make the Septuagesima mystically represent the Babylonian Captivity of seventy years, would have it begin with this Sunday on which the Sacramentaries and Antiphonaries give the Introit "Circumdederunt me undique" and end with the Saturday after Easter, when the Church sings "Eduxit Dominus populum suum." Perhaps the word is only one of a numerical series: Quadragesima, Quinquagesima, etc. Again, it may simply denote the earliest day on which some Christians began the forty days of Lent, excluding Thursday, Saturday, and Sunday from the observance of the fast. Septuagesima is today inaugurated in the Roman Martyrology by the words: "Septuagesima Sunday, on which the canticle of the Lord, Alleluja, ceases to be said". On the Saturday preceding, the Roman Breviary notes that after the "Benedicamus" of Vespers two Alleluias are to be added, that thenceforth it is to be omitted till Easter, and in its place "Laus tibi Domine" is to be said at the beginning of the Office. Formerly the farewell to the Alleluia was quite solemn. In an Antiphonary of the Church of St. Cornelius at Compi gne we find two special antiphons. Spain had a short Office consisting of a hymn, chapter, antiphon, and sequence. Missals in Germany up to the fifteenth century had a beautiful sequence. In French churches they sang the hymn "Alleluia, dulce carmen" (Gu ranger, IV, 14) which was well-known among the Anglo-Saxons (Rock, IV, 69). The "Te Deum" is not recited at Matins, except on feasts. The lessons of the first Nocturn are taken from Genesis, relating the fall and subsequent misery of man and thus giving a fit preparation for the Lenten season. In the Mass of Sunday and ferias the Gloria in Excelsis is entirely omitted. In all Masses a Tract is added to the Gradual. FRANCIS MERSHMAN Septuagint Version Septuagint Version The first translation of the Hebrew Old Testament, made into popular Greek before the Christian era. This article will treat of: I. Its Importance; II. Its Origin: A. According to tradition; B. According to the commonly accepted view; III. Its subsequent history, recensions, manuscripts, and editions; IV. Its critical value; Language. I. HISTORICAL IMPORTANCE OF THE SEPTUAGINT The importance of the Septuagint Version is shown by the following considerations: A. The Septuagint is the most ancient translation of the Old Testament and consequently is invaluable to critics for understanding and correcting the Hebrew text (Massorah), the latter, such as it has come down to us, being the text established by the Massoretes in the sixth century A.D. Many textual corruptions, additions, omissions, or transpositions must have crept into the Hebrew text between the third and second centuries B.C. and the sixth and seventh centuries of our era; the manuscripts therefore which the Seventy had at their disposal, may in places have been better than the Massoretic manuscripts. B. The Septuagint Version accepted first by the Alexandrian Jews, and afterwards by all the Greek-speaking countries, helped to spread among the Gentiles the idea and the expectation of the Messias, and to introduce into Greek the theological terminology that made it a most suitable instrument for the propagation of the Gospel of Christ. C. The Jews made use of it long before the Christian Era, and in the time of Christ it was recognised as a legitimate text, and was employed in Palestine even by the rabbis. The Apostles and Evangelists utilised it also and borrowed Old Testament citations from it, especially in regard to the prophecies. The Fathers and the other ecclesiastical writers of the early Church drew upon it, either directly, as in the case of the Greek Fathers, or indirectly, like the Latin Fathers and writers and others who employed Latin, Syriac, Ethiopian, Arabic and Gothic versions. It was held tin high esteem by all, some even believed it inspired. Consequently, a knowledge of the Septuagint helps to a perfect understanding of these literatures. D. At the present time, the Septuagint is the official text in the Greek Church, and the ancient Latin Versions used in the western church were made from it; the earliest translation adopted in the Latin Church, the Vetus Itala, was directly from the Septuagint: the meanings adopted in it, the Greek names and words employed (such as: Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers [Arithmoi], Deuteronomy), and finally, the pronunciation given to the Hebrew text, passed very frequently into the Itala, and from it, at times, into the Vulgate, which not rarely gives signs of the influence of the Vetus Itala; this is especially so in the Psalms, the Vulgate translation being merely the Vetus Itala corrected by St. Jerome according to the hexaplar text of the Septuagint. II. ORIGIN OF THE SEPTUAGINT A. According to Tradition The Septuagint Version is first mentioned in a letter of Aristeas to his brother Philocrates. Here, in substance, is what we read of the origin of the version. Ptolemy II Philadelphus, King of Egypt (287-47 BC) had recently established a valuable library at Alexandria. He was persuaded by Demetrius of Phalarus, chief librarian, to enrich it with a copy of the sacred books of the Jews. To win the good graces of this people, Ptolemy, by the advice of Aristeas, an officer of the royal guard, an Egyptian by birth and a pagan by religion, emancipated 100,000 slaves in different parts of his kingdom. He then sent delegates, among whom was Aristeas, to Jerusalem, to ask Eleazar, the Jewish high-priest, to provide him with a copy of the Law, and Jews capable of translating it into Greek. The embassy was successful: a richly ornamented copy of the Law was sent to him and seventy-two Israelites, six from each tribe, were deputed to go to Egypt and carry out the wish of the king. They were received with great honor and during seven days astonished everyone by the wisdom they displayed in answering seventy-two questions which they were asked; then they were led into the solitary island of Pharos, where they began their work, translating the Law, helping one another and comparing translations in proportion as they finished them. At the end of seventy-two days, their work was completed, The translation was read in presence of the Jewish priests, princes, and people assembled at Alexandria, who all recognized and praised its perfect conformity with the Hebrew original. The king was greatly pleased with the work and had it placed in the library. Despite its legendary character, Aristeas' account gained credence; Aristobulus (170-50 B.C.), in a passage preserved by Eusebius, says that "through the efforts of Demetrius of Phalerus a complete translation of the Jewish legislation was executed in the days of Ptolemy"; Aristeas's story is repeated almost verbatim by Flavius Josephus (Ant. Jud., XII, ii) and substantially, with the omission of Aristeas' name, by Philo of Alexandria (De vita Moysis, II, vi). the letter and the story were accepted as genuine by many Fathers and ecclesiastical writers till the beginning of the sixteenth century; other details serving to emphasize the extraordinary origin of the version were added to Aristeas's account" The seventy-two interpreters were inspired by God (Tertullian, St. Augustine, the author of the "Cohortatio ad Graecos" [Justin?], and others); in translating they did not consult with one another, they had even been shut up in separate cells, either singly, or in pairs, and their translations when compared were found to agree entirely both as to the sense and the expressions employed with the original text and with each other (Cohortatio ad Graecos, St. Irenaeus, St. Clement of Alexandria). St. Jerome rejected the story of the cells as fabulous and untrue ("Praef. in Pentateuchum";"Adv. Rufinum", II, xxv). likewise the alleged inspiration of the Septuagint. Finally the seventy two interpreters translated, not only the five books of the Pentateuch, but the entire Hebrew Old Testament. The authenticity of the letter, called in question first by Louis Vivès (1492-1540), professor at Louvain (Ad S. August. Civ. Dei, XVIII, xlii), then by Jos. Scaliger (d. 1609), and especially by H. Hody (d. 1705) and Dupin (d. 1719) is now universally denied. Criticism (1) The letter of Aristeas is certainly apocryphal. The writer, who calls himself Aristeas and says he is a Greek and a pagan, shows by his whole work that he is a pious, zealous Jew: he recognizes the God of the Jews as the one true God; he declares that God is the author of the Mosaic law; he is an enthusiastic admirer of the Temple of Jerusalem, the Jewish land and people, and its holy laws and learned men. (2) The account as given in the letter must be regarded as fabulous and legendary, at least in several parts. Some of the details, such as the official intervention of the king and the high priest, the number of the seventy-two translators, the seventy-two questions they had to answer, the seventy-two days they took for their work, are clearly arbitrary assertions; it is difficult, moreover, to admit that the Alexandrian Jews adopted for their public worship a translation of the Law, made at the request of a pagan king; lastly, the very language of the Septuagint Version betrays in places a rather imperfect knowledge both of Hebrew and of the topography of Palestine, and corresponds more closely with the vulgar idiom of Alexandria. Yet it is not certain that everything contained in the letter is legendary, and scholars ask if there is not a historic foundation underneath the legendary details. Indeed it is likely -- as appears from the peculiar character of the language, as well as from what we know of the origin and history of the version -- that the Pentateuch was translated at Alexandria. It seems true also that it dates from the time of Ptolemy Philadelphus, and therefore from the middle of the third century B.C. For if, as is commonly believed, Aristeas's letter was written about 200 B.C., fifty years after the death of Philadelphus, and with a view to increase the authority of the Greek version of the Law, would it have been accepted so easily and spread broadcast, if it had been fictitious, and if the time of the composition did not correspond with the reality? Moreover, it is possible that Ptolemy had something to do with the preparation or publishing of the translation, though how and why cannot be determined now. Was it for the purpose of enriching his library as Pseudo-Aristeas states? This is possible, but is not proven, while, as will be shown below, we can very well account for the origin of the version independently of the king. (3) The few details which during the course of ages have been added to Aristeas's account cannot be accepted; such are the story of the cells (St. Jerome explicitly rejects this); the inspiration of the translators, an opinion certainly based on the legend of the cells; the number of the translators, seventy-two (see below); the assertion that all the Hebrew books were translated at the same time. Aristeas speaks of the translation of the law (nomos), of the legislation (nomothesia), of the books of the legislator; now these expressions especially the last two, certainly mean the Pentateuch, exclusive of the other Old Testament books: and St. Jerome (Comment. in Mich.) says: "Josephus writes, and the Hebrews inform us, that only the five books of Moses were translated by them (seventy-two), and given to King Ptolemy." Besides, the versions of the various books of the Old Testament differ so much in vocabulary, style, form, and character, sometimes free and sometimes extremely literal, that they could not be the work of the same translators. Nevertheless, in spite of these divergencies the name of the Septuagint Version is universally given to the entire collection of the Old Testament books in the Greek Bible adopted by the Eastern Church. B. Origin according to the commonly accepted view. As to the Pentateuch the following view seems plausible, and is now commonly accepted in its broad lines: The Jews in the last two centuries B.C. were so numerous in Egypt, especially at Alexandria, that at a certain time they formed two-fifths of the entire population. Little by little most of them ceased to use and even forgot the Hebrew language in great part, and there was a danger of their forgetting the Law. Consequently it became customary to interpret in Greek the Law which was read in the synagogues, and it was quite natural that, after a time, some men zealous for the Law should have undertaken to compile a Greek Translation of the Pentateuch. This happened about the middle of the third century B.C. As to the other Hebrew books -- the prophetical and historical -- it was natural that the Alexandrian Jews, making use of the translated Pentateuch in their liturgical reunions, should desire to read the remaining books also and hence should gradually have translated all of them into Greek, which had become their maternal language; this would be so much the more likely as their knowledge of Hebrew was diminishing daily. It is not possible to determine accurately the precise time or the occasions on which these different translations were made; but it is certain that the Law, the Prophets, and at least part of the other books, that is, the hagiographies, existed in Greek before the year 130 B.C., as appears from the prologue of Ecclesiasticus, which does not date later than that year. It is difficult also to say where the various translations were made, the data being so scanty. Judging by the Egyptian words and expressions occurring in the version, most of the books must have been translated in Egypt and most likely in Alexandria; Esther however was translated in Jerusalem (XI, i). Who were the translators and how many? Is there any foundation for their number, seventy or seventy-two, as given in the legendary account (Brassac-Vigouroux, n. 105)? It seems impossible to decide definitely; the Talmudists tell us that the Pentateuch was translated by five interpreters (Sopherim, c.i.). History gives us no details; but an examination of the text shows that in general that the authors were not Palestinian Jews called to Egypt; and differences of terminology, method, etc. prove clearly that the translators were not the same for the different books. It is impossible also to say whether the work was carried out officially or was merely a private undertaking, as seems to have been the case with Ecclesiasticus; but the different books when translated were soon put together -- the author of Ecclesiasticus knew the collection -- and were received as official by the Greek-speaking Jews. III. SUBSEQUENT HISTORY Recensions The Greek version, known as the Septuagint, welcomed by the Alexandrian Jews, spread quickly throughout the countries in which Greek was spoken; it was utilized by different writers, and supplanted the original text in liturgical services. Philo of Alexandria used it in his writings and looked on the translators as inspired Prophets; it was finally received even by the Jews of Palestine, and was employed notably by Josephus, the Palestinian Jewish historian. We know also that the writers of the New Testament made use of it, borrowing from it most of their citations; it became the Old Testament of the Church and was so highly esteemed by the early Christians that several writers and Fathers declared it to be inspired. The Christians had recourse to it constantly in their controversies with the Jews, who soon recognized its imperfections, and finally rejected it in favour of the Hebrew text or of more literal translations (Aquila, Theodotion). Critical corrections of Origen, Lucian, and Hesychius On account of its diffusion alone the hellenizing Jews and early Christians, copies of the Septuagint were multiplied; and as might be expected, many changes, deliberate as well as involuntary, crept in. The necessity of restoring the text as far as possible to its pristine purity was felt. The following is a brief account of the attempted corrections: A. Origen reproduced the Septuagint text in the fifth column of his Hexapla; marking with obeli the texts that occurred in the Septuagint without being in the original; adding according to Theodotion's version, and distinguishing with asterisks and metobeli the texts of the original which were not in the Septuagint; adopting from the variants of the Greek Version the texts which were closest to the Hebrew; and, finally, transposing the text where the order of the Septuagint did not correspond with the Hebrew order. His recension, copied by Pamphilus and Eusebius, is called the hexaplar, to distinguish it from the version previously employed and which is called the common, vulgate, koine, or ante-hexaplar. It was adopted in Palestine. B. St. Lucien, priest of Antioch and martyr, in the beginning of the fourth century, published an edition corrected in accordance with the hebrew; this retained the name of koine, vulgate edition, and is sometimes called Loukianos, after its author. In the time of St. Jerome it was in use at Constantinople and Antioch. C. Finally, Hesychius, an Egyptian bishop, published about the same time, a new recension, employed chiefly in Egypt. Manuscripts The three most celebrated manuscripts of the Septuagint known are the Vatican, "Codex Vaticanus" (fourth century); the Alexandrian, "Codex Alexandrinus" (fifth century), now in the British Museum, London; and that of Sinai, "Codex Sinaiticus" (fourth century), found by Tischendorf in the convent of St. Catherine, on Mount Sinai, in 1844 and 1849, now part at Leipzig and in part in St. Petersburg; they are all written in uncials. The "Codex Vaticanus" is the purest of the three; it generally gives the more ancient text, while the "Codex Alexandrinus" borrows much from the hexaplar text and is changed according to the Massoretic text (The "Codex Vaticanus" is referred to by the letter B; the "Codex Alexandrinua" by the letter A, and the "Codex Sinaiticus" by the first letter of the Hebrew alphabet Aleph or by S). The Bibliotheque Nationale in Paris possesses also an important palimpsest manuscript of the Septuagint, the "Codex Ephraemirescriptus" (designated by the letter C), and two manuscripts of less value (64 and 114), in cursives, one belonging to the tenth or eleventh century and the other to the thirteenth (Bacuez and Vigouroux, 12th ed., n. 109). Printed Editions All the printed editions of the Septuagint are derived from the three recensions mentioned above. + The editio princeps is the Complutensian or that of Alcalá. It was from Origen's hexaplar text; printer in 1514-18, it was not published till it appeared in the Polyglot of Cardinal Ximenes in 1520. + The Aldine edition (begun by Aldus Manucius) appeared at Venice in 1518. The text is purer than that of the Complutensian edition, and is closer to Codex B. The editor says he collated ancient manuscripts but does not specify them. It has been reprinted several times. + The most important edition is the Roman or Sixtine, which reproduces the "Codex Vaticanus" almost exclusively. It was published under the direction of Cardinal Caraffa, with the help of various savants, in 1586, by the authority of Sixtus V, to assist the revisers who were preparing the Latin Vulgate edition ordered by the Council of Trent. It has become the textus receptus of the Greek Old Testament and has had many new editions, such as that of Holmes and Pearsons (Oxford, 1798-1827), the seven editions of Tischendorf, which appeared at Leipzig between 1850 and 1887, the last two, published after the death of the author and revised by Nestle, the four editions of Swete (Cambridge, 1887-95, 1901, 1909), etc. + Grabe's edition was published at Oxford, from 1707 to 1720, and reproduced, but imperfectly, the "Codex Alexandrinus" of London. For partial editions, see Vigouroux, "Dict. de la Bible", 1643 sqq. IV. CRITICAL VALUE AND LANGUAGE Critical Value The Septuagint Version, while giving exactly as to the form and substance the true sense of the Sacred Books, differs nevertheless considerably from our present Hebrew text. These discrepancies, however, are not of great importance and are only matters of interpretation. They may be thus classified: Some result from the translators having had at their disposal Hebrew recensions differing from those which were know to the Massoretes; sometimes the texts varied, at others the texts were identical, but they were read in different order. Other discrepancies are due to the translators personally; not to speak of the influence exerted on their work by their methods of interpretation, the inherent difficulties of the work, their greater or less knowledge of Greek and Hebrew, they now and then translated differently from the Massoretes, because they read the texts differently; that was natural, for, Hebrew being written in square characters, and certain consonants being very similar in form, it was easy to confound them occasionally and so give an erroneous translation; moreover, their Hebrew text being written without any spacing between the various words, they could easily make a mistake in the separation of the words; finally, as the Hebrew text at their disposal contained no vowels, they might supply different vowels from those used later by the Massoretes. Again, we must not think that we have at present the Greek text exactly as it was written by the translators; the frequent transcriptions during the early centuries, as well as the corrections and editions of Origen, Lucian, and Hesychius impaired the purity of the text: voluntarily or involuntarily the copyists allowed many textual corruptions, transpositions, additions, and omissions to creep into the primitive text of the Septuagint. In particular we may note the addition of parallel passages, explanatory notes, or double translations caused by marginal notes. On this consult Dict. de la Bible, art. cit., and Swete, "An Introduction to the Old Testament in Greek". Language Everyone admits that the Septuagint Version was made in popular Greek, the koine dislektos. But is the Greek of the Old Testament a special idiom? Many authorities assert that it is, though they disagree as to its real character. The "Dict. de la Bible", s.v. Grec biblique, asserts that it was "the hebraicizing Greek spoken by the Jewish community at Alexandria", the popular Greek of Alexandria "with a very large admixture of Hebraicisms". The same dictionary, s.v. Septante, mentions the more recent opinion of Deissmann that the Greek of the Septuagint is merely the ordinary vernacular Greek, the pure koine of the time. Deissmann bases his theory on the perfect resemblance of the language of the Septuagint and that of the papyri and the inscriptions of the same age; he believes that the syntactical peculiarities of the Septuagint, which at first sight seem to favour the theory of a special language, a hebraicizing Greek, are sufficiently explained by the fact that the Septuagint is a Greek translation of Hebrew books. A. VANDER HEEREN Serajevo (Sarajevo) Archdiocese of Serajevo (SERAIUM). The healthy growth of the Church in Bosnia was blighted and stunted by Arianism and the disturbances caused by the wandering of the nations. Irreparable, however, was the damage inflicted by the Oriental Schism. To this day forty-three per cent of the population are Greek Orthodox, calling themselves Servians, and their religion and language Servian. From the earliest times the Church of Christ opposed the Bogomiles, a branch of the Manichaeans, who, varying as to time and place, dress, and nomenclature, are well nigh a historical puzzle. They have been called Paulicians, Phundaites, Eneratites, Marcionites, Christopolites, and, after a certain Bulgarian priest, Bogomiles. They were very numerous in Bosnia, as is proved by the great number of Bogomile graves. From 1292 onwards the Franciscan monks co-operated with the secular clergy in attending to the needs of the faithful. When in 1463 Stephan Tomasevie, the last native sovereign of Bosnia, was taken prisoner by the Turks and decapitated, there were many Catholics, who in order to save their possessions, renounced their faith and became Mohammedans (now known as "Begs"). Nearly all the Bogomiles became Mohammedans at the same time, and the few who remained true to their faith were degraded to the position of "rayahs", i.e. serfs possessing no civil rights. The Catholic Church of Bosnia suffered the most severe of hardships during the succeeding four centuries. The faithful lost their possessions, and might not, without the Sultan's permission, build themselves a hut, let alone a church. From 1683 onwards, repeated inhuman oppressions drove them frequently to have recourse to arms, but each time only to make their position worse than before. The Franciscan Friars alone saved the Church in Bosnia. They disguised themselves as Turks and were addressed by the Catholics as ujaci (uncle). Often they were compelled to hold services and to bury their dead at night in the woods or in caves. They lived in the direst poverty and very many of them became martyrs. The old people instructed the younger generation during the winter months in the catechism, and during Lent the Franciscans examined the pupils. Nearly all Catholics in Bosnia bore a cross tattooed on breast or hand. The subjection of the Bosnian people to the House of Habsburg marks the beginning of its growth in religion and in culture. In 1878 the European powers charged Austria-Hungary with the military government of Bosnia and Herzegovina, and in 1908 these two countries were declared part of the empire. In 1881 His Apostolic Majesty formed the ecclesiastical province of Serajevo, and appointed as archbishop J. Stadler, professor of theology at Agram. Native Franciscans were elevated to the sees of Mostar and Banjalika. The Society of Jesus took over and has retained charge of the seminary for priests in Serajevo, which supplies the entire province, and in Travnik conducts a seminary for boys, the gymnasium of which is frequented by pupils of all religions. The Franciscans maintain two schools of six classes each for the preparation of the young postulants of the order, while the Sisters of Charity conduct 32 Catholic primary schools. The Archdiocese of Serajevo has 180,000 Catholics, with 50 priests and 110 friars. KLAU, Gesch. Bosnicus von den altesten Leiten bis zum Verfalle des Konigreiches, Germ. tr. BOJNICIC (Leipzig, 1885); STRAUS, Bosnien, Land und Leute (Vienna, 1864); NIKASCHINOVILISCH, Bosnien und die Herzegovina unter der Verwaltung der oster. ungar. Monarchie, I (Berlin, 1901); PUNTIGAN, Unsere Zukunft in Bosnien (Graz and Vienna, 1909). COLESTIN WOLFSGRUBER Seraphim Seraphim The name, a Hebrew masculine plural form, designates a special class of heavenly attendants of Yahweh's court. In Holy Writ these angelic beings are distinctly mentioned only in Isaias's description of his call to the prophetical office (Isa., vi, 2 sqq.). In a vision of deep spiritual import, granted him in the Temple, Isaias beheld the invisible realities symbolized by the outward forms of Yahweh's dwelling place, of its altar, its ministers, etc. While he stood gazing before the priest's court, there arose before him an august vision of Yahweh sitting on the throne of His glory. On each side of the throne stood mysterious guardians, each supplied with six wings: two to bear them up, two veiling their faces, and two covering their feet, now naked, as became priestly service in the presence of the Almighty. His highest servants, they were there to minister to Him and proclaim His glory, each calling to the other: "Holy, holy, holy, Yahweh of hosts; all the earth is full of His glory." These were seraphim, one of which flew towards Isaias bearing a live coal which he had taken from the altar, and with which he touched and purified the Prophet's lips, that henceforth these might be consecrated to the utterances of inspiration. Such, in substance, is Isaias's symbolical vision from which may be inferred all that Sacred Scripture discloses concerning the seraphim. Although described under a human form, with faces, hands, and feet (Is., vi, 2, 6), they are undoubtedly existing spiritual beings corresponding to their name, and not mere symbolic representations as is often asserted by advanced Protestant scholars. Their number is considerable, as they appear around the heavenly throne in a double choir and the volume of their chorus is such that the sound shakes the foundations of the palace. They are distinct from the cherubim who carry or veil God, and show the presence of His glory in the earthly sanctuary, whilst the seraphim stand before God as ministering servants in the heavenly court. Their name too, seraphim, distinguishes them from the cherubim, although it is confessedly difficult to obtain from the single Scriptural passage wherein these beings are mentioned a clear conception of its precise meaning. The name is oftentimes derived from the Hebrew verb saraph ("to consume with fire"), and this etymology is very probable because of its accordance with Isa., vi, 6, where one of the seraphim is represented as carrying celestial fire from the altar to purify the Prophet's lips. Many scholars prefer to derive it from the Hebrew noun saraph, "a fiery and flying serpent", spoken of in Num., xxi, 6; Isa., xiv, 29, and the brazen image of which stood in the Temple in Isaias's time (IV Kings, xviii, 4); but it is plain that no trace of such serpentine form appears in Isaias's description of the seraphim. Still less probable are the views propounded of late by certain critics and connecting the Biblical seraphim with the Babylonian Sharrapu, a name for Nergal, the fire-god, or with the Egyptian griffins (séréf) which are placed at Beni-Hassan as guardians of graves. The seraphim are mentioned at least twice in the Book of Enoch (lxi, 10; lxxi, 7), together with and distinctly from the cherubim. In Christian theology, the seraphim occupy with the cherubim the highest rank in the celestial hierarchy (see CHERUBIM), while in the liturgy (Te Deum; Preface of the Mass) they are represented as repeating the Trisagion exactly as in Isa., vi. Commentaries on Isaias: KNABENBAUER (Paris, 1887); DELITSCH (tr. Edinburgh, 1890); DURM (Gottingen, 1892); SKINNER (Cambridge, 1896); MARTI (Tubingen, 1900); CONDAMIN (Paris, 1905). Theology of the Old Testament: OEHLER (tr. New York, 1883); DILLMANN-KITTEL (Leipzig, 1895); SCHULTZ (tr. Edinburgh, 1898). FRANCIS E. GIGOT St. Seraphin of Montegranaro St. Seraphin of Montegranaro Born at Montegranaro, 1540; died at Ascoli, 12 October 1604. Felix de Nicola was born of a poor, pious family, and in his youth was employed as a shepherd, an occupation which gave him much leisure for prayer and other pious exercises. Upon the death of his parents, he was subjected to harsh and cruel treatment by his eldest brother. At the age of sixteen, he entered the Order of Friars Minor Capuchin and received the name Seraphin. He was distinguished from the first by his unaffected simplicity, mortification, and obedience as well as charity which towards the poor knew no bounds. He had a special devotion to the Blessed Eucharist and to Our Lady. Seraphin was endowed with the gift of reading the secrets of hearts, and with that of miracles and prophecy. Although unlettered, his advice was sought by secular and ecclesiastical dignitaries, and was a fruitful source of virtue to souls. His tomb is in the Capuchin friary at Ascoli. He was canonized by Clement XIII, 16 July, 1767. His feast is celebrated in the Franciscan Order on 12 October. Clary: Lives of the Saints and Blessed of the Three Orders of St. Francis, III (Taunton, 1886), 292- 296; Acta SS. Oct., VI 128-60; Lechner, Leben der heiligen aus dem Kapuzinerorden, I (1863), 229- 72; Svampa, Vita di S. Serafino da Montegranaro Laico Cappucino (Bologna, 1904). FERDINAND HECKMAN Blessed Seraphina Sforza Blessed Seraphina Sforza Born at Urbino about 1434; died at Pesaro, 8 September, 1478. Her parents were Guido Antonio of Montefeltro, Count of Urbino, and Cattarina Colonna. She was brought up at Rome by her maternal uncle, Martin V. In 1448 Seraphina married Alexander Sforza, Lord of Pesaro. Ten years afterwards her husband gave himself up to a dissolute life. All the efforts of Seraphina to reform him were in vain. Instead, he heaped insults and ill-treatment upon her, and even attempted her life, and finally forced her to enter the convent of Poor Clares at Pesaro. Her life there was one of incessant prayer especially for the conversion of her husband, which was finally granted. In 1475 Seraphina was elected abbess of the monastery at Pesaro. Her body, exhumed some years after her death, was found incorrupt, and is preserved in the cathedral at Pesaro. She was beatified by Benedict XIV in 1754, and her feast is kept on 9 September throughout the Franciscan Order. FERDINAND HECKMANN St. Serapion St. Serapion Bishop of Antioch (190-211). Known principally through his theological writings. Of these Eusebius (Hist. eccl., V, 19) mentions a private letter addressed to Caricus and Pontius against the Montanist heresy; a treatise addressed to a certain Domninus, who in time of persecution abandoned Christianity for the error of "Jewish will-worship" (Hist. eccl., VI, 12); a work on the Docetic Gospel attributed to St. Peter, in which the Christian community of Rhossus in Syria is warned of the erroneous character of this Gospel. These were the only works of Serapion with which Eusebius was acquainted, but he says it is probable that others were extant in his time. He gives two short extracts from the first and third. [ Note: St. Serapion is commemorated in the Roman Martyrology on 30 October.] JEROME, De Viris Ill., c. 31; SOCRATES, H. E., III, 7; ROUTH, Reliquiae sacrae, 447-62; HARNACK, Chronologie, II, 132; Acta SS., XIII Oct., 248-52. PATRICK J. HEALY Diocese of La Serena Diocese of La Serena (De Serena, Serenopolitana). Embracing Atacama and Coquimbo provinces (Chile), suffragan of Santiago, erected 1 July, 1840. The boundaries of the diocese were definitively established on 26 March, 1844; on 5 June, 1844, the first bishop, José Agustín de la Sierra, was installed. Mgr. Jara, fifth bishop, was appointed on 31 August, 1909. The diocesan territory exceeds 60,000 square miles, with a population (Catholic) of about 250,000. There are 64 secular, 35 regular priests; 30 parishes; 145 churches and chapels. The town of La Serena, with about 20,000 inhabitants, has 20 churches (including an imposing cathedral, erected 1844-60); boasts a seminary with 160 students; affords good educational facilities -- an orphan asylum, lazaretto, and foundling home. Sisters of Mercy, of the Good Shepherd, and of the Congregation of Piepus are active. P.J. MACAULEY John Sergeant John Sergeant Born at Barrow-upon-Humber, Lincolnshire, in 1623; died in 1710, not, as Dodd asserts, in 1707 (MS. "Obituary of the Old Chapter"). He was son of William Sergeant, a yeoman, and was educated as an Anglican at St John's College, Cambridge, graduating in 1642-3. Being appointed secretary to Bishop Morton of Durham, he was employed in patristic and historical researches which resulted in his conversion. He then went to the English College, Lisbon, where he studied theology and was ordained priest (24 February, 1650). He taught humanities till 1652, when he became procurator and prefect of studies. In 1653 he was recalled to the English mission, where he made many converts; but the year following he returned to Lisbon to resume his former offices and to teach philosophy. In 1655 the chapter, recognizing his unusual ability, elected him a canon and appointed him secretary. For the next twenty years he was actively engaged in controversy with Stillingfleet, Tillotson, and other Anglican divines, also with the Catholic theologians who opposed the views of Thomas Blacklow. At the time of the Oates Plot he entered into communication with the Privy Council, which greatly scandalized the Catholics, but some of the incidents which happened suggest that his mind was unbalanced at the time. He avoided arrest by passing as a physician under the names of Dodd, Holland, and Smith. His peculiar temperament, which always made him difficult to work with, increased in his later years, and he fell into a state of nervous irritation, saying and writing things which caused great offence and pain, even to his friends. He was a voluminous writer, leaving over fifty works, either published or in MS. His chief writings are: "Schism Disarm'd" (Paris, 1655); "Schism Dispatcht" (1657); "Vindication of Benedict XII.'s Bull" (Paris, 1659); "Reflections upon the Oath of Supremacy and Allegiance" (1661); "Statera Appensa" (London, 1661); "Tradidi Vobis" (London, 1662); "Sure-Footing in Christianity" (London, 1665); a system of controversy, for which he was attacked by Peter Talbot, Archbishop of Dublin, and in defence of which Sergeant wrote several pamphlets; "Solid Grounds of the Roman Catholic Faith" (1666); "Faith Vindicated" (Louvain, 1667); "Reason against Raillery" (1672); "Error Non-plust" (1673); "Methodus Compendiosa" (Paris, 1674); "Clypeus Septemplex" (Paris, 1677), a defence of his own teaching; a series of "Catholic Letters" in reply to Stillingfleet (London, 1687-8); "Method to Science" (London, 1696); a series of works against Cartesian philosophy, "Ideæ Cartesianæ" (London, 1698); "Non Ultra" (London, 1698); "raillery by Calm Reason" (London, 1699); "Abstract of the Transactions relating to the English Secular Clergy" (London, 1706); other pamphlets relating to the chapter, some of which, with replies thereto, were suppressed by the orders of the chapter. There is an original painting at the English College, Lisbon. KIRK, Literary Life of the Rev. John Sergeant, written by sergeant himself in 1700, and printed in The Catholicon (1816); DODD, Church History, III (Brussels vere Wolverhampton, 1739-42); WOOD, Athenæ Oxonienses (London, 1813-20); BUTLER, Memoirs of English Catholics (London, 1819); GILLOW, Bibl. Dict. Eng. Cath. s. v.,; CROFT, Kirk's Historical Account of Lisbon College (London, 1902); COOPER, Dict. Nat. Biog. s. v. EDWIN BURTON Ven. Richard Sergeant Ven. Richard Sergeant English martyr, executed at Tyburn, 20 April, 1586. He was probably a younger son of Thomas Sergeant of Stone, Gloucestershire, by Katherine, daughter of John Tyre of Hardwick. He took his degree at Oxford (20 Feb., 1570-1), and arrived at the English College, Reims, on 25 July, 1581. He was ordained subdeacon at Reims (4 April, 1582), deacon at Soissons (9 June, 1582), and priest at Laon (7 April, 1583). He said his first Mass on 21 April, and left for England on 10 September. He was indicted at the Old Bailey (17 April, 1586) as Richard lea alias Longe. With him was condemned and suffered Venerable William Thomson, a native of Blackburn, Lancashire, who arrived at the English College, Reims, on 28 May, 1583, and was ordained priest in the Reims cathedral (31 March, 1583-4). Thomson was arrested in the house of Roger Line, husband of the martyr Anne Line (q. v.) in Bishopsgate St. Without, while saying Mass. Both were executed merely for being priests and coming into the realm. CHALLONER, Missionary priests, I (London, 1878), nos. 32, 33; KNOX, Douay Diaries (London, 1878); FOSTER, Alumni Oxonienses, (Oxford, 1892); Harleian Soc. Publ. xxi (London, 1885), 258; POLLEN, English Martyrs 1584-1603 in Cath. Rec. Soc. (London, 1908), 129; Cath. Rec. Soc. II (London, 1906), 249, 255, 271. JOHN B. WAINEWRIGHT Sergiopolis Sergiopolis A titular see in Augusta Euphratensis, suffragan of Hierapolis. Under its native name Rhesapha, it figures in Ptolemy, V, xiv, 19; as Risapa in the "Tabula Peutinger."; as Rosafa in the "Notitia dignitatum" (edited by Böcking, p. 88), the latter locates in it the equites promoti indigenae, i.e. the natives promoted to Roman Knighthood. This name signifies in Arabic causeway, paved or flagged road, and a milliary mentioned by Sterrett (Corpus inscript. latin., III, 6719) who calls the town Strata Diocletiana. Procopius also (De bello pers., II, i, 6) speaks of a region called Strata (see Clermont-Ganneau, "La voie romaine de Palmyre â Resapha" and "Resapha et la Strata Diocletiana" in "Recueil d'archéol. orientale", IV, 69-74, 112). It is commonly admitted that Resapha is identical with the Reseph (IV Kings, xix, 12; Is., xxxvii, 12) which the envoys of Sennacherib to King Ezechias mentioned as having recently fallen into the hands of the Assyrians; the name occurs also several times in the cuneiform inscriptions under the forms Rasaappa, Rasappa, or Rasapi, and a certain number of its Assyrian governors from 839 to 737 B.C. are known. The town was then an important commercial centre [Schrader, "Keilinschriften und Geschichtsforschung" (Giessen, 1878), 167, 199]. At Rosapha in the reign of Maximian the soldier Sergius, after whom the town was officially named, was martyred on 7 Oct.; Rosapha contained a Roman fortress at that time. Its first bishop was appointed shortly after 431 by John of Antioch, in spite of the opposition of the Metropolitan of Hierapolis, on whom that church had till then depended, for he had, he declared spent three hundred pounds of gold on it (Mansi), "Concil. collectio", V, 915, 943). A little later Marianus of Rhosapha assisted at the Council of Antioch (Mansi), op. cit., VII, 325). The metropolis of Sergiopolis with five suffragan sees figures in the "Notitia episcopatuum" of Antioch in the sixth century ("Echos d'Orient", X, 145). It had obtained this title from Emperor Anastasius I (491-518), according to a contemporary (Cramer, "Anecdota", 11, 12, 109); at the fifth general council (553) Abraham signed as metropolitan (Mansi), op. cit., IX, 390). The favors of Anastasius obtained for the town the name of Anastasiopolis, which it still retained at the beginning of the seventh century (Gelzer, "Georgii Cyprii Descriptio orbis romani", 45). We may mention also Bishop Candidus, who, at the time of the siege of the town by Shah Chosroes, (543), ransomed 1200 captives for two hundred pounds of gold (Procopius, "De bello pers." II, 5, 20), and the metropolitan Simeon in 1093 ("Echos d'Orient", III, 238); this proves that Christianity continued to exist even under Mussulman domination. Procopius ("De aedificiis", II, ix), describes at length the ramparts and buildings erected there by Justinian. The walls of Resapha which are still well preserved are over 1600 feet in length and about 1000 feet in width; round or square towers were erected about every hundred feet; there are also ruins of a church with three apses. HALIFAX, An extract of the Journals of two voyages. . . of Aleppo to Tadmor in Philosophical Transactions, XIX (Oxford, 1695), 109 150-2; LE QUIEN, Oriens chriatianus, II, 951; WADDINGTON, Inscriptions de Grece et d'Asie Mineure, 609, Analecta bollandiana, XIV, 373-95; FlLLION in Dict. de la Bible, s. v. Reseph; CHAPOT in Bulletin de correspondance hellenique, XXVII, 280-91; IDEM, La frontiere de 1'Euphrate (Paris, 1907), 328-332. S. VAILHÉ Sergius and Bacchus Sergius and Bacchus Martyrs, d. in the Diocletian persecution in Coele-Syria about 303. Their martyrdom is well authenticated by the earliest martyrologies and by the early veneration paid them, as well as by such historians as Theodoret. They were officers of troops on the frontier, Sergius being primicerius, and Bacchus secundarius. According to the legend, there were high in esteem of the Caesar Maximianus on account of their bravery, but this favour was turned into hate when they acknowledged their Christian faith. When examined under torture they were beaten so severely with thongs that Bacchus died under the blows. Sergius, though, had much more suffering to endure; among other tortures, as the legend relates, he had to run eighteen miles in shoes which were covered on the soles with sharp-pointed nails that pierced through the foot. He was finally beheaded. The burial-place of Sergius and Bacchus was pointed out in the city of Resaph; in honour of Sergius the Emperor Justinian also built churches in honour of Sergius at Constantinople and Acre; the one at Constantinople, now a mosque, is a great work of Byzantine art. In the East, Sergius and Bacchus were universally honoured. Since the seventh century they have a celebrated church in Rome. Christian art represents the two saints as soldiers in military garb with branches of palm in their hands. Their feast is observed on 7 October. The Church calendar gives the two saints Marcellus and Apuleius on the same day as Sergius and Bacchus. They are said to have been converted to Christianity by the miracles of St. Peter. According to the "Martyrologium Romanum" they suffered martyrdom soon after the deaths of Sts. Peter and Paul and were buried near Rome. Their existing Acts are not genuine and agree to a great extent with those of Sts. Nereus and Achilleus. The veneration of the two saints is very old. A mass is assigned to them in the "Sacramentarium" of Pope Gelasius. Analecta Bollandiana, XIV (1895), 373-395; Acta SS., October, III, 833-83; Bibliotheca hagiographica latina (Brussels, 1898-1900), 1102; Bibliotheca hagiographica graeca (2nd ed., Brussels, 1909), 229-30; cf. for Marcellus and Apuleius: Acta SS., October, III, 826-32; Bibliotheca hagiogr. lat., 780. KLEMENS LÖFFLER Pope St. Sergius I Pope St. Sergius I (Reigned 687-701), date of birth unknown; consecrated probably on 15 Dec., 687; d. 8 Sept., 701. While Pope Conon lay dying, the archdeacon Pascal offered the exarch a large sum to bring about his election as his successor. Through the exarch's influence the archdeacon was accordingly elected by a number of people; about the same time another faction elected the archpriest Theodore. The mass of clergy and people, however, set them both aside and chose Sergius, who was duly consecrated. Sergius, the son of Tiberius, was a native of Antioch; he was educated in Sicily, and ordained by [St.] Leo II. The new pope had numerous relations with England and the English. He received [St.] Caedwalla, King of the West Saxons, and baptized him (689); and, as he died in Rome, caused him to be buried in St. Peter's. He ordered St. Wilfrid to be restored to his see, greatly favoured St. Aldhelm, Abbot of Malmesbury, and is credited with endeavouring to secure the Venerable Bede as his adviser. Finally he consecrated the Englishman [St.] Willibrord bishop, and sent him to preach Christianity to the Frisians. The cruel Emperor Justinian wanted him to sign the decrees of the so- called Quinisext or Trullan Council of 692, in which the Greeks allowed priests and deacons to keep the wives they had married before their ordination, and which aimed at placing the Patriarch of Constantinople on a level with the Pope of Rome. When Sergius refused to acknowledge this synod, the emperor sent an officer to bring him to Constantinople. But the people protected the pope, and Justinian himself was soon afterwards deposed (695). Sergius succeeded in extinguishing the last remnants of the Schism of the Three Chapters in Aquileia. He repaired and adorned many basilicas, added the Agnus Dei to the Mass, and instituted processions to various churches. Liber Pontificalis, ed. DUCHESNE, I (Paris, 1886), 371 sqq.; HEFELE, Hist. of the Councils, V (tr., Edinburgh, 1894), 221 sqq.; BEDE, Hist. eccles., V; PAULUS DIACONUS, De gest. Langob., VI; HODGKIN, Italy and Her Invaders, VI (Oxford, 1895), 352 sqq.; MANN, Lives of the Popes, I (London, 1902), ii, 77 sqq. HORACE K. MANN Pope Sergius II Pope Sergius II Date of birth unknown; consecrated in 844, apparently in January; d. 27 Jan., 847. He was of noble birth, and belonged to a family which gave two other popes to the Church. Educated in the schola cantorum, he was patronized by several popes, and was ordained Cardinal-priest of the Church of Sts. Martin and Sylvester by Paschal. Under Gregory IV, whom he succeeded, he became archpriest. At a preliminary meeting to designate a successor to Gregory, the name of Sergius was accepted by the majority; but a mob endeavoured by force to place a deacon, John, upon the pontifical throne. He was, however, shut up in a monastery, and Sergius was duly consecrated. From one obviously very partial edition of the "Liber Pontificalis" it would appear that Sergius, owing to devotion to the pleasures of the table, had no taste for business, and entrusted the management of affairs to his brother Benedict; and that, owing to attacks of gout, he was helpless in body and irritable in mind. His brother usurped all power, and made the getting of money his one concern. As all this is in sharp contrast with the character given to Sergius by the other editions of the "Liber Pontificalis", there can be no doubt about its gross exaggeration. As Sergius was, after a disputed election, consecrated without any reference to the Emperor Lothaire, the latter was indignant, and sent his son Louis with an army to examine into the validity of the election. But Sergius succeeded in pacifying Louis, whom he crowned king, but to whom he would not take an oath of fealty. He also made the king's adviser, Drogo, Bishop of Metz, his legate for France and Germany (844). Before he died he witnessed a terrible raid of the Saracens on the Roman territory (846), which nearly resulted in the capture of the City. Despite the resistance of the scholae of the foreigners at Rome, the pirates sacked the basilicas of St. Peter and St. Paul, and were only prevented by its strong walls from plundering Rome itself. Churches, aqueducts, and the Lateran Basilica were improved by Sergius, who, on his death, was buried in St. Peter's. Liber Pontificalis, ed. DUCHESNE, II, 86 sqq.; various annals in Mon. Germ. Hist.: Script., I; the Letters of Hincmar of Reims in P.L., I, 126, and of SERGIUS himself in Mon. Germ. Hist.: Epp., V, 583; DUCHESNE, The Beginnings of the Temporal Sovereignty of the Popes (London, 1908), 138 sqq.; MANN, Lives of the Popes in the early Middle Ages, II (London, 1906), 232 sqq. HORACE K. MANN Pope Sergius III Pope Sergius III Date of birth unknown; consecrated 29 Jan., 904; d. 14 April, 911. He was a Roman of noble birth and the son of Benedict. He became a strong upholder of the party opposed to Pope Formosus; as this party was not ultimately successful, the writings of its supporters, if they ever existed, have perished. Hence, unfortunately, most of our knowledge of Sergius is derived from his opponents. Thus it is by an enemy that we are told that Sergius was made Bishop of Caere by Formosus in order that he might never become Bishop of Rome. However, he seems to have ceased to act as a bishop after the death of Formosus, and was put forward as a candidate for the papacy in 898. Failing to secure election, he retired, apparently to Alberic, Count of Spoleto. Disgusted at the violent usurpation of the papal throne by Christopher, the Romans threw him into prison, and invited Sergius to take his place. Sergius at once declared the ordinations conferred by Formosus null; but that he put his two predecessors to death, and by illicit relations with Marozia had a son, who was afterwards John XI, must be regarded as highly doubtful. These assertions are only made by bitter or ill-informed adversaries, and are inconsistent with what is said of him by respectable contemporaries. He protected Archbishop John of Ravenna against the Count of Istria, and confirmed the establishment of a number of new sees in England. Because he opposed the errors of the Greeks, they struck his name from the diptychs, but he showed his good sense in declaring valid the fourth marriage of the Greek emperor, Leo VI. Sergius completely restored the Lateran Basilica, but he was buried in St. Peter's. Liber Pontif., II, 236; Letters of Sergius in P.L., CXXXI; Letters of St. Nicholas I, the Mystic in LABBE, Concil., IX, 1246 sqq.; FEDELE, Ricerche per la storia di Roma e del papato nel secolo X in Archivio Rom. di storia pat. (1910), 177 sqq.; MANN, Lives of the Popes in the early Middle Ages, IV (St. Louis, 1910), 119 sqq. HORACE K. MANN Pope Sergius IV Pope Sergius IV Date of birth unknown; consecrated about 31 July, 1009; d. 12 May, 1012. Peter Pig's Snout (Bucca Porci) was the son of Peter the shoemaker, of the ninth region of Rome (Pina), and before he became Sergius IV had been bishop of Albano (1004-9). He checked the power of the Patricius, John Crescentius, who dominated Rome by strengthening the party in favour of the Germans. Little is known of the doings of Sergius except that by grants of privilege, the papyrus originals of some of which still exist, he exempted several monasteries from episcopal jurisdiction. Though his own temporal power was small, various nobles placed their lands under his protection. He showed himself a great friend of the poor in a time of famine, and was buried in the Lateran Basilica. Liber Pontificalis, II, 267; Letters, Privileges of Sergius, in P.L., CXXXIX; MANN, Lives of the Popes in the early Middle Ages, V (St. Louis, 1910), 142 sq. HORACE MANN Girolamo Seripando Girolamo Seripando Italian theologian and cardinal, b. at Troja (Apulia), 6 May, 1493; d. at Trent 17 March, 1563. He was of noble birth, and intended by his parents for the legal profession. After their death, however, and at the age of fourteen he entered the Augustinian Order, at Viterbo, where he joined the study of Greek and Hebrew to that of philosophy and theology. After a short stay in Rome, whither he had been called by his superior general, he was appointed lecturer at Siena (1515), professor of theology at Bologna (1517), and vicar-general (1532), which last charge he filled with great credit for two years. He won such reputation for eloquence by his discourses in the principal cities of Italy, that the Emperor Charles V often made it a point to be present at his sermons. Elected superior general in 1539, he governed for twelve years, with singular prudence, zeal, and piety. He attended (1546) the sessions of the Council of Trent, where he distinguished himself by his zeal for the purity of the text of Holy Writ, and also by his peculiar views concerning original sin and justification. Paul III sent him as his legate to the emperor and to the King of France, after which mission he was offered the Bishopric of Aquila. Seripando not only declined this dignity, but even resigned his charge of superior general (1551), and withdrew into a small convent, from the retirement of which he was called (1553) on a mission from the city of Naples to Charles V. Upon completion he was appointed Archbishop of Salerno. He proved a zealous and efficient pastor. A few years later (1561) Pius IV made him cardinal and second legate of the Holy See at the Council of Trent. Upon the death of Cardinal Gonzaga, he became first president of the same Council. Seripando was an elegant and prolific writer, and a vigorous controversialist, rather than an orator. The following are his principal published works: "Novae constitutiones ordinis S. Augustini" (Venice, 1549); "Oratio in funere Caroli V imperatoris" (Naples; 1559); "Prediche sopra il simbolo degli Apostoli, etc." (Venice, 1567); "Commentarius in D. Pauli epistolas ad Galatas" (Venice, 1569); "Commentaria in D. Pauli epistolas ad Romanos et ad Galatas" (Naples, 1601); "De arte orandi" (Lyons, 1670); and several of his letters, included by Lagomarsini in "Poggiani epist. et orationes" (Rome, 1762). ELLIES DUPIN, Hist. de l'eglise (Paris, 1703); RAYNALD-MANSI Annal. eccl. (LUCCA, 1735-6); OSSINGER, Bibl. August. (Ingolstadt, 1768). FRANCIS E. GIGOT Jean-Baptiste-Louis-George Seroux d'Agincourt Jean-Baptiste-Louis-George Seroux d'Agincourt Born at Beauvais, 5 April, 1730; died at Rome, 24 September, 1814. He was a descendant of the counts of Namur. He entered the French cavalry while a young man, but soon resigned in order to devote himself to his family. Louis XV appointed him collector of the taxes. A disciple of Count de Caylus, the archaeologist, in 1777 he visited England, Belgium, Holland, and a part of Germany; in 1778 he went to Italy, where he devoted himself particularly to the study of the Catacombs of Rome. He formed the plan of imitating for Christian art the work which Winkelmann had done for ancient art, and of studying Christian art from its antiquity up to the Renaissance. This task, in which Louis XVI was also interested, was far from being finished at the time of his death. During the Revolution, d'Agincourt's property had been confiscated; however, during the Empire, the sale of his work brought the distinguished archaeologist once more into comfortable circumstances. D'Agincourt lacked Winkelmann's critical acumen. The reproductions published in his "Histoire de l'art" are imperfect and at times even altered. He took the paintings from the walls of the Catacombs and in this way often caused their destruction. His work is entitled: "Histoire de l'art par les monuments, depuis sa décadence au IVme siècle jusqu' à son renouvellement au XVIme" (Paris, 1825). LECLERQ, Manuel d'archeologie chretienne, I (Paris, 1907), 15 sqq. R. MAERE Alessandro Serpieri Alessandro Serpieri b. at S. Giovanni in Marignano, near Rimini, 31 Oct., 1823; d. at Fiesole, 22 Feb., 1885. His early education was received at Rimini from the brothers Speranza, priests. His classical studies he made at the College of the Scolopians at Urbino, of which the distinguished Latin scholar, Father Angelo Bonuccelli, was the rector. He entered their novitiate at Florence, 30 Nov., 1838. From 1840-43 he studied philosophy and the exact sciences at the Ximenian College and observatory, whose rector, the able astronomer and geodete, Father Giovanni Inghirami, was at the same time professor of higher mathematics. Serpieri was only twenty years old when he was appointed instructor in mathematics and philosophy at the college of Siena. Here he became known as a model teacher on account of his lucid style of exposition, his eloquence, and his affable manners. In Nov., 1846, his superior appointed him professor of philosophy and physics at the college of Urbino, while two months later the Papal Government called him also to the chair of physics in the university of the same city. On 27 Aug., 1848, he was ordained priest, and in Nov., 1857, he became rector of the college. He continued in this position and acted at the same time as professor until 1884, when the municipal authorities notified him of the impending secularization of education, both in the primary schools and in the colleges, inviting him however to remain as professor. This unjust decree caused him and his colleagues to give up their positions at the college. The sorrow caused by this event had an almost fatal effect upon his health, which had not been good for some time. Appointed to the rectorship of the Collegio della Badia Fiesolana, he died in the following year after a short illness. Serpieri's chief merits as an astronomer lay in the observation of shooting stars. His first treatise on this subject dates from 1847 in the "Annali di fisica e chimica" of Maiocchi. In August, 1850, he discovered that the August meteors originate in a radiant not far removed from Gamma Persei (hence "Perseids", Ann. di Tortolino, 1850). In the same year he established an observatory at Urbino, and thereafter published regularly in his monthly bulletin the results of his meteoric observations. These were of great assistance to Schiaparelli in the formulation of his theory on the shooting stars. Serpieri himself expressed some interesting views on this subject in his bulletin in 1867. Urged by Father Secchi, he went to Reggio in Callabria to observe the total eclipse of the sun in 1870, and to ascertain with exactness the northern limit of the zone of totality. The coronal streamers of the sun observable during the eclipse he declared to be sun auroras caused by the electrical influence of the earth and other planets on the sun (Rendic, Ist. Lomb., 1871). When Schiaparelli called his attention to the magnificent work by the American, George Jones, comprising 328 drawings of the zodiacal light as observed at different times and from different places (published at Washington at the expense of the Government), he at once submitted it to a searching analysis. This led him to his theory, in which he explains this phenomenon as light of the earth produced and maintained in the atmosphere by special solar radiations ("La luce zodiacale studiata nelle osserv. di. G. Jones", 138 pp. in "Mem. Soc. Spettr. Ital.", 1876-81). Serpieri's greatest achievements are in the field of seismology. His study of the earthquake of 12 March, 1873, is, in the opinion of de Rossi, a model of scientific analysis. In this he was the first to introduce the concept of the seismic radiant. The so-called premonition on the part of animals he explains by the hypothesis of a preceding electrical disturbance. His master-work is his study on the earthquake of 17 and 18 March, 1875, which caused great devastation in his home city and in other places. In this study he embodies 240 documents coming from 100 different places, and in it his theory of radiants is proved in a striking manner. He also wrote two memoranda on the terrible catastrophe of Casamicciola. His complete seismological studies, for which he received the gold medal at the General Italian Exposition at Turin (1884), were republished in 1889 by P. G. Giovanozzi. Among his works on physics must be mentioned: a study on the pendulum of Foucault (Ann. Tortolini, 1851); a treatise on the simultaneous transmission of opposing electric currents in the same wire (Corr. sc. di Roma, 1855), a lecture on the unity of natural forces (La forza e le sue trasformazioni, 1868). His work on the electric potential ("Il potentziale elettrico", 171 pp., Milan, 1882), is noted for its system, clearness, and conciseness. It has been translated into German by Reichenbach (Vienna, 1884). His last work, on absolute measures ("Le misure assolute", etc., Milan, 1884), gives in condensed form the principal theories on physics, in particular of electric currents. It has been translated into French by Gauthier-Villars (1886) and into German (Vienna, 1885). GIOVANOZZI, Della Vita e degli Scritti di Alessandro Serpieri delle Scuole Pie (Florence, 1887), 134 pp.; Allesandro Serpieri, D.S.P., Scritti sismologici nuovamente raccolti e pubblicati da G. Giovanozzi, Direttore dell' Osservatorio Ximeniano (Florence, 1888-89); POGGENDORFF, Biogr. litt. Handwb., iii, 1898, s. v. J. STEIN Junipero Serra Junípero Serra Born at Petra, Island of Majorca, 24 November, 1713; died at Monterey, California, 28 August, 1784. On 14 September, 1730, he entered the Franciscan Order. For his proficiency in studies he was appointed lector of philosophy before his ordination to the priesthood. Later he received the degree of Doctor of Theology from the Lullian University at Palma, where he also occupied the Duns Scotus chair of philosophy until he joined the missionary college of San Fernando, Mexico (1749). While traveling on foot from Vera Cruz to the capital, he injured his leg in such a way that he suffered from it throughout his life, though he continued to make his journeys on foot whenever possible. At his own request he was assigned to the Sierra Gorda Indian Missions some thirty leagues north of Queretaro. He served there for nine years, part of the time as superior, learned the language of the Pame Indians, and translated the catechism into their language. Recalled to Mexico, he became famous as a most fervent and effective preacher of missions. His zeal frequently led him to employ extraordinary means in order to move the people to penance. He would pound his breast with a stone while in the pulpit, scourge himself, or apply a lighted torch to his bare chest. In 177 he was appointed superior of a band of fifteen Franciscans for the Indian Missions of Lower California. Early in 1769 he accompanied Portolá's land expedition to Upper California. On the way (14 May) he established the Mission San Fernando de Velicatá, Lower California. He arrived at San Diego on 1 July, and on 16 July founded the first of the twenty-one California missions which accomplished the conversions of all the natives on the coast as far as Sonoma in the north. Those established by Father Serra or during his administration were San Carlos (3 June, 1770); San Antonio (14 July, 1771); San Gabriel (8 September, 1771); San Luis Obispo (1 September, 1772); San Francisco de Asis (8 October, 1776); San Juan Capistrano (1 Nov. 1776); Santa Clara (12 January, 1777); San Buenaventura (31 March, 1782). He was also present at the founding of the presidio of Santa Barbara (21 April, 1782), and was prevented from locating the mission there at the time only through the animosity of Governor Philipe de Neve. Difficulties with Pedro Fages, the military commander, compelled Father Serra in 1773 to lay the case before Viceroy Bucareli. At the capital of Mexico, by order of the viceroy, he drew up his "Representación" in thirty-two articles. Everything save two minor points was decided in his favour; he then returned to California, late in 1774. In 1778 he received the faculty to administer the Sacrament of Confirmation. After he had exercised his privilege for a year, Governor Neve directed him to suspend administering the sacrament until he could present the papal Brief. For nearly two years Father Serra refrained, and then Viceroy Majorga gave instructions to the effect that Father Serra was within his rights. During the remaining three years of his life he once more visited the missions from San Diego to San Francisco, six hundred miles, in order to confirm all who had been baptized. He suffered intensely from his crippled leg and from his chest, yet he would use no remedies. He confirmed 5309 persons, who, with but few exceptions, were Indians converted during the fourteen years from 1770. Besides extraordinary fortitude, his most conspicuous virtues were insatiable zeal, love of mortification, self-denial, and absolute confidence in God. His executive abilities has been especially noted by non-Catholic writers. The esteem in which his memory is held by all classes in California may be gathered from the fact that Mrs. Stanford, not a Catholic, had a granite monument erected to him at Monterey. A bronze statute of heroic size represents him as the apostolic preacher in Golden Gate Park, San Francisco. In 1884 the Legislature of California passed a concurrent resolution making 29 August of that year, the centennial of Father Serra's burial, a legal holiday. Of his writings many letters and other documentation are extant. The principal ones are his "Diario" of the journey from Loreto to San Diego, which was published in "Out West" (March to June, 1902), and the "Representación" before mentioned. PALOU, Noticias de la Nueva California (San Francisco, 1774); IDEM, Relacion historica de la vida y apostolicas tarcas del Ven. P. Fr. Junípero Serra (Mexico City, 1787); Santa Barbara Mission Archives; San Carlos Mission Records; ENGELHARDT, Missions and Missionaries of California, I (San Francisco, 1886); GLEESON, Catholic Church in California, II (San Francisco, 1871); HITTELL, History of California, I (San Francisco, 1885); JAMES, In and Out of the Missions (New York, 1905). ZEPHYRIN ENGELHARDT Serrae Serrae Titular metropolitan see in Macedonia, more correctly Serrhae, is called Siris by Herodotus (VIII, 115), Sirae by Titus Livius (XLV, iv). Inscriptions show the official spelling to have been Sirrha or Sirrhae; the form Serrhae prevailed during the Byzantme period (Hierocles, 639, 10; Stephanius Byzantius, s. v.). The city, now called in Turkish "Sérès", is in Eastern Macedonia, about forty-three miles north-east of Salonica in the plain of Strymon, on the last outposts of the mountains which bound it on the north-east. On his return to the Hellespont, Xerxes left some of his sick followers at Serrae, and here also P. AEmilius Paulus, after his victory at Pydna, received a deputation from Perseus. The city possessed great strategic importance under the Byzantine Empire in the wars against the Serviani and Bulgars. It was captured by the latter in 1206 and recaptured by the Emperor John Dukas in 1245. Later the Servian, Kral Stephen Dushan, captured it in turn, was crowned there im 1345, established a Court on the model of that of Byzantium, and married the daughter of Andronicus II. In 1373 it was captured by a Greek apostate in the service of Sultan Murad I. In 1396, while Sigismund of Hungary was preparing to attack the Ottoman Empire, the Sultan Bayazet had his camp at Sérès, where he assembled his Christian allies shortly before the Battle of Nicopolis. Sérès is now the capital of a sanjak in the vilayet of Salonica. It has about 30,000 inhabitants, of whom 13,000 are Turks and the same number Greeks. It carries on a brisk trade in textile and agricultural products. At first Serrae was a suffragan of Thessalonica, remaining so probably until the eighth century, when Eastern Illyricum was removed from Roman jurisdiction and attached to the Patriarchate of Constantinople. It figures in the "Notitiae episcopatuum" as an autocephalous archdiocese as early as the tenth century; at the end of the next century it had become a metropolitan see without suffragans, and such is still its status for the Greeks. Le Quien (Oriens Christ., II, 87) gives a list of fourteen bishops, but a much more complete list is given in Papageorgiou's article cited in the bibliography. The oldest of these bishops is Maximianus or Maximus, present at the Latrocinium of Ephesus (449) and at the Council of Chalcedon (451). A gap intervenes till the end of the tenth century, when Leontius assisted at a council of Constantinople. Among the other titulars was Nicetas, formerly a deacon of St. Sophia, Constantinople, and eventually Metropolitan of Heraclea (Pontus), at the end of the eleventh century. He was a prolific writer [see Krumbacher, "Gesch. der byzant. Litt." (Munich, 1897), 137 sqq., 211 sqq., 215 sqq., 587, etc.]. Under Michael Palaeologus, a metropolitan of Serrae whose name is unknown was among the advocates of union with Rome. In 1491 Manasses became Patriarch of Constantinople under the name of Maximus. Eubel, "Hierarchia catholica medii aevi", I, 473, mentions two Latin metropolitans: Arnulphus in 1225 and Pontius in 1358. SMITH, Dict. of Greek and Roman Geogr., s. v. Siris; BOUTYRAS, Dict. of Hist. and Geogr. (in Greek), VII, 479; LEAKE, Northern Greece, III, 200-210; DEMITSAS, Macedonica (Athens, 1874), 575-587; TOMASCHEK, Zur Kunde der Hamus-Halbinsel (Vienna, 1887), 83; PAPAGEORGIOU in Byzantinische Zeitschrift, III (Munich, 1894), 225-329. S. PÉTRIDÈS Servants of the Most Blessed Sacrament Congregation of the Servants of the Most Blessed Sacrament An order of nuns, founded by the Venerable Pierre-Julien Eymard (q. v.) in 1858, assisted by Mother Margaret of the Blessed Sacrament, with the authorization of Mgr Morlot, Archbishop of Paris. A Decree of Pius IX (21 July, 1871) canonically erected it into a religious congregation, and on 8 May, 1885, Leo XIII approved the constitutions. The aim of the society is to render "before all else solemn and perpetual adoration to Our Lord Jesus Christ, abiding perpetually in the Most Blessed Sacrament of the Altar for the love of men". "The Congregation of the Servants of the Most Blessed Sacrament devote themselves with all their souls and all their strength to propagate this same worship of adoration and love in the world, especially by means of 'The People's Eucharistic League' in the way that was erected by a Rescript of August 2, 1872 (Bishops and Regulars), by Retreats of Adoration, and the work of the worship of Jesus Christ"; that is, by work for poor churches, as well as by catechetical instruction to children and to poor or ignorant adults. Each sister is required to make three adorations in the twenty-four hours, of which two are in the day and one at night. The Divine Office is said in choir. The community is contemplative and cloistered. The mother-house is at Angers, France. The congregation has houses at Lyons (France), founded 29 June, 1874; Paris, founded 1 May, 1876; Binche (Belgium), founded 17 November, 1894. In October, 1903, at the request of Mgr Labrecque, Bishop of Chicoutimi, a house was established at Chicoutimi on the banks of the Saguenay. The first exposition took place on 22 October, 1903, in the chapel of the Sisters of Good Counsel, who for several months extended hospitality to the newly-arrived community. On 25 March, 1906, it took possession of a new convent and on 18 June, 1909, the chapel of the Eucharistic Heart of Jesus was consecrated. Canada has now its novitiate. The community numbers thirteen professed of the perpetual vows, and fifteen novices. TENAILLON, Le Rev. Pere Pierre-Julien Eymard; Documents sur sa vie et ses vertus (Rome, 1899). A. LETELLIER Servia (Serbia) Servia ( Serbia) A European kingdom in the north-western part of the Balkan peninsula. I. HISTORY The greater part of the territory of the present Kingdom of Servia belonged, at the beginning of the Christian era, to the Roman Province of Moesia, the western part to the Province of Dalmatia. Under Roman supremacy a number of cities arose along the Danube and the Morava, and the country attained to a considerable height of economic prosperity and intellectual development. Christianity found entrance into the Roman districts of the Balkan Peninsula at an early date and suffered but little in this region from the persecutions of the emperors. Martyrs are not mentioned until the reign of Diocletian, when several suffered death for Christ at Singidunum (Belgrade). During the migrations the country was traversed in succession by Ostrogoths, Huns, and Lombards. In 550 it was conquered by the Emperor Justinian, head of the Eastern Empire. Soon after this, the Avars fell upon the land, devastating and burning wherever they went, and turned the region into a wilderness. In the seventh century the forefathers of the present Serbs, a tribe of the southern Slavs, migrated into the country, which received from them the name of Servia. During the Middle Ages and well into modern times the term included not only the present Servia, but also Bosnia, Herzegovina, Montenegro, and the northern parts of Macedonia and Albania. In the early centuries of their history the political cohesion of the Serbs was slight; the political organization was based upon the family clan, the sadruga. The sadruga was composed of about fifty or sixty persons, who bore a common name and obeyed an elder who was the representative of the clan in dealings with outsiders or with the gods. All members of the clan had the same rights and were entitled to a share of the common possessions. Several such family-clans formed a tribe whose affairs were managed by a council of the family elders. At the head of the tribe was a Zupan, elected by the elders of the families. The religion of the Serbs was a natural religion. They worshipped their gods in the open air and accompanied their sacrifices with singing. They had neither images, temples, nor priests. In common with all Slavs they believed in a life after death. At various times during the first centuries of their history they were obliged to acknowledge the supremacy either of the Eastern Empire or of the Bulgarians. For short periods also they were able to maintain their independence. They accepted Latin Christianity in the eighth century, during the period of Bulgarian suzerainty. Until the union of Servia with the Greek Orthodox Church, the Servian Church was under the control of the Latin Archbishop of Spalato and, later, the Latin Archbishop of Antivari. After the death of the most powerful of the Bulgarian princes, Symeon (927), the Servian Zupan Cestaw was able, for the first time, to unite several Servian tribes against Peter, the weak ruler of the Bulgarians. However, the destruction of the Bulgarian kingdom by Basil II, Bulgaroktonos, the Byzantine emperor (976-1025), re-established Byzantine supremacy over the whole Balkan Peninsula. Although the oppressive sway of the Eastern Empire led to repeated revolts of the Serbs, the supremacy of Constantinople continued until the twelfth century. For a time indeed the Grand Zupan Michael (1050-80) was able to maintain his independence; he even received the title of king from Pope Gregory VII. In the twelfth century the family of the Nemanyich, to whom the union of the Serbs is due, became prominent in Servian history. Urosch, who was 2upan of Rassa from about 1120, entered into friendly relations with the Hungarian king, Bela II. His son, Stephen I, Nemanya (1159-95), conquered the chiefs of the other Servian tribes, with the exception of those in Bosnia, and thus founded a united hereditary and independent state. He accomplished this with the aid of the Eastern Emperor, Manuel I, to whom he swore fealty in return for recognition as grand Zupan. Free from-his oath after the death of Manuel I (1180), he seized for himself those portions of Servian Territory which belonged directly to the Eastern Empire. Stephen I, Nemanja, who was a Catholic, maintained amicable relations with the popes in ecelesiastico-political affairs, especially with Pope Innocent III. He received the latter's legates and letters in a friendly manner and repeatedly assured the pope of his attachment. His brother Vlkan, as lord of Antivari and Cattaro, was also closely connected with the Catholic Church. Nevertheless, the Greek Orthodoxy Church grew constantly stronger in the eastern part of the country, although in this era the sharp distinction between the Churches of the Eastern and Western Empires had not yet appeared. In 1196 Stephen abdicated in favour of his eldest son and retired to the monastery of Chilandar, which he had founded on Mount Athos. Here he died in 1199 or 1200. The work of the father was continued during the administration of the son, Stephen II (1196-1228), who had received an excellent Byzantine education and was a skilful diplomatist. In church affairs he, like his father, maintained good relations with the popes. The sixth canon of the Servian Council of Dioclea (1199) formally declared that the Servian Church regarded the Roman Church as the mother and ruler of all the Churches. During the Fourth Crusade, which ended in the establishment of the Latin Empire of Constantinople, Stephen II had the skill to maintain himself against all his neighbors and to use the favourable opportunity for increasing his power. Like the Bulgarian Kalojan, he asked Innocent III to grant him the title of king and to send a legate to Servia. However, the opposition of the Hungarian king, Emmerich, prevented the carrying out of this plan, to which Pope Innocent had given his consent. Stephen finally obtained the royal crown in 1217 from Honorius III, probably through the aid of Venice, which, since the Fourth Crusade had become a neighbor of Servia. In order to make his kingdom autonomous in religious matters he appointed his brother Sabas, who had been a monk at Mount Athos, Metropolitan of Servia, and organized the dioceses of the Servian Church in co-operation with this new metropolitan. Stephen II had four sons and was succeeded by one of them, Stephen Radoslav (1228-34). This king was the son-in-law of the Emperor Theodore the Epirote, and as such regarded himself as a Greek. He was so incompetent that he was overthrown and banished by the nobility. His brother Stephen Vladislav (1234-1243) could not maintain his power in the confusion caused by the incursion of the Mongols into the Balkan Peninsula, and was obliged to resign the throne to a more vigorous brother and content himself with the empty title of king. Stephen Urosch I the Great (1243-76) was victorious in a war with the city of Ragusa, the bishop of which was obliged, in 1254, to renounce all ecclesiastical jurisdiction over Servian territory. He was also successful, in league with the Latin Empire of Constantinople, in a campaign against the Greek Empire of Nica, but failed in an attack upon Hungary. After the fall of the Latin Empire the relations between the papacy and Servia grew gradually less intimate; although married to a Catholic Frenchwoman, Helena, Stephen Urosch permitted both his sons to be brought up in the Greek Orthodox religion. Of these sons Stephen Dragutin, who drove his father from the throne, soon gave up the government to his younger brother Stephen Milutin (1282-1321), while retaining for himself the title of king. The separation from Rome was completed during the reigns of these two princes and has continued from that period until the present day, although several popes have exerted themselves to reestablish the union, e. g. Nicholas IV (1288), Benedict XI (1303), and Clement V (1308). Stephen Milutin conquered several provinces of the Byzantine Empire, and advanced victoriously as far as Mount Athos, besides receiving Bosnia, without striking a blow, as the dowry of his wife, a daughter of the Hungarian king Stephen V. During his reign and that of his son Stephen IV, Urosch (1320-31), Servia gained a Europena reputation and was the leading power of Eastern Europe. The son carried on a successful war against the revived Bulgarian kingdom and broke its power forever. Stephen IV Urosch, was willing, in 1323, to unite with Rome and abandon the schism in order to secure the aid of Western Europe against the claims to the throne of his half-brother Vladislav; but this union with Rome was only of short duration. As in the latter years of his reign he showed a preference for the son of a second marriage, his eldest son Stephen Duschan rose against him and threw him into prison where he was soon killed. Stephen Duschan being probably an accomplice in his death. The constant aim of this, the greatest of all the rulers of Servia (1331-55) was to establish a Greater Servia, which should unite all the peoples of the Balkan Peninsula, to conquer Constantinople, and to win for himself the crown of a new Oriental empire with its centre at Constantinople. Taking advantage of the civil war in the Eastern Empire he was able, in 1336-40 and in 1345, to conquer Albania, Macedonia, Epirus, and Thessaly, and undertook thirteen campaigns against Constantinople in which he advanced as far as the imperial capital itself. In 1346 he was crowned at Skopje as 'Tsar of the Serbs and Greeks"; this is translated in Latin documents as " Imperator Rasciae et Romaniae ". At the same time, in a Servian synod, he had the Servian Archbishop of Ipek created an independent "Metropolitan of the Serbs and Greeks", notwithstanding the anathema of the Church of Constantinople. The new head of the Servian Church had twenty metropolitans and bishops under him. Stephen Duschan's reign has been called the Golden Age of Servia, because he gave the country a better administration and judicial system, sought to improve education. mining, commerce, etc., and, in issued a code of laws, an important monument of the Kingdom of Servia. He was very hostile to the Catholic Church. Article 6 of his code punished with death any Servian who adhered to the "Latin heresy", or any Latin ecclesiastic who sought to make proselytes. Yet he repeatedly entered into relations with the pope in order to gain aid from Western Europe against increasing danger of Turkish invasion, and held out the prospect of union with the Latin Church. The great kingdom he had created soon fell to pieces during the reign of his weak son, Urosch V (1355-71). Vlkasin, a Servian noble, rose against Urosch as a rival and gained almost the entire country for his cause; the strength of the kingdom was frittered away by internal disorders and civil wars, and thus the way was prepared for the Turks. Vlkasin lost both the throne and his life at the battle on the Maritza River (26 September, 1371), in which he took part as an ally of the Eastern Empire. Two months later, Urosch V also died, and with his death the Nemanyich dynasty became extinct. The nobles disputed over a successor; Lazar Gobljanovitch, one of the most prominent, formed an alliance with the Bulgarians, Albanians, and Bosnians, and defeated a viceroy of the Turkish Sultan, Amurath I. However, the Serbs suffered a severe defeat on 15 June 1389, in the terrible battle on the Plain of Kossovo (the Plain of the Blackbirds). Lazar and a large number of the most distinguished Serbs were taken prisoners and were beheaded during the night after the battle. The land was defenseless against the Turks, and Servian independence was in abeyance for four hundred Years. Araurath's successor, Bajazet, divided the country between a son and a son-in-law of Lazar, both of whom were obliged to Pay tribute to the Turks and to take part in the Turkish military expeditions. In 1459 Mohammed II put an end to the sovereignty of these two rulers. Servia was formally incorporated into the Turkish Empire and was divided into pashalics. Many Servian families were destroyed, many others fled to Hungary, some 200,000 persons were dragged away as slaves. The Servian Patriarchate of Ipek was also suppressed, and the Servian Church was placed under the control of the Groeco-Bulgarian Patriarchate of Schrida. In 1557 the Patriarchate of Ipek was reestablished, and remained independent until its second suppression in 1766. For more than two hundred years the name of Servia almost entirely disappeared from history. However, the Turks maintained only a military occupation of the country; they rung large sums of money from the people, and took large numbers of young men to be trained as Janizaries. But they did not claim any land for themselves, and thus the Serbs under the Turkish yoke were able to preserve their language, customs, religion, and the memory of the heroic age of their country until the hour of their deliverance. The folk-songs, which celebrated the exploits of their most famous heroes, did much to preserve the national consciousness during the worst periods of oppression, by keeping before the people the recollection of Servia's history and past greatness. The first hope of deliverance from the Turkish yoke came from Austria which, under Charles of Lorraine, repeatedly defeated the Turks in the years 1684-86 and took possession of several provinces. When, in 1690, the Emperor Leopold I issued a proclamation declaring that he would protect the religion and the political rights of all Slavonic peoples on the Balkan peninsula, and called upon them to rise against the Turks, about 36,000 Servian and Albanian families, led by their patriarch, emigrated from Servia. After Leopold had given them the desired guarantees they crossed the Save and settled in Slavonia, in Syrmia, and in some of the Hungarian cities, where their descendants now form a considerable portion of the population. Their rights have always been protected by the emperor, and the see of a Servian patriarch was established at Carlowitz. The victories of Prince Eugene of Savoy forced Turkey to surrender all of Servia to Austria by the Treaty of Passarowitz (1718). But the Austrian Government was not able to win the sympathy of its new subjects, and, after the unsuccessful war of Charles VI against Turkey (1738-39), Servia was retroceded to that power. Although the Serbs themselves had contributed largely to the restoration of the Turkish supremacy, their loyalty was ill repaid by the cruelties of the Janizary revolt. At the request of the Greek Orthodox Church, the Patriarchate of Ipak was again suppressed, in 1766, and the Servian Church was placed directly under the patriarch of Constantinople, who sent as bishops to Servia almost exclusively men of Greek nationality, who were hostile to Servian efforts for liberty. During the war against Turkey carried on by Joseph II and Catherine II in the years 1788-1790, rose in favour of Austria. In 1804 a general revolt was provoked by the atrocities of the Janizaries. The head of the rebellion was George Petrowitch, who was also called Karageorge (Black George). A series of victories delivered the country from the Turkish soldiers, and in 1807 even Belgrade was taken. The people, however, were not sufficiently supported by Russia, and could not obtain complete freedom. By the Treaty of Bucharest, in 1812, the Serbs were guaranteed complete amnesty and granted a measure of internal self administration, but were obliged to remain under Turkish suzerainty. As the Turks did not keep their promises a new revolt broke out in 1815, the leader of which was Milosch Obrenovich, Karageorge having been assas-sinated. On 6 November 1817, Milosch was proclaimed Prince of Servia at Belgrade by an assembly of Servian nobles by the Porte in 1820. By the Peace of Adrianople (1829), Servia received the right to elect its own princes, the right of self administration, in short, internal autonomy, but was obliged to pledge itself to pay a fixed yearly tribute to the Porte. Treaty of Akerman (1826) and the Peace of Adrianople (1829) also granted the people of Servia, freedom of worship and the right to elect their bishops. In 1832 a concordat was made with the Greek Patriarch of Constantinople which regulated the relation of the Servian to the Greek Orthodox Church; the Archbishop of Belgrade received the title of Metropolitan of Servia, and was henceforth to be elected without the participation of the Patriarch of Constantinople; the election, however, must be announced to, and confirmed by, the patriarch, who had the privilege of confirming it and consecrating the new metropolitan. In 1830 Milosch was recognized by the Porte as hereditary prince; in 1834 the Turkish military occupation of Servia was limited to Belgrade. Influenced by Russia, Milosch ruled as an absolute prince without calling any national assembly; he seized commercial monopolies for his own benefit, and in this way so irritated the people that in 1835 a revolt broke out. He was finally obliged to grant a constitution which, however, the Turkish Government replaced in 1838, by the organic Statue (Ustav). This statute replacing the National Assembly with a senate provided with extensive powers, satisfied neither the people nor the prince. Milosch swore to observe the Organic Statute, but did not keep his oath and, after a fresh uprising, in 1839, abdicated in favour of his eldest son Milan I. Milan died in three months and was followed by his incapable and tyrannical brother Michael, who, in 1842, was forced by his opponents to abdicate, and then fled to Austria. A national assembly convoked 11 September, 1842, elected the son of Karageorge, Alexander Karageorgevitch, Prince of Servia. He was confirmed by the sultan, but only with the title of Beschbeg (overlord). In his home policy he followed Austria and, influenced as rigidly conservative, which made him unpopular among the Serbs and in Russia. When in 1858, the Senate wished to force him to retire, he sought protection with the Turkish garrison at Belgrade. Thereupon the National Assembly (Skupshtina) deposed him as a fugitive, and called to the throne Milosch Obrenovitch, now eighty years old, who had abdicated in 1839. Milosch was followed, in 1860, by his son Michael, who had been forced to abdicate in 1842. Under him the organization of the army was carried out, notwithstanding complaints from the Porte, and the efforts of the Serbs to become entirely independent of Turkey became constantly more evident. Urged by Austria, the Turks, in 1867, withdrew the last garrison, that of Belgrade, from the country, in order-to allay the national excitement. Notwithstanding the success that had been attained, a conspiracy was formed against the ruling prince, who was killed on 29 June, 1868, in the park of Topschider. The Skupshtina then chose as prince the sole surviving member of the Obrenovitch family, Milan II, then a student in Paris. During Milan's minority a new constitution was granted to the country by the regent Ristitch. When, in September, 1874, the Christians of Bosnia and Herzegovina against the Turkish yoke, and the revolt constantly spread, Milan believed the occasion favourable to gain the independence of the country, while augmenting it with Bosnia, Herzegovina, and Old Servia, thus founding a Great Servia. In July, 1976 he began war against the Turks, without being able to gain any success in battle. Nevertheless, when war broke out between Turkey and Russia in 1878, he joined Russia, and the Servian army in Bulgaria captured several places which the Turks were on the verge of abandoning. In the Peace of San Stefano, Servia gained not only the recognition of its complete independence, but also considerable additions to its territory, which was still further increased by the Congress of Berlin. In return it was obliged to grant unconditional equality to all denominations and to assume a part of the Turkish national debt. On 21 August, 1878 the independence of the country was formally proclaimed. One of Milan's first acts was to obtain for the Servian Church complete independence from the Greek Church and release from its obligations it had assumed in 1832. In 1879 he compelled the Greek Patriarch of Constantinople to recognize the Servian Church as self-governing, and to renounce all rights over it. Since then the relations between the two Churches have been friendly. On 6 March, 1882, Milan assumed the title of king. In 1884, to increase his territories, thinking to exploit the embarrassment of Bulgaria, which after the annexation of Eastern Rumelia was threatened by the Turks and deserted by Russia, he declared war on that principality, although ill prepared for it. Led by their courageous ruler, Alexander of Battenberg, the Bulgarians gained a brilliant victory over the Serbs at Slivnitza, and only the interference of Austria, which hastily sent Count Khevenhüller to the Bulgarian head-quarters and checked Prince Alexander, saved Servia. In his home policy, too, Milan sheltered himself under the protection of Austria and opposed his own people. The Serbs, greatly embittered by the Austrian occupation of Bosnia and Herzegovina, became more and more favourable to the Radical and Russophile party, while the king's position was rendered increasingly difficult by the agitation of political party leaders who were under Russian influence, and the bad financial management of his cabinet. At last Milan's quarrels with his wife Natalie, the daughter of a Russian colonel, led to the dissolution of the marriage by the metropolitan. When the Liberal party, which had been the support of Milan and Ristitch, was defeated in the elections of 1888, and the Radicals forced a new and more democratic constitution, Milan abdicated, 6 March, 1889, in favour of his only son Alexander, a minor, and then left the country. In 1892 he gave up his Servian citizenship. The sorely distracted country had still less internal peace during Alexander's reign. The regency during his minority was carried on mainly by Ristitch. In 1893 the impulsive king although only sixteen years old, declared himself of age, and forced the regency to retire. Alexander recalled his father from Paris to help him against the Radicals and the menace of anarchy. Milan returned to Belgrade, 21 January, 1894, at once assumed control of the administration, did away with the democratic Constitution of 1889 by a coup data, restored that of 1869, and limited the constitutional liberties and the suffrage. In 1897 he also assumed supreme control of the army. However, the friendly relations between father and son were ruptured in 1900 by the marriage of Alexander, who was mentally somewhat abnormal, with a widow of ill repute named Draga Maschin. Milan broke off all connection with his son and left the country for good (d. at Vienna 11 February, 1901). After that, Alexander ruled despotically, contrary to the Constitution. By two political stratagems a new constitution was forced on the country in 1901, but was set aside after two years. The king lost whatever sympathy was still felt for him on account of the undignified manner in which the queen, 1901, deceived the country into expecting an heir to the throne. When at last the queen formed a plan to have one of her brothers, Lieutenant Nikodem Lunjevitza, who was hated in the army, made heir to the throne, a revolt broke out. In the night of 10-11 June, 1903, a number, of officers, who had formed a conspiracy under the leadership of Colonel Mischitch, entered the palace and murdered the king and queen, the queen's two brothers, and three ministers. The following day the army proclaimed Peter Karageorgevitch, son of the former Prince Alexander Karageorgevitch, king, and the National Assembly confirmed the choice on 15 June, after restoring the Constitution of 1889. Even under the new dynasty the country has not yet (1911) found peace and economic development. Peter's position was from the beginning made more difficult by the fact that he was rightly regarded as an accessory to the murder of his predecessor, and was, moreover, completely controlled by the assassins during the early ears-of his reign. These murderers claimed the chief positions in the army and the civil service; on account of his connection with them Peter's administration was only recognized by the Powers after the lapse of some time, the last power to recognize him being Great Britain (19O6). The country was kept in disorder by the constant struggles between political parties, while cabinet changes and dissolutions of the Chamber followed in rapid succession. In foreign affairs, Servia was soon involved in an economic and political dispute with Austria-Hungary, with which it carried on its main export trade. When Servia formed a customs union with Bulgaria, in 1906, a customs war with Austria-Hungary began, which inflicted severe damage on the economic life of the country. Relations with Austria-Hungary were still further strained by the zealous agitation for a Great Servia carried on among the related peoples of Mentenegro, Macedonia, Bosnia, and even Croatia. In October, 1908, Austria completed the annexation of Bosnia and Herzegovina; this brought the anti-Austrian feeling in Servia to fever-heat, as the Serbs believed they had a moral claim on these countries inhabited by related peoples. The Servian Government, in a note addressed to the signatory Powers, protested against what it alleged to be an infringement of the Treaty of Berlin of 1878. It also formed an alliance with Montenegro, called out the reserves, and set about raising a war loan. Servia was openly supported by Russia, and secretly encouraged by Great Britain. It demanded from Austria-Hungary the cession of a strip of territory to connect Servia, by way of the Sandjak of Novi Bazar and Bosnia, with Montenegro and the Adriatic; it also demanded the autonomy of Bosnia and Herzegovina under the supervision of the European Powers. In the spring of 1909 war seemed inevitable. However, the stand taken by Germany, which declared itself ready to support Austria-Hungary with arms if the latter were attacked by Russia in a war with Servia led Russia to change its position and forced Servia to yield. Servia was obliged to acknowledge formally the annexation of Bosnia and Herzegovina, to renounce economic and territorial compensation, and to express the desire to renew friendly relations with the dual monarchy. At the same time the Crown Prince George was obliged to renounce his right to the succession in favour of his brother Alexander. George had a large share in urging a war and was greatly disliked by the Serbs on account of his wild behavior, his extravagance, and brutal conduct. Since then the relations between Servia and Austria, Hungary have become more friendly, and the customs war was settled in tho early part of 1911 by a commercial treaty. II. ACTUAL CONDITIONS Servia has an area of 18,650 square miles; on 31 December, 1900, the population was 2,492,882. Of this number 2,331,1O7 were by language Serbs, 89,873 Rumanians, 7494 Germans, 2151 Albanians, 1956 Magyars. Divided by religions, 4,460,515 belonged to the Serbo-Orthodox Church, 10,423 were Roman Catholics, 1399 Protestants, 3056 Turkish Mohammedans, 11, 689 Mohammedan Gypsies, while 71 belonged to various other religions. At the beginning of 1910 the population was estimated at 2,855,660. According to the constitution of 2 January, 1989, Servia is a constitutional monarchy, hereditary by primogeniture in the male line in the Karageorgevitch family. The King shares the legislative power with the national assembly, the Skupshtina; this consists of 160 deputies elected for four years. The right of suffrage is exercised by every Servian citizen who is twenty-one years of age and pays a national tax of at least 15 pence, as well as all members of sadrugas who have reached their majority, irrespective of taxation. Those voters are eligible as deputies who are thirty years old and pay an annual state tax of 30 pence. A "Great Skupshtina", consisting of twice the ordinary numbers of deputies, is elected for certain special occasions, as for making changes in the Constitution, electing a king when there is no heir to the throne, etc. The national religion of Servia is that of the Orthodox Greek Church. All denominations permitted by the Government enjoy complete freedom and protection, so far as their exercise does not contravene morals and public order. However, all attempts to influence the members of the State Church to adopt other creeds are forbidden. All church organizations are under the supervision of the Ministry of Worship and Education, which also watches the correspondence of all Servian with foreign ecclesiastical authorities. The control of the Orthodox Church is in the hands of a synod consisting of the five bishops of the country under the presidency of the metropolitan, the Archbishop of Belgrade. This synod elects all the bishops, issues all the edicts for the guidance of the Church, and has a share in drawing up all laws referring to the Church and clergy. The metropolitan is elected by a special synod consisting of the active bishops, all archimandrites and arch-priests of the subdivisions of Servia, the head of the ecclesiastical seminary of St. Saba, and several lay adherents of the Orthodox Church. The choice of this synod requires the confirmation of the king. In' 1907 there were 750 churches and chapels, 54 monasteries, 1042 priests, and 98 monks. The, Orthodox Church is supported partly by the revenues of the church lands, partly by additional sums granted by the State. The value of the church lands is nearly 345 million marks; that of the monastery lands makes an additional 250 million marks. Since 1848 the Catholic Serbs, who are in large part subjects of the Austro-Hungarian Monarchy, have bee under the spiritual jurisdiction of the Bishop of Diakovo, in Slavonia. Although freedom of religion was constitutionally guaranteed by the Congress of Berlin, the position of the Catholic Church is a disadvantageous one, as the Orthodox clergy put various difficulties in the way of parochial work. In the course of the nineteenth century negotiations were several times begun for the erection of a Latin bishopric in Servia. Bishop Strossmayer of Diakovo, especially, tried repeatedly to attain this end, but all efforts were in vain. In 1890 the Holy See gave its consent to the erection of a bishopric for Servia, but the movement has failed on account of the opposition of the Servian Government and other difficulties. There are only three parochial stations for the Catholics of Servia, and the expenses of these are largely borne by the Austro-Hungarian Government. The title of Catholic Primate of Servia is borne by the Archbishop of Antivari, who, since March, 1911, has been Father Matthew Cardun of the Dalmatian province of the Franciscans. NOVAKOVITCH, Serbiache Bibliographie 1741-1867 (Belgrade, 1869) (in the Servian language); JOVANOVITCH An English Bibliography on the New Easter Question (Belgrade, 1909); GOPCEVIC Serbien und die Serben (Leipzig, 1880); TUMA Serbien (Hanover, 1894); DE GUBERNATIS, La Serbie et les Serbes (Paris, 1898); COQUELLE, e Royaume de Serbie (Paris, 1901); LAZARD AND HOGGE, La Serbie d'aujourd'hui (Gembloux, 1900); HOGGE, La Serbie de nos jours (Brussels, 1901); CVIJIC, Siedlungen der serbiscchen Länder (6 vols., Belgrade, 1902-09)(in the Servian language); DAVELUY, La Serbie (Brussels 1907); MIJATOVITCH, Servia and the Servians, (London, 1908); STEAD, Servia by the Servians, (London, 1909); KANITZ, Das Königreich Serbien und das serbische Volk von der Römerzeit bis zur Gegenwart (two vols., Leipzig, 1904-09); LAZAROVICH-HREBELIANOVITCH, The Servian People (New York, 1910); VON RADIC, Die Verfassung der orthodox-serbischen und rumänischen Partikularkirchen (1880). concerning the history of the country, cf. HILFERDING, Geschichte der Serben und Bulgaren (2 pts., Bautzen, 1856-64).; VON KALLAY, Geschichte der Serben (2 vol Budapest and Leipzig, 1877-1885); RANKE, Serbien und die Türkei im neunzehnten Jahrhundert, (Leipzig, 1879); MIJATOVITCH, History of Modern Servia, (London, 1872); CUNIBERTI, Serbia e la dinastia Obrenovic, 1804-93, (Turin 1893); YAKSCHITCH, L'Europe et la résurrection de la Serbie (Paris, 1907); GAVRILOVIC, Miloch Obrenovitch (Belgrade, 1908) (in French); BARRE, La tragédie serbe (Paris, 1906); GEORGEVIC, Das Ende der Obrenovic, (Leipzig, 1905); IDEM, Die serbische Frage, (Leipzig, 1908); VON KALLAY, Geschichte des serbischen Aufstands 1807-10, (Vienna, 1910);JIRECEK, Geschichte der Serben, (Gotha, 1911); (vol I extends to 1371, and the work contains a bibliography of Servia). JOSEPH LINS Order of Servites Order of Servites (SERVANTS OF MARY). The Order of Servites is the fifth mendicant order, the objects of which are the sanctification of its members, preaching the Gospel, and the propagation of devotion to the Mother of God, with special reference to her sorrows. In this article we shall consider: (1) the foundation and history of the order; (2) devotions and manner of life; (3) affiliated associations; (4) Servites of distinction. (1) Foundation and History To the city of Florence belongs the glory of giving to the Church the seven youths who formed the nucleus of the order: Buonfiglio dei Monaldi (Bonfilius), Giovanni di Buonagiunta (Bonajuncta), Bartolomeo degli Amidei (Amideus), Ricovero dei Lippi-Ugguccioni (Hugh), Benedetto dell' Antella (Manettus), Gherardino di Sostegno (Sosteneus), and Alessio de' Falconieri (Alexius); they belonged to seven patrician families of that city, and had early formed a confraternity of laymen, known as the Laudesi, or Praisers of Mary. While engaged in the exercises of the confraternity on the feast of the Assumption, 1233, the Blessed Virgin appeared to them, advised them to withdraw from the world and devote themselves entirely to eternal things. They obeyed, and established themselves close to the convent of the Friars Minor at La Camarzia, a suburb of Florence. Desiring stricter seclusion than that offered at La Camarzia, they withdrew to Monte Senario, eleven miles north of Florence. Here the Blessed Virgin again appeared to them, conferred on them a black habit, instructed them to follow the Rule of St. Augustine and to found the order of her servants (15 April, 1240). The brethren elected a superior, took the vows of obedience, chastity, and poverty, and admitted associates. In 1243, Peter of Verona (St. Peter Martyr), Inquisitor-General of Italy, recommended the new foundation to the pope, but it was not until 13 March, 1249, that the first official approval of the order was obtained from Cardinal Raniero Capocci, papal legate in Tuscany. About this time St. Bonfilius obtained permission to found the first branch of the order at Cafaggio outside the walls of Florence. Two years later (2 Oct., 1251) Innocent IV appointed Cardinal Guglielmo Fieschi first protector of the order. The next pope, Alexander IV, favoured a plan for the amalgamation of all institutes following the Rule of St. Augustine. This was accomplished in March, 1256, and about the same time a Rescript was issued confirming the Order of the Servites as a separate body with power to elect a general. Four years later a general chapter was convened at which the order was divided into two provinces, Tuscany and Umbria, the former of which St. Manettus directed, while the latter was given into the care of St. Sostene. Within five years two new provinces were added, namely, Romagna and Lombardy. After St. Philip Benizi was elected general (5 June, 1267) the order, which had long been the object of unjust attack from jealous enemies, entered into the crisis of its existence. The Second Council of Lyons in 1274 put into execution the ordinance of the Fourth Lateran Council, forbidding the foundation of new religious orders, and absolutely suppressed all mendicant institutions not yet approved by the Holy See. The aggressors renewed their assaults, and in the year 1276 Innocent V in a letter to St. Philip declared the order suppressed. St. Philip proceeded to Rome, but before his arrival there Innocent V had died. His successor lived but five weeks. Finally John XXI, on the favourable opinion of three consistorial advocates, decided that the order should continue as before. The former dangers reappeared under Martin V (1281), and though other popes continued to favour the order, it was not definitively approved until Benedict IX issued the Bull, "Dum levamus" (11 Feb., 1304). Of the seven founders, St. Alexis alone lived to see their foundation raised to the dignity of an order. He died in 1310. We must here make mention of St. Peregrine Laziosi (Latiosi), whose sanctity of life did much towards increasing the repute of the Servite Order in Italy. Born at Forli in 1265, the son of a Ghibelline leader, Peregrine, in his youth, bitterly hated the Church. He insulted and struck St. Philip Benizi, who, at the request of Martin V, had gone to preach peace to the Forlivese. Peregrine's generous nature was immediately aroused by the mildness with which St. Philip received the attack and he begged the saint's forgiveness. In 1283 he was received into the order, and so great was his humility it was only after much persuasion he consented to be ordained a priest. He founded a monastery in his native city, where he devoted all his energies to the restoration of peace. His humility and patience were so great that he was called by his people a second Job. He died in 1345. His body remains incorrupt to the present day. He was canonized by Benedict XIII in 1726, and his feast is celebrated on 30 April. One of the most remarkable features of the new foundation was its wonderful growth. Even in the thirteenth century there were houses of the order in Germany, France, and Spain. Early in the fourteenth century the order had more than one hundred convents including branch houses in Hungary, Bohemia, Austria, Poland, and Belgium; there were also missions in Crete and India. The disturbances during the Reformation caused the loss of many Servite convents in Germany, but in the South of France the order met with much success. The Convent of Santa Maria in Via (1563) was the second house of the order established in Rome; San Marcello had been founded in 1369. Early in the eighteenth century the order sustained losses and confiscations from which it has scarcely yet recovered. The flourishing Province of Narbonne was almost totally destroyed by the plague which swept Marseilles in 1720. In 1783 the Servites were expelled from Prague and in 1785 Joseph II desecrated the shrine of Maria Waldrast. Ten monasteries were suppressed in Spain in 1835. A new foundation was made at Brussels in 1891, and at Rome the College of St. Alexis was opened in 1895. At this period the order was introduced into England and America chiefly through the efforts of Fathers Bosio and Morini. The latter, having gone to London (1864) as director of the affiliated Sisters of Compassion, obtained charge of a parish from Archbishop Manning in 1867. His work prospered: besides St. Mary's Priory at London, convents were opened at Bognor (1882) and Begbroke (1886). In 1870 Fathers Morini, Ventura, Giribaldi, and Brother Joseph Camera, at the request of Rt. Rev. Bishop Melcher of Green Bay, took up a mission in America, at Neenah, Wisconsin. Father Morini founded at Chicago (1874) the monastery of Our Lady of Sorrows. A novitiate was opened at Granville, Wisconsin, in 1892. The American province, formally established in 1908, embraces convents in the dioceses of Chicago, St. Louis, Milwaukee, Superior, and Denver. In 1910 the order numbered 700 members in 62 monasteries, of which 36 were in Italy, 17 in Austria-Hungary, 4 in England, 4 in North America, 1 in Brussels. (2) Devotions: Manner of Life In common with all religious orders strictly so called, the Servites make solemn profession of the three vows of poverty, chastity, and obedience. The particular object of the order is to sanctify first its own members, and then all men through devotion to the Mother of God, especially in her desolation during the Passion of her Divine Son. The Servites give missions, have the care of souls, or teach in higher institutions of learning. The Rosary of the Seven Dolours is one of their devotions, as is also the Via Matris. The fasts of the order are Advent, Lent, and the vigils of certain feasts. All offices in the order are elective and continue for three years, except that of general and assistant- generals which are for six years. The canonized Servite saints are: St. Philip Benizi (feast 23 Aug.), St. Peregrine Latiosi (30 April), St. Juliana Falconieri (19 June), and the Seven Holy Founders (12 Feb.). (3) Affiliated Associations Connected with the first order of men are the cloistered nuns of the second order, which originated with converts of St. Philip Benizi. These sisters have convents in Spain, Italy, England, The Tyrol, and Germany. The Mantellate, a third order of women founded by St. Juliana (see, MARY, SERVANTS OF), have houses in Italy, France, Spain, England, and Canada. In the United States they are to be found in the dioceses of Sioux City and Belville. There is also a third order for seculars, as well as a confraternity of the Seven Dolours, branches of which may be erected in any church. (4) Servites of Distinction A few of the most distinguished members are here grouped under the heading of that particular subject to which they were especially devoted; the dates are those of their death. Ten members have been canonized and several beatified. Sacred Scripture. Angelus Torsani (1562?); Felicianus Capitoni (1577), who wrote an explanation of all the passages misinterpreted by Luther; Jerome Quaini (1583); Angelus Montursius (1600), commentary in 5 vols.; James Tavanti (1607), whose "Ager Dominicus" comprises 25 vols.; Julius Anthony Roboredo (1728). Theology. Laurence Optimus (1380), "Commentarium in Magistrum Sententiarum"; Ambrose Spiera (1454); Marian Salvini (1476); Jerome Amidei (1543); Laurence Mazzocchi (1560); Gherardus Baldi (1660), who was styled by his contemporaries "eminens inter theologos"; Amideus Chiroli (1700?), celebrated for his "Lumina fidei divinae"; Julius Arrighetti (1705); Callixtus Lodigerius (1710); Gerard Capassi (1737), who was by Benedict XIV called the most learned man of his day; Mark Struggl (1761); Caesar Sguanin (1769). Canon Law. Paul Attavanti (1499), "Breviarium totius juris canonici"; Dominic Brancaccini (1689), "De jure doctoratus"; Paul Canciani (1795?), "Barbarorum leges antiquae"; Theodore Rupprecht, eighteenth-century jurist; Bonfilius Mura (1882), prefect of the Sapienza before 1870. Philosophy and Mathematics. Urbanus Averroista, commentator of Averroes; Andrew Zaini (1423); Paul Albertini (1475), better known as Paolo Veneto; Philip Mucagatta (1511); John Baptist Drusiani (1656), the "Italian Archimedes"; Benedict Canali (1745); Raymond Adami (1792); Angelus Ventura (1738). History and Hagiography. James Philip Landrofilo (1528); Octavian Bagatti (1566); Raphael Maffei (1577); Archangelus Giani (1623); Philip Ferrari (1626); Archangelus Garbi (1722); Placidus Bonfrizieri (1732); Joseph Damiani (1842); Austin M. Morini (1910). Fine Arts. Alexander Mellino (1554), choirmaster at the Vatican; Elias Zoto, John Philip Dreyer (1772); Paul Bonfichi, who received a pension from Napoleon Bonaparte for his musical compositions; Ambrose of Racconigi, Cornelius Candidus, Jilis of Milan, Germanus Sardus, poets; Arsenius Mascagni and Gabriel Mattei, painters; Angelus Montursius (1563), architect and sculptor, among whose works are the Neptune of Messina, the arm of Laocoon in the Vatican, and the Angels on the Ponte Sant' Angelo. Mon. ord. Serv. (Brussels, 1897); GIANI-GARBI, Annales ord. serv. (Lucca, 1725); POCCIANTI, Chronicon ord. serv. (Florence, 1557); SPORR, Lebensbilder aus den Serviten-Orden (Innsbruck, 1892); SOULIER, Storia dei sette santi fondatori (Rome, 1888); IDEM, Vie de S. Philippe Benizi (Paris, 1886); LEPICIER, Sainte Julienne Falconieri (Brussels, 1907); LEDOUX, Hist. des sept saints fondateurs (Paris, 1888); DOURCHE, Roses et marguerites (Brussels, 1905). PATRICK J. GRIFFIN Servus Servorum Dei Servus servorum Dei (SERVANT OF THE SERVANTS OF GOD.) A title given by the popes to themselves in documents of note. Gregory the Great was the first to use it extensively, and he was imitated by his successors, though not invariably till the ninth century. John the Deacon states (P.L., LXXV, 87) that Gregory assumed this title as a lesson in humility to John the Faster. Prior to the controversy with John (595), addressing St. Leander in April, 591, Gregory employed this phrase, and even as early as 587, according to Ewald ("Neues Archiv fur altere deutsche Geschichtskunde", III, 545, a. 1878), while still a deacon. A Bull of 570 begins: "Joannes (III) Episcopus, servus servorum Dei". Bishops actuated by humility, e.g. St. Boniface [Jaffe, "Monum. Mogun." in "Biblioth. Rer. Germ.", III (Berlin, 1866), 157, 177 etc.], and the archbishops of Benevento; or by pride, e.g. the archbishops of Ravenna as late as 1122 [Muratori, "Antiq. Ital.", V (Milan, 1741), 177; "Dissertazioni", II, disser. 36]; and even civil rulers, e.g. Alphonsus II, King of Spain (b. 830), and Emperor Henry III (b. 1017), applied the term to themselves. Since the twelfth century it is used exclusively by the pope. (See BULLS AND BRIEFS.) DU CANGE, Glossarium med. et inf. lat. ANDREW B. MEEHAN Sessa-Aurunca Sessa-Aurunca (SUESSANA). Diocese in Campania, Province of Caserta (Southern Italy). The city is situated on a hill in the midst of a fertile plain, and possesses a large and beautiful cathedral, built in 1113. A city of the Aurunci, it became a Roman colony 313 B.C. It was the birthplace of the poet Lucilius and of the philosopher Agostino Nifo. Local legend relates that the Faith was preached in Suessa (the Latin name of the city) by St. Peter himself. The inhabitants venerate as patron saint their Bishop, St. Castus, a martyr at the end of the third century. There still remain ruins of the ancient basilica dedicated to him, with which catacombs are still connected (cf. "Nuovo Bullettino d' Archeologia Cristiana", 1897, p. 140). The first bishop of certain date was Fortunatus (499); but until the end of the tenth century the names of the bishops are unknown. Of the others we mention: Erveo (1171), who rendered great services to the city, Pandulfo (1224), who donated the pulpit, adorned with mosaics, in the cathedral; Giovanni (1259), who embellished the cathedral; Angelo Geraldini (1462), a learned humanist; Galeazzo Florimonte (1552), who played an important part in the affairs of the Holy See under Paul III and Julius III, and published various works; Giovanni Placidi (1566), founder of the seminary; Ulisse Gherardini (1624), who restored the cathedral and the episcopal residence; Francesco Granata (1759), who promoted study in the seminary, and wrote various historical works. Later bishops were: Pietro de Felice (1797), who was cast into prison by the revolutionists; Ferdinando Girardi (1848), exiled in 1860. The diocese is suffragan of Capua; it contains 42 parishes with 56,750 souls and 90 secular clergy. CAPPELLETTI, Le Chiese d'Italia, XX; DIAMARE, Memorie storico-critiche della Chiesa di Sessa Aurunca (Naples, 1906). U. BENIGNI Benedict Sestini Benedict Sestini Astronomer, mathematician, b. at Florence, Italy, 20 March, 1816; d. at Frederick, Maryland, 17 Jan., 1890. He entered the Society of Jesus at Rome on 30 Oct., 1836, and studied at the Roman College where he followed the courses of Father Caraffa, the distinguished professor of mathematics; endowed with mathematical ability, supplemented by keen sight and skill as a draughtsman, he was appointed assistant to Father De Vico, director of the Roman Observatory. He was ordained in 1844, and filled the chair of higher mathematics at the Roman College, when the Revolution of 1848 caused his precipitate flight from Rome; coming to America he lived at Georgetown College, except for a few years, until 1869. He was stationed at Woodstock, Maryland, at the opening of the scholasticate, and remained there until 1884. On account of failing health, he was transferred in 1885 to the novitiate, Frederick, Maryland, where paralysis terminated his career. In astronomy, his principal work is his "Catalogue of Star-Colors", published in his "Memoirs of the Roman College", 1845 and 1847. The second memoir includes the first, and forms the entire catalogue, except the twelve celestial charts that accompanied the first. The Revolution broke out at Rome when the second memoir was in the printer's hands, and prevented the completion of the work. The colour catalogue is important for two reasons: it is the first general review of the heavens for star-colours, embodying the entire B. A. C. catalogue, from the North Pole to 30 degrees south of the Equator; then, as the observations are now about seventy years old (having been made from 1844 to 1846), the "Catalogue" will be invaluable for deciding the question whether there are stars variable in colour. For these reasons it has been republished, with notes, at the Vatican Observatory, as No. III Publications, 1911. It is remarkable how few are the errors of identification, in view of the then existing difficulties, and how closely Sestini's general scale of colours agrees with that of the Potsdam catalogue. At Georgetown Observatory, in 1850, Sestini made a series of sunspot drawings, which were engraved and published (44 plates) as "Appendix A" of the Naval Observatory volume for 1847, printed in 1853. His last scientific work as an astronomer was the observation of the total eclipse of 29 July, 1878, at Denver, Colorado. A sketch of the corona as it appeared to him was published in the "Catholic Quarterly Review". From his arrival at Georgetown (1848) until his retirement from Woodstock (1884) he had been almost constantly engaged in teaching mathematics to the Jesuit scholastics, and he published a series of textbooks on algebra, geometry and trigonometry, analytical geometry, infinitesimal analysis. These were works of sterling merit, but they never became popular with students or teachers; their severe analytic method was repellent to practical American taste; he had no sympathy with commercial mathematics, and furthermore the make-up of the books was not as attractive as the ordinary high-school and college textbooks. He wrote treatises on natural science for the use of his pupils; some of these were lithographed and others were privately printed at Woodstock: "Theoretical Mechanics" in 1873; "Animal Physics" in 1874; "Principles of Cosmography" in 1878. He founded the American "Messenger of the Sacred Heart" in 1866, and retained editorial control of it until 1885; during these years he was also head director of the Apostleship of Prayer in the United States. He was an indefatigable worker and had many difficulties to contend with in launching and sustaining the "Messenger", and in directing the League of the Sacred Heart, but he was supported in this labour of love by his cheerful disposition and ardent zeal for the glory of God. It was pleasantly said of him that he had two passions---one for pure mathematics, and the other for the pure Catholic religion. SOMMERVOGEL, Bibliothèque de la C. de J., VII, 1159; Woodstock Letters, XIX, 259; XXX, 99; Messenger of the Sacred Heart, new series, V (1890), 161, 343, 435, 486. E.I. DEVITT Setebo Indians Setebo Indians A considerable tribe of Panoan linguistic stock formerly centering about the confluence of the Manoa with the Ucayali River, Loreto province, north-eastern Peru, and now engaged as boatmen, rubber gatherers, etc., along the whole extent of the latter river to, or below, its junction with the Marañon. They speak the same language as their neighbours the Pano, Conibo, and Sipibo, whom they resembled in their primitive custom and belief as now in their more civilized condition. The first entry of the upper Ucayali country was made early in the seventeenth century by gold hunters from Peru, whose treatment of the wild tribes had the effect of rendering the Indians bitterly hostile towards the Spaniards. In 1657, however, the Franciscan Father Alonzo Caballero with two other priests and three lay brothers, passing through the country of the connibal Cashibo, reached the Setebo on the Ucayali. After a year or more of patient effort they succeeded in gathering a part of the tribe into two mission villages. These had but a brief existence; they were attacked and destroyed by the more powerful Sipibo, hereditary enemies of the Setebo, the five religious in charge and many of the neophytes being killed. In 1661 a second attempt was made under Father Lorenzo Tineo, with several other Franciscans; attended by an escort of soldiers and two hundred Christian Indians from Central Peru. Two missions were established, but only to meet the fate of the first at the hands of the cannibal tribes, the missionaries retiring to the Huallaga with a part of their neophyte flock. Other attempts at establishment on the Ucayali within the next forty years were frustrated by hostile attacks and by smallpox epidemics, particularly a great smallpox visitation which desolated the whole region in 1670. Within this period eight missionaries were slain in the Setebo country, one of them, Father Jeronimo de los Rios, being devoured by cannibals in 1704. In 1736 the Setebo were still further decimated in a bloody engagement with their inveterate enemies, the Sipibo. In 1760 another Franciscan mission entry into the Setebo territory was made by Fathers Francisco de San José and Miguel de Salcedo, accompanied by about one hundred Christian Indians, and, as interpreter, a young girl of the tribe who had been taken prisoner in a previous expedition and who was baptized under the name of Ana Rosa. Through her good offices they came to a friendly arrangement with the chief of one band, and on his invitation established a mission chapel in his village under the name of San Francisco de Manoa. they were greatly pleased to find that the Indians still retained a deep reverence for the cross, which they had set up in front of their houses and in their fields, and retained also a few words of Spanish greeting as heirlooms of earlier missions. In 1764 father Frezneda bravely ventured among the Sipibo and succeeded in bringing about a peace between the two tribes, as the result of which both the Sipibo and the Conibo accepted missionaries. The work grew and flourished. Four missions had been established and more priests were on the way, when, without warning or any later explanation, the three savage tribes in August, 1766, murdered all but one or two of the missionaries, slaughtered the Christian converts, and thus in a few days wiped out the work of years. The Setebo missions were not renewed, but on the establishment of Sarayacú (q.v.) by Father Girbal in 1791, numbers of the tribe were attracted to that settlement, where in due course they became civilized and Christianized. See also SIPIBO. RAIMONDI, El Perú, II (Lima, 1876), book I, Hist. de la Geografía del Perú; HERNDON, Exploration of the Amazon (Washington, 1854); MARKHAM, Tribes in the Valley of the Amazon in Jour. Anthrop. Institute, XXIV (London, 1895); ORDINAIRE, Les sauvages du Pérou in Revue d'Ethnographie, VI (Paris, 1887), no. 4; SMYTH AND LOWE, Journey from Lima to Pará (London, 1836). JAMES MOONEY St. Elizabeth Ann Seton St. Elizabeth Ann Seton Foundress and first superior of the Sisters of Charity in the United States, b. in New York City, 28 Aug., 1774, of non-Catholic parents of high position; d. at Emmitsburg, Maryland, 4 Jan., 1821. Her father, Dr. Richard Bayley (b. Connecticut and educated in England), was the first professor of anatomy at Columbia College and eminent for his work as health officer of the Port of New York. Her mother, Catherine Charlton, daughter of an Anglican minister of Staten Island, N.Y., died when Elizabeth was three yeas old, leaving two other young daughters. The father married again, and among the children of this second marriage was Guy Charleton Bayley, whose convert son, James Roosevelt Bayley, became Archbishop of Baltimore. Elizabeth always showed great affection for her stepmother, who was a devout Anglican, and for her stepbrothers and sisters. Her education was chiefly conducted by her father, a brilliant man of great natural virtue, who trained her to self-restraint as well as in intellectual pursuits. She read industriously, her notebooks indicating a special interest in religious and historical subjects. She was very religious, wore a small crucifix around her neck, and took great delight in reading the Scriptures, especially the Psalms, a practice she retained until her death. She was married on 25 Jan., 1794, in St. Paul's Church, New York, to William Magee Seton, of that city, by Bishop Prevoost. In her sister-in-law, Rebecca Seton, she found the "friend of her soul", and as they went about on missions of mercy they were called the "Protestant Sisters of Charity". Business troubles culminated on the death of her father-in-law in 1798. Elizabeth and her husband presided over the large orphaned family; she shared his financial anxieties, aiding him with her sound judgment. Dr. Bayley's death in 1801 was a great trial to his favourite child. In her anxiety for his salvation she had offered to God, during his fatal illness, the life of he infant daughter Catherine. Catherine's life was spared, however, she died at the age of ninety, as Mother Catherine of the Sisters of Mercy, New York. In 1803 Mr. Seton's health required a sea voyage; he started with his wife and eldest daughter for Leghorn, where the Filicchi brothers, business friends of the Seton firm, resided. The other children, William, Richard, Rebecca, and Catherine, were left to the care of Rebecca Seton. From a journal which Mrs. Seton kept during her travels we learn of her heroic effort to sustain the drooping spirits of her husband during the voyage, followed by a long detention in quarantine, and until his death at Pisa (27 Dec., 1803). She and her daughter remained for some time with the Filicchi families. While with these Catholic families and in the churches of Italy Mrs. Seton first began to see the beauty of the Catholic Faith. Delayed by her daughter's illness and then by her own, she sailed for home accompanied by Antonio Filicchi, and reached New York on 3 June, 1804. Her sister-in-law, Rebecca, died in July. A time of great spiritual perplexity began for Mrs. Seton, whose prayer was, "If I am right Thy grace impart still in the right to say. If I am wrong Oh, teach my heart to find the better way." Mr. Hobart (afterwards an Anglican bishop), who had great influence over her, used every effort to dissuade her from joining the Catholic Church, while Mr. Filicchi presented the claims of the true religion and arranged a correspondence between Elizabeth and Bishop Cheverus. Through Mr. Filicchi she also wrote to Bishop Carroll. Elizabeth meanwhile added fasting to her prayers for light. The result was that on Ash Wednesday, 14 March, 1805, she was received into the Church by Father Matthew O'Brien in St. Peter's Church, Barclay St., New York. On 25 March she made her first Communion with extraordinary fervour; even the faint shadow of this sacrament in the Protestant Church had had such an attraction for her that she used to hasten from one church to another to receive it twice each Sunday. She well understood the storm that her conversion would raise among her Protestant relatives and friends at the time she most needed their help. Little of her husband's fortune was left, but numerous relatives would have provided amply for her and her children had not this barrier been raised. She joined an English Catholic gentleman named White, who, with his wife, was opening a school for boys in the suburbs of New York, but the widely circulated report that this was a proselytizing scheme forced the school to close. A few faithful friends arranged for Mrs. Seton to open a boarding-house for some of the boys of a Protestant school taught by the curate of St. Mark's. In January, 1806, Cecilia Seton, Elizabeth's young sister-in-law, became very ill and begged to see the ostracized convert; Mrs. Seton was sent for, and became a constant visitor. Cecilia told her that she desired to become a Catholic. When Cecilia's decision was known threats were made to have Mrs. Seton expelled from the state by the Legislature. On her recovery Cecilia fled to Elizabeth for refuge and was received into the Church. She returned to her brother's family on his wife's death. Mrs. Seton's boarding-house for boys had to be given up. Her sons had been sent by the Filicchis to Georgetown College. She hoped to find a refuge in some convent in Canada, where her teaching would support her three daughters. Bishop Carroll did not approve, so she relinquished this plan. Father Dubourg, S. S., from St. Mary's Seminary, Baltimore, met her in New York, and suggested opening in Baltimore a school for girls. After a long delay and many privations, she and her daughters reached Baltimore on Corpus Christi, 1808. Her boys were brought there to St. Mary's College, and she opened a school next to the chapel of St. Mary's Seminary and was delighted with the opportunities for the practice of her religion, for it was only with the greatest difficulty she was able to get to daily Mass and Communion in New York. The convent life for which she had longed ever since her stay in Italy now seemed less impracticable. Her life was that of a religious, and her quaint costume was fashioned after one worn by certain nuns in Italy. Cecilia Conway of Philadelphia, who had contemplated going to Europe to fulfill her religious vocation, joined her; soon other postulants arrived, while the little school had all the pupils it could accommodate. Mr. Cooper, a Virginian convert and seminarian, offered $10,000 to found an institution for teaching poor children. A farm was bought half a mile from the village of Emmitsburg and two miles from Mt. St. Mary's College. Meanwhile Cecilia Seton and her sister Harriet came to Mrs. Seton in Baltimore. As a preliminary to the formation of the new community, Mrs. Seton took vows privately before Archbishop Carroll and her daughter Anna. In June, 1808, the community was transferred to Emmitsburg to take charge of the new institution. The great fervour and mortification of Mother Seton, imitated by her sisters, made the many hardships of their situation seem light. In Dec., 1809, Harriet Seton, who was received into the Church at Emmitsburg, died there, and Cecilia in Apr., 1810. Bishop Flaget was commissioned in 1810 by the community to obtain in France the rules of the Sisters of Charity of St. Vincent de Paul. Three of these sisters were to be sent to train the young community in the spirit of St. Vincent de Paul, but Napoleon forbade them to leave France. The letter announcing their coming is extant at Emmitsburg. The rule, however, with some modifications, was approved by Archbishop Carroll in Jan., 1812, and adopted. Against her will, and despite the fact that she had also to care for her children, Mrs. Seton was elected superior. Many joined the community; Mother Seton's daughter, Anna, died during her novitiate (12 March, 1812), but had been permitted to pronounce her vows on her death-bed. Mother Seton and the eighteen sisters made their vows on 19 July, 1813. The fathers superior of the community were the Sulpicians, Fathers Dubourg, David, and Dubois. Father Dubois held the post for fifteen yeas and laboured to impress on the community the spirit of St. Vincent's Sisters of Charity, forty of whom he had had under his care in France. The fervour of the community won admiration everywhere. The school for the daughters of the well-to-do prospered, as it continues to do (1912), and enabled the sisters to do much work among the poor. In 1814 the sisters were given charge of an orphan asylum in Philadelphia; in 1817 they were sent to New York. The previous year (1816) Mother Seton's daughter, Rebecca, after long suffering, died at Emmitsburg; her son Richard, who was placed with the Filicchi firm in Italy, died a few years after his mother. William, the eldest, joined the United States Navy and died in 1868. The most distinguished of his children are Most. Rev. Robert Seton, Archbishop of Heliopolis (author of a memoir of his grandmother, "Roman Essays", and many contributions to the "American Catholic Quarterly" and other reviews), and William Seton (q.v.). Mother Seton had great facility in writing. Besides the translation of many ascetical French works (including the life of Saint Vincent de Paul, and of Mlle. Le Gras) for her community she has left copious diaries and correspondence that show a soul all on fire with the love of God and zeal for souls. Great spiritual desolation purified her soul during a great portion of her religious life, but she cheerfully took the royal road of the cross. For several years the saintly bishop (then Father) Bruti was her director. The third time she was elected mother (1819) she protested that it was the election of the dead, but she lived for two years, suffering finally from a pulmonary affection. Her perfect sincerity and great charm aided her wonderfully in he work of sanctifying souls. In 1880 Cardinal Gibbons (then Archbishop) urged the steps be taken toward her canonization. The result of the official inquiries in the cause of Mother Seton, held in Baltimore during several years, were brought to Rome by special messenger, and placed in the hands of the postulator of the cause on 7 June, 1911. Her cause is entrusted to the Priests of the Congregation of the Mission, whose superior general in Paris is also superior of the Sisters of Charity with which the Emmitsburg community was incorporated in 1850, after the withdrawal of the greater number of the sisters (at the suggestion of Archbishop Hughes) of the New York houses in 1846. This union had been contemplated for some time, but the need of a stronger bond at Emmitsburg, shown by the New York separation, hastened it. It was effected with the loss of only the Cincinnati community of six sisters. With the Newark and Halifax offshoots of the New York community and the Greenburg foundation from Cincinnati, the sisters originating from Mother Seton's foundation number (1911) about 6000. The original Emittsburg community now wearing the cornette and observing the rule just as St. Vincent gave it, naturally surpasses any of the others in number. It is found in about thirty dioceses in the United States, and forms a part of the worldwide sisterhood, whilst the others are rather diocesan communities. [ Note: Elizabeth Ann Seton was beatified in 1963 and canonized on September 14, 1975.] 13 vols. of letters, diaries, and documents by Mother Seton as well as information concerning her, are in the archives of the mother-house at Emmitsburg, Maryland; ROBERT SETON, Memoirs, Letter and Journal of Elizabeth Seton (2 vols., New York, 1869); BARBEREY, Elizabeth Seton (6th ed., 2 vols., Paris, 1892); WHITE, Life of Mrs. Eliza. A. Seton (10th ed., New York, 1904); SADLIER, Elizabeth Seton, Foundress of the Amer. Sisters of Charity (New York, 1905); BELLOC, Historic Nuns (2nd ed., London, 1911). B. RANDOLPH William Seton William Seton Author, b. in New York, 28 Jan., 1835; d. there, 15 Mar., 1905. His father was William Seton, captain in the U. S. Navy, son of Elizabeth Ann Seton (q.v.), his mother was Emily Prime. Burke's Peerage (1900) recognized him as the head of the Seton family of Parbroath, senior cadets of the earls of Winton in Scotland. He was educated at St. John's College, Fordham, at Mt. St. Mary's, Emmittsburg, Md., and at the University of Bonn. He traveled extensively abroad before entering a law office in New York. Soon after his admission to the bar he answered Lincoln's first call for troops in 1861. Disabled for a time by two wounds received in the Battle of Antietam, where he fought as captain of the Forty-first New York Volunteers, French's Division, Sumner's Corps, he returned to his father's home, Cragdon, Westchester Co., New York, but went back to the front to be captain of the 16th Artillery in Grant's campaign against Richmond. After the war he devoted himself chiefly to literature, publishing two historical novels, "Romance of the Charter Oak" (1870) and "Pride of Lexington" (1871); "The Pioneer", a poem (1874); "Rachel's Fate" (1882); "The Shamrock Gone West", and "Moire" (1884). About 1886 he went to Europe for serious study in paleontology, psychology, etc., and thereafter usually spent the greater part of each year in France in such pursuits. His forte was presenting scientific matters in attractive English. He issued a brief work, "A Glimpse of Organic Life, Past and Present" (1897). He was a frequent contributor of scientific articles to the "Catholic World". "The Building of the Mountain", a novel, was in the press at the time of his death. His Alma Mater, Mt. St. Mary's, conferred on him the degree of LL.D. in 1890. He outlived by ten years his wife Sarah Redwood Parrish, a Philadelphian convert from the Society of Friends. Their only child William died in infancy. He did much charitable work, especially in obtaining employment for the poor. He is buried with the Setons at Mt. St. Mary's, Emmitsburg, Maryland. SETON, An Old Family (New York, 1889), 359-61, Living Catholic Men of Science in Catholic World, LXVI (New York, 1898); Lambs Encyl. of American Biography; Appletons' Cycl. of American Biography. B. RANDOLPH Desiderio Da Settignano Desiderio da Settignano Born at Settignano, Tuscany, 1428; died at Florence, 1463. He is said to have been the son of a stone-cutter and was admitted to the association of "Maestri di Pietra" (stone-workers) in 1453. He studied under Donatello, from whom no doubt he acquired the characteristics of fineness, joyfulness, elegance, and distinction which cause his work to be often confused with his master's. In spite of his brief life his name ranks among those of the great artists of his day. His chief productions are: the architectural tomb covered with fine sculpture of Carlo Marsuppini, secretary of the republic, in the Church of Sta Croce; a marble tabernacle at San Lorenzo with a charming standing figure of the Child Jesus; a very interesting bust of Marietta Strozzi in the Strozzi Palace; a graceful relief of the Madonna and Infant on the corner of the Palazzo Panciatichi; portrait bust of a young girl in the Bargello; the wooden statue of the Magdalen over her altar in the Church of Sta Trinità (finished by Benedetto da Majano); and a bust in the Palazzo Pubblico at Forli. Besides these, mention should be made of a number of works attributed to Desiderio by some authorities and by others to Donatello or his school — a Pietà in San Lorenzo, Florence; a Beatrice d'Este in the Louvre; a Virgin and Child in the South Kensington Museum, London; a portrait bust of a young woman in the Museum, Berlin; the "Child Laughing" in the Benda Collection, Vienna; and the well-known relief of Sta Cecilia in the collection of Lord Wemyss, London. PERKINS, Tuscan Sculptors (London, 1886); CICOGNARA, Storia della scultura (Venice, 1853); BODE, Denkmaler der Renaissance-Sculptur Toscanas (Munich, 1905). M.L. HANDLEY Seven-Branch Candlestick Seven-Branch Candlestick One of the three chief furnishings of the Holy of the Tabernacle and the Temple (Exodus 25:31-40; 37:17-24). In reality it was an elaborate lampstand, set on the south side of the Holy Place so as to face the loaves of proposition. It was beaten out of finest gold. A central shaft, together with three pairs of branches curving upward from out of the shaft, all exquisitely ornamented and surmounted with stands, held in a line the seven golden lamps that gave light to the sanctuary. The priests dressed the lamps in the morning and set them on the lampstand in the evening (Exodus 30:7, 8). All night long the seven lamps were kept burning (Exodus 27:20-21; Leviticus 24:3; I Kings 3:3). As for the day, Josephus (Antiq. Jud., III, viii, 3) tells us that three lamps were lighted. Levites of the family of Caath cared for the golden lampstand on the march (Numbers 3:31). It was among the spoils brought by Vespasian and Titus to grace their triumph at Rome, and may be seen sculptured upon the Arch of Titus. WALTER DRUM Seven Deacons Seven Deacons The seven men elected by the whole company of the original Christian community at Jerusalem and ordained by the Apostles, their office being chiefly to look after the poor and the common agape. The number of believers at Jerusalem had grown very rapidly, and complaints had been made that poor widows of Hellenistic Jews were neglected. The Apostles, not desiring to be drawn away from preaching and the higher spiritual ministry to care for material things, proposed to the believers to transfer such duties to suitable men, and following this suggestion the "Seven" were appointed (Acts, vi, 1-6). This was the first separation of an ecclesiastical, hierarchical office from the Apostolate in which up to then the ecclesiastico-religious power had been concentrated. The "seven men" were "full of the Holy Ghost" and therefore able partially to represent the Apostles in more important matters referring to the spiritual life, as is seen in the case of St. Stephen (q.v.) at Jerusalem, of St. Philip in Samaria, and elswhere. Nothing further is known of several of the seven deacons, namely Nicanor, Timon, and Parmenas. Philip, who is called the "Evangelist", preached with much success in Samaria (Acts, viii, 5 sq.), so that the two Apostles Peter and John went there later to bestow the Holy Ghost on those whom he had baptized. He also baptized the eunuch of the Queen of the Ethiopians (Acts, viii, 26 sqq.). According to the further testimony of the Book of the Acts (xxi, 8 sqq.) he lived later with his prophetically gifted daughters at Caesarea. His feast is observed on 6 June, by the Greek Church on 11 October. In later narratives Prochorus is said to be one of the seventy disciples chosen by Christ; it is related that he went to Asia Minor as a missionary and became Bishop of Nicomedia. The apocryphal Acts of John were wrongly ascribed to him [cf. Lipsius, "Apokryphe Apostelgeschichten und Apostellegenden", I (Brunswick, 1883), 355 sqq.] In the second half of the second century a curious tradition appeared respecting Nicholas. Irenaeus and the anti-heretical writers of the early Church who follow him refer the name of the Nicolaitans -- a dissolute, immoral sect that are opposed, as early as the Apocalypse of John -- to that of Nicholas and trace the sect back to him (Irenaeus, "Adv. haer.", I, xxvi, 3; III, xi, 1). Clement relates as a popular report (Stromat., II, xx) that Nicholas was reproved by the Apostles on account of his jealousy of his beautiful wife. On this he set her free and left it open for any one to marry her, saying that the flesh should be maltreated. His followers took this to mean that it was necessary to yield to the lusts of the flesh (cf. the Philosophumena, VII, 36). This narrative points to a similar tradition, such as is found in Irenaeus respecting the Nicolaitans. How far the tradition is historical cannot now be determined, perhaps the Nicolaitans themselves falsely ascribed their origin to the Deacon Nicholas [cf. Wohlenberg, "Nikolas von Antiochen und die Nikolaiten" in the "Neue kirchl. Zeitschrift" (1895), 923 sqq.]. J.P. KIRSCH Seven Robbers Seven Robbers (Septem Latrones), martyrs on the Island of Corcyra (Corfu) in the second century. Their names are Saturninus, Insischolus, Faustianus, Januarius, Marsalius, Euphrasius, and Mammius. The greek menologoies inform us that Sts. Jason and Sosipater, who had been instructed in the Christian religion by the Apostles or by Christ Himself, came to the Island of Corcyra to preach the Gospel of Christ. After making numerous conversions they were cast into a dungeon where the above-named seven robbers were imprisoned. They succeeded in converting the robbers who were then taken outside the city and martyred by being cast into caldrons that were filled with seething oil and pitch. Some Greek menologies mantion them on 27, others on 29, April. In the Roman martyrology they are commemorated on 20 April. MICHAEL OTT Severian Severian Bishop of Gabala in Syria, flourished in the fourth and fifth centuries. Concerning his life before his episcopal consecration nothing has come down to us. He was regarded by his contemporaries as a good preacher, and was known as the author of Biblical commentaries and sermons: "vir in divinis Scripturis eruditus et in homiilis declamator admirabilis fuit" (Gennadius, "De script. eccles.", xxi, in P.L., LVIII, 1073). Posterity has preserved his name on account of the prominent but regrettable role which he played in the deposition and banishment of St. John Chrysostom. Incited by the great oratorical and financial success attained in Constantinople by his fellow-Syrian, Antiochus, Bishop of Ptolemais, Severian came to the capital about 400 provided with a series of Greek sermons. Invited by Chrysostom to preach, he succeeded, in spite of his strong Syrian accent, in winning the approval of his hearers (Sozomen, "Hist eccl.", VIII, x). Owing to the strained relations between Chrysostom and the Empress Eudoxia, Severian had to declare for one of the parties, and, since he allowed himself to be swayed by personal interests, his choice was soon made. Nevertheless, the unsuspecting Chrysostom, when ecclesiastical affairs necessitated a journey into the Province of Asia in 401, appointed his guest his representative for liturgical functions. Severian took advantage of Chrysostom's absence and was soon engaged in open conflict with Serapion, archdeacon and administrator of the ecclesiastical property and the episcopal palace, who remained true to Chrysostom. The resulting scandal and general excitement were so great that on his return (401) Chrysostom requested Severian to return again to his diocese (Socrates, "Hist.eccl.", VI, xi; the longer version, ibid. in P.G., LXVII, 731). Eudoxia now interfered personally, and at her request Chrysostom allowed Severian to return to Constantinople. In this place Chrysostom delivered in Severian's presence an address to the people (P.G., LII, 423 sqq.; Severian's answer, ibid., 425 sqq.; cf. Socrates, "Hist. eccl.", VI, xi, Sozomen, VIII, x). The peace thus effceted was not lasting. Severian commenced anew his intrigues, and at the Synod of the Oak was one of Chrysostom's most active opponents. He also signed the lampoon against Chrysostom which Theophilus of Alexandria sent to Pope Innocent (Palladius, "Dialogus", III, in P.G., XLVII, 14). He even ventured to proclaim to the people from the pulpit this success of his party immediately after the first banishment of Chrysostom, and to proclaim the removal of the archbishop a just punishment for his pride. Rapid flight alone saved him from violence at the hands of the enraged populace (Sozomen, VIII, xviii). Shortly after Chrysostom's return from his first exile, we find Severian with Acacius of Beroea and Antiochus of Ptolemais at the head of the party opposed to the archbishop. It was this party which on the night of Easter Sunday, 404, incited the attack on the catechumens and clerics of Chrysostom, and finally approached the emperor directly to procure the final banishment of their hated opponent (Palladius, III, IX, loc. cit., 14, 31 sqq.). On the death of Flavian (404), the friend of Chrysostom, this same triumvirate proceeded to Antioch, and, in defiance of justice and right, consecrated in an underhanded fashion Porphyrius (Chrysostom's opponent) Bishop of Antioch (Palladius, XVI, loc. cit., 54). Thus ends Severian's role in church history. Of the later period of his life and activity, as little is known as concerning the first period. According to Gennadius (loc. cit.) he died during the reign of Theodosius II (408-50). Writings (1) Sermons. Of these the following are extant: "Orationes sex in mundi creationem" (P.G., LVI, 429-500); "Oratio de serpente, quem Moyses in cruce suspendit" (ibid., 500-516); "In illud Abrahae dictum: Pone manum tuam sub femur meum, Gen., xxiv, 2" (ibid., 553-64); "De ficu arefacta" (ibid., LIX, 585-90); "Contra Judaeos" (ibid., LXI, 793-802, cf. LXV, 29 sqq.); "De sigillis librorum" (ibid., LXIII, 531-44); "In Dei apparitionem" (ibid., LXV, 26); "De pace" (ibid. LII, 425-28), completed bv A. Papadopulos, Analekta hierosolymitikes stachyologias, I (St. Petersburg, 1891), 15-26; "De nativitate Christi", edited under Chrysostom's name bv Savile, VII, 307, but attributed by Theodoret (Eranistes, III, in P.G., LXIII, 308) to Severian; fifteen homilies in an Old Armenian translation, edited by J. B. Aucher, "Severiani . . . homiliae nunc primum editae ex antiqua versione armena in latinum sermonem translatae" (Venice, 1827), of which no. 7 is the homily "In Abrahae dictum: Gen., xxiv, 2", no. 13 "De ficu arefacta", and no. 10 the homily of St. Basil on Baptism (P.G., XXXI, 423-44). The Codex Ambrosianus of Milan, c. 77 sup. (VII-VIII saec.) contains eighty-eight "sermones sancti Severiani"; the "Homilarium Lacense" (Berlin Cod. lat.341) has addresses of Peter Chrysologus under the name of "Severianus episcopus". (2) The commentaries of Severian are all lost; he had composed such on Genesis, Exodus, Deuteronomy, Job, the Epistles to the Romans, the Galatians, I Corinthians, II Thessalonians, and the Colossians (cf. Cosmas Indicopleustes, " Topographica christ.", I, vi, x, in P.G., LXXXVIII, 373, 417; Gennadius, "De script. eccles.", xxi). LUDWIG, Der his joh Chrysostomus in seinem Verhaltniss zum byzantin. Hof (Braunsberg, 1883), 51 sqq.; TILLEMONT, Memoires, XI (1706), 170-77. 587-89; FABRICIUS HARLES, Bibliotheca graeca, X, 507-11. CHRYS. BAUR Pope Severinus Pope Severinus The date of his birth is not known. He was consecrated seemingly on 28 May, 640, and died 2 Aug., 640. Severinus, a Roman and the son of Abienus, was elected as usual on the third day after the death of his predecessor, and envoys were at once sent to Constantinople, to obtain the confirmation of his election (Oct., 638). But the emperor, instead of granting the confirmation, ordered Severinus to sign his Ecthesis, a Monothelite profession of faith. This the pope-elect refused to do, and the Exarch Isaac, in order to force him to compliance, plundered the Lateran Palace. All was in vain; Severinus stood firm. Meanwhile his envoys at Constantinople, though refusing to sign any heretical documents and deprecating violence in matters of faith, behaved with great tact, and finally secured the imperial confirmation. Hence, after a vacancy of over a year and seven months, the See of Peter was again filled, and its new occupant proceeded at once to declare that as in Christ there were two natures so also were there in Him two wills and two natural operations. During his brief reign he built the apse of old St. Peter's in which church he was buried. Liber Pontificalis, ed. DUCHESNE, I (Paris, 1886), 328 sq.; the works of St. MAXIMUS, in P.G., XC, XCI; MANN, Lives of the Popes in the Early Middle Ages, I (London, 1906), 346 sqq. HORACE K. MANN Alexander Severus Alexander Severus Roman emperor, b. at Acco in Palestine, 208, murdered by his mutinous soldiers at Sicula on the Rhine. 235 (Sicklingen near Mainz). He was the son of Genessius Marcianus and Julia Mammaea, and was known in youth as Alexianus. When Elagabalus, his cousin and father by adoption, was murdered in 222, Alexander succeeded to the imperial throne. His education had been carefully conducted by Mammaea at Antioch, whither she invited, some time between 218 and 228, the great Christian teacher, Origen. Eusebius relates (Hist. Eccl., VI, xxi-xxviii) that she was "a very religious woman", and that Origen remained some time with her, instructing her in all that could serve to glorify the Lord and confirm His Divine teachings. It does not, however, follow that she was a Christian. Her son Alexander was certainly very favorable to the Christians. His historian, Lampridius, tells us several interesting details concerning this emperor's respect for the new religion. He placed in his private oratory (lararium) images of Abraham and Christ before those of other renowned persons, like Orpheus and Apollonius of Tyana (Vita Alex., xxix); he tolerated the free exercise of the Christian faith ("Christianos esse passus est", ibid., xxii); he recommended in the appointment of imperial governors the prudence and solicitude of the Christians in the selection of their bishops (ibid., xiv); he caused to be adjudged to them (ibid., xlix) a building site at Rome that the tavern-keepers (cauponarii) claimed, on the principle that it was better that God should be in some way honored there than that the site should revert to such uses; he caused the famous words of Christ (Luke, vi, 31): "And as you would that men should do to you, do you also to them in like manner" to be engraved on the walls of the palace of the Caesars; he even cherished the idea of building a temple to Our Lord, but refrained when it was said to him that very soon all the other divinities would cease to be honored (ibid., xliii). In spite of these signs of imperial goodwill, the Christians continued to suffer, even in this mild reign. Some writers think that it was then that St. Cecilia died for the Christian faith. His principal jurisconsult, Ulpian, is said by Lactantius (Inst. Div., V, ii) to have codified, in his work on the duties of a proconsul (De officio proconsulis), all anti-Christian imperial legislation (rescripta principum), in order that the magistrates might more easily apply the common law (ut doceret quibus oportet eos paenis affici qui se cultores Dei confiterentur). Fragments of this cruel code, from the seventh of the (ten) lost books of Ulpian on the proconsular office may yet be seen in the "Digests" (I, tit. xvi, xvii, tit. II, 3; xvliii, tit. IV, 1, and tit. xiii, 6). The surname "Severus", no less than the manner in which both he and Mammaea met their death, indicate the temper of his administration. He sought to establish at Rome good order and moral decency in public and private life, and made some use of his power as censor morum by nominating twelve officials (curatores urbis) for the execution of his wise dispositions. He seems to have been a disciple of the prevailing religious "syncretism" or eclecticism, established at Rome by his predecessor Elagabalus as the peculiar contribution of this remarkable Syro-Roman family to the slow but certain transformation of the great pagan Empire into a mighty instrument of Divine Providence for the healing of the moral ills that were then reaching fullness. All historians agree as to his life, and the moral elevation of his public and private principles; Christian historians are usually of opinion that these elements of virtue were owing to the education he received under the direction of Origen. LAMPRIDIUS, Vita Alexandri in Script. Hist. Aug., TILLEMONT, Hist. des empereurs romains, III (Paris, 1740), 475; GIBBON, Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire, I; SCHILLER, Gesch. d, rom. Kaiserzeit (Stuttgart, 1880); SMITH, Dict. of Greek and Roman Biogr., s. v.; REVILLE, Religion a Rome sous les Severes (Paris, 1886); ALLARD, Hist. des persecutions pendant la premiere moitie du III siecle (Paris 1886); TROPLONG, De l'influence du Christianisme sur le droit civil des romains (Paris, 1842; 1902). THOMAS J. SHAHAN Severus Sanctus Endelechus Severus Sanctus Endelechus Christian rhetorician and poet of the fourth century. It is possible that his true name was Endelechius and that he adopted the other names after his conversion to Christianity. In the MSS. of the "Metamorphoses" of Apuleius, the subscription of the corrector and revisor, Sallustius, declares him the pupil at Rome in 395 of the rhetorician Endelechius in the forum of Mars (which is the forum of Augustus): "in foro Martis controversiam declamans oratori Endelechio". This rhetorician is certainly identical with the poet. He was probably of Gallic origin. He was a friend of St. Paulinus of Nola, who dedicated to him his panegyric of Theodosius and even owed to him the idea of this work. We are in possession of Endelechius's "De morte boum", an idyl in thirty-three Asclopedian strophes, in which the shepherd Bucolus explains to his companion AEgon that he is sad because his flock are dying of contagion. Tityrus enters leading his flock which remains healthy amid the epidemic. He explains that this miracle is due to the Sign of the Cross made on the forehead of the animals, whereupon AEgon and Bucolus decide to become Christians. This little poem is chiefly interesting because it shows the resistance of paganism in the country and the means by which Christian preaching sought to overcome it. It was discovered in an unknown MS. and published by P. Pithou in 1586. Riese reprinted it in the "Anthologia Latina" (2nd ed., Leipzig, 1906, n. 893). TEUFFEL, Gesch. der romischen Literatur (Leipzig, 1890), =15448, I; BARDENHEWER, Patrologie, 1573-5; EBERT, Gesch. der Literatur des Mittelalters, I, 314; MANITIUS, Gesch. der christlich-lateinischen Lit. (Stuttgart, 1891), 258. PAUL LEJAY Madame de Sevigne Madame de Sévigné (Marie de Rabutin-Chantal). Writer, b. at Paris, 6 Feb., 1626; d. at Grignan, 18 April, 1696. She was the granddaughter of St. Jane Frances de Chantal. Her father died the year after she was born, her mother in 1632. She was placed under the guardianship of her maternal uncle, the Abbé de Coulanges, who placed her education in charge of Messrs. Ménage and Chapelain, who taught her Latin, Italian, and Spanish. At eighteen she married the Marquess Henri de Sévigné, who did not make her very happy, and who was slain in a duel after seven years of marriage. She had a daughter (1646) and a son (1648). In 1669 her daughter married the Count de Grignan, who was afterwards Governor of Provence. The Countess de Grignan went to rejoin her husband in 1671, which was a great sorrow to her mother. It may be said that her love for her daughter filled Mme de Sévigné's life. On four occasions, Mme deGrignan returned to the north (1674, 1676, 1677, and 1680), and three times her mother went to visit her in the south (1672, 1690, and 1694). From this last visit she was not to return. Stricken at the bedside of her sick daughter — although this was disputed at the end of the nineteenth century — she died at Grignan at the age of seventy. As soon as she became a widow Mme de Sévigné, without favoring them, found numerous aspirants to her hand, among them Turenne, the Prince de Conti, and her cousin, Bussy-Rabutin. She lived mostly at court, visiting her friends Mme de La Fayette, Mme de Larochefoucauld, Mme de Pomponne etc. As early as 1677 she went to reside at the Hotel Carnavalet, of which she remained the lessee until her death, but she often stayed at Livry (Seine et Oise) or at the Château des Rochers (Ille-et-Vilaine).But wherever she was, the memory of her daughter was with her. Her maternal love is unparalleled. Arnaud d'Andilly reproaches the Marchioness with loving "as a lovely pagan" her whom Bussy-Rabutin calls "the prettiest girl in France". As a matter of fact this absorbing and somewhat impassioned affection caused her much suffering owing to the enforced separations, but unlike vulgar passions, it was never egotistical. Naturally it inspired the correspondence of the Marchioness, but this correspondence is also a picture of the lovely-period at which it was written, or rather it is an eloquent echo of what was said and thought at the court and in the distinguished world frequented by its author. Her style is marked by naturalness, movement, and humor, displaying a constant creation of words, not with regard to new terms, but the placing of the old, and the uses to which they were put. The author manifests her gaiety, her natural disposition to look on the best side of things, while her irony and wit, though sometimes light, are always healthy. Exuberant and independent in speech, Mme de Sévigné was always dignified in conduct, with serious tastes beneath her worldly manner. Sincerely religious, she had a special devotion to Divine Providence. She displayed this devotion to her last hour in a manner which impressed the Count de Grignan. "She faced death", he says, "with astonishing firmness and submission". GEORGES BERTRIN Seville Seville ARCHDIOCESE OF SEVILLE (HISPALENSIS). Archdiocese in Spain, is bounded on the north by Badajoz; on the east by Cordova and Malaga, on the south by Cadiz, on the west by Portugal. It comprises portions of the civil provinces of Seville, Cadiz, Cordova, Huelva, and Malaga. Its episcopal city has a population of some 144,000. Its suffragans are Badajoz, Cadiz and Ceuta, the Canaries, Cordova, and Teneriffe. In Roman times Seville was the capital of the Province of Baetica, and the origin of the diocese goes back to Apostolic times, or at least to the first century of our era. St. Gerontius, Bishop of Italica (about four miles from Hispalis or Seville), preached in Baetica in Apostolic times, and without doubt must have left a pastor of its own to Seville. It is certain that in 303, when Sts. Justa and Rufina, the potters, suffered martyrdom for refusing to adore the idol Salambo, there was a Bishop of Seville, Sabinus, who assisted at the Council of Iliberis (287). Before that time Marcellus had been bishop, as appears from a catalogue of the ancient prelates of Seville preserved in the "Codex Emilianensis", a manuscript of the year 1000, now in the Escorial. When Constantine brought peace to the Church Evodius was Bishop of Seville; he set himself to rebuild the ruined churches, among them he appears to have built the church of San Vicente, perhaps the first cathedral of Seville. In the time of Bishop Sempronius Seville was considered the metropolis of Baetica; and Glaucius was bishop when the barbarians invaded Spain. Marcianus was bishop in 428, when Gunderic wished to seize the treasures of the Church of San Vicente; Sabinus II was dispossessed of his see by Rechila the Suevian (441) and recovered it in 461. Zeno (472-486) was appointed vicar Apostolic by Pope Simplicius, and Pope Hormisdas gave the same charge to Bishop Sallustius (510-22) in the provinces of Baetica and Lusitania. But the see was rendered illustrious above all by the holy brothers Sts. Leander and Isidore. The former of these contributed to the conversion of St. Hermengild and Recared, and presided at the Third Council of Toledo (589), while the latter presided at the Fourth Council of Toledo and was the teacher of medieval Spain. A very different kind of celebrity was attained by Archbishop Oppas, who usurped the See of Toledo and conspired with his nephews, the sons of Witiza, against Don Rodrigo, contributing by his treason to the disaster of Guadalete and the downfall of the Visigothic power. During that period two provincial councils of Baetica were held at Seville: the first, in the reign of Recared, in 590, assembled in the cathedral to urge the execution of the mandates of the Third Council of Toledo; the second, in November, 690, in the reign of Sisebut, was convoked and presided over by St. Isidore, to promote ecclesiastical discipline. The succession of the bishops of Seville continued after the Mohammedan conquest, Nonnitus being elected on the death of Oppas. The lost Mozarabic bishop was Clement, elected two years before the invasion of the Almohades (1144). The Catholic religion was confined to the parish Church of S. Ildefonso, until the restoration following the reconquest of the city by St. Ferdinand. After a siege of fifteen months, the holy king took the city on 23 Nov., 1248; and the Bishop of Cordova, Gutierre de Olea, purified the great mosque and prepared it for Divine worship on 22 December. The king deposited in the new cathedral two famous images of the Blessed Virgin: "Our Lady of the Kings", an ivory statue to which a miraculous origin was attributed, and which St. Ferdinand always carried with him in battle on his saddle bow; and the silver image, "Our Lady of the See". The king's son Philip was appointed Archbishop of Seville, while he was given as coadjutor the Dominican Raimundo de Losada, Bishop of Segovia, who became archbishop five years later, on the abdication of the infante. In addition to the catheral chapter, another community of clerics was formed to sing the Divine Office in the Chapel Royal of Our Lady of the Kings (Nuestra Senora de los Reyes) about 1252. Most of the other mosques of the city were converted into churches, only Sta. María la Blanca, Sta. Cruz, and S. Bartolome being left to the Jews for synagogues. The cathedral originated in the great mosque which was the work of the emirs who built the Aljama mosque, rebuilt in 1171 by the Almohad emir, Yusuf-ben Yacub. The famous tower called the Giralda is due to Almanzor. In order to secure the liturgical orientation, when the mosque was converted into a cathedral its width was made the length of the new church; and it was divided into two parts, the lesser part, on the cast, being separated from the rest by a balustrade and grating, to form the chapel royal. This cathedral having become too small for Seville, the chapter resolved in 1401 to rebuild it on so vast a scale that posterity should deem it the work of madmen. Only the GiraIda and the Court of Oranges were left as they were. The work was commenced in 1403 and finished in December, 1506. The dome was as high as the lower part of the Giralda; it fell in, however, 111 1511, and was restored by Juan Gil de Montanon in 1517. The principal facade, which looks to the east, extends the whole width of the building, and is as high as the naves, to which its five divisions correspond. The decoration of the upper part, including the rose window, are eighteenth-century work. The plan of the building is a rectangle, 380 by 250 feet, the chapel royal projecting an additional 62 feet to the east. It is roofed with seventy ogival vaults, supported by thirty-two gigantic columns. In the windows above the door of the bell-tower is preserved the original design of the Giralda, which, it is said, was constructed by Geber, to whom are attributed the invention of algebra, and the origin of the name (Al-Geber). Where the bell-chamber now is there stood another rectangular mass, surmounted with four enormous balls, or apples, of bronze. In the interior is an enormous spike which serves as an axis from which thirty-five sloping planes radiate. In 1568 Fernán Ruiz, by order of the chapter, added ninety-two feet to the height of the tower giving it its present form, and setting up the giraidillo, gyrating statue of Faith, which serves as a wind-vane. This statue, cast by Bartolome Morel, measures over 13 feet in height and weighs 28 quintals (about 2840 lb.). The magnificent reredos of the high altar was designed by Danchart in 1482 and is the largest in Spain. In the sacristy beyond it are preserved the "Alphonsine Tables" (Tablas Alfonsinas), a reliquary left by the Wise King. The splendid stalls of the choir are the work of Nufro Sánchez, who wrought them in 1475. The Plateresque screen which closes the front of the sanctuary was designed by Sancho Muñoz in 1510. The chapel of S. Antonio holds Murillo's famous picture of the saint's ecstasy and the Infant Jesus descending into his arms. The chapel royal contains the tombs of St. Ferdinand, Alfonso the Wise, and Beatriz, consort of the latter, while in the pantheon, behind the sanctuary, lie the remains of Pedro I, his son Juan, the Infante Fadrique, Alfonso XI, and other princes. After the cathedral, the Alcázar is the most noteworthy building in Seville. No other Mussulman building in Spain has been so well preserved. Inhabited for a time by the Abbatid, Almoravid, and Almohad kings, its embattled enclosure became the dwelling of St. Ferdinand, and was rebuilt by Pedro the Cruel (1353-64), who employed Granadans and Mohammedan subjects of his own (mudejares) as its architects. Its principal entrance, with Arab facade, is in the Plaza de la Monteria, once occupied by the dwellings of the hunters (monteros) of Espinosa. The principal features of the Alcazar are the Court of the Ladies, brilliantly restored by Carlos I, with its fifty-two uniform columns of white marble supporting interlaced arches, and its gallery of precious arabesques; and the Hall of Ambassadors, which, with its cupola, dominates the rest of the building, and the walls of which axe covered with beautiful azulejos (glazed tiles) and Arab decorations. The University of Seville was founded by Archdeacon Rodrigo Fernandez de Santaella, in virtue of an ordinance of the Catholic Sovereigns dated 22 Feb., 1502, and two Bulls of Julius II, of 1505 and 1506. It could not compete, however, with the powerful institutions of Salamanca and Alcalá. The same Archdeacon Santaella founded the Colegio Mayor, or "Great College" called the Maese Rodrigo. Carlos III took away the general studies from this college, ordering them to be transferred, in 1771, to the professed house of the Jesuits expelled by him. Among the churches of Seville those worthy of mention are: Santa Ana en Triana, thirteenth-century Gothic, built by order of Alfonso X; S. Andres, which preserves some considerable traces of the mosque it originally was; S. Esteban, with its mudejar door and paintings by Zuraran; S. Ildefonso, perhaps the oldest church in Seville, dating, like S. Isidoro and the formerly Mozarabic church of S. Julian, from the Visigothic period. S. Lorenzo possesses the "Christ carrying the Cross" of Jan Martiñéz Montanes which is called el Gran Poder (the Great Power). Other churches are the Magdalena, S. Marcos, Sta. Marina, S. Martin, S. Nicolas, etc. The picture gallery contains more Murillos than any other gallery in the world; indeed, to know this master it is necessary to visit Seville. The archiepiscopal palace (seventeenth-century) has a fine Plateresque doorway. The ecclesiastical seminary, first established at San Lúcar de Barrameda, in 1830 in the archiepiscopate of Cardinal Francisco Javier de Cienfuegos y Jovellanos, was transferred to Seville in 1848, under Archbishop Judas José Romo, and established in the Plaza de Maese Rodrigo; it now occupies the palace of San Telmo, which belongs to the dukes of Montpensier. The Archives of the Indies, preserved in Casa Lonja, contain immense treasures in the way of documents for the history of early Spanish missions in America and Oceania. Among the benevolent institutions are the Hospital of Las Cinco Llagás (or La Sangre), that of S. Lázaro that of El Cristo de los Dolores etc. DE ESPINOSA, Episcopologios: Antiguedades de Sevilla; DÁVILA Teatro de las Eglesias de Sevilla; FLÓREZ Espana Sagrada, IX (3rd ed., Madrid, 1860); MADRAZO, Sevilla in Espana sus monumentos (Barcelona, 1884); MALVERDE Guia de Espana y Portugal (Madrid, 1886); ALDERETE, Guía ecclesiastica de España (Madrid, 1888). RAMÓN RUIZ AMADO University of Seville University of Seville In the middle of the thirteenth century the Dominicans, in order to prepare missionaries for work among the Moors and Jews, organized schools for the teaching of Arabic, Hebrew, and Greek. To co-operate in this work and to enhance the prestige of Seville, Alfonso the Wise in 1254 established in that city "general schools" (escuelas generales) of Arabic and Latin. Alexander IV, by Bull of 21 June, 1260, recognized this foundation as a generale litterarum studium and granted its members certain dispensations in the matter of residence. Later, the cathedral chapter established ecclesiastical studies in the College of San Miguel. Rodrigo de Santaello, archdeacon of the cathedral and commonly known as Maese Rodrigo, began the construction of a building for a university in 1472; in 1502 the Catholic Majesties published the royal decree creating the university, and in 1505 Julius II granted the Bull of authorization; in 1509 the college of Maese Rodrigo was finally installed in its own building, under the name of Santa María de Jesús, but its courses were not opened until 1516. The Catholic Majesties and the pope granted the power to confer degrees in logic, philosophy, theology, and canon and civil law. It should be noted that the colegio mayor de Maese Rodrigo and the university proper, although housed in the same building, never lost their several identities, as is shown by the fact that, in the eighteenth century, the university was moved to the College of San Hermanegildo, while that of Maese Rodrigo remained independent, although languishing. The influence of the University of Seville, from the ecclesiastical point of view, though not equal to that of the Universities of Salamanca and of Alcalá, was nevertheless considerable. From its lecture halls came Sebastián Antonio de CortÈs, Riquelme, Rioja, Luis Germán y Rimbón, founder of the Horatian Academy, Juan Sánchez, professor of mathematics at San Telmo, Martín Alberto Carbajal, Cardinal Belluga, Cardinal Francisco Solis Folch, Marcelo Doye y Pelarte, Bernardo de Torrijos, Francisco Aguilar Ribon, the Abate Marchena, Alberto Lista, and many others who shone in the magistracy, or were distinguished ecclesiastics. The influence of the University of Seville on the development of the fine arts, was very great. In its shadow the school of the famous master Juan de Mablara was founded, and intellects like those of Herrera (q. v.) Arquijó, and many others were developed, while there were formed literary and artistic clubs, like that of Pacheco, which was a school for both painting and poetry. During the period of secularization and sequestration (1845-57) the University of Seville passed into the control of the State and received a new organization. At present it comprises the faculties of philosophy and letters, law, sciences, and medicine, with an enrolment (1910) of 1100 students. At the same time that the royal university was established, there was developed the Universidad de Mareantes (university of sea-farers), in which body the Catholic Majesties, by a royal decree of 1503, established the Casa de Contratación with classes of pilots and of seamen, and courses in cosmography, mathematics, military tactics, and artillery. This establishment was of incalculable importance, for it was there that the expeditions to the Indies were organized, and there that the great Spanish sailors were educated. This species of polytechnic school, which, according to Eden, BournÈ, and Humboldt, taught a great deal to Europe, following the fortunes of Spanish science, fell into decay in the seventeenth century. DE LA FUENTE, Hist. de las universidades (1887); ORTIZ DE ZÚÑIGA, Anales eclesiásticos y seculares de Sevilla (1667); DE LA CUADRA Y LIBAJA, Hist. del colegio mayor de Santa Tomás de Sevilla (1890); DE AVIÑÓN, Sevillana medicina (1419); CARO, Antigüedades de Sevilla (1634); PICATOSTE, Apuntes para unabiblioteca científica española (1891); MARTINEZ VILLA, Reseña histórica de la universidad de Sevilla y descripción de su iglesia (1886); HAZAÑAS DE LA RUA, Maese Rodrigo (1444-l504) (1909); PADRINO Y SOLÍS, Memorias literarias de la Real Academia Sevillana de Buenas Letras (1773). TEODORO RODRÍGUEZ Sexagesima Sexagesima (Lat. sexagesima, sixtieth) is the eighth Sunday before Easter and the second before Lent. The Ordo Romanus, Alcuin, and others count the Sexagesima from this day to Wednesday after Easter. The name was already known to the Fourth Council of Orleans in 541. For the Greeks and Slavs it is Dominica Carnisprivii, because on it they began, at least to some extent, to abstain from meat. The Synaxarium calls it Dominica secundi et muneribus non corrupti adventus Domini. To the Latins it is also known as "Exsurge" from the beginning of the Introit. The statio was at Saint Paul's outside the walls of Rome, and hence the oratio calls upon the doctor of the Gentiles. The Epistle is from Paul, II Cor., xi and xii describing his suffering and labours for the Church. The Gospel (Luke, viii) relates the falling of the seed on nood and on bad ground, while the Lessons of the first Nocturn continue the history of man's iniquity, and speak of Noah and of the Deluge. (See SEPTUAGESIMA.) BUTLER. The Movable Feasts of the Catholic Chureh (New York, s. d.), tr. IV, ii. FRANCIS MERSHMAN St. Sexburga St. Sexburga Died about 699. Her sisters, Sts. Ethelburga and Saethrid, were both Abbesses of Faremontier in Brie, St. Withburga was a nun at Ely, and St. Etheldreda became Abbess of Ely. Sexburga was the daughter of Anna, King of the East Angles, and was married about 640 to Earconbert, King of Kent. She lived with her husband for twenty-four years, and by him had two sons, Egbert and Lothar, both successively Kings of Kent, and two daughters, both of whom became nuns and saints: St. Earcongota, a nun of Faremontier, and St. Ermenhild, who married Wulfhere, King of Mercia, and after his death took the veil and became Abbess of Ely. After the death of her husband in 664, Sexburga founded the Abbey of Minster in Sheppey; after a few years there she removed to Ely and placed herself under her sister Etheldreda, then abbess. The "Liber Eliensis" contains the farewell speech made by Sexburga to her nuns at Minster, and an account of her reception at Ely. St. Etheldreda died, probably in 679, and Sexburga was elected abbess. She was still alive and acting as abbess in 695, when she presided at the translation of St. Etheldreda's relics to a new shrine she had erected for her at Ely, which included a sarcophagus of white marble from the ruined city of Grantchester. Sexburga was buried at Ely, near her sister St. Etheldreda and her feast is kept on 6 July. There are several lives of St. Sexburga extant. The one printed in Capgrave, "Nova, Legenda" and used by the Bollandists seems to be taken from the Cotton manuscript (Tib. E. 1) in the British Museum. There is another Latin life in the same collection (Cotton MS., Calig. A. 8), but it is so damaged by fire that it is useless. At Lambeth there are fragments of an Anglo-Saxon life (MS. 427). BEDE, Hist. Eccl., iii, c. 8; IV, cc. 19, 21; Liber Eliensis in Anglo. Chr. Soc.; Acta SS., July, II, 346-9; MONTALEMBERT, Monks of the West, ed. GASQUET, iv, 401; HARDY, Cat. Mat. in R. S., I, 36O-2; BUTLER, Lives of the Saints. 6 July. S. BARNES Sext Sext I. MEANING, SYMBOLISM, AND ORIGIN The hora sexta of the Romans corresponded closely with our noon. Among the Jews it was already regarded, together with Terce and None, as an hour most favourable to prayer. In the Acts of the Apostles we read that St. Peter went up to the higher parts of the house to pray (x, 9). It was the middle of the day, also the usual hour of rest, and in consequence for devout men, an occasion to pray to God, as were the morning and evening hours. The Fathers of the Church dwell constantly on the symbolism of this hour; their teaching is merely summarized here: it is treated at length in Cardinal Bona's work on psalmody (ch. viii). Noon is the hour when the sun is at its full, it is the image of Divine splendour, the plenitude of God, the time of grace; at the sixth hour Abraham received the three angels, the image of the Trinity; at the sixth hour Adam and Eve ate the fatal apple. We should pray at noon, says St. Ambrose, because that is the time when the Divine light is in its fulness (In Ps. cxviii, vers. 62). Origen, St. Augustine, and several others regard this hour as favourable to prayer. Lastly and above all, it was the hour when Christ was nailed to the Cross; this memory excelling all the others left a still visible trace in most of the liturgy of this hour. All these mystic reasons and traditions, which indicate the sixth hour as a culminating point in the day, a sort of pause in the life of affairs, the hour of repast, could not but exercise an influence on Christians, inducing them to choose it as an hour of prayer. As early as the third century the hour of Sext was considered as important as Terce and None as an hour of prayer. Clement of Alexandria speaks of these three hours of prayer ("Strom.", VIII, vii, P.G., IX, 455), as does Tertullian ("De orat.", xxiii-xv, P.L., I, 1191-93). Long previous the "Didache" had spoken of the sixth hour in the same manner (Funk, "Doctrina XII Apostolorum", V, XIV, XV). Origen, the "Canons of Hippolytus", and St. Cyprian express the same tradition (cf. Bäumer, "Hist. du bréviaire", I, 68, 69, 73, 75, 186, etc.). It is therefore evident that the custom of prayer at the sixth hour was well-established in the third century and even in the second century or at the end of the first. But probably most of these texts refer to private prayer. In the fourth century the hour of Sext was widely established as a canonical hour. The following are very explicit examples. In his rule St. Basil made the sixth hour an hour of prayer for the monks ("Regulæ fusius tractatæ", P.G., XXXI, 1013, sq., 1180), Cassian treats it as an hour of prayer generally recognized in his monasteries (Instit. Coenob., III, iii, iv). The "De virginitate" wrongly attributed to St. Athanasius, but in any case dating from the fourth century, speaks of the prayer of Sext as do also the "Apostolic Constitutions", St. Ephrem, St. Chrysostom (for the texts see Bäumer, op. cit., I, 131, 145, 152, etc., and Leclercq, in "Dict. d'arch. chrét.", s.v. Bréviaire). But this does not prove that the observance of Sext, any more than Prime, Terce, None, or even the other hours, was universal. Discipline on this point varied widely according to regions and Churches. And in fact some countries may be mentioned where the custom was introduced only later. That the same variety prevailed in the formulæ of prayer is shown in the following paragraph. II. VARIETY OF PRAYERS AND FORMULAE Despite its antiquity the hour of Sext never had the importance of those of Vigils, Matins, and Vespers. It must have been of short duration. The oldest testimonies mentioned seem to refer to a short prayer of a private nature. In the fourth and the following centuries the texts which speak of the compositions of this Office are far from uniform. Cassian tells us that in Palestine three psalms were recited for Sext, as also for Terce and None (Instit., III, ii). This number was adopted by the Rules of St. Benedict, Columbanus, St. Isidore, St. Fructuosus, and to a certain extent by the Roman Church. However, Cassian says that in some provinces three psalms were said at Terce, six at Sext, and nine at None. Others recited six psalms at each hour and this custom became general among the Gauls (cf. Hefele-Leclercq, "Hist. des conciles", III, 189; Leclercq, loc. cit., 1296, 1300; Martène, "De antiq. eccl. ritibus", III, 20; IV, 27). In Martène will be found the proof of variations in different Churches and monasteries. With regard to ancient times the "Peregrinatio Sylviæ", tells us that at the hour of Sext all assembled in the Anastasis where psalms and anthems were recited after which the bishop came and blessed the people (cf. Cabrol, "Étude sur la Peregrinatio", Paris, 1895, 45-46). The number of psalms is not stated. In the sixth century the Rule of St. Benedict gives the detailed composition of this Office. We quote it here because it is almost the same as the Roman Liturgy; either the latter borrowed from St. Benedict, or St. Benedict was inspired by the Roman usage. Sext, like Terce and None, was composed at most of three psalms, of which the choice was fixed, the Deus in adjutorium, a hymn, a lesson (capitulum), a versicle, the Kyrie Eleison, and the customary concluding prayer and dismissal (xvii, cf. xviii). In the Roman liturgy Sext is also composed of the Deus in adjutorium, a hymn, three portions of Ps. cxviii, the lesson, the short response, the versicle, and the prayer. In the Greek Church Sext is composed like the lesser hours of two parts; the first includes Pss. liii, liv, xc, with invitatory, tropes, and conclusion. The second, of Mesarion which is very similar to the first, consists of Pss. lv, lvi, and lxix. In the modern Mozarabic Office Sext consists only of Ps. liii, three "octonaries" of Ps. cxviii, two lessons, the hymn, the supplication, the capitulum, the Pater Noster, and the benediction. Beside the authors mentioned in the course of the article see DUCHESNE, Christian Worship (London, 1904), 448, 449, 450, 492; BONA, De divina psalmodia, viii, de sexta; SMITH, Dict. of Christ. Antiq., s.v. Office, The Divine; NEALE AND LITTLEDALE, Comment. on the Psalms, I, 7, 32, 34, etc.; BATIFFOL, Hist. du bréviaire romain, 3rd. ed. (Paris, 1911), 19-21. FERNAND CABROL Sexton Sexton (Old English Sexestein, sextein, through the French sacristain from Lat. sacrista). One who guards the church edifice, its treasures, vestments, etc., and as an inferior minister attends to burials, bell-ringings and similar offices about a church. In ancient times, the duties of the modern sexton, who is generally a layman, were part of the functions of the clerical order of ostiariatus. The clerics called ostiarii had the keys of the church committed to them and were responsible for the guardianship of the sacred edifice, the holy vessels, books, and vestments. They opened the church and summoned the faithful to the Divine Mysteries. Others of them were specially deputed to guard the bodies and shrines of the martyrs. According to the Council of Trent (Sees. XXIII, cap. xvii, De Ref.), the sexton or sacristan should be a cleric, but it allowed him to be a married man, pro=1Fvided he received the tonsure and wore the clerical dress. By custom, however, these conditions have ceased to be effective, and at present the office is usu=1Fally held by a layman. In many cathedral churches, e.g. in Austria and Germany, the title of sacristan or custos is still held by a priest, who is generally one of the dignitaries of the cathedral chapter, and has supervision of the fabric of the cathedral and of the buildings that serve for the residences of canons and parochial vicars. This official has special charge of the cure of souls and sees also to the solemnizing of the great church festivals. He generally has an assistant, whose particular duty it is to watch over the performance of the Divine service in choir. According to a decision of the Roman Rota, the sacristan of a cathedral church should always be in priest's orders. In Rome the office of sacristan in the Apostolic palace is always committed to a member of the Order of Hermits of St. Augustine, by a Decree of Pope Alexander VI. The sacristan of the conclave for the election of a new pope has all the privileges of the conclavists. Ferraris, Bibl. canonica, VII (Rome, 1891), s. v., Sacrista. WILLIAM H.W. FANNING Celestino Sfondrati Celestino Sfondrati Prince-abbot of St. Gall and cardinal, b. at Milan, 10 January, 1644, d. at Rome, 4 September, 1696. He belonged to the noble Milanese family of the Sfondrati, of which Cardinals Francesco and Paolo Sfondrati and Pope Gregory XIV were members. At the age of twelve he was placed in the school at Rorschach, on the Bodensee, which was conducted by the Benedictines of St Gall, and on 26 April, 1660, he took the Benedictine habit at St. Gall. When twenty-two years old he already taught philosophy and theology at Kempten, and, after his elevation to the priesthood (26 April 1668), he became professor and master of novices at his monastery. From 1679 to 1682 he taught canon law at the Benedictine University of Salzburg. In 1682 he returned to St. Gall to take charge of a small country church near Rorschach for a short time, whereupon Abbot Gallus appointed him his vicar-general. In 1686 Pope Innocent XI created him Bishop of Novara, a dignity which he accepted only with reluctance. He was, however, prevented form taking possession of his see by being elected Prince-abbot of St. Gall on 17 April, 1687. As abbot he set an example of great piety and mortification to his monks, and watched carefully over the observance of monastic discipline; as prince, he ruled mildly and rendered himself dear to his people by his great charity, which he had a special opportunity to practice during the famine of 1693. His learning and piety, as well as his able literary works in defense of the papal authority against the principles of Gallicanism, induced Pope Innocent XII to create him cardinal-priest on 12 December, 1695, with the titular church of St. Caecilia in Trastevere. But he had scarcely reached Rome when his health began to fail. He died nine months after receiving the purple and was buried in his titular church. His chief works are: (1) "Cursus theologicus in gratiam et utilitatem Fratrum Religiosorum" (10 vols., St. Gall, 1670), published anonymously; (2) "Disputatio juridica de lege in praesumptione fundata" (Salzburg, 1681; 2nd ed., Salem, 1718), a moral treatise against Probabilism; (3) "Regale sacerdotium Romano Pontifici assertum" (St. Gall, 1684; 1693; 1749), published under the pseudonym of Eugenius Lombardus, an able defence of the papal authority and privileges against the Four Articles of the Declaration of the French Clergy (1682); (4) "Cursus philosophicus monasterii S. Galli" (3vols., St. Gall, 1686; 1695); (5) "Gallia vindicate" (2 vols., St. Gall, 1688; 1702), another able treatise against Gallicanism, in particular against Maimbourg; (6) "Legatio Marchionis Lavardini ejusque cum Innocentio XI dissidium" (1688), a short treatise concerning the right of asylum (les franchises) of the French ambassadors at Rome; (7) "Nepotismus theologice expensus" (St. Gall, 1692); (8) "Innocentia vindicata" (St. Gall, 1695; Graz, 1708), an attempt to prove that St. Thomas held the doctrine of the Immaculate Conception; (9) "Nodus praedestinationis ex sac. litteris doctrinaque SS. Augustini et Thomae, quantum homini licet, dissolutus" (Rome,. 1697; Cologne, 1705), a posthumous work against the Jansenists, in which the author expounds the difficult question of grace and predestination in the sense of Molina and the Jesuits. It called forth numerous rejoinders but found also many defenders [see Dunand in "Revue du Clergé Français", III (Paris, 1895), 316-26]. ZIEGELBAUER, Hist. rei literariae ord. S. Ben., III, 416-20; EGGER, Colestin Sfondrati, Kardinal und Furstabt, (1896); SATTLER, Collectaneenblatter zur Gesch. der ehem. Ben. Universitat Salzburg (Kempten, 1890), 237-45. MICHAEL OTT The Religion of Shakespeare (Was Shakespeare Catholic?) The Religion of Shakespeare Of both Milton and Shakespeare it was stated after their deaths, upon Protestant authority, that they had professed Catholicism. In Milton's case (though the allegation was made and printed in the lifetime of contemporaries, and though it pretended to rest upon the testimony of Judge Christopher Milton, his brother, who did become a Catholic) the statement is certainly untrue (see The Month, Jan., 1909, pp. 1-13 and 92-93). This emphasizes the need of caution — the more so that Shakespeare at least had been dead more than seventy years when Archdeacon R. Davies (d. 1708) wrote in his supplementary notes to the biographical collections of the Rev. W. Fulman that the dramatist had a monument at Stratford, adding the words: "He dyed a Papyst". Davies, an Anglican clergyman, could have had no conceivable motive for misrepresenting the matter in these private notes and as he lived in the neighbouring county of Gloucestershire he may be echoing a local tradition. To this must be added the fact that independent evidence establishes a strong presumption that John Shakespeare, the poet's father, was or had been a Catholic. His wife Mary Arden, the poet's mother, undoubtedly belonged to a family that remained conspicuously Catholic throughout the reign of Elizabeth. John Shakespeare had held municipal office in Stratford-on-Avon during Mary's reign at a time when it seems agreed that Protestants were rigorously excluded from such posts. It is also certain that in 1592 John Shakespeare was presented as a recusant, though classified among those "recusants heretofore presented who were thought to forbear coming to church for fear of process of debt". Though indications are not lacking that John Shakespeare was in very reduced circumstances, it is also quite possible that his alleged poverty was only assumed to cloak his conscientious scruples. A document, supposed to have been found about 1750 under the tiles of a house in Stratford which had once been John Shakespeare's, professes to be the spiritual testament of the said John Shakespeare, and assuming it to be authentic it would clearly prove him to have been a Catholic. The document, which was at first unhesitatingly accepted as genuine by Malone, is considered by most modern Shakespeare scholars to be a fabrication of J. Jordan who sent it to Malone (Lee, Life of William Shakespeare, London, 1908, p. 302). It is certainly not entirely a forgery (see The Month, Nov., 1911), and it produces in part a form of spiritual testament attributed to St. Charles Borromeo. Moreover, there is good evidence that a paper of this kind was really found. Such testaments were undoubtedly common among Catholics in the sixteenth century. Jordan had no particular motive for forging a very long, dreary, and tedious profession of Catholicism, only remotely connected with the poet; and although it has been said that John Shakespeare could not write (Lee, J.W. Gray, and C.C. Stopes maintain the contrary), it is quite conceivable that a priest or some other Catholic friend drafted the document for him, a copy of which was meant to be laid with him in his grave. All this goes to show that the dramatist in his youth must have been brought up in a very Catholic atmosphere, and indeed the history of the Gunpowder Plot conspirators (the Catesbys lived at Bushwood Park in Stratford parish) shows that the neighbourhood was regarded as quite a hotbed of recusancy. On the other hand many serious difficulties stand in the way of believing that William Shakespeare could have been in any sense a staunch adherent of the old religion. To begin with, his own daughters were not only baptized in the parish church as their father had been, but were undoubtedly brought up as Protestants, the elder, Mrs. Hall, being apparently rather Puritan in her sympathies. Again Shakespeare was buried in the chancel of the parish church, though it is admitted that no argument can be deduced from this as to the creed he professed (Lee, op. cit., p. 220). More significant are such facts as that in 1608 he stood godfather to a child of Henry Walker, as shown by the parish register, that in 1614 he entertained a preacher at his house "the New Place", the expense being apparently borne by the municipality, that he was very familiar with the Bible in a Protestant version, that the various legatees and executors of his will cannot in any way be identified as Catholics, and also that he seems to have remained on terms of undiminished intimacy with Ben Johnson, despite the latter's exceptionally disgraceful apostasy from the Catholic Faith which he had for a time embraced. To these considerations must now be added the fact recently brought to light by the researches of Dr. Wallace of Nebraska, that Shakespeare during his residence in London lived for at least six years (1598-1604) at the house of Christopher Mountjoy, a refugee French Huguenot, who maintained close relations with the French Protestant Church in London (Harper's Magazine, March, 1910, pp. 489-510). Taking these facts in connection with the loose morality of the Sonnets, of Venus and Adonis, etc. and of passages in the play, not to speak of sundry vague hints preserved by tradition of the poet's rather dissolute morals, the conclusion seems certain that, even if Shakespeare's sympathies were with the Catholics, he made little or no attempt to live up to his convictions. For such a man it is intrinsically possible and even likely that, finding himself face to face with death, he may have profited by the happy incident of the presence of some priest in Stratford to be reconciled with the Church before the end came. Thus Archdeacon Davies's statement that "he dyed a Papyst" is by no means incredible, but it would obviously be foolish to build too much upon an unverifiable tradition of this kind. The point must remain forever uncertain. As regards the internal evidence of the plays and poems, no fair appreciation of the arguments advanced by Simpson, Bowden, and others can ignore the strong leaven of Catholic feeling conspicuous in the works as a whole. Detailed discussion would be impossible here. The question is complicated by the doubt whether certain more Protestant passages have any right to be regarded as the authentic work of Shakespeare. For example, there is a general consensus of opinion that the greater part of the fifth act of "Henry VIII" is not his. Similarly in "King John" any hasty references drawn from the anti-papal tone of certain speeches must be discounted by a comparison between the impression left by the finished play as it came from the hands of the dramatist and the virulent prejudice manifest in the older drama of "The Troublesome Reign of King John", which Shakespeare transformed. On the other hand the type of such characters as Friar Lawrence or of the friar in "Much Ado About Nothing", of Henry V, of Katherine of Aragon, and of others, as well as the whole ethos of "Measure for Measure", with numberless casual allusions, all speak eloquently for the Catholic tone of the poet's mind (see, for example, the references to purgatory and the last sacraments in "Hamlet", Act I, sc. 5). Neither can any serious arguments to show that Shakespeare knew nothing of Catholicism be drawn from the fact that in "Romeo and Juliet" he speaks of "evening Mass". Simpson and others have quoted examples of the practice of occasionally saying Mass in the afternoon, one of the places where this was wont to happen being curiously enough Verona itself, the scene of the play. The real difficulty against Simpson's thesis comes rather from the doubt whether Shakespeare was not infected with the atheism, which, as we know from the testimony of writers as opposite in spirit as Thomas Nashe and Father Persons, was rampant in the more cultured society of the Elizabethan age. Such a doubting or sceptical attitude of mind, as multitudes of examples prove in our own day, is by no means inconsistent with a true appreciation of the beauty of Catholicism, and even apart from this it would surely not be surprising that such a man as Shakespeare should think sympathetically and even tenderly of the creed in which his father and mother had been brought up, a creed to which they probably adhered at least in their hearts. The fact in any case remains that the number of Shakespearean utterances expressive of a fundamental doubt in the Divine economy of the world seems to go beyond the requirements of his dramatic purpose and these are constantly put into the mouths of characters with whom the poet is evidently in sympathy. A conspicuous example is the speech of Prospero in "The Tempest", probably the latest of the plays, ending with the words: "We are such Stuff As dreams are made on, and our little life Is rounded with a sleep". Whether the true Shakespeare speaks here no one can ever tell, but even if it were so, such moods pass and are not irreconcilable with faith in God when the soul is thrown back upon herself by the near advent of suffering or death. A well-known example is afforded by the case of Littré. The most serious and original contribution made from a Catholic point of view to the question of Shakespeare's religious opinions is by Richard Simpson in The Rambler (July, 1854 and March, April, and May, 1858). A volume rounded on the materials printed and manuscript accumulated by Simpson was afterwards published by Father H.S. Bowden, The Religion of Shakespeare (London, 1899). In the present writer's judgment, the evidence in favour of the poet's Catholicity is unduly pressed by both of these investigators and the difficulties too lightly dismissed, but on the other hand Simpson's thesis certainly deserves more careful examination than it has usually received, even from the few who have noticed his arguments, for example from Canon Beeching in vol. X of the Stratford Town edition of the Works of Shakespeare. (Stratford, 1907). See also: Lilly, Studies in Religion and Literature (London, 1904), 1-30: Collins, Studies in Shakespeare (London, 1904); Gildea in Amer. Cath. Quart. Rev. (Philadelphia, 1900); Baumgartner in Kirchenlexikon (Freiburg, 1899); Hager, Die Grosse Shakespeares (Freiburg, 1878), Spanier, Der =93Papistö Shakespeare in Hamlet (Trier, 1890); Raich, Shakespeareæs Stellung zur kat. Kirche (Mainz, 1884); Carter, Shakespeare Puritan and Recusant (Edinburgh, 1897); Downing, God in Shakespeare (London, 1901); Holland, Shakespeareæs Unbelief (Boston, 1884) Irwin, Shakespeare's Religious Belief in Overland Monthly (San Francisco, Aug. and Sept., 1875); Pope, Shakespeare the Great Dramatic Demonstrator of Catholic Faith (Washington, 1902); Robertson, Religion of Shakespeare (London, 1877); Schuler, Shakespeareæs Confession in Katholische Flugschriften (No 134); Wilkes, Shakespeare from an American Point of View (New York, 1877): Countermine, The Religious Belief of Shakespeare (New York, 1906), a booklet of no value; Rio, William Shakespeare (Paris, 1864); Mahon in Edinburgh Review (Jan. 1866); Thurston in Month (May, 1882; Nov., 1911); Boswin, The Religion of Shakespeare (Trichinopoly, 1899); Roffe, Real Religion of Shakespeare (London, 1872). HERBERT THURSTON Shamanism Shamanism (From Shaman or Saman, a word derived by Bantzaroff from Manchu saman, i.e., an excited or raving man, by van Gennep and Keane from Saman a Tungus word; others say a later dialectic form of the Sanskrit sraman, i.e., a worker or toiler.) A vague term used by explorers of Siberia in the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries to designate not a specific religion but a form of savage magic or science, by which physical nature was believed to be brought under the control of man. It prevails among Turanian and Mongolian tribes and American Indians, and blends with their varied religious beliefs and customs. Thus the Turanians believe the shamans were a class created by the heaven-god Tengri to struggle for men's good against the evil spirits. The Buddhist Mongols call Shamanism shara-shadshin, i.e., the black faith, the Chinese tjao-ten, i.e., dancing before spirits. The shamans are variously designated, e.g., by Tatars kam, by Samoyeds taryib, by Ostjaks tadib, by Buriates boe, by Yakut Turks oyun, by American Indians medicine men, In the Bhagavata Purana the Jains are called shramans. In Persian-Hindu the term "shaman" means an idolater. In Tibet Shamanism represents a Buddhism degenerated into demonology. Thus the Mongols say that shamans are closely allied with Odokil, or Satan, who will not injure any tribe that obeys its wizards. (1) Shamanism rests for its basis on the animistic view of nature. Animism (q.v.) teaches that primitive and savage man views the world as pervaded by spiritual forces. Fairies, goblins, ghosts, and demons hover about him waking or sleeping: they are the cause of his mishaps, losses, pains. Mountains, woods, forests, rivers, lakes are conceived to possess. spirits, i.e., the itch-tchi of the Yakuts, and to be living, thinking, willing, passionful beings like himself. In respect to these, man is in a state of helplessness. The shaman by appropriate words and acts uses his power to shield man and envelops him in a kind of protective armour so that the evil spirits become inactive or inoffensive. His rôle is that of antagonist to the spirits and of guardian to ordinary man. The Esquimaux believe all the affairs of life are under the control of malignant spirits who are everywhere. These minor spirits are subject to the great spirit. Tung-Ak, yet must be propitiated. The shaman alone is supposed to be able to deal with Tung-Ak, though not superior to him. Tung-Ak is a name for Death, who ever seeks to harass the lives of people that their spirits may go to dwell with him. Ellis says that spirits far from friendly compassed the lives of the Polynesian islanders on every side. The gods of the Maori were demons thronging like mosquitos and ever watchful to inflict evil; their designs could be counteracted only by powerful spells and charms. In Kamchatka every corner of earth and heaven was believed to be full of spirits more dreaded than God. The Navajo, Ojibwas, and Dakotah Indians have a multiplicity of spirits, both evil and good, filling all space, which can be communicated with only after due preparation by the persons who have power to do so, i.e., medé or jossakeed. (2) The main principle of Shamanism is the attempt to control physical nature. Hence the term embraces the various methods by which the spirits can be brought near or driven away. The belief that the shaman practises this magic art is universal among savages. To this art nothing seems impossible; it intimately affects their conduct and is reflected in their myths. In some cases initiation is required. Thus with the Navajo and Ojibwas they who have successfully passed through the four degrees of the medéwin are called medé, and are considered competent to foresee and prophesy, to cure diseases and to prolong life, to make fetishes, and to aid others in attaining desires not to be realized in any other way. They who have received instruction in one or two degrees usually practise a specialty, e.g., making rain, finding game, curing diseases. For this women are eligible. Again the jossakeed, or jugglers, form a distinct class with no system of initiation, e.g., an individual announces himself a jossakeed and performs feats of magic in substantiation of his claim. Among the Australians the birraark were supposed to be initiated by wandering ghosts. The Dakotahs believe the medicine men to be wakanised (from wakan, i.e., godman) by mystic intercourse with supernatural beings in dreams and trances. Their business was to discern future events, lead on the war-path, raise the storm, calm the tempest, converse with thunder and lightning as with familiar friends. Father Le Jeune writes that the medicine men of the Iroquois enjoyed all the attributes of Zeus. Tiele says that the magical power is possessed by the shaman in common with the higher spirits and does not differ from theirs; in religious observances the magician priests entirely supersede the gods and assume their forms (Science of Religion, II, 108) Most commonly the shaman is a man. Among the Yakuts, the Carib tribes, and in Northern California there are female as well as male shamans; and in some cases, e.g., the Yakuts, male shamans have to assume women's dress. Every Maori warrior is a shaman. In Samoa there is no regular caste, but in other Polynesian groups the shaman is the exclusive privilege of an hereditary class of nobles. With the Yakuts the gift of shamanism is not hereditary, but the protecting spirit of a shaman who dies is reincarnated in some member of the same family. To them the protecting spirit is an indispensable attribute of the shaman. They believe that the shaman has an ãmãgãt, i.e., a spirit-protector, and an ie-kyla i.e., image of an animal protector, e.g., totemism. Hence the shamans are graded in power according to the ie-kyla, e.g., the weakest have the ie-kyla of a dog, the most powerful that of a bull or an eagle. The ãmãgãt is a being completely different, and generally is the soul of a dead shaman. Every person has a spirit-protector, but that of the shaman is of a kind apart. With the American Indians the guardian spirit, from whom the novice derives aid, is more generally secured from the hosts of animal spirits; it can also be obtained from the local spirits or spirits of natural phenomena, from the ghosts of the dead or from the greater deities. In the practice of his art the Shaman is regarded as: + A healer, hence the term "medicine man", and the secret medicine societies of the Seneca, and of other American tribes; the Alaskan Tungaks are principally healers. + An educator, i.e., the keeper of myth and tradition, of the arts of writing and divination; he is the repository of the tribal wisdom. + A civil magistrate; as seers possessing secret knowledge with power at times of assuming other shapes and of employing the souls of the dead, they are credited with ability to detect and punish crimes, e.g., the Angaput wizards among the Esquimaux. In Siberia every tribe has its chief shaman who arranges the rites and takes charge of the idols; under him are local and family wizards who regulate all that concerns birth, marriage, and death, and consecrate dwellings and food. + A war-chief; thus with the Dakotahs and Cheyennes the head war-chief must be a medicine man. Hence the shaman possesses great influence and in many cases is the real ruler of the tribe. The means which the shaman uses are: + Symbolic magic, on the principle that association in thought must involve similar connexion in reality, e.g., the war and hunting dances of the Red Indians, placing magical fruit-shaped stones in the garden to insure a good crop, to bring about the death of a person by making an image of him and then destroying it or rubbing red paint on the heart of the figure and thrusting a sharp instrument into it. + Fasting with solitude and very generally bodily cleanness and incantations usually in some ancient or unmeaning language and with the Yakuts very obscene. Thus the song that salved wounds was known to the Greeks, e.g., the Odyssey, and to the Finns, e.g., the epic poem Kalewala. Among the Indo-Europeans the incantations are known as mantras, and are usually texts from the Vedas chanted over the sick. With the New Zealanders they are called karakias. In ancient Egypt, according to Maspero, the gods had to obey when called by their own name. At Eleusis not the name but the intonation of the voice of the magician produced the mysterious results. In calling on the spirits the shaman imitates the various sounds of objects in nature wherein the spirits are supposed to reside, e.g., the whispering breeze, the whistling and howling storm, the growling bear, the screeching owl. + Dances and contortions with use of rattle and drum and a distinctive dress decked with snakes, stripes of fur, little bells. Among the Ojibwas at the sound of the sacred drum every one rises and becomes inspired because the Great Spirit is then present in the lodge. The frenzy and contortions lead to an ecstatic state which is considered of the greatest importance. In South America drugs are used to induce stupor. The spiritual flight in search of information is characteristic of the Siberian shaman; it is rare in America. Vambéry cites a whole series of shamanistic ceremonies, e. g., tambourines and fire-dances, practised by the ancient sak-uyzur. Shaman incantations are found in the cuneiform inscriptions of the Medes at Suze. Sacrifices, gifts of beads and tobacco, and a few drops of the novice's blood form part of these rites with the American Indians. + Possession; thus in Korea the pan-su is supposed to have power over the spirits, because he is possessed by a more powerful demon whose strength he is able to wield. This is also the belief of the Yakuts. (3) Shamanism is closely akin to Fetishism, and at times it is difficult to tell whether the practices in vogue among certain peoples should be referred to the one or to the other. Both spring from Animism; both are systems of savage magic or science and have certain rites in common. Yet the differences consist in the belief that in Fetishism the magic power resides in the instrument or in particular substances and passes into or acts upon the object, whereas in Shamanism the will-effort of the magician is the efficient factor in compelling souls or spirits or gods to do his will or in preventing them from doing their own. Hence in Fetishism the emphasis is laid on the thing, although fasting and incantations may be employed in making the fetish; in Shamanism the prime factor is the will or personality of the magician, although he may employ the like means. Therefore we cannot admit the statement of Peschel who refers to Shamanism everything connected with magic and ritual. Criticism (a) The reasons which prove Animism to be false destroy the basis on which Shamanism rests. (b) Shamanism takes for granted the theory that fear is the origin of religion. De La Saussaye holds that the concept of God cannot arise exclusively from fear produced by certain biological phenomena. Robertson Smith teaches that from the earliest times, religion, distinct from magic and secrecy, addresses itself to kindred and friendly beings, and that it is not with a vague fear of unknown powers but with a loving reverence for known Gods that religion in the true sense of the word began (Religion of the Semites, 2nd ed., p. 54). Tiele says "worship even in its most primitive form always contains an element of veneration" and calls sorcery "a disease of religion" (Science of Religion, II, 136, 141). (c) Shamanism is not a religion. The religious priest beseeches the favour of the gods; the shaman is believed to be able to compel and command them to do his will. Hence de La Saussaye regards Shamanism not as a name for a principal form of religion but for important phenomena and tendencies of Animism. D'HARLEZ, La religion nationale des Tartares orientaux in Académie royale des sciences, des lettres et des beaux-arts de Belgique, XL (1887); ACHELIS, Abriss der vergleichenden Religionswissenschaft (Leipzig 1904); TYLOR, Primitive Culture (3rd Amer. ed., New York, 1889); FRAZER, Golden Bough (London, 1900); Jesuit Relations, ed. THWAITES (Cleveland, 1896-1901); MÜLLER, Contributions to the Science of Mythology (London, 1897); LANG, Myth Ritual and Religion (London, 1887); ABERCROMBY, Preand Proto-historic Finns (London, 1898); KEANE, The World's Peoples (New York; 1908); FURLONG, The Faiths of Man (London, 1906); SIEROSZEWSKI in Revue de l'hist. des religions, XLVI; VAN GENNEP in Revue de l'hist. des religions, XLVII; STADLING in Contemporary Review (Jan. 1901); DIXON in Journal of American Folklore (Jan., 1908); American Anthropologist, I, IV. JOHN T. DRISCOLL Shammai Shammai (Called ha-Zekan, "the Elder"). A famous Jewish scribe who together with Hillel made up the last of "the pairs" (zúgóth), or, as they are sometimes erroneously named, "presidents and vice-presidents" of the Sanhedrin. The schools of Shammai and Hillel held rival sway, according to Talmudic tradition (Shabbath 15a), from about a hundred years before the destruction of Jerusalem (A.D. 70). Comparatively little is known about either of the great scribes. The Mischna, the only trustworthy authority in this matter, mentions Shammai in only eight passages (Maaser sheni, II, 4, 9; Orla, II, 5; Eduyoth I, 1-4, 10, II; Aboth, I, 12, 15, V, 17; Kelim, XXII, 4; Nidda, I, 1). He was the very opposite of Hillel in character and teaching. Stern and severe in living the law to the letter, he was strict to an extreme in legal interpretation. The tale tells that, on the feast of the Tabernacles, his daughter-in-law gave birth to a child; straightway Shammai had the roof broken through and the bed covered over with boughs, so that the child might celebrate the feast in an improvised sukka (tent or booth) and might not fail of keeping the law of Leviticus (xxiii, 42). The strictness of the master characterizes the school of Shammai as opposed to that of Hillel. The difference between the two schools had regard chiefly to the interpretation of the first, second, third and fifth parts of the "Mishna" — i.e. to religious dues, the keeping of the Sabbath and of holy days, the laws in regard to marriage and purification. The law, for example, to prepare no food on the Sabbath had to be observed by not allowing even the beast to toil; hence it was argued that an egg laid on the Sabbath might not be eaten (Eduyoth, iv, 1). Another debate was whether, on a holy day, a ladder might be borne from one dove-cote to another or should only be glided from hole to hole. The need of fringes to a linen night-dress was likewise made a matter of difference between the two schools (Eduyoth, iv, 10). In these and many other discussions we find much straining out of gnats and swallowing of camels (Matt., xxiii, 24), much pain taken to push the Mosaic law to an unbearable extreme, and no heed given to the practical reform which was really needed in Jewish morals. It was the method of the school of Shammai rather than that of Hillel which Christ condemned. On this account non-Catholic scholars generally make Him out to have belonged to the school of Hillel. This opinion has been shared in by a few Catholics (Gigot, "General Introduction to the Study of the Holy Scripture", New York, 1900, p. 422). Most Catholic exegetes, however, refuse to admit that Christ belonged to any of the fallible Jewish schools of interpretation. He established His own school — to wit, the infallible teaching body to which He gave the Old Testament to have and to keep and to interpret to all nations without error. SCHURER, The Jeuish People in the Time of Jesus Christ, I (Edinburgh, 1885), 361; GRATZ, Geschichte der Juden, III (3rd ed. Berlin, 1875), 671 (tr. Philadelphia, 1873). WALTER DRUM Vicariate Apostolic of Northern Shan-Si Vicariate Apostolic of Northern Shan-si The Faith was carried for the first time into the Province of Shan-si. Norhter China, by the Jesuit and Franciscan Fathers during the sixteenth century. At first the province was under the jurisdiction of the bishops of Peking; in 1698 it was erected, with the Province of Shen-si, a vicariate Apostolic by Innocent XII. From 1762 to 1838 the two Provinces of Hu-pe and Hu-nan were added to the same vicariate. On 17 June, 1890, the Vicariate Apostolic of Shan-si was divided into two missions: Northern and Southern Shan-si. In 1900 the notorious Yu-Hien ordered a wholesale massacre of misisonaries, both Catholic and Protestant, at T'ai-yuan-fu. Grogorio Grassi, vicar Apostolic, his coadjutor Francisco Fogolla, Fathers Facchini, Saccani, Throdoric Balat, Egide. Brother Andrew Baur, seven Franciscan Sister of Mary, several native priests, and many Christians were massacred. The vicariate Apostolic has 6,000,000 inhabitants. The mission is entrusted to the Franciscan Fathers. The present vicar Apostolic is the Right Rev. Eugene Massi, who resides at T'ai-yuan. In 1904 the Catholic community numbered: 11 European Franciscan Fathers; 14 native priests; 14,700 Catholics; 2500 catechumens. In 1910 there were: 15 European Franciscan Fathers; 16 native priests; 24 churches; 154 chapels, 269 stations; 2 seminaries, with 33 students; 150 schools for boys, with 900 pupils; 20 schools for girls, with 200 pupils; 1 asylum for old men, with 118 inmates; 6 orphanages, with 609 inmates; 10 Franciscan Sisters of Mary; 18,200 Catholics; 7302 catechumens. Missiones Catholicæ (Rome, 1907). V.H. MONTANAR Vicariate Apostolic of Southern Shan-Si Vicariate Apostolic of Southern Shan-si Erected in 1890; there are about 6,000,000 inhabitants; the mission is entrusted to the Franciscan Fathers. The present vicar Apostolic is the Rt. Rec. Mgr. Oderic Timmer, titular Bishop of Drusipare, born 18 October, 1859, consecrated 20 July, 1901. He resides at Lu-an-fu. In 1903 the mission numbered: 21 European Franciscan Fathers; 5 native priests; 10,300 Catholic; 9,200 catechumens; 94 churches and chapels. In 19190 there were: 24 European Franciscan Fathers; 6 native priests; 15,003 Catholics; 9,230 catechumens; 183 churches and chapels. Missiones Catholicæ (Rome, 1907). V.H. MONTANAR Vicariate Apostolic of Eastern Shan-Tung Vicariate Apostolic of Eastern Shan-tung This mission was separated in 1894 from Northern Shan-Tung and erected into a vicariate Apostolic. It includes the three civil Prefectures of Yen-Chu-Fu, Lai-Chu-Fu, and Teng-Chu-Fu. There are about 10,000,000 inhabitants. The climate is very healthy. On Nov., 1897, two German missionaries, Fathers Francis Xavier Nies and Richard Henle, were attacked and massacred in the village of Chang-Kia-Chwang. This double murder led to the occupation of Kiao-Chau on 14 Nov., 1897, by the German fleet. In 1899 the territory occupied by the German Government was separated from Eastern Shan-Tung and confided to the mission of Southern Shan-Tung. The Vicariate Apostolic of Eastern Shan-Tung is entrusted to the Franciscan Fathers. The actual vicar Apostolic is Rt. Rev. Mgr. Cæsarius Schang, titular Bishop of Vaga, b. 3 July, 1835, appointed 22 May, 1894. He resides at Che-Fu. In 1904 the mission had: 16 European Franciscan Fathers; 3 native priests; 9400 Catholics; 10,500 catechumens; and 145 churches and chapels. In 1909 there were: 17 European Franciscan Fathers; 2 European secular priests; 3 native priests; 9000 Catholics; 11,700 catechumens; 13 churches; 138 chapels; 350 stations; 1 seminary with 5 students; 1 preparatory seminary, with 27 students; 30 schools for boys, with 622 pupils; 24 schools for girls, with 435 pupils; 2 colleges for boys, with 140 students; 1 college for girls, with 25 students; 2 industrial schools, with 154 pupils; 3 hospitals; 3 orphanages, with 195 orphans; 30 sisters of the Franciscan Missionaries of Mary. Missiones Catholicæ (Rome, 1907). V.H. MONTANAR Vicariate Apostolic of Northern Shan-Tung Vicariate Apostolic of Northern Shan-tung Erected by Gregory XVI in 1839. The first vicar Apostolic was Louis de Besi, formerly Pro-Vicar of Hu-pe and Hu-nan. The vicariate Apostolic had to undergo many wars and persecutions. In 1885 it was divided into Northern and Southern Shan-tung; in 1894, the Vicariate Apostolic of Eastern Shan-tung was erected. The Vicariate Apostolic of Northern Shan-tung enjoys a salubrious and temperate climate; it numbers 11,000,000 inhabitants, and is entrusted to the Franciscan Fathers. The present vicar Apostolic Paltus, born 16 October, 1868, consecrated 8 July, 1902. He resides at Tsi-nan-fu. In 1904 the mission numbered: 11 European Franciscan Fathers; 18 native priests; 18,000 Catholics; 13,900 catechumens; and 134 churches and chapels. In 1910 there were: 29 European Franciscan Fathers; 19 native priests; 28,000 Catholics; 20,000 catechumens; 187 churches and chapels. Missiones Catholicæ (Rome, 1907). V.H. MONTANAR Vicariate Apostolic of Southern Shan-Tung Vicariate Apostolic of Southern Shan-tung On 2 Jan., 1882, the then vicar Apostolic of Shan-tung, Rt. Rev. Mgr. D. Cosi, elected as pro-vicar Apostolic for the southern part of his vicariate Father John Baptist Anzer, a member of the Steyl Seminary. Father Anzer with another missionary of the same seminary went to this part of the mission, where the Catholic religion had been scarcely preached before. Later, other missionaries of the same society name, and in 1886 the Vicariate Apostolic of Southern Shan-tung was erected. In 1898 the four civil districts of Kiao-Chau, Tsi-Me, Kau-Mi and Chu-chong, belonging to the German Government, were added. The climate is temperate, and there are 12,000,000 inhabitants. The mission is entrusted to the priests of the Divine Word of Steyl. The actual vicar Apostolic is Rt. Rev. Mgr. Augustine Henninghaus, titular Bishop of Hupæpa, appointed 7 Aug., 1904. He resides at Yen-Chu-Fu. In 1904 the mission had: 37 European priests; 11 native priests; 26,300 Catholics; 40,400 catechumens; and 130 churches and chapels. In 1908 there were: 46 European priests; 12 native priests; 35,301 Catholics; 39,838 catechumens; 131 churches and chapels; 1 seminary, with 6 students; 1 preparatory seminary, with 50 students; 8 Chino-German schools, with 323 students; 107 schools for catechumens, with 1384 students; 2 schools for catechists, with 194 students; 33 Chinese schools, with 350 pupils; 1 college for European girls, with 51 students; 2 asylums for old men, with 68 inmates; 1 hospital; 6 orphanages, with 428 orphans; 3 Marianist Brothers; 12 sisters of the Franciscan Missionaries of Mary; 6 Servants of the Holy Ghost. Missiones Catholicæ (Rome, 1907). V.H. MONTANAR James Sharpe James Sharpe (Alias POLLARD). Born at York, 1577; died at Lincoln, 1630. Converted when young, he made his priestly studies at the English College, Valladolid, was ordained in 1604, and returned to England in 1606. Here a singular trial awaited him. Believing that he must assist his parents to the Faith, he visited them at Everingham, but was insidiously kept a prisoner at home, and subjected to every possible pressure to induce him to renounce the Faith. Disputations and entreaties alternated with threats, the use of violence, and constant surveillance. While his mother conjured him on her knees to yield, his father begged the authorities rather to keep home close in England, than to let him go into exile. But the "Annals" of his College attest that Sharpe was a man "of great courage and learning". His constancy prevailed. He was eventually taken to the archbishop's prison, then deported. Having entered the Society of Jesus (1608), he became professor of Scripture at Louvain for three years, after which he returned, and worked on the English mission until his death. He wrote "The Trial of Protestant Private Spirit." (s.l., 1630) FOLEY Records,II (1884), 618; BLACKFAN, Annales collegii S. Albani Vallesoleti (London, 1898); MORE, Hist. prov. anglicanæ S.J. (St. Omers, 1661); GILLOW, Bibl. Dict. Eng. Cath., s.v. J.H. POLLEN John Dawson Gilmary Shea John Dawson Gilmary Shea Historian, born in New York, 22 July, l824; died at Elizabeth, New Jersey, 22 February, l892. The name Gilmary (Servant of Mary) was assumed at a late period of his life. Young Shea was a pupil of the Sisters of Charity, and a graduate of Columbia College grammar school, of which his father was principal. At an early age he became a clerk in a Spanish merchant's office, where he learned to read and write Spanish fluently. When only fourteen he contributed an article on the soldier-cardinal Albornoz to the "Young People's Catholic Magazine" (1838) Subsequently he studied law, and was admitted to the bar in 1846. In the following year he entered the novitiate of the Society of Jesus at Fordham, New York, and remained a member of the order until 1852. As a Jesuit he was associated with the scholarly Father Martin, S.J., Rector of St. Mary's College, Montreal, under whose inspiration was developed his natural taste for literary and historical studies. In 1852 he left the Society, and presently began a systematic study of the early Indian missions in America. The results of his researches soon appeared in the pages of the "United States Catholic Magazine", published in Baltimore. Shea's first note-worthy publication was the "Discovery and Exploration of the Mississippi Valley with the original narratives of Marquette, Allouez, Membre, Hennepin and Anastase Douay" (1852). The "Westminster Review" described it as "a most valuable and interesting volume" (July, 1853), and the London "Athenaeum" (1853, p.132) also spoke highly of it. In 1854, he published the "History of the Catholic Missions among the Indian Tribes of the United States, 1529-1854", a work of much labour and research. In the "Cramoisy Series" of twenty-six small volumes, he initiated in 1857 the republication of rare and valuable pamphlets touching upon the voyages of early explorers to America. In 1859 followed "A Bibliographical Account of Catholic Bibles, Testaments and Other Portions of Scripture", translated and published in the United States; he also edited an edition of Challoner's Bible. In 1860 appeared the first issue of his "Library of American Linguistics", a series of fifteen volumes of grammars and dictionaries of Indian languages. Beside "The Life of Pius IX" (1877), "The Catholic Churches of New York City" (1878), "The Hierarchy of the Catholic Church in the United States" (1886), Shea compiled many school histories and text-books; he also published numerous translations and adaptations, and contributed historical articles to Justin Winsor's "History of America", the "Catholic World", and the "U. S. Catholic Historical Magazine", of which he was the founder and first editor. He also edited for a number of years Sadlier's "Catholic Directory and Almanac". The articles on the Indians in the "Encyclopaedia Britannica" and the "American Encyclopedia" are all from his pen, and he was looked upon as the best informed man in America on everything pertaining to the aborigines. The notes, biographical sketches, and bibliographical accounts of works upon aboriginal history scattered throughout his various publications will be very serviceable for future historians. The preparation of the "History of the Catholic Church in the United States" (4 vols., 1886-92) extended over many years and entailed immense labour He was practically a pioneer in this field, as the very sources of information had yet to be unearthed. This work will stand as a monument to his untiring industry. Most of his time was meanwhile claimed by his position as literary editor of Frank Leslie's secular publications. In 1888 he became editor of the "Catholic News", in which position he continued up to the time of his death. St. Francis Xavier's College, Fordham University, and Georgetown conferred on him the degree of LL.D. in recognition of his work as a Catholic historian, and the University of Notre Dame awarded him the first Lætare Medal (1883) VALETTE in Cath. World, LV 55; Historical Records and Studies (1899), 130; WOLFF in Am. Cath. Quart., XVII, 411; Catholic News (New York, Feb. 1892) EDWARD P.SPILLANE Sir Ambrose Shea Sir Ambrose Shea Born in Newfoundland, 17 Sept., 1815; d. in London, 30 July, 1905. At the age of twenty-two he embarked successfully in journalism for a period of eight years, and thereafter devoted himself to mercantile pursuits. In 1848 he was elected to the House of Assembly of Newfoundland and, with the exception of a short period in 1869, he was continuously a member until 1886. In 1855, and again in 1860, he was chosen its speaker. He successfully negotiated the admission of Newfoundland, into reciprocity treaty arrangements in 1855; was an unofficial member of the executive government 1864-69; and went as delegate from Newfoundland to the Quebec conference on confederation in 1864. In 1883 he was appointed commissioner for Newfoundland to the International Fisheries Exhibition in London, and hereafter he was sent to Washington, where he successfully brought the State department into harmony with Canada for the extension of the Washington Treaty, 1885. For distinguished services rendered, he was honoured with the Knight Commandership of the Order of St. Michael and St. George in 1883. In 1887 he was appointed Governor of the Bahama Islands, and in that position achieved signal success in breathing new life and activity into a commercially stagnant colony. He initiated the sisal fibre industry, organized a public bank, laid the Bahamas-Florida cable, and fostered commercial enterprise in every department of the colony's industries, and by his prudent and progressive administration built up a lasting reputation as a most energetic governor. After his retirement in 1895 from the governorship to private life, he lived the last years of his active and successful career in London. In life religion was to Sir Ambrose a fact as real as were his duties in the various positions of responsibility held by him, and his fine character was strengthened and balanced by an ever-present consciousness of deep religious responsibility. CHRYSOSTOM SCHREINER Richard Lalor Sheil Richard Lalor Sheil Dramatist, prose writer, and politician, b. at Drumdowny, County Kilkenny, Ireland, 17 August, 1791; d. at, Florence, Italy, 25 May, 1851. His father, Edward Sheil, who had been a successful merchant at Cadiz, Spain, returned to Ireland and purchased the estate of Bellevue, near the city of Waterford. Richard received his early education at home from a French priest, an émigré. When eleven years old he was sent to a Catholic school kept by a French nobleman, at, Kensington, London, and a few years later to the Jesuit College at Stonyhurst, in Lancashire. In 1807 he entered Trinity College Dublin, "with a, competent knowledge of the classics some acquaintance with Italian and Spanish, and the power of reading and writing French as if it were his mother tongue". Graduating in 1811, he went to London to study law and was admitted to the Irish Bar in 1814. Meantime, pecuniary reverses had overtaken his family, and he could not look to his father for support. Having a literary bent, he turned to dramatic composition and produced a number of plays some of which were quite successful, the most popular being "Adelaide", "The Apostate", and "Evadne". Financially they were very successful. His chief fame, however. as a literary man came through his "Sketches at the Irish Bar", a series of articles contributed to the "New Monthly Magazine", which were published in two volumes after his death. They give considerable information of the leading men and events of the times. Early in life, even while at college, he had become interested in politics. The Catholic Board, the leaders of public opinion in Ireland, were divided as to the best policy to be pursued in the struggle for Catholic Emancipation. Sheil sided with those who were in favour of conciliating Protestant opinion, especially in granting the king a veto power over the appointment of the Catholic bishops. But O'Connell, wearied of the old method of petitioning and salaaming which had degraded Catholics in their own esteem and had procured from their rulers nothing but contempt, favoured more active measures. O'Connell's method prevailed, and Sheil would have nothing to do with it. After a few years, however, convinced that nothing short of strenuous agitation would succeed, he joined heartily with O'Connell in all his plans for Catholic Emancipation, demanding it not as a favour but as a right. In the Catholic Association, which succeeded the Catholic Board in 1823, Sheil was next to O'Connell the leading power. At the request of this organization he drew up a petition to Parliament setting forth the manifold abuses of justice in Ireland. Early in 1825 he went with several others to London to protest against the contemplated act of the English Government of suppressing the Catholic Association which had enrolled almost all Ireland in its effective plan of campaign. In I826 he contributed to "L'Etloile", a French periodical, a number of articles on the condition of Ireland. Written in French and unsigned, they were translated and published in leading periodicals in England and on the Continent, and accomplished their purpose -- to gain a hearing for Ireland. That Sheil was fearless and had the courage of his convictions was manifested on many occasions, especially by his scathing denunciation of the Duke of York, by his public address on the Irish patriot Theobald Wolfe Tone, and by his boldly coming before the people of Kent, England, who had assembled at Penenden Heath to protest against any relaxation of the laws against Catholics. Though his request, for a hearing on behalf of Catholic Ireland was not granted, his speech, which was already in press, appeared in a London newspaper as a part of the proceedings. Of this speech Jeremy Bentham, the philosopher, said: "So masterly a union of logic and of rhetoric scarcely have I ever beheld". In the historic Clare election of 1828 Sheil took a leading part. Under his influence the Catholic Association resolved to oppose the re-election of Mr. Vesey Fitzgerald because he had taken office in the anti-Catholic Government of the Duke of Wellington. Finding no Protestant candidate to make the fight, Sheil conceived the bold project of having O'Connell, "the uncrowned king of Ireland", enter the contest, though he knew well that no Catholic would consent to take the anti-Catholic test oath required of members of Parliament. But he knew also that an election meant the demand of 6,000,000 united Irish Catholics for justice a demand which even an anti-Catholic Parliament and an anti-Catholic king would probably grant for fear of a general uprising. At the close of the polling when the returns showed the triumphant election of the Liberator, Sheil in a remarkable address to the landlords assembled pointed out the folly and injustice of wreaking vengeance on their tenants. The Clare election brought on the Catholic Relief Bill of 1829 and opened to Sheil a career in Parliament where for eighteen years he served with distinction, first for Melbourne Port, then for Tipperary, and later for Dungarvan. His most important speeches in the House of Commons were on "The Church of Ireland", "Repeal of the Union", "Orange Lodges", "Corn Laws", "Votes by Ballot", and "Income Tax". In spite of a harsh voice and other natural defects, he became a leading orator in a Parliament noted for its eloquence=2E This is the testimony of two experts of such different schools as Mr. Gladstone and Mr. Disraeli. His speeches were always well prepared. He was very resourceful in the use of metaphor and antithesis and also in working out an idea to carry great weight, as in his famous reply to Lord Lyndhurst's accusation that the Irish were "aliens in blood, and aliens in religion". After some hesitation, he joined his old friends in demanding the restoration of the Irish Parliament, but the crushing defeat of the measure in 1834 caused him to look upon the agitation for repeal as a "splendid but unattainable fancy". From this time on, he cast his lot with the Whig party, and accepted office under the Government. For this he has been severely condemned as a mere officeseeker who thought more of his own interests than of his native land. Yet he acted as counsel for John O'Connell, son of the Liberator, in the famous state trials of 1844, and often spoke in behalf of Ireland. But evidently holding office moderated his zeal as a critic of the Government except when the Tories were in power. In November, 1850, Sheil accepted the post of British plenipotentiary at the Court of Tuscany, Italy, where he died six months later. His body was conveyed to Ireland and buried at Long Orchard, County Tipperary. McCULLAGH, Memoirs of Richard Lalor Sheil (London, 1855); WEBB, Compendium of Irish Biography (Dublin, 1878), s.v.; McCARTHY, A History of our own Times (London, 1880); D'ALTON, History of Ireland (London, 1910); DUNLOP in Dict. Nat. Biog., a. v. M.J. FLAHERTY Edward Sheldon Edward Sheldon Translator, b. at Beoley, 23 April, 1599; d. in London, 27 March, 1687. He was the third son of Edward Sheldon of Beoley, Worcestershire, and Elizabeth Markham his wife. He studied at Oxford and afterward at Gray's Inn, London, completing his education by a foreign tour. Having married Mary (or Margaret) Wake, daughter of Lionel Wake of Pedington, Northamptonshire, by whom he had nine sons and four daughters, he led a quiet life on his estate at Stratton, Gloucestershire. In 1641, being molested because of his religion, he removed to London where hi lived in retirement till his death. He translated four works from the French: "The Holy Life of M. De Renty" (1658); "The Rule of Catholic Faith", by Dr. Veron (1660); "The Counsels of Wisdom", by Nicholas Fouquet, Marquis of Belle Isle (1680); and "Christian Thoughts for Every Day of the Month" (1680). FOLEY, Records Eng. Prov. S.J., V, (Sheldon Pedigree), 850; WOOD, Athenæ Ozonienses, ed. BLISS, (London, 1813-1820); DODD, Church History m III (Brussels vere Wolverhampton, 1737-1742); GILLOW, Bibl. Dict. Eng. Cath., s.v.; COOPER in Dict. Nat. Biog., s.v. EDWIN BURTON Richard Shelley Richard Shelley English confessor; d. in Marshalsea prison, London, probably in February or March, 1585-6. Third son of John Shelley of Michelgrove, Clapham, Sussex, he was for some time abroad in attendance on his uncle Sir Richard Shelley, Knight of St. John, the last Grand Prior of England. He was given permission to return to England in May, 1583, which he did shortly afterwards. Two accounts are extant of the petition he presented on behalf of his persecuted fellow-Catholics. One is by Peter Penkevel, who was his servant in the Marshalsea at the time of his death. This is printed by Father Pollen. Peter Penkevel says he came to London about 1584, when Mr. Robert Bellamy and others were prisoners in the Marshalsea: but Robert Bellamy was not committed there till 30 January, 1585-6. So Penkevel must be wrong in his dates, and all that he knows about the petition, which was presented (as he says, to the queen) nearly a year previously, is mere hearsay. Strype on the other hand seems to have seen the petition, and according to him it was presented to Parliament. The only result was that Richard Shelley was sent to the Marshalsea, 15 March, 1584-5. There he remained till his death, which probably took place in February or March, 1585-6. He was certainly alive and in the Marshalsea in October, 1585. He was sick when Peter Penkevel came to him, and "shortly after died, a constant confessor in the said prison". This Richard Shelley must be distinguished from the Richard Shelley of Findon, Sussex, and All Cannings, Wilts (second son of Edward Shelley of Warminghurst, Sussex, and brother of Ven. Edward Shelley the martyr), who was committed to the Marshalsea for his religion, 13 August, 1580. Mass was said in his chamber there by the priest William Hartley, 24 August, 1582. He was still there 8 April, 1584, but was liberated soon after. He was again in prison in 1592. STRYPE, Annals, III (Oxford, 1824), ii, 432-4; BERRY, Sussex Genealogies (London, 1830), 62; POLLEN, Acts of the English Martyrs (London, 1891), 283; Calen= dar State Papers Domestic (1581-90), 231, 276. JOHN B. WAINEWRIGHT Northern Shen-Si Northern Shen-si ( Vicariate Apostolic). In 1640 the Christian religion was preached for the first time in the Province of Shen-si. It was, by turns, looked upon with favor and disfavor by the emperors of China. The Province of Shen-si belonged to the Vicariate Apostolic of Shan-si until 1841. By a Decree of 3 February, 1841, it was erected as a separate vicariate Apostolic. It kept the Province of Kan-su and Ku-Ku-Nor until 1878. In 1887, by a Decree of 6 July, the province was divided in two vicariates Apostolic, Northern and Southern Shen-si. The Vicariate Apostolic of Northern Shen-si includes the five Prefectures of Si-ngan, Feng-tsiang, Tung-chu, Yen-ngan and Ye-lin. The climate is healthful but very cold in winter. There are about 7,000,000 inhabitants. The mission is entrusted to the Franciscan Fathers. The present vicar Apostolic is the Rt. Rev. Maurice Gabriel, consecrated in 1908. He resides at Si-ngan. In 1903 the missions numbered: 10 European Franciscan Fathers; 21 native priests; 23,600 Catholics; 2,500 catechumens; 160 churches and chapels. In 1910 there were: 18 European Franciscan Fathers; 28 native priests; 25,116 Catholics; 4,627 catechumens; 203 churches and chapels. On May, 1911, the Vicariate Apostolic of Northern Shen-si was divided in two missions, Northern and Central Shen-si. Missiones Catholicae (Rome, 1907). V.H. MONTANAR Vicariate Apostolic of Southern Shen-Si Vicariate Apostolic of Southern Shen-si The southern part of Shen-si was entrusted in 1885 to the Seminary of Sts. Peter and Paul, established at Rome by Pius IX, 1874. In 1887 this section was erected as a vicariate Apostolic including two civil prefectures, Han-chung and Singan. The climate is damp and changeable. There are about 5,000,000 inhabitants. The present vicar Apostolic is the Right Rev. Mgr. Pio Giuseppe Passerini, titular Bishop of Achantus (b. 7 January 1866; consecrated in 1895). He resides at Tcheng-kow. In 1885 the mission numbered: 2 European missionaries, 3 native priests, 32 churches, 2 chapels, 7700 Catholics, 100 catechumens, 2 schools for boys, 4 schools for girls, 1 seminary, with 9 students. In 1910 there were: 16 European priests, 2 native priests, 50 churches, 23 chapels, 11,489 Catholics, 6305 catechumens, 19 schools for boys, 17 schools for girls, 1 seminary, with 20 students, 1 orphanage for boys, with 74 inmates, 1 orphanage for girls, with 350 inmates. Missiones Catholicæ (Rome, 1907). V.H. MONTANAR John Shepherd John Shepherd Musical composer, born about 1512; died about 1563; one of the great English musicians who rank with Tallis, Whyte, Taverner Farrant, Edwars, and Byrd. He was educated at St. Paul's music-school under Thomas Mulliner, and was appointed organist and master of the choristers of Magdalen College, Oxford, in 1542, which position he held, with a short intermission, till 1547. His attention was not wholly given to music, at this date, for he obtained a fellowship in Magdalen College in 1549, retaining it for two years. On 21 April, 1554, he petitioned as a student of music for twenty years the University of Oxford for the Degree of Mus.D., and he was one of Queen Mary's Chapel Royal from 1553 to 1558. Among the New Year's gifts to Queen Mary, on 1 January, 1557, there is an entry in the Chapel Royal books that "Shepherd of the Chapel gave three Rolls of Songs". He was certainly alive in 1562, but there is no record of him after that date, from which it is concluded that he died, or resigned, in 1563. There exist numerous compositions printed as well as manuscripts testifying to Shepherd's undoubted powers. His "Esurientes" for five voices, while The Royal College of Music, London, has four of his Latin motets. The Music School, Oxford, possesses much of his church music, including a delightful Magnifcat. Hawkins has reprinted two of his pieces, and Morley names him among the distinguished musicians of the sixteenth century. BURNEY, General History of Music (London, 1776-89); MORLEY, Introd. To Practicall Musicke (London, 1597); WALKER, Hist. Of Music in England (Oxford, 1907); GROVE, Diet. Of Music and Musicians (London, 1904-10). W.H. GRATTAN-FLOOD Sherborne Abbey Sherborne Abbey Located in Dorsetshire, England; founded in 998. Sherborne (scir-burne, clear brook) was originally the episcopal seat of the Bishop of Western Wessex, having been established as such by St. Aldhelm (705). The Benedictine Rule was introduced by Bishop Wulfsy III, who also governed the monastery as abbot, the monks forming his chapter. The office of abbot was, however, separated from that of bishop by Roger of Caen (1122), when the see was removed to Sarum, and the abbey church ceased to hold cathedral rank. The original Saxon Church of St. Aldhelm having become too small, Bishop Roger replaced it by a larger Norman one, and this was subsequently so rebuilt and altered, that it is now almost entirely perpendicular in style. A Lady-chapel was added in the thirteenth century, and later on a great restoration was commenced by Abbot John Brunyng (1415-1436), and continued by his successor William Bradford. A parish church had previously been erected at the west end of the abbey nave, but there were continual quarrels between the parishioners and the monks, because this Church of All-Hallows had not the proper status of a parish church, and remained the property of the monastery. Their differences led to serious disturbances which were eventually settled through the intervention of the bishop. A great fire occurred in 1437, said to have been caused by a parishioner, and this may perhaps have necessitated more rebuilding than had been originally contemplated. At the dissolution of the monastery (1536) the abbey and its lands were bought by Sir John Horsey, Knight, from whom the parishioners purchased the abbey church for the sum of £300, and since two churches were not now needed, that of All-Hallows, about which there had been so much contention, was forth with demolished. The conventual buildings, chiefly of the thirteenth, fourteenth, and fifteenth centuries, were handed over to the school, which had existed there since 705, and which in 1550 was refounded, receiving a new charter from Edward VI. These buildings have been added to from time to time, and Sherborne School now ranks amongst the leading public schools of England. The abbey church remains the parish church of the town, having been judiciously restored in recent years. Though Norman in plan, its perpendicular work is unusually fine, and the fan-vaulting of the choir absolutely unrivaled. TANNER, Notitia Monastica (London, 1794); DUGDALE, Monasticon Anglicanum (London, 1817-30); WILDMAN, Short History of Sherborne (Sherborne, 1902). G. CYPRIAN ALSTON Sherbrooke Sherbrooke ( Sherbrookiensis). Diocese in the Province of Quebec, suffragan of the Archdiocese of Montreal, erected by Pius IX, 28 Aug., 1874, formed of parts of the Dioceses of Three Rivers, St. Hyacinthe, and Quebec, and including that part of the Province of Quebec known as the Eastern Townships, renowned for the fertility of their soil, for their industry, and commerce. At present it comprises 74 parishes. The first missionaries who visited the territory now within the limits of the Diocese of Sherbrooke were Rev. Jean Raymbault (1816-23), John Holmes (1823-27), Michael Power (1827-31), Hugh Paisley (1831-32), Hubert Robson (1832-34). The last three died, martyrs of their zeal, attending the fever-stricken Irish in 1847. From 1834 till 1874 a great many missionaries labored with indefatigable zeal attending the Catholic population, which was thinly scattered over this immense tract of land. Roads in many places were unknown, and the missionaries had to travel on horseback or on foot, through dense forests infested with wolves, bears, and other savage animals. BISHOPS OF SHERBROOKE (1) Antoine Racine Born at St. Ambrose, Quebec, 26 Jan., 1822; ordained priest at Quebec, 12 Sept., 1844; elected Bishop of Sherbrooke, 1 Sept., 1874; consecrated by Cardinal Taschereau, 18 Oct., 1874; governed the See of Sherbrooke during nineteen years, d. 17 July, 1893. The following extract from his funeral oration, delivered by Mgr. Bernard O'Reilly, gives us an idea of the precepts this good bishop fulfilled in his career: "Yes, I must be a bishop without stain or blemish in my whole life; a man adorned with every virtue, and with all the graces of wisdom; a man modest, affable and of the most perfect moderation in his lofty dignity; a man who is an enemy to contestation and trouble, an angel of peace and conciliation; a man who is a stranger to self-interest and generous toward the Church and the poor; a man full of the knowledge of Holy Writ, of the unction of the Divine Word in all his pastoral teaching; a man solely intent on sanctifying his people, on rearing a clergy of model priests by giving them in his own person the example of the most edifying zeal and of a shining piety". (2) Paul S. La Rocque Born at Sainte Marie de Monnoir, 28 Oct., 1846; ordained priest, 9 May, 1869; elected Bishop of Sherbrooke, 6 Oct., 1893; consecrated on the 30 Nov. of the same year. Bishop La Rocque has continued the good work undertaken by his predecessor, and Sherbrooke is progressing wonderfully. STATISTICS When the diocese was erected, in 1874, there were but 28 secular priests and 26 parishes with resident priests; to-day there are 122 secular priests, 74 parishes, and 8 missions. The Catholic population in 1874 numbered 29,000; now it is 85 000. In 1874 there were only 130 schools with an attendance of 4000 pupils; now there are 369 schools, 1 college, 1 seminary, 12 academies, and 9 boarding-schools, with an attendance of 16,000 pupils. The Brothers of the Sacred Heart have 10 schools in the diocese. In all the principal towns there are convents wherein young girls get an excellent training. The different orders of nuns who have houses in the diocese are: Congregation de Notre Dame, Soeurs de la Presentation, Soeurs de l'Assomption, Soeurs des SS. Noms de Jesus-Marie, Filles de la Charite de Jesus, Soeurs de la Charite, Soeurs du Precieux Sang, Soeurs de la Sainte Famille, whose mother-house is in Sherbrooke. The Missionaires de la Salette have charge of the Sacred Heart Parish, Stanstead. The Redemptorist Fathers have also taken charge of a parish, and in the future their novitiate will be in Sherbrooke instead of Montreal. The Irish Brothers of the Presentation are opening a school in the city of Sherbrooke for the English speaking children. The diocese has also an Old Folks' Home, an Orphans' Home, and a hospital second to none in the Dominion of Canada. J.C. MCGEE Philip Henry Sheridan Philip Henry Sheridan Born at Albany, N.Y., U.S.A., 6 March, 1831; died at Nonquitt, Mass, 5 August, 1888. His family were among the Catholic pioneers who moved to Somerset, Ohio, during his boyhood; he entered the U.S. Military Academy in 1848 from that state and graduated in 1853, receiving the rank of brevet second lieutenant of infantry. In the following year he was sent to Texas and there, and in Oregon, served with much credit, settling difficulties with the Indians. At the outbreak of the Civil War he was made chief Quartermaster under General Halleck, and in May, 1862, was commissioned colonel of the Second Michigan Volunteer Cavalry. Rapid promotion followed, that of brigadier-general in July, and the command of a division of the Army of the Ohio in September; in the operations in the South-west, during the two following years, he greatly distinguished himself. Appointed commander of all the cavalry of the Army of the Potomac in April, 1864, he was thereafter one of General Grant's chief reliances in his operations in Virginia against Lee. During a brief absence of Sheridan in Washington, General Early attacked the Union Army near Cedar Creek, 19 October, 1864, and was at first victorious. Sheridan arived during the retreat, rode at full speed from Winchester, arrived in the field, and rallying his men, converted the disaster into a complete victory. General Grant writing of this feat said: "Turning what bid fair to be a disaster into a glorious victory, stamps Sheridan what I have always thought him, one of the ablest of generals". In November, 1864, his commission of major-general in the regular army was awarded him. His raids during the early part of 1865, to destroy the railroads and the other avenues of supply to Lee's army, contributed much to the final surrender of the Confederate Army at Appomattox in April. After the war Sheridan was appointed to command the military department in Louisina, Texas and Missouri, and during 1870-1, at the period of the Franco Prussian trouble, visited Europe where he was received with distinguished consideration at the headquarters of the German army, and was present at several important battles of the campaigne. He was promoted to the rank of lieutenant-general in 1869, succeeding General Sherman as commander-in-chief of the army in 1883, and shortly before his death, on1 June, 1888, was confirmed as general of the army. Personal Memoirs of P.H. Sheridan, General U.S. Army (New York, l888); CULLUM, Biog. Register of the Graduates, U.S.M.A., West Point (New York, 1868); Appleton's Annual Cyclopedia for 1883 (New York, 1889). THOMAS F. MEEHAN Martin Sherson Martin Sherson English priest and confessor, one of the Dilati (see ENGLISH MARTYRS), b. 1563; d. 1588. A native of Yorkshire, he matriculated at Oxford from St. John's College in 1575 at the age of twelve, becoming "a poor scholar of George Mannering who taught Rhetoric there"; arrived at the English College at Reims, 1 April, 1580; was confirmed by Bishop Goldwell, 11 June, 1580; left for Rome, 20 March; and entered the English College, 8 May, 1581,aged eighteen, where "through an over-zealous application to study and prayer he began to spit blood". He returned to Reims, 22 June, 1585; and was ordained sub-deacon in the chapel of the Holy Cross in Reims Cathedral, 21 Sept. by Mgr Louis de Brezé, Bishop of Meaux, deacon at Laon, 14 March, and priest at Laon, 5 April, 1586. He left for England, 16 June, and was imprisoned in the Marshalsea before 22 December, 1586. He was still there in March 1587-8, and died there soon after, aged twenty-five. Fr. Morris is in error in saying he died in February 1587-8, aged twenty-eight. "He was a young man of good abilities and well trained in piety and obedience. He was of moderate height, had a slight beard, a pale, oval face, and a rather large head." POLLEN, Acts of the English Martyrs (London, 1891), 271; MORRIS, Troubles of our Catholic Forefathers (3rd series, London, 1877), 36; KNOX, Douay Diaries (London, l878); FOLEY, Records Eng. Prov. S.J., VI (London, 1875-83), 125, 147; Catholic Record Society publications, II, V (London, 1905); FOSTER, Alumni Oxonienses. JOHN B. WAINEWRIGHT William Sherwood William Sherwood Bishop of Meath, d. at Dublin, 3 Dec. 1482. He was an English ecclesiastic who obtained the see by papal provision in April, 1460. Of his earlier life nothing is known. He soon came into conflict with Thomas Fitzgerald, eighth Earl of Desmond, who was deputy to George, Duke of Clarence, Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland. The earl accused the bishop of instigating the murder of some of his followers, and in 1464 both went to England to lay their grievances before the king. Edward IV upheld the earl, who was supported by the Irish parliament, and acquitted him of all charges of disloyalty and treasonable relations with the Irish people. But when in 1467 he was disgraced, and succeeded by the Earl of Worcester, Bishop Sherwood was suspected of leading the opposition, which finally brought the earl to the scaffold. Some years after his rival's death, Sherwood himself was appointed deputy, but his own rule was so unpopular that in 1477 he was removed from office, having governed for two years. He held the Chancellorship of Ireland from 1475 to 1481. He lies buried at Newton Abbey near Trim. Annals of the Four Masters (Dublin, 1848-51); GILBERT, Viceroys of Ireland (Dublin, 1865); KINGSFORD in Diet. Nat. Biog. Register of St. Thomas Abbey, Dublin (R.S. London, 1889) gives text of an agreement between Sherwood and the abbey. EDWIN BURTON James Shields James Shields Military officer, b. in Dungannon County Tyrone, Ireland, 12 Dec., 1810; d. at Ottumwa, Iowa, 1 June, 1879. He emigrated to the United States in 1826 where he at one proceeded to study law and began practicing at Kaskaskia, Ill., in 1832. He was elected to the state Legislature in 1836; became state auditor in 1839 and judge of the state supreme court in 1843. He was fulfilling his duties as commissioner of the general land-office when war with Mexico was declared, and he was commissioned brigadier general by President Polk, 1 July 1846. General Shields served with distinction under Taylor, Wool, and Scott, and gained the brevet of major-general at Cerro Gordo, where he was shot through the lung. He was again severely wounded at Chapultepec, and was mustered out in 1848. The same year he was appointed Governor of the Territory of Oregon, which office he soon resigned to represent Illinois in the United States Senate as a democrat. After the expiration of his term he removed to Minnesota and was United States senator from that state from 1858 to 1860, when he removed to California. On the breaking out of the Civil War, he was appointed brigadier-general of volunteers, 19 August, 1861. He fought gallantly in the Shenandoah Valley campaign, opening hostilities at Winchester, though severely wounded the preceding day in a preliminary engagement. While in command at Port Republic he was decisively beaten by General Jackson and resigned his commission, 28 March, 1863. He returned to California whence he removed to Carrollton, Mo., where he continued the practice of law. He subsequently served his state as a railroad commissioner and was a member of the Legislature from 1874-79. He was United States senator from Missouri at the time of his death. A monument was erected to him in St. Mary's Cemetery at Carrollton, which was unveiled by Archbishop Glennon on 12 Nov., 1910. JARVIS KEILEY Shi-Koku Shi-koku One of the four great islands of Japan, has all area of 7009 square miles, not counting the smaller islands which depend upon it. Its population according to the census of 1909 was 3,199,500. The name Shi-koku signifies "Four Kingdoms", the island having been divided, from ancient times, into the four provinces of: Awa, in the east; Sanuki, in the north-east; Tyo, in the north-west; and Tosa, in the south. In 1868 at the Restoration of Japan the names of these four provinces, as of all others in the empire, were changed, and the island is now divided into the four prefectures of: Tokushima-Ken (formerly Awa), Kagawa-Ken (Sanuki), Ehime-Ken (Tyo), and Kochi-Ken (Tosa). The proportion of inhabitants to the square mile for the island is 176; in the Prefecture of Kagawa it rises to 418, a higher figure than in any other prefecture of Japan. The climate is very temperate and salubrious, and the Province of Tosa is the only one in the empire where two crops of rice are grown every year. The country is very mountainous, rising at some points to 3000 and 4000 feet, and even to 6480 feet at Tshizuchi-Yama in the Prefecture of Ehime, which is the highest point of the island. The population is most dense on the seacoast. The four prefectures have many good schools, primary and secondary, normal schools for both sexes schools of art, of agriculture, and of commerce; but there is no university, the public libraries are very insignificant, and the charitable institutions and social organizations are embryonic where they are not altogether wanting. There are good roads but no railway, although the project of one has been approved by the Government for about ten years past. Various lines of steamers, making the passage daily in six hours or little more, connect all the provinces of Shikoku with the great ports of Kobe and Osaka. Shikoku is the territorial district of the eleventh division of the army; the bulk of the troops are quartered at Marugame and Zentsuji (Kagawa-Ken); but in the three other provincial capitals there is a regiment of about 1500 men. The principal cities are: Tokushima (Toku-shima-Ken), pop. 65,561; Kochi (Kochi-Ken), pop. 39,781; Takamatsu (Kagawa-Ken), pop. 43,489; Matsuyama (Ehime-Ken), pop. 42,338. Religion The Prefecture-Apostolic of Shi-koku was established by a Decree of Pius X, 28 Feb., 1904, and its administration given to the Spanish Dominicans of the Province of Smo. Rosario de Filipinas. Before this it had been administered by the Missions Etrangeres of Paris, being regarded as part of the Diocese of Osaka, under the jurisdiction of Mgr Jules Chatron, the present bishop. The evangelization of the island began in 1882, when Father M. Plessis, in spite of great difficulties, founded in the city of Kochi the first chapel, under the invocation of the Twenty-six Martyrs of Japan. In 1889 and 1898 were founded the residences of Matsuyama and Tokushima. These three stations were all that the Dominicans found when they took charge of the mission in Oct., 1904. Since 1906 there has been a missionary resident at Uwajima, a city of 15,000 inhabitants, in Ehime-Ken; and since 1911 a mission has been established at Takamatsu, which is connected with more than five secondary ports. There is an orphanage for boys, and the confraternity of the Most Holy Rosary is established at Kochi. The official residence of the prefect Apostolic, the Very Rev. José M. Alvarez (appointed 2 Oct., 1904), is the city of Tokushima. The statistics of the mission in 1911 were: Dominican missionaries, 6; Christians, 394; baptisms, 86; communions, 889; confirmations, 17; marriages, 4; interments, 6. The inhabitants of Shi-koku profess various forms of Buddhism; some few profess Shintoism. Both of these creeds are constantly falling into decay, and as it is very difficult to introduce Christianity, religious indifference gains ground among the youth of Japan. JOSÉ M. ALVAREZ Shire Shire (SHIRENENSIS). Vicariate apostolic in Nyassaland Protectorate, Africa. The Nyassaland Protectorate, formerly known as British Central Africa, lies between 9°41' and 17°15' S. lat., and 33° and 36° E. long. It is about 520 miles long, its width varying from 50 to 100 miles. It covers an area of 43,608 square miles. The white population is at most 600, while there are millions of blacks. Nyassaland is divided into thirteen districts. The mission of the White Fathers evangelizes the five northern districts which lie west of Lake Nyassa. The Vicariate Apostolic of Shire is composed of the eight other districts lying south of Lake Nyassa. The vicariate lies between 13°30' and 17°15' S. lat. It is bounded on the north by the District of Angoniland and Lake Nyassa, on the east, south, and west by Portuguese East Africa. The territory lies 130 miles as the crow flies from the Indian Ocean. The name is derived from the River Shire which flows through the length of the vicariate. The river carries to the Zambezi the waters of Lake Nyassa; it is 295 miles long, 245 miles in English territory, and 50 in Portuguese territory. Propaganda confided to the missionaries of the Society of Mary, founded by Bl. Louis Grignion de Montfort, the evangelization of the territory which now forms the Vicariate Apostolic of Shire. On 28 June, 1901, the first three missionaries arrived at Blantyre and on 25 July began their first mission in Angoniland. The mission of Shire developed rapidly, owing doubtless to the zeal of the missionaries but also to the sympathy of the numerous population. In 1904 the mission was made a prefecture Apostolic and one of the missionaries, Rev. Father Prezeau, former missionary of the Diocese of Kingston, Canada, was elected the first prefect Apostolic. Already four stations had been founded, and numerous schools established in all directions spread the Christian doctrine. The results were satisfactory. On 14 April, 1908, Pius X erected the prefecture into a vicariate Apostolic with Mgr Prezeau as the first vicar. Mgr Prezeau was consecrated at Zanzibar, 4 Oct., 1908, by Mgr Allgeyer of the Fathers of the Holy Ghost. The life of the first vicar Apostolic was of short duration; he died in France 4 December, 1910. On 4 May, 1910, one of the missionaries received from Rome the notification of his elevation to the dignity of vicar Apostolic. Mgr Auneau was consecrated at Chilubula, Northern Rhodesia, by Mgr Dupont of the White Fathers, 1 Nov., 1910. At present the Vicariate Apostolic of Shire has 4 missionary stations and 2 convents of the Daughters of Wisdom founded by Bl. Louis Grignion de Montfort. The staff of the mission is composed of 12 missionaries, 9 nuns, and 2 lay brothers. The workers are few for the task but good work is being done. From 1901 to 1911, 2078 baptisms were administered, 1000 catechumens prepared. The 70 schools have more than 5200 pupils. By means of schools the Protestant sects spread their doctrines; they are the most powerful means of propagation. Within the vicariate there are 7 Protestant missions; they have 325 schools, more than 11,606 pupils, and for the support of their schools they spend more than £5173. Schools are also the most powerful means of action for Catholics; the teachers are especially trained and educated for this work, the schools are open on every week day, and on Sunday prayers are taught there. Despite formidable Protestant competition the Catholic religion makes progress, and by degrees its doctrines are made known to the people. The negroes who inhabit the region are Angouis, Yaos, and Angourous, representing three different tribes. JEAN MARIE RYO Shrewsbury Shrewsbury (SALOPIENSIS). One of the thirteen English dioceses created by Apostolic Letter of Pius IX on 27 Sept., 1850. It then comprised the English counties of Shropshire and Cheshire, and the Welsh counties of Carnarvon, Flint, Denbigh, Merioneth, Montgomery, and Anglesey. When on 4 March, 1895, Leo XIII formed the Vicariate of Wales, these Welsh counties were separated from this diocese, so that now only Shropshire and Cheshire are under the jurisdiction of the Bishop of Shrewsbury. Before the Reformation, Cheshire and the portion of Shropshire north and east of the River Severn were under the Bishop of Coventry and Lichfield, and the rest of Shropshire was under the Bishop of Hereford. On the creation of the Diocese of Chester by Henry VIII, Cheshire was withdrawn from the old Diocese of Coventry and Lichfield. When Pope Innocent XI in 1688 divided England into four vicariates, Shropshire was in the Midland, and Cheshire in the Northern District, and when eight vicariates were formed by Gregory XVI in 1840, Shropshire was part of the Central District, and Cheshire part of the Lancashire District. The diocese takes its name from Shrewsbury, the county town of Shropshire, and is under the patronage of Our Lady Help of Christians, and St. Winefride. The latter saint was chosen because her body had been translated from Gwytherin, in Denbighshire, to Shrewsbury in 1138, and deposited with great honor and solemnity in the Benedictine abbey founded by Roger, Earl of Montgomery, in 1083, where it remained until her shrine was plundered at the dissolution of the monasteries. The first bishop of the diocese was James Brown (1812-81), president of Sedgeley Park School, who was consecrated 27 July, 1851. Out of a total population of 1,082,617, Catholics numbered about 20,000. There were 30 churches and chapels attended by resident priests, and 6 stations; 1 convent, that of the Faithful Companions of Jesus, in Birkenhead, to which was attached a boarding-school for young ladies, and also a small day-school for poor children. There were Jesuits at Holywell, who also had a college at St. Bruno's, Flintshire, and a Benedictine at Acton Burnell. When Dr. Brown celebrated the jubilee of his consecration, the secular priests had increased to 66, and the regulars to 32. Instead of one religious house of men and one of women, there were now four of men, and nine of women; and many elementary schools had been provided for the needs of Catholic children. In 1852 the bitter feeling caused by-the re-establishment of the hierarchy found vent in serious riots at Stockport. On 29 June a large mob attacked the Church of Sts. Philip and James; they broke the windows and attempted to force in the doors, but before they could effect an entrance, Canon Randolph Frith, the rector, succeeded in removing the Blessed Sacrament, and secreting It with the chalices, etc., in a small cupboard in the side chapel. He was compelled to flee immediately to the belltower, and, whilst the rabble were destroying whatever they could lay their hands upon, he made his escape along the roof, and descended by the spouting at the back of the presbytery. Much of the church furniture, with vestments, etc., was piled up in the street and burned. At St. Michael's, the Host was desecrated, and the pyx and ciborium carried away. On the death of Dr. Brown, Right Rev. Edmund Knight (1827-1905), who was auxiliary from 1879, was translated to this see 25 April, 1882, and, on his resignation in May, 1895, was succeeded by Right Rev. John Carroll (1838-97), who had been coadjutor since 1893. He was followed by Right Rev. Samuel Webster Allen (1844-1908), who ruled the diocese from 1897 till his death in 1908. His valuable library on Egyptology, his favorite study, was bequeathed to the new Capuchin foundation at Cowley College, Oxford. The present ruler of the diocese, 1911, is Right Rev. Hugh Singleton (b. 1851). The Catholic population of the diocese is now 58,013, Shropshire contributing under 3000, partly on account of agricultural depression and the consequent flocking to industrial centres. There are 90 clergy, 16 convents, representatives of 4 orders of men, 8 secondary schools for girls, an orphanage and industrial school for boys, a home for aged poor, a home for penitents, and soon there is to be an orphanage erected in memory of Bishop Knight. At Oakwood Hall, Romiley, a house of retreats for working-men has been opened and has already done important work; and at New Brighton, the nuns of Our Lady of the Cenacle have opened a house of retreats for working-women and ladies. Shropshire is singularly rich in archeological interest, its pre-Reformation parish churches, the noble ruins of monasteries round the Wrekin, the Roman city of Uriconium (Wroxeter), the lordly castle of Ludlow, giving the county a place apart in the heart of the antiquary. In Shrewsbury itself, where once Grey, Black, and Austin Friars and the Black Monks of St. Benedict had foundations, there is now a beautiful little cathedral, built by E. Welby Pugin. Chester, too, with its quaint streets, black and white houses, and venerable cathedral and city walls, claims the visitor's attention. When the body of Daniel O'Connell was brought back from Genoa, it rested in the old chapel in Queen's Street on its way to Ireland. Diocesan Archives; MS. History of Missions of the Diocese; Catholic Directories; Transactions of Shropshire Archeological Society; BUTLER, Lives of the Saints; MAZIERE BRADY, Annals of the Catholic Hierarchy; GAIRDNER, Hist. of the English Church in the 16th Century (London, 1904); GILLOW, Bibl. Dic. Eng. Cath. (London, 1885). JOSEPH KELLY Shrines in Great Britain and Ireland Shrines of Our Lady and the Saints in Great Britain and Ireland I. SANCTUARIES OF OUR LADY A. England (1) Abingdon -- St. Edward the Martyr and St. Dunstan, Archbishop of Canterbury, both encouraged pilgrimages to Our Lady of Abingdon, causing it to be resorted to by crowds of pious persons. (2) Canterbury -- At the east end of St. Augustine's monastery was an oratory of Our Lady built by King Ethelbert in which reposed the bodies of many saints. The old Chronicler informs us that "in it the Queen of heaven did often appear; in it was the brightness of miracles made manifest; in it the voices of angels, and the melodious strains of holy virgins were frequently heard". (3) Caversham, Berks -- A chapel of Our Lady in the church of the Austin Canons was a centre of great devotion, where rich offerings were made by Countess Isabel of Warwick, Elizabeth of York, queen-consort of Henry VII, and by Henry VIII in his youthful days. The entire image was plated with silver. (4) Coventry -- A celebrated image of Our Lady was here greatly venerated. With it are associated the glorious names of Leofric, Earl of Mercia, and his wife, the Countess Godgifu (Godiva). The splendid abbey church founded by them in 1043 surpassed all others in the land in princely, even royal magnificence. It was spoken of as the glory of England and contained dazzling treasures. On her death Godgifu sent a rich chaplet of precious gems to be hung round Our Lady's neck; no description of this image has reached us. The church was entirely demolished by Henry VIII. (5) Ely -- In the abbey church was venerated a magnificent image of Our Lady seated on a throne with her Divine Child in her arms, the whole marvellously wrought in silver and gold. Hither came King Canute on the feast of Our Lady's Purification (1020?). (6) Evesham -- The name of this renowned sanctuary perpetuates the vision of Our Lady to a poor herdsman named Eoves. An abbey church was here built by Earl Leofric and the Countess Godgifu and enriched with a splendid image of Our Lady and Child, beautifully wrought of gold and silver. At once it became an object of popular devotion and attracted numerous pilgrims. (7) Glastonbury was the most ancient and venerable sanctuary of Our Lady in England (see Glastonbury Abby). In 530 St. David of Menevia, accompanied by seven of his suffragan bishops, came to Glastonbury, invited thither by the sanctity of the place, and consecrated a Chapel of Our Lady on the east side of the church. As a mark of his devotion to the Queen of Heaven, he adorned the golden superaltar with a sapphire of inestimable value, known as the Great Sapphire of Glastonbury. The Silver Chapel of Our Lady was stored with costly gifts, the value of which, at our present standard, mounted to a prodigious sum. Among the Saxon kings who came hither on pilgrimage may be mentioned Athelstan and Edgar the Peaceable, the latter laying his sceptre on the Blessed Virgin's altar and solemnly placing his kingdom under her patronage. (8) Ipswich -- There were four churches of Our Lady in Ipswich, but the greatly renowned miraculous image was in St. Mary's chapel, known as Our Lady of Grace. The numerous miracles wrought there were proved genuine by Blessed Thomas More in one of his works. Cardinal Wolsey ordered a yearly pilgrimage to be made to Our Lady's sanctuary by the students of the college he had founded at Ipswich. In the thirtieth year of Henry VIII this image was conveyed to London and burnt at Chelsea, the rich offerings and jewels going to the king's treasury. (9) Tewkesbury -- The church, founded in 715 by two Mercian dukes, Oddo and Doddo, enshrined within its walls a statue of Our Lady that was held in the greatest veneration. Isabella Beauchamp, Countess of Warwick, gave a chalice and other valuable presents to this sanctuary in 1439. The statue had the good fortune to escape destruction at the time of the Reformation, probably owing to the reluctance of the magistrates to arouse the indignation of the populace, who regarded it with extraordinary veneration. In the reign of James I a Puritan inhabitant of the town got possession of this relic of the old religion, and to mark his contempt for it caused it to be hollowed out and used as a trough for swine. Terrible punishments overtook him and all the members of his family. (10) Walsingham was the most celebrated of all the English sanctuaries of Our Lady. So great was the veneration in which it was held that it was called the "Holy Land of Walsingham". About 1061 a little chapel, similar to that of the Holy House of Nazareth (not yet translated to Loreto) and dedicated to the Annunciation, was built here by Rychold (Recholdis) de Faverches, a rich widow, in consequence, it is said, of an injunction received from Our Lady. Within the chapel was a wooden image of the Blessed Virgin and Child. Pilgrims flocked from all parts of England and from the Continent to this sanctuary, and its priory became one of the richest in the world. Among the royal and noble pilgrims were: Henry III, who came in 1248; Edward I in 1272 (?) and 1296; Edward II in 1315; his consort, Isabella of France, in 1332; Edward III in 1361; Edward IV and his queen in 1469; Henry VII in 1487; Henry VIII in 1511, walking barefoot from Barsham Hall, on which occasion he presented Our Lady with a necklace of great value; and finally Queen Catherine of Aragon in 1514. About 1538 the venerated image was brought to London with that of Our Lady of Ipswich, and both were publicly burnt at Chelsea in presence of Cromwell. Fifteen of the canons of Walsingham were condemned for high treason; five were executed. All the jewels and treasures left by the piety of the faithful found their way into Henry VIII's coffers. (11) Worcester -- St. Mary's Minster at Worcester is of ancient date, and pre-eminent amongst its benefactors were Leofric and Godgifu, Earl and Countess of Mercia. The celebrated image of Our Lady and the Holy Child was carved of wood and of large size; it stood over the high altar and could be seen from all parts of the church. The apostate Bishop Latimer, writing to Cromwell, refers to this Statue in coarse terms, and expresses a hope that with its sisters of Walsingham and Ipswich it my be burnt in Smithfield. (12) Lincoln -- Our Lady of Lincoln is frequently mentioned among the sanctuaries which were regarded by the English with special veneration. In the inventory of the treasures of the cathedral appropriated by Henry VIII, there is mention of the image of Our Lady, sitting in a chair, silver and gilt, having a crown on her head, silver and gilt, set with stones and pearls, and her Child sitting on her knee with one crown upon His head, with a diadem set with pearls and stones, having a ball with a cross, silver and gilt, in His left hand". Of St. Hugh of Lincoln it is said that "for the glory of the ever Virgin Mother of the True Light, he crowned the lights which usually burned in her church with a host of others". Besides the above, there were many other remarkable sanctuaries of Our Lady in England, to which Catholic pilgrims resorted before the unhappy days of the Reformation. B. Scotland (1) Aberdeen -- Our Lady at the Bridge of Dee, described as Our Lady at the Brig, is mentioned in 1459. Near to the chapel was a well dedicated to the Blessed Virgin, where miraculous favours were obtained. In the cathedral were four altars of Our Lady, each with her image, one being of silver. (2) Edinburgh: Our Lady of Holyrood -- In the Jesuit Church of the Sacred Heart, Lauriston Street there is an image of Our Lady and Child, carved in wood, which formerly was in Holyrood. For many years it was in the possession of the earls of Aberdeen and subsequently was purchased by Mr. Edmund Waterton, who presented it to the above church. (3) Haddington -- After defeating the Scots at Halidon Hill in 1333 Edward III ravaged the Lowlands, and part of his navy (says the chronicler of 1355) "spoiled the Kirk of Our Lady of Haddington, and returned with the spoil thereof to their ships". But the sacrilege did not go unpunished, for a violent north wind rose and hurled the ships upon the sands and rocks. (4) Musselburgh -- The church, dedicated to Our Lady of Loreto, was most famous and resorted to by numerous pilgrims, whose piety was rewarded with miraculous favours. The fury of the Calvinist reformers destroyed the sanctuary, and in 1590 the materials were used in building the Tolbooth. C. Ireland (1) Dublin -- A statue of the Virgin Mother was greatly venerated in St. Mary's Abbey and mention is made of it by Simmel in 1487. In 541 the abbey was destroyed, its property sequestrated, and the image partly burnt. Part of it, however, was saved and is now venerated in the Carmelite church. (2) Muckross, formerly Irrelagh -- The image of Our Lady was here greatly venerated. When the English were devastating the abbey and had torn down and trampled on the crucifix, some of the friars carried off the image of Our Lady and hid it at the foot of a dead tree. Soon the dead tree revived and leaves sprouted in abundance, forming a shelter to the concealed statue. (3) Navan -- In the abbey church was an image of the Blessed Virgin held in great repute, to which people from all parts of Ireland, princes and peasants, rich and poor, came on pilgrimage, and to which was attributed miraculous power. (4) Trim, the most celebrated sanctuary of Our Lady in Ireland, stood in the abbey of the canons regular of St. Augustine. Pilgrims flocked to it from all parts of the country and enriched it with their offerings. Many and great miracles are said to have been wrought here. The image of Our Lady of Trim shared the fate of Our Lady of Walsingham, being publicly burnt in 1539. II. SHRINES OF THE SAINTS (1) St. Thomas a Becket, Archbishop of Canterbury, was martyred in Canterbury Cathedral in 1170. His sacred body, at first buried in the lower part of the church, was shortly after taken up and laid in a sumptuous shrine in the east end. Innumerable miracles were wrought at his tomb and pilgrims from all parts of England and the continent flocked thither to implore his aid. So great were the offerings made by them that the church abounded with more than princely riches. The shrine was covered with plates of gold and enriched with jewels, rubies, sapphires, diamonds, and great oriental pearls (Morris, "Life of St. Thomas", 391). It was an object of the unceasing veneration of all Christendom until the well-known sacrilegious profanation under Henry VIII. (2) St. Edward the Confessor, d. 5 Jan., 1066. William the Conqueror, who ascended the throne in October of the same year, caused the saint's coffin to be inclosed in a rich case of gold and silver. In 1102 the body was found to be incorrupt, the limbs flexible, and the cloths fresh and clean; several remarkable miracles took place at the tomb. Two years after canonization (1161) the saint's body, still incorrupt, was solemnly translated to a shrine of surpassing magnificence, which was despoiled in the reign of Henry VIII. (3) St. Patrick, Apostle of Ireland, d. 493 at Down in Ulster, where his body was found in a church of his name in 1185. It was then reverently translated to a shrine prepared in another part of the same church. On St. Patrick's Purgatory, see PILGRIMAGES. (4) St. Wulstan, Bishop of Worcester, and one of the last of the Anglo-Saxon bishops, d. in 1095, and was canonized in 1203. His venerable remains, clothed in pontifical vestments, were exposed in the church for three days to satisfy the devotion of the people, after which his friend, Robert, Bishop of Hereford, to whom he had appeared in a vision, came to celebrate his obsequies. His tomb in Worcester Cathedral was for centuries a centre of attraction to numerous pilgrims, whose piety was rewarded with many miraculous favours. It was rifled of its treasures and despoiled by Henry VIII about the year 1539. (5) St. Gilbert of Sempringham -- At the time of his death (4 Feb., 1189) many persons testified that they saw marvellous lights flashing from the sky, indicating that a great servant of God was quitting this world. He was buried at Sempringham and many miracles were reported to have occurred at his tomb. (6) St. Kentigern of Scotland (d. 600) spent the closing years of his life in Glasgow, where he was visited by St. Columba of Iona. His tomb in the crypt of his titular church in Glasgow was long famous for miracles, but is now despoiled of ornament and left without honour, except by the few Catholics who chance to visit the cathedral. (7) St. Cuthbert of Lindisfarne (See ST. CUTHBERT). (8) St. Alban, protomartyr of England, d. 304. In the time of Constantine the Great a magnificent church was erected on the place of his martyrdom, where his tomb became illustrious for miracles. The pagan Saxons having destroyed this edifice, Offa, King of the Mercians, erected another in 793 with a great abbey, which became the head of the Benedictine communities in England. (9) St. Swithin (See ST. SWITHIN). (10) St. Osmund, Bishop of Salisbury, d. 1099. In 1457 his remains were translated from Old Sarum to the new cathedral in modern Salisbury, and there deposited in the chapel of Our Lady. (11) St. Oswald, King of Northumbria, was slain by the King of Mercia in 642. His mutilated body found a resting place in Bardney Abbey, Lincolnshire, whence, during the Danish invasion, it was removed to Gloucester Cathedral. See Oswald, Saint. (12) St. Aidan, Bishop Of Lindisfarne, d. 651 within a tent set up for him by the wall of the church of the king's villa at Bamborough. It is related that St. Cuthbert, then a shepherd boy in the mountains, saw in vision his blessed spirit carried by angels into heaven. He was first buried in the cemetery in Lindisfarne, but when the new Church of St. Peter was built there, his body was translated to it and deposited on the right hand of the altar. A portion of his relics was afterwards taken to Iona. (13) St. Ninian, Bishop of Galloway -- His tomb, where miracles were wrought, was venerated at Whithorn till the change of religion. (14) St. Thomas, Bishop of Hereford. -- The narrative of numerous miracles obtained at his tomb in the cathedral church at Hereford filled whole volumes. A large relic is preserved at Stonyhurst College. (15) St. Wilfrid, Bishop of York, d. 709 at Oundle in Northamptonshire. His sacred relics were carried to Ripon and deposited in the Church of St. Peter, built by him. In the time of the Danish wars they were translated by St. Odo to Canterbury. (16) St. Winefride, virgin and martyr, d. 600. Her holy death took place at Gwytherin in Wales, hence her body was translated to Shrewsbury in 1138, and there deposited in the church of the Benedictine Abbey. At the dissolution of the monasteries her shrine was plundered. Her miraculous well at Holywell is the only place of pilgrimage in Great Britain that has survived the shock of the Reformation. (17) St. Hugh, Bishop of Lincoln, d. 1200, in London. His funeral was attended by John of England, William of Scotland, who had dearly loved the saint, three archbishops, fourteen bishops, above a hundred abbots, and a great number of earls and barons of the realm. Many and great miracles took place at his tomb in Lincoln Cathedral. Eighty years after his deposition the venerable body, found to be incorrupt, was translated to a richer shrine, which was plundered by Henry VIII some centuries later. (18) St. Edmund -- This holy king was martyred by the Danes in 870. The saint's head, which had been struck off, was carried by the infidels into a wood and thrown into a brake of bushes, but miraculously found by a pillar of light and deposited with the body at Haxon. The sacred treasure was conveyed to St. Edmundsbury, where the church of timber erected over it was replaced in 1020 by a stately edifice of stone. In 920, for fear of the Danes, the body was conveyed to London, but subsequently translated again to St. Edmundsbury. The abbey church that enshrined his remains was one of the richest and stateliest in England. Gumppenberg, Atlas Marianus (Munich, 1672); Waterton, Pietas Mariana Britannica (London, 1879); Northcote, Celebrated sanctuaries of the Madonna (London, 1868). Acta SS.; Butler, Lives of the Saints; Stanton, Menology of England and Wales (London. 1888). P.J. CHANDLERY The Shroud of Turin The Holy Shroud (of Turin) This name is primarily given to a relic now preserved at Turin, for which the claim is made that it is the actual "clean linen cloth" in which Joseph of Arimathea wrapped the body of Jesus Christ (Matthew 27:59). This relic, though blackened by age, bears the faint but distinct impress of a human form both back and front. The cloth is about 13 1/2 feet long and 4 1/4 feet wide. If the marks we perceive were caused by human body, it is clear that the body (supine) was laid lengthwise along one half of the shroud while the other half was doubled back over the head to cover the whole front of the body from the face to the feet. The arrangement is well illustrated in the miniature of Giulio Clovio, which also gives a good representation of what was seen upon the shroud about the year 1540. The cloth now at Turin can be clearly traced back to the Lirey in the Diocese of Troyes, where we first hear of it about the year 1360. In 1453 it was at Chambéry in Savoy, and there in 1532 it narrowly escaped being consumed by a fire which by charring the corners of the folds has left a uniform series of marks on either side of the image. Since 1578 it has remained at Turin where it is now only exposed for veneration at long intervals. That the authenticity of the Shroud of Turin is taken for granted, in various pronouncements of the Holy See cannot be disputed. An Office and Mass "de Sancta Sindone" was formerly approved by Julius II in the Bull "Romanus Pontifex" of 25 April, 1506, in the course of which the Pope speaks of "that most famous Shroud (proeclarissima sindone) in which our Savior was wrapped when he lay in the tomb and which is now honorably and devoutly preserved in a silver casket." Moreover, the same Pontiff speaks of the treaties upon the precious blood. Composed by his predecessor, Sixtus IV, in which Sixtus states that in the Shroud "men may look upon the true blood and portrait of Jesus Christ himself." A certain difficulty was caused by the existence elsewhere of other Shrouds similarly impressed with the figure of Jesus Christ and some of these cloths, notably those of Besançon, Cadouin, Champiègne, Xabregas, etc., also claimed to be the authentic linen sindon provided by Joseph of Arimathea, but until the close of the last century no great attack was made upon the genuineness of the Turin relic. In 1898 when the Shroud was solemnly exposed, permission was given to photograph it and a sensation was caused by the discovery that the image upon the linen was apparently a negative -- in other words that the photographic negative taken from this offered a more recognizable picture of a human face than the cloth itself or any positive print. In the photographic negative, the lights and the shadows were natural, in the linen or the print, they were inverted. Three years afterwards, Dr. Paul Vignon read a remarkable paper before the Académie des Sciences in which he maintained that the impression upon the Shroud was a "vaporigraph" caused by the ammoniacal emanations radiating from the surface of Christ's body after so violent a death. Such vapours, as he professed to have proved experimentally, were capable of producing a deep reddish brown stain, varying in intensity with the distance, upon a cloth impregnated with oil and aloes. The image upon the Shroud was therefore a natural negative and as such completely beyond the comprehension or the skill of any medieval forger. Plausible as this contention appeared, a most serious historical difficulty had meanwhile been brought to light. Owing mainly to the researches of Canon Ulysse Chevalier a series of documents was discovered which clearly proved that in 1389 the Bishop of Troyes appealed to Clement VII, the Avignon Pope then recognized in France, to put a stop to the scandals connected to the Shroud preserved at Lirey. It was, the Bishop declared, the work of an artist who some years before had confessed to having painted it but it was then being exhibited by the Canons of Lirey in such a way that the populace believed that it was the authentic shroud of Jesus Christ. The pope, without absolutely prohibiting the exhibition of the Shroud, decided after full examination that in the future when it was shown to the people, the priest should declare in a loud voice that it was not the real shroud of Christ, but only a picture made to represent it. The authenticity of the documents connected with this appeal is not disputed. Moreover, the grave suspicion thus thrown upon the relic is immensely strengthened by the fact that no intelligible account, beyond wild conjecture, can be given of the previous history of the Shroud or its coming to Lirey. An animated controversy followed and it must be admitted that though the immense preponderance of opinion among learned Catholics (see the statement by P.M. Baumgarten in the "Historiches Jarbuch", 1903, pp. 319-43) was adverse to the authenticity of the relic, still the violence of many of its assailants prejudiced their own cause. In particular the suggestion made of blundering or bad faith on the part of those who photographed were quite without excuse. From the scientific point of view, however, the difficulty of the "negative" impression on the cloth is not so serious as it seems. This Shroud like the others was probably painted without fraudulent intent to aid the dramatic setting of the Easter sequence: Die nobis Maria, quid vidisti in via Angelicos testes, sudarium et vestes. As the word sudarium suggested, it was painted to represent the impression made by the sweat of Christ, i.e. probably in a yellowish tint upon unbrilliant red. This yellow stain would turn brown in the course of centuries, the darkening process being aided by the effects of fire and sun. Thus, the lights of the original picture would become the shadow of Paleotto's reproduction of the images on the shroud is printed in two colours, pale yellow and red. As for the good proportions and æsthetic effect, two things may be noted. First, that it is highly probable that the artist used a model to determine the length and position of the limbs, etc.; the representation no doubt was made exactly life size. Secondly, the impressions are only known to us in photographs so reduced, as compared with the original, that the crudenesses, aided by the softening effects of time, entirely disappear. Lastly, the difficulty must be noticed that while the witnesses of the fifteenth and early sixteenth centuries speak of the image as being then so vivid that the blood seemed freshly shed, it is now darkened and hardly recognizable without minute attention. On the supposition that this is an authentic relic dating from the year A.D. 30, why should it have retained its brilliance through countless journeys and changes of climate for fifteen centuries, and then in four centuries more have become almost invisible? On the other hand if it be a fabrication of the fifteenth century this is exactly what we should expect. Baumgarten stated in 1903 that more than 3500 articles, books, et,. Had at that time been written upon the Holy Shroud. The most important is CHEVALIER, Etude critique sur l'origine du saint suaire (Paris, 1900). Some useful details are added by MÉLY, Le saint suaire de Turin est-il authentique? (Parish, 1902). Baumgarten in Historiches Jahrbuch (Munich, 1903), 319-43, shows that the preponderance of Catholic opinion is greatly against the authenticity of the shroud. See also BRAUN in Stimmen aus Maria-Loach, LXIII (1902), 249 sqq. And 398 sqq.,; THURSTON in The Month (London, Jan. and Feb., 1903) and in Revue du clergé francais (15 Nov. and 15 Dec., 1902). In favour of the shroud may be mentioned VIGNON, Le linceul du Christ (Paris, 1902) also in English translation; MACKEY in Dublin Review (Jan., 1903); DE JOHANNIS in Etudes (Paris, 1902 and Nov., 1910); LOTH, La photographie du s. suaire de Turin, documents nouveauz et concluants (Paris, 1910), the promise of "new and conclusive documents" is by no means justified; GARROLD in The Tablet, CXVII (1 and 8 April, London, 1911), Esplicatione del lenzuolo (Bologna, 1598 and 1599): MALLONIUS, Jesu Christi stigmata sacra sindoni impressa (Venice, 1606); CHIFFLET, De linteis sepulchralibus (Antwerp, 1624). HERBERT THURSTON Shrovetide Shrovetide Shrovetide is the English equivalent of what is known in the greater part of Southern Europe as the "Carnival", a word which, in spite of wild suggestions to the contrary, is undoubtedly to be derived from the "taking away of flesh" (camera levare) which marked the beginning of Lent. The English term "shrovetide" (from "to shrive", or hear confessions) is sufficiently explained by a sentence in the Anglo-Saxon "Ecclesiastical Institutes" translated from Theodulphus by Abbot Aelfric (q.v.) about A.D. 1000: "In the week immediately before Lent everyone shall go to his confessor and confess his deeds and the confessor shall so shrive him as he then my hear by his deeds what he is to do [in the way of penance]". In this name shrovetide the religious idea is uppermost, and the same is true of the German Fastnacht (the eve of the fast). It is intelligible enough that before a long period of deprivations human nature should allow itself some exceptional licence in the way of frolic and good cheer. No appeal to vague and often inconsistent traces of earlier pagan customs seems needed to explain the general observance of a carnival celebration. The only clear fact which does not seem to be adequately accounted for is the widespread tendency to include the preceding Thursday (called in French Jeudi gras and in German fetter Donnerstag -- just as Shrove Tuesday is respectively called Mardi gras and fetter Dienstag) with the Monday and Tuesday which follow Quinquagesima. The English custom of eating pancakes was undoubtedly suggested by the need of using up the eggs and fat which were, originally at least, prohibited articles of diet during the forty days of Lent. The same prohibition is, of course, mainly responsible for the association of eggs with the Easter festival at the other end of Lent. Although the observance of Shrovetide in England never ran to the wild excesses which often marked this period of licence in southern climes, still various sports and especially games of football were common in almost all parts of the country, and in the households of the great it was customary to celebrate the evening of Shrove Tuesday by the performance of plays and masques. One form of cruel sport peculiarly prevalent at this season was the throwing at cocks, neither does it seem to have been confined to England. The festive observance of Shrovetide had become far too much a part of the life of the people to be summarily discarded at the Reformation. In Dekker's "Seven Deadly Sins of London", 1606, we read: "they presently, like prentices upon Shrove-Tuesday, take the game into their own hands and do what they list"; and we learn from contemporary writers that the day was almost everywhere kept as a holiday, while many kinds of horseplay seem to have been tolerated or winked at in the universities and public schools. The Church repeatedly made efforts to check the excesses of the carnival, especially in Italy. During the sixteenth century in particular a special form of the Forty Hours Prayer was instituted in many places on the Monday and Tuesday of Shrovetide, partly to draw the people away from these dangerous occasions of sin, partly to make expiation for the excesses committed. By a special constitution addressed by Benedict XIV to the archbishops and bishops of the Papal States, and headed "Super Bacchanalibus", a plenary indulgence was granted in 1747 to those who took part in the Exposition of the Blessed Sacrament which was to be carried out daily for three days during the carnival season. Nilles, Calendarium Manuale Utriusque Ecclessiae, II (Innsbruck, 1897), 55-70; Thurston, Lent and Holy Week (London, 1904), 110-48; Idem in The Month (Feb., 1912); Rademacher in Encyclopedia of Religion and Ethics, s.v. Carnival, can only be mentioned to caution the reader against the unsupported assumptions upon which the whole treatment of the subject is based. HERBERT THURSTON Shuswap Indians Shuswap Indians (Properly SU-KHAPMUH, a name of unknown origin and meaning). A tribe of Salishan linguistic stock, the most important of that group in British Columbia, formerly holding a large territory on middle and upper Thompson River, including Shuswap, Adams, and Quesnel Lakes. On the south they bordered upon the Okanagan and Thompson River Indians; on the west, the Lillooet; on the north, the Chilcotin; and on the east extended to the main divide of the Rocky Mountains. They are now gathered upon a number of small reservations attached to the Kamloops-Okanagan and Williams Lake agencies, besides a small detached band of about sixty domiciliated with the Kutenai farther to the south. From perhaps 5000 souls a century ago they have been reduced, chiefly by smallpox, to about 2200. The principal bands are. those of Kamloops, Adams Lake, Alkali Lake, Canoe Creek, Neskainlith, Spallumcheen, and Williams Lake. What little is known of the early history of the Shuswap consists chiefly of a record of unimportant tribal wars and dealings with the traders of the Hudson Bay Company, which established Fort Thompson at Kamloops as early as 1810. The work of Christianization and civilization began in the winter of 1842-43 with the visit of Father Modeste Demers, who accompanied the annual Hudson Bay caravan from Fort Vancouver on the Columbia to the northern posts, and spent some time both going and returning among the Shuswap at Williams Lake, preaching and instructing in a temporary chapel built for the purpose by the Indians. About two years later the noted Jesuit missionary, Father P. J. de Smet, and hia fellow-labourers established several missions in British Columbia, including one among the Shuswap. These were continued until about 1847, when more pressing need in the south compelled a withdrawal, and for some years the Indians saw only an occasional visiting priest. In 1862 a rush of American miners into the newly discovered gold mines in the Caribou mountains at the head of Eraser River brought with it a terrible smallpox visitation by which, according to reliable estimate, probably one-half the Indians of British Columbia were wiped out of existence, the Shuswap suffering in the same proportion. In the meantime the Oblates had entered the province and in 1867 Father James M. McGuckin of that order established the Saint Joseph Mission on Williams Lake for the Shuswap and adjacent tribes, giving attention also to the neighbouring white miners. A few years later the mission had two schools in operation served by six Oblate fathers and lay brothers and four Sisters of Saint Anne. Father McGuckin was in charge until 1882 and was succeeded by Fr. A.G. Morice, noted for his ethnologic and philologic contributions, including the invention of the Dene Indian syllabary. Another distinguished Oblate worker at the same mission was Fr. John M. Le Jeune, editor of the "Kamloops Wawa", published since 1891 at Kamloops, in the Chinook jargon, in a shorthand system of his own invention. 13764a01.jpg Reduced Facsimile of First Page of Kamloops Wawa From Filling's Bibliography of the Salishan Languages In their primitive condition the Shuswap were without agriculture, depending for subsistence upon hunting, fishing, and the gathering of wild oats and berries. The deer was the principal game animal and each family group had its own hereditary hunting ground and fishing place. The salmon was the principal fish and was dried in large quantities as the chief winter provision. Among roots the lily and the camas ranked first, being usually roasted, by an elaborate process, in large covered pits. Considerable ceremony attended the ripening and gathering of the berries, which were crushed and dried for winter. The house was the semi-subterranean circular lodge, built of logs and covered with earth, common to all the interior Salishan tribes of British Columbia. The temporary summer lodge was of poles covered with mats or interwoven branches. As in .other tribes the sweat-house for steam baths on ceremonial occasions was an adjunct of every camp. The ordinary weapons were the bow, lance, stone axe, and club. Body armour of tough hide or strips of wood was worn. They made no pottery, but excelled in basket making and the weaving of rush mats. Dug-out canoes of cedar were used for river travel. The tribal organization was loose, without central authority. Village chiefs were hereditary, and the people were divided into "nobles", commons, and slaves, the last being prisoners of war and their descendants, perhaps purchased from some other tribe. There were no clans and descent was paternal. The "potlatch" or great ceremonial gift distribution was not so prominent as among the coast tribes, but there were elaborate ceremonies in connexion with marriage, mourning for the dead, and puberty of girls. The dead were buried in a sitting position, or if the death occurred far from home the body was burned and the bones brought back for burial. Horses and dogs were killed at the grave, and the slaves of the dead man were buried alive with the body, after which a funeral feast was spread, for the mourners, above the grave. Women were isolated at the menstrual period, and twins, being held uncanny, were secluded together with the mother until old enough to walk. Their religion was animism, each man believing himself under the special protection of some animal spirit, which had appeared to him in visions during his puberty vigil. Most of their important myths centred about the coyote as the great transformer and culture hero. Heathenism and old custom are now extinct, the entire tribe being civilized and officially reported Catholic, with the exception of one band of forty-five attached to the Anglican Church. In addition to the flourishing Oblate mission at Williams Lake, another under the same auspices at Kamloops is equally successful. Besides their own language, they use the Chinook jargon for intertribal communication. The official report (1908) for the Williams Lake band will answer for all: "The general health has been good. Their dwellings are clean and premises kept in a good sanitary condition. Farming, stock raising, teaming, hunting and fishing are the principal occupations. They have good dwellings and stables, a number of horses, cattle and pigs. They are well supplied with all kinds of farm implements. Most of the children have attended the Williams Lake industrial school. They are industrious and law-abiding and making good progress. A few are fond of intoxicants when they can procure them. As a rule they are moral". BANCROFT, Hist. Brit. Columbia (San Francisco, 1887); BOAS, Sixth Rept. on Northwestern Tribes of Canada in Brit. Ass. Advan. Sci. (London, 1890): Ann. Rep. Can. Dept. Ind. AS'. (Ottawa); DAWSON, Notes on the Shuswap in Proc. and Trans. Roy, Soc. Canada, IX, ii (Montreal, 1892); MORICE, Catholic Church in Western Canada (2 vols., Toronto, 1910); PILLING, Bibliography of the Salishan Languages, Bulletin Bur. Am. Eth. (Washington, 1893). JAMES MOONEY Siam (Thailand) Siam Siam, "the land of the White Elephant" or the country of the Muang Thai (the Free), is situated in the south-eastern corner of Asia, lying between 4° and 21° north lat. and 97° and 106° east long. It is bounded on the north by Tong-king and the southern states of Burma, on the east by Annam and Cambodia, on the south by the Gulf of Siam and the Malay Peninsula, and on the west by the Indian Ocean, and thus forms a buffer state between French and British possessions. From north to south Siam measures in length some 1130 and in breadth some 508 miles, covering an area of some 242,580 square miles, about the size of Spain and Portugal, and is divided into 41 provinces. Its population is estimated to be between six and nine million inhabitants, of whom a third are Siamese, a quarter Chinese or of Chinese descent, whilst the rest is made up of Burmese, Cambodians, Laotines, Malays, Pegus, Tamils, and Europeans. The Siamese are described as a polite, hospitable, obliging, light-hearted, pleasure and feast-loving people, as clever gold and silversmiths, possessing great taste for art and skill as painters, decorators, and carvers in wood, stone, plaster, and mosaic. They are, however, not fond of work nor is it necessary for them to be so, for they have few wants for housing and food, fire and clothing, and mother earth has endowed them with a perpetual summer and a fertile soil, yielding rich harvests of rice and pepper, whilst the mountains abound in teak and yellow wood, box and ebony, sapan and padoo. The chief commerce is in silk, which is carried on along the Menam River and its numerous affluents and canals. The state religion is Buddhism, which, according to the earliest annals, was introduced as far back as 638. With perhaps the exception of Tibet, there is no country in the East where Buddhism is so intensely interwoven with the life of a nation from the king to the lowest subject, and where the talapoins or bonzes play such an important rôle in the national life, so that every male subject, the king and the crown prince not excepted, has to live in a Buddhist monastery and join the ranks of the talapoins for a short period. Up to a few years ago these Buddhist monasteries were the only establishments for education, which were restricted to the male population. Though Buddhism is the acknowledged religion of the state and towards it the Government allows some $20,000,000 yearly, all other religious creeds are granted full liberty of worship, nor does any one incur disabilities on account of his religious beliefs. The king, being the highest "supporter of the doctrine", stands at the head of the religion and appoints all religious dignitaries, from the four Somdet Phra Chow Rajagana (archpriests) downwards. Little is known about the early history of the country. It was first called Siam by the Portuguese (1511) and other nations who came into contact with it. Before Ayuthia or Yuthia was established as the capital (1350), the country was divided into a number of separate principalities bound together by race, language, religion, and customs. A continual migration from the north to the south took place till in 1350 a branch of the Thai race established itself at Ayuthia. The history of Siam as a dominant power begins with Phra-Chao Utong Somdetch Pra Rama Tibaudi I (1351-71) and it was ruled by thirty-four kings (1351-1767) belonging to three different dynasties. During the inroads of the Burmese (1767-82), Ayuthia was destroyed and the new Siamese capital was established at Bangkok, "the Venice of the East". As early as 1511 the Portuguese made a commercial treaty with Siam and subsequently the Japanese, the Dutch, and the British entered into commercial relations with it. But the present flourishing commercial condition only dates from 1851, when King Mongkut opened Siam to Europeans and to European trade, favoured European factories, and made himself acquainted with Western civilization. After his death in 1868, his eldest son, Chulalongkorn (d. 1910), succeeded as the fortieth ruler of Siam, and during a reign of forty-two years showed himself one of the greatest and most farseeing princes who ever sat on an Asiatic throne, a king of European education and manners, to whose energy and initiative Siam owes much of her prosperity, railways, telegraphs, army (20,000 men), navy (37 ships, 15,000 men), and education for both sexes. Siam has so far been able to maintain her national independence, owing to the rivalry of England and France. The latter has tried ever since the days of Louis XIV to obtain a footing in Siam and has actually gained large concessions of territory by the treaties of 1891, 1893, 1904, and 1907, nor has England lacked her share (1909). The first historical record of an attempt to introduce Christianity we owe to John Peter Maffei who states that about 1550 a French Franciscan, Bonferre, hearing of the great kingdom of the Peguans and the Siamese in the East, went on a Portuguese ship from Goa to Cosme (Peguan), where for three years he preached the Gospel, but without any result. In 1552 St. Francis Xavier, writing from Sancian to his friend Diego Pereira, expressed his desire to go to Siam, but his death on 2 December, 1552, prevented him. In 1553 several Portuguese ships landed in Siam, and at the request of the king three hundred Portuguese soldiers entered his service. In the following year two Dominicans, Fathers Hieronymus of the Cross and Sebastian de Cantù, joined them as chaplains. In a short time they established three parishes at Ayuthia with some fifteen hundred converted Siamese. Both missionaries, however, were murdered by the pagans (1569), and were replaced by Fathers Lopez Cardoso, John Madeira, Alphonsus Ximenes, Louis Fonseca (martyred in 1600), and John Maldonatus (d. 1598). In 1606 the Jesuit Balthasar de Sequeira at the request of the Portuguese merchant Tristan Golayo, and in 1624 Father Julius Cesar Margico, came to Ayuthia and gained the favour of the king. A subsequent persecution, however, stopped the propagation of the Faith and no missionary entered till Siam was made a vicariate Apostolic by Alexander VII on 22 August, 1662. Soon after, Mgr Pierre de la Motte-Lambert, Vicar-Apostolic of Cochin China, arrived at Ayuthia, accompanied by Fathers De Bourges and Deydier. In 1664 he was joined by Mgr Pallu, Vicar Apostolic of Tong King. Siam, in those days the rendezvous of all commercial enterprise in the East, gave shelter to several hundred Annamite and Japanese Christians who had been expelled or lived there as voluntary exiles on account of persecutions at home. Some Portuguese and Spanish Jesuits, Franciscans, and Augustinians had the spiritual care of their countrymen in Siam. Mgr Pallu, on his return to Rome (1665), obtained a Brief from Clement IX (4 July, 1669), by which the Vicariate of Siam was entrusted to the newly-founded Society of Foreign Missions of Paris. In 1673 Father Laneau was consecrated titular Bishop of Metellopolis and first Vicar Apostolic of Siam, and ever since Siam has been under the spiritual care of the Society of Foreign Missions. King Phra-Naraï (1657-83?) gave the Catholic missionaries a hearty welcome, and made them a gift of land for a church, a mission-house, and a seminary (St. Joseph's colony). Through the influence of the Greek or Venetian, Constantine Phaulcon, prime minister to King Phra-Naraï, the latter sent a diplomatic embassy to Louis XIV in 1684. The French king returned the compliment by sending M. de Chaumont, accompanied by some Jesuits under Fathers de Fontenay and Tachard. On 10 December, 1685, King Phra-Naraï signed a treaty at Louvo with France, wherein he allowed the Catholic missionaries to preach the Gospel throughout Siam, exempted his Catholic subjects from work on Sunday, and appointed a special mandarin to settle disputes between Christians and pagans. But after the departure of M. De Chaumont, a Siamese mandarin, Phra-phret-racha, got up a revolution, the prime minister was murdered, King Phra-Naraï deposed, Mgr Laneau and several missionaries were taken prisoners and ill-treated, and the Christians were persecuted. When in 1690 peace and order were restored, Bishop Laneau resumed work till his death in 1696. His successor, Bishop Louis of Cice (1700-27), was able to continue it in peace. But after his death the rest of the century is but the history of persecutions (those of 1729, 1755, 1764 are the most notable), either by local mandarins or Burmese invaders, though the kings remained more or less favourable to the missionaries and to Bishops Texier de Kerlay and de Lolière-Puycontat (1755). During the inroads of the Burmese the Siamese king even appealed to Bishop Brigot for help against the common foe, who sacked and burned the Catholic stations and colleges and imprisoned both the bishop and the missionaries. In 1769 Father Corre resumed the missions in Siam and thus paved the way for the new vicar Apostolic, Mgr Lebon (1772-80). But a fresh persecution in 1775 forced him to leave the kingdom, and both his successors, Bishops Condé and Garnault, were unable to do much. During the Burmese wars the Christians were reduced from 12,000 to 1000, while Bishop Florens was left in charge with only seven native priests. It was only in 1826 and 1830 that a fresh supply of European missionaries arrived, among them Fathers Bouchot, Barbe, Bruguière, Vachal, Grandjean, Pallegoix, Courvezy, etc. In 1834 the last was appointed Vicar Apostolic of Siam, and the missions began to revive. Under him Siam numbered 6590 Catholics, 11 European and 7 native priests. His successor, Bishop Pallegoix (1840-62), author of "Déscription du royaume Thai ou Siam" and "Dictionnaire siamois-latin-français-anglais" (30,000 words), was one of the most distinguished vicars Apostolic of Siam, the best Siamese scholar, and a missionary among the Laotines. He induced Napoleon III to renew the French alliance with Siam and to send an embassy under M. de Montigny to Siam in 1856. On 8 July, 1856, King Mongkut signed a political-commercial treaty with France, by which the privileges granted to the Catholic missionaries by Phra-Naraï in the seventeenth century were renewed. The bishop was highly esteemed by the king, who personally assisted at his funeral and accepted from the missionaries as a token of friendship the bishop's ring. Thanks to the broad-mindedness of Kings Mongkut (1851-68) and Chulalongkorn (1868-1910), the Catholic Church in Siam has enjoyed peace under Pallegoix's successors, Bishops Dupont (1862-72) and Vey (1875-1909). Owing to the complications between France and Siam, in 1894, the missionaries had to endure the ill-will of local mandarins, though the minister of foreign affairs promised that no harm would be done to the missionaries and their work on account of the French invasion. Though the mission in Laos, commenced in 1876, formally opened in 1883, and erected into a vicariate Apostolic on 4 May, 1899, is now separated from Siam, the Catholic missions have made great progress during the last thirty-five years. While in 1875 there were in Siam 11,000 Catholics, 17 European and 7 native priests, and 30 churches, these are now (1911), 23,000 Catholics, 42 European and 13 native priests, 38 catechists, 50 central stations, 55 churches and chapels, 12 Brothers of St. Gabriel, 103 sisters (Holy Infant Jesus, St. Paul of Chartres, Lovers of the Cross), 50 elementary schools with over 3000 pupils, 15 orphanages with 314 inmates, 3 agricultural schools, 1 seminary with 62 students, 1 college with 400 boys, and a pensionnat with 220 girls, under the jurisdiction of Mgr René Mary Joseph Perros de Guewenheim, titular Bishop of Zaora, appointed 17 September, 1909. CARTER, The King of Siam (New York and London, 1904); HESSE WARTEGG, Siam (Leipzig, 1899); PALLEGOIX, Description du royaume Thai ou Siam (Beaune, 1853); PIOLETT, Les Missions Catholiques françaises au XIX siècle, II (Paris, s. d.); LAUNAY, Hist. Général de la Société des Missions Etrangères (3 vols., Paris, 1894). MATERNUS SPITZ Joseph Sibbel Joseph Sibbel Sculptor, b. at Dulmen, 7 June, 1850; d. in New York, 10 July, 1907. As a boy he evinced the inclination for cutting ornaments and figures from wood, which attracted the attention of his teacher, who urged the parents of the boy to send him to Munster, Westphalia. At the establishment of the wood carver, Friedrich A. Ewertz, Sibbel developed a genius for ecclesiastical sculpture. He spent his leisure time in visiting the studio of the sculptor Achterman, where he acquired the art of modeling in clay. In 1873 he emigrated to Cincinnati, Ohio. Here he joined several other artists from the same workshop, who had established an atelier for ecclesiastical sculpture, mostly in wood. When this enterprise failed, he tried his hand at secular sculpture with a certain Rebisso. When this establishment also failed, Sibbel came to New York, where he established the studio from which issued his many works. Here the difficult task confronted him of competing with the mechanical manufacture of pseudo-art with which the churches were being filled, and which gave them a stereotyped and monotonous decoration. To emulate foreign ecclesiastical decoration was his aim. His first work in New York was a lectern, cast in bronze, for the Episcopal Stewart Memorial Cathedral in Garden City, Long Island. Here the young artist broke loose from the ordinary form by placing religious groups in front of the stand. Below the customary eagle with spread wings he designed an upright figure of the Saviour blessing a group at His feet. The sermon desk proper he adorned with a symbolical group of three figures, typifying youth, maturity, and age, listening to the word of God from above. It was not until he furnished for the cathedral at Hartford, Connecticut, a series of alto-relievos, prominent among which was an altar picture representing the Child Christ disputing with the Scribes in the temple, that the Catholic churches began to appreciate him. These and a series of Stations of the Cross were cast in imitation alabaster, and attracted great attention. Still more admirable was his colossal statue of Archbishop Feehan of Chicago. His works showed complete emancipation from the conventionality of the cloister-art of modern times. His best-known work is the heroic and delicately wrought statue of St. Patrick in St. Patrick's Cathedral, New York. Here also are to be found his statues of St. Anselmo, St. Bernard of Clairvaux, St. Alphonsus Liguori, and St. Bonaventure. The two heroic panels, representing "Our Lady Comforter of the Afflicted" and "The Death of St. Joseph", erected in the Church of St. Francis Xavier at St. Louis, are of unique conception. These groups, each twelve feet high and eight feet wide, were carved from one blook weighing nearly nine tons. The four heroic statues at St. Joseph's Seminary, Dunwoodie, New York, must be classed as the final step in his emancipation from conventionality. These figures represent Father Jogues, S.J., the martyred apostle of the Mohawk Indians; St. Rose of Lima, the first canonized saint of the New World; St. Turibius; and Catherine Tagawitha, the Indian maiden, and first convert of the Indian race. In these statues the artist ventured on a new path in religious sculpture, portraying typical American subjects. Among his latest works was the exterior and interior statuary decoration of St. Paul's Cathedral in Pittsburgh. Among these statues are represented the Apostles and Doctors of the Church, executed in Indian lime-stone. In the conception of each statue there is expressed a new idea. Most noteworthy is the marble-statue representing Purgatory. Here the artist represents in two figures a very complex idea. Out of the flames of torture there rises a female figure, symbolical of a liberated soul casting off the veil of darkness and beholding the light of eternal reward. Below, there appears a still afflicted soul, represented by a wan male figure imploring intercession. Characteristic of Sibbel's works is the pleasing tendency toward freedom from conventionality. They evince originality of design, though still in accord with history and tradition. His statues are pervaded by a pleasing realistic spirit, which gives to the dull and lifeless marble a form that appeals to the heart and inspires devotion and prayer. ARMIN SIBBEL Siberia Siberia A Russian possession in Asia forming the northern third of that continent; it extends from the Ural mountains to the Pacific Ocean and from the coast of the Arctic Ocean to about 50o north latitude. It has an area of 4,786,730 square miles and in 1897 had 5,758,822 inhabitants. Classified according to race its population included: 4,659,423 Russians, 29,177 Poles, 5424 Germans, 61,279 Finno-Ugrians (Mordvinians, Ostiaks, Syryenians, etc.), 476,139 Turko-Tatars (Tatars, Yakuts, Kasakkirghizes), 288,589 Buriats, 11,931 Samoyedes, 66,269 Tunguses, 31,057 Palaeo-Asiatics, or Hyperboreans (Yukaghirs, Tchuktchis, Ghilyaks, etc..), 41,112 Chinese, 25,966 Koreans. According to religion the population was estimated later thus: 5,201,250 Orthodox Greeks, 227,720 Raskolniks, 32,530 Catholics, 13,370 Protestants, 30,550 Jews, 1,068,800 Mohammedans, 224,000 Buddhists, etc. At the beginning of the year 1909 the population was estimated to number about 7,878,500 persons. For purposes of administration Siberia is divided into four governments and six departments. The Siberian Catholics belong to the Archdiocese of Mohileff; according to the Mohileff year-book for 1910 they number almost 74,000. They are largely Poles or the descendants of Poles and Ruthenians who were banished to Siberia on account of their religion; this was especially the ease when the Emperor Nicholas I sought in 1827-39 to convert the Uniat Ruthenians and Lithuanians by force to the Orthodox Church, and when thousands of Catholics and several hundred priests were deported to Siberia after the Polish revolt of 1863. Great difficulties are connected with the pastoral care of the Catholics on account of the small number or priests and the great extent of territory which the priests must traverse. Very often the priests are obliged to lead a real nomad life in order to be able to visit the members of their flock at least once a year. When a priest leaves his presbytery at Easter he often does not return from his pastoral tour until Easter of the next year. The priests often break down under the burden of their toil, although they receive relatively good support from the Government which grants them 600 roubles, 30 dessiatines (81 acres) of land, and refunds the expenses of their journeys. On account of the great distances a canonical visitation of the churches of Siberia by a Catholic bishop was not possible until in 1909, when Bishop Johannes Cieplak, coadjutor of Mohileff, traversed all Siberia and Saghalian. In addition to this canonical visitation interest in the Church among Catholics has been greatly quickened by the missions held by the Redemptorists in 1908, by permission of the Government, in all towns where there were Catholic communities; Catholics came to these services from great distances. An actual organization of the ecclesiastical administration for the Catholics of Siberia will only be possible when an independent diocese is established for Siberia with its see at Irkutsk or Tomsk. This is what the Holy See desires to do but the plan will probably not be carried out soon on account of the attitude of the Russian Government towards the Catholic Church. During the seventh decade of the last century the Catholics had the use of only five churches while now according to the year-book for Mohileff of 1910 there are in Siberia, including Omsk that geographically belongs to Siberia but is assigned by the Russian government to Central Asia, 27 Catholic priests, 73,800 Catholics, 7 parishes with as many parish churches, 15 dependent communities, and 21 chapels. The parishes are; Irkutsk, Krassnoyarsk, Omsk. Tehita, Tobolsk, Tomsk, Vladivostok. History Siberia does not appear in the light of history until a late era. When and whence the original inhabitants migrated to their present homes cannot be definitely ascertained. While the peoples near the polar circle from the beginning until now have been tribes barely subsisting by hunting, the nomadic tribes of herdsmen who probably emigrated from Central Asia to Siberia, have gradually risen to a somewhat higher level of civilization. In some tribes, as the Yakuts, the memory of the migration from the south still exists. During the great migrations from Central Asia the tribes living on the plateau of Asia were generally drawn into the movement and became incorporated into the empires of nomads that arose in the course of centuries. The tribes in north-western Siberia also, that are grouped together as Ugrians, generally shared this fate. When in the thirteenth century the Mongols of Central Asia advanced as conquerors towards the west they overthrew the peoples of western Siberia also. After the fall of the Mongolian empire these tribes belonged to the Mongolian Kingdom of Kiptchak that included besides western Siberia the lowlands of Eastern Russia and the steppes as far as the Sea of Aral and the Caspian. Western Europe came first into connection with the Ugrian tribes by the trade in skins which adventurous merchants of the Russian city of Novgorod carried on as early as the twelfth century with the tribes east of the Ural and on the borders of the Arctic Ocean. These commercial relations led to the establishment of permanent agencies in western Siberia by the merchants of Novgorod. These agencies were maintained during the domination of the Mongols, so that the connection of western Russia with the Ugrians was not interrupted even then. At the fall of the Kingdom of Kiptchak, which Timur brought under his control, the leaders of the hordes of Nogaian Tatars began to found small principalities in the country of the Ugrians. The most powerful of these rulers was On, living at the beginning of the fifteenth century, who opposed the Novgorodians. His son Taibuga drove the Novgorodians entirely from the country and founded a small kingdom the capital of which was near the present Tyumen. Weakened by wars with the neighboring tribes of Ostiaks, Voguls, Kirghizes, and the Mongolian ruler of Kazen, this kingdom was obliged to pay tribute in 465 to Russia, which had now made its appearance as a new power in eastern Europe. The Russian grand duke, Ivan III (1462-1505, who had conquered Novgorod in 1478, took up the old claims of this commercial city to the sovereignty of western Siberia and soon began to transform them into reality. In 1499 the territory along the lower course of the River Obi was taken. This caused the Tatar khan to transfer his capital from Tyumen to the Tobol River, where he built the city of Isker or Sibir. In the middle of the sixteenth century (about 1563) a Usbeke called Kozum, or Kutchum, seized Sibir, took the title of Emperor of Siberia, and soon entered on a plan of conquest. He advanced across the Ural, devastating and plundering as he went, towards Perm, where the Russian family of Stroganoff had brought the entire Siberian trade under their control in order to play off one enemy against the other. Stroganoff took into his pay the Cossacks of the Volga, who had repeatedly made marauding expeditions towards Perm. A horde of about 7000 Cossacks under the command of the Hetman Yermak and in the pay of the Stroganoff family, undertook an expedition into Siberia . In 1580 Yermak carried Tyumen by storm, in 1581 he advanced to the mouth of the Tobol River, and in October of that year completely defeated Kutchurn's army on the Tchuvachenberg near the present city of Tobolsk. On 26 October Yermak entered the city of Sibir. As Yermak received no further aid either from the Stroganoff family or from the Cossacks still living on the Volga, he turned to the Russian tsar, Ivan the Terrible, and did homage to him as the ruler of the new Siberian empire. Yet Russia gave him very little help, and after a time Sibir was lost. In 1584 Yermak himself was killed in an ambush that the Tatars had set for him. Soon, however, the knowledge that here in the east there was a wide field for conquest made headway in Russia. The Russians perceived, moreover, that this country gave an opportunity to employ usefully the restless Cossacks, and the conquests in Siberia were resumed. In 1588 Sibir was taken again and in 1589 Kutchuk Khan who had ruled in the south was driven to the northern slope of Asia. In order to give permanence to the conquest of the new territory large numbers of Cossacks and soldiers of the body-guard were constantly dispatched to Siberia; these advanced along the large rivers towards the east and established permanent settlements as props of the Russian supremacy. The Government soon began also to establish Russian peasants in these regions. As early as 1590 nearly thirty peasant families were aided to migrate to Siberia; in 1593 the first exiles were deported from Uglitch to Siberia. Slowly but steadily the Russians pushed towards the east. In 1632 Yakutsk on the Lena was founded; in 1643 the first Cossacks advanced to the upper Amur and descended along it to the sea of Okhotsk. In 1644 the fortress Nizhne-Kolymsk was built where the Kolyma flows into the Arctic Ocean. In 1652 Irkutsk was founded and the territory around Lake Baikal was brought under Russian supremacy. The aboriginal tribes with which the Russians came into contact frequently fought them courageously, opposing especially the exactment of the tribute in pelts, but their small numbers and the European arms of the Cossacks lead to their defeat. Along with their care for the extension and security of the boundaries the Russians combined care for the economic development of the newly-won regions. Whole caravans of country people and women intended for the Cossacks were sent to Siberia at government expense to promote agriculture and to accustom the Cossacks to a settled mode of life; this was accompanied by concessions in the payment of taxes. The migration of peasants to Siberia was encouraged by releasing those who went from the yoke of serfdom. Consequently at the beginning of the eighteenth century, there were already 230,000 Russians in Siberia. In 1621 the Siberian eparchy was established for the religious and moral needs of the settlers and for missionary work among the natives. The Russians came into contact with the Chinese for the first time in the districts along the Amur River. Although in 1689 the Russians were forced to restore their conquests on the upper Amur to the Chinese, the relations between the powers were, in general, friendly. In 1728-9 the two countries made the first settlement of their boundaries. To protect the southern border against the incursions of the Kirghizes and Kalmucks the Russians founded many permanent towns, for instance, Petropaulovsk, Omsk, Semipalatinsk, and other places. Thereafter, the disturbances on the border gradually ceased and the order thus established permitted the Russian Government to take up the scientific exploration of the enormous region, the greater part of which was totally unknown. The most important of these scientific expeditions was the journey of the Danish captain Vitus Bering during the years 1733-43, in which distinguished scholars from all parts of Europe took part. Bering himself proved the connection of the Pacific and Arctic Oceans by Bering Strait; as early as 1648 the Cossack Dejneff had discovered this strait and had announced his discovery, but the fact had been forgotten. The economic development of the country was aided by the discovery in 1723 of rich mineral treasures in the Altai mountains. From 1754 the Russian Government began the systematic exiling of convicts and prisoners of war to Siberia, where they were partly settled on the land and partly employed in the mines. The colonizing of free peasants was also taken up again systematically. Consequently by the end of the eighteenth century the Russian population of Siberia was about 1,600,000 persons. In the second and third decades of the nineteenth century the Russian supremacy over the nomadic Kirghiz tribes living on the south-western steppes was strengthened, and important settlements were established (1824 Koktchtaff, 1829 Akmolinsk). The discovery in 1849 of the estuary of the Amur River by a Russian ship led to a renewed strengthening of the Russian settlements along the Amur; this impulse was powerfully aided by the desire to have a large stretch of coast along an ocean. In 1849 the Russian flag was hoisted without opposition at the mouth of the Amur; in 1851 a bay near the coast of Korea was occupied, and here later Vladivostok was built, in 1854 a fleet under Count Nikolai Muravieff Amurski was sent from the upper Amur to its mouth and the post of Nikolaievsk was more strongly fortified. The Chinese Government indeed made a complaint, but as it could not venture to go to war it acknowledged, in the Treaty of Pekin, 2 November, 1860, Russia's right to the Amur and the entire basin of the Ussuri River, together with all the coast down to Korea. As by the founding of Vladivostok a port nearly free from ice was secured, Russian advance ceased for some time. In the interior of Siberia there was a great increase of the colonizing movement in the nineteenth century; from the thirties on especially there was a great number of exiles. Numerous Decembrists, Lithuanians, and Ruthenians, who had opposed the forcible union with the Orthodox Church and Poles who had joined in the revolt, were banished to Siberia. The importance of exile as a factor in colonizing was lessened by the fact that the exiles were not permitted to settle on independent estates but were obliged to live in small towns already established. Moreover a large part of the exiles were exhausted in mind and body by their previous terrible sufferings in the Russian prisons and by the long and severe transportation to Siberia. Consequently it was of much more importance for the development of the country that a constantly increasing stream of free peasants migrated from the most widely differing parts of Russia to Siberia, especially after the suppression of serfdom in Russia in 1861. This migration has continued in undiminished numbers up to the present time; it has been greatly encouraged by the law of 1889 by which every Russian emigrant who has received the permission of the Government to go is granted 15 dessiatines (40.5 acres) of farming land as his own property, besides three years without taxes and nine years release from military duty. While the European population has rapidly increased, the native population has constantly declined. Among the causes for this decline, outside of the small natural increase of the aborigines, are such diseases as small-pox and typhus that have been introduced by Europeans, the injury done by brandy, the decline of the chase, and the steady advance of the Russian peasant. The construction of the great Siberian railway, which was begun in 1891 and completed in 1904, has opened immense possibilities for the economic development of the country and has enabled Siberia to overcome quickly the injuries caused by the defeat of Russia in the war against Japan during the years 1904-5. The intellectual life of Siberia has also been gradually raised, a result brought about partly by the large number of educated exiles. A further aid has been the establishment of a university at Tomsk in 1888, of a high-school for Eastern Siberia at Vladivostok in 1899, of a polytechnic in 1900, and a high-school for women in 1907, both the last named institutions being at Tomsk. The very decided limitation of the exile of convicts which will soon be followed by the revocation of the law of exile, will contribute greatly to the elevation of the moral level of the population of Siberia. DE WINDT, The New Siberia (London, 1896); KENNAN, Siberia and the Exile System (4th ed., London, 1897); WIRTH, Gesch. Sibiriens und der Mandschurei (Munich, 1899); LEGRAS, En Siberie (Paris, 1899); LUTSCHG, Wegweiser auf der Grossen Sibirischen Eisenbahn (Berlin, 1901); FRASER, The Real Siberia (London 1902); ZABEL, Durch die Mandschurei und Sibirien (Leipzig 1902); BEVERIDGE, The Russian Advance (New York, 1903); WRIGHT, Asiatic Russia (London, 1903); MESCHOW, Sibirische Bibliographie (St. Petersburg, 1903-4), in Russian; SWAYNE, Through the Highlands of Siberia (London, 1904); DEUTSCH, Sixteen Years in Siberia (London, 1905); HENNING, Reiseberichte uber Sibirien von Herberstein bis Ides (1906); SEMENOW, Russland, XVI (St. Petersburg, 1907), in Russian; VON ZEPELIN, Der ferne Osten (Leipzig, 1908-9); PAQUET, Sudsibirien und Nordwestmongolei (Jena, 1909); TAFT, Strange Siberia: Along the Trans-Siberian Railway (New York, 1910); CURTIN, A Journey in Southern Siberia (London, 1910); ANONYMOUS, Johann Georg Gmelin: Der Erforscher Sibiriens (Munich, 1911). JOSEPH LINS Marie-Dominique-Auguste Sibour Marie-Dominique-Auguste Sibour Born at Saint-Paul-Trois-Chateaux (Drome, France), 4 August, 1792; died in Paris, 3 January, 1857. After his ordination to the priesthood at Rome in 1818, he was assigned to the Archdiocese of Paris. He was named canon of the cathedral of Nîmes in 1822, became favorably known as a preacher, and contributed to "L'Avenir". In 1837, during a vacancy, he was chosen administrator of the Diocese of Nimes, and two years later was raised to the episcopal See of Digne. His administration was marked by his encouragement of ecclesiastical studies, a practical desire to increase the importance of the functions exercised by his cathedral chapter, and a faithful observance of canonical forms in ecclesiastical trials. The same principles actuated him in his rule of the Archdiocese of Paris, to which he was called largely because of his prompt adhesion to the new government after the Revolution of 1848. He held in l849 a provincial council in Paris, and in 1850 a diocesan synod. In 1853 he officiated at the marriage of Napoleon III, who had named him senator the previous year. Although in his answer to Pius IX he declared the definition of the Immaculate Conception inopportune, he was present at the promulgation of the Decree and shortly afterwards solemnly published it in his own diocese. The benevolent co-operation of the imperial government enabled him to provide for the needs of the poor churches in his diocese and to organize several new parishes. He also aimed at introducing the Roman Rite in Paris and was progressing favorably in this direction when he was killed by an interdicted priest named Verger. L'episcopat francais, 1802-1905 (Paris, 1907), 215-16; 460-61, passim; MCCAFFREY, History of the Catholic Church in the Nineteenth Century, I (2nd ed., Dublin, 1910), 63, 236, 241, 243-4. N.A. WEBER Sibylline Oracles Sibylline Oracles Sibylline Oracles is the name given to certain collections of supposed prophecies, emanating from the sibyls or divinely inspired seeresses, which were widely circulated in antiquity. The derivation and meaning of the name Sibyl are still subjects of controversy among antiquarians. While the earlier writers (Eurìpides, Aristophanes, Plato) refer invariably to "the sibyl", later authors speak of many and designate the different places where they were said to dwell. Thus Varro, quoted by Lactantius (Div. Instit., L, vi) enumerates ten sibyls: the Persian, the Libyan, the Delphian, the Cimmerian, the Erythræan, the Samarian, the Cumæan, and those of the Hellespont, of Phrygia, and of Tibur. The Sibyls most highly venerated in Rome were those of Cumæ and Erythræa. In pagan times the oracles and predictions ascribed to the sibyls were carefully collected and jealously guarded in the temple of Jupiter Capitolinus, and were consulted only in times of grave crises. Because of the vogue enjoyed by these heathen oracles and because of the influence they had in shaping the religious views of the period, the Hellenistic Jews in Alexandria, during the second century B.C. composed verses in the same form, attributing them to the sibyls, and circulated them among the pagans as a means of diffusing Judaistic doctrines and teaching. This custom was continued down into Christian times, and was borrowed by some Christians so that in the second or third century, a new class of oracles emanating from Christian sources came into being. Hence the Sibylline Oracles can be classed as Pagan, Jewish, or Christian. In many cases, however, the Christians merely revised or interpolated the Jewish documents, and thus we have two classes of Christian Oracles, those adopted from Jewish sources and those entirely written by Christians. Much difficulty is experienced in determining exactly how much of what remains is Christian and how much Jewish. Christianity and Judaism coincided on so many points that the Christians could accept without modification much that had come from Jewish pens. It seems clear, however, that the Christian Oracles and those revised from Jewish sources all emanated from the same circle and were intended to aid in the diffusion of Christianity. The Sibyls are quoted frequently by the early Fathers and Christian writers, Justin, Athenagoras, Theophilus, Clement of Alexandria, Lactantius, Augustine, etc. Through the decline and disappearance of paganism, however, interest in them gradually diminished and they ceased to be widely read or circulated, though they were known and used during the Middle Ages in both the East and the West. Large collections of these Jewish and Christian oracles are still in existence. In 1545 Xystus Betuleius (Sixtus Birken) published an edition of eight books of oracles with a preface dating from perhaps the sixth century A. D. At the beginning of the last century Cardinal Mai discovered four other books, which were not a continuation of the eight previously printed, but an independent collection. These are numbered XI, XII, XIII, XIV, in later editions. Alexandre published a valuable edition with a Latin translation (Paris, 1841-56), and a new and revised edition appeared from the pen of Geffcken (Leipzig, 1902) as one of the volumes in the Berlin Corpus. In addition to the books already enumerated several fragments of oracles taken from the works of Theophilus and Lactantius are printed in the later editions. In form the Pagan, Christian, and Jewish Oracles are alike. They all purport to be the work of the sibyls, and are expressed in hexameter verses in the so-called Homeric dialect. The contents are of the most varied character and for the most part contain references to peoples, kingdoms, cities, rulers, temples, etc. It is futile to attempt to find any order in the plan which governed their composition. The perplexity occasioned by the frequent change of theme can perhaps be accounted for by the supposition that they circulated privately, as the Roman Government tolerated only the official collection, and that their present arrangement represents the caprice of different owners or collectors who brought them together from various sources. There is in some of the books a general theme, which can be followed only with difficulty. Though there are occasionally verses which are truly poetical and sublime, the general character of the Sibylline Oracles is mediocre. The order in which the books are enumerated does not represent their relative antiquity, nor has the most searching criticism been able accurately to determine how much is Christian and how much Jewish. Book IV is generally considered to embody the oldest portions of the oracles, and while many of the older critics saw in it elements which were considered to be Christian, it is now looked on as completely Jewish. Book V has given rise to many divergent opinions, some claiming it as Jewish, others as the work of a Christian Jew, and others as being largely interpolated by a Christian. It contains so little that can be considered Christian that it can safely be set down as Jewish. Books VI and VII are admittedly of Christian origin. Some authors (Mendelssohn, Alexandre, Geffcken) describe Book VI as an heretical hymn, but this contention has no evidence in its favour. It dates most probably from the third century. Books I and II are regarded as a Christian revision of a Jewish original. Book VIII offers peculiar difficulties; the first 216 verses are most likely the work of a second century Jew, while the latter part (verses 217-500) beginning with an acrostic on the symbolical Christian word Icthus is undoubtedly Christian, and dates most probably from the third century. In the form in which they are now found the other four books are probably the work of Christian authors. Books XII and XIII are from the same pen, XII being a revision of a Jewish original. Book XI might have been written either by a Christian or a Jew in the third century, and Book XIV of the same doubtful provenance dates from the fourth century. The general conclusion is that Books VI, VII, and XIII and the latter part of Book VIII are wholly Christian. Books I, II, XI, XII, XIII, and XIV received their present form from a Christian. The peculiar Christian circle in which these compositions originated cannot be determined, neither can it be asserted what motive prompted their composition except as a means of Christian propaganda. GEFFCKEN, Komposition u. Entstehungszeit der Oracula Sibyllina (Leipzig, 1902); HARNACK, Gesch. der altchrist. Litt. (Leipzig, 1893), I, pt. ii, 581-89; II, pt. ii, 184-89; BARDENHEWER, Gesch. der altkirch. Litt., II (1902-3), 651, 656; SCHÜRER, Gesch. des jud. Volkes, III (Leipzig, 1910), 290 sqq. PATRICK J. HEALY Sicard Sicard Bishop of Cremona (Italy) in the twelfth century, a member of one of the principal families of that city, d. 1215. After having pursued his studies in different cities, he was made subdeacon by Lucius III in 1182, after which he returned to his native city, and was ordained priest by Offredus, Bishop of Cremona, whose successor he became in 1185. During his lifetime he was entrusted with many important missions by the Holy See, and enjoyed the confidence of the Emperor Frederick I. He was famed as an historian, canonist, and liturgiologist. His "Chronicon" containing a summary account of the history of the world down to 1213, is valuable because of the light it throws on the Crusade of Frederick I. He also composed an important work on the liturgy., "Mitrale, seu de officiis ecclesiasticis summa", in nine books; and a "Summa Canonum" or handbook of canon law, based on the so-called "Decretum Gelasianum". MIGNE, P.L., CCCXIII; MURATORI, Rerum Ital. Script., VII; see WATTENBACH, Deutschlands Geschichtsquellen, II, 315-27; KOMOROWSKI, Sicard Bischof von Cremona (Konigsberg, 1881). PATRICK J. HEALY Sicca Veneria Sicca Veneria A titular see in Africa Proconsularis, suffragan of Carthage. Sicca was an ancient important town in the kingdom of Numidia, very probably of Phoenician origin, on the Bagradas, on the road from Carthage to Hippo Regius and from Musti to Cirta. It got its name from a celebrated temple of Venus. It was to Sicca, after the first Punic War, that the Carthaginians sent the Mercenaries whose discontent they feared. Included later in the proconsulate it received from Augustus the title of colony. It had moreover been colonized by the Sittians of Cirta, whence the name Colonia Cirta Nova and Colonia Julia Veneria Cirta Nova Iulia; it is sometimes even called simply Cirta. Arnobius taught rhetoric there under Diocletian. Six of its bishops are known: Castus, at the Council of Carthage, 255; Patritius in 349; Fortunatianus mentioned in 407, present in 411 at a conference of Carthage and spoken of by St. Augustine, "Retractationes" XLI; Urbanus in 418, mentioned in 429 by St. Augustine, "Epist." ccxxix; Paul towards 480; Candidus in 646. The town commanding the principal natural roads leading from Algeria to Tunis preserved a great strategic importance till the French occupation; the Arabs called it Shikka Benar, or Shak Banaria, but it is better known as Le Kef (rock). It is the chief town of a civil "controle" in Tunis, contains 6000 inhabitants, and is connected with Tunis by a railroad. Its only interesting monuments are two mosques and the fortress. Among the Roman ruins are baths, cisterns, the remains of a temple (of Augustus?); some of the inscriptions discovered are Christian; the most curious ruins are however those of the Basilica Kasr el-Ghoul, 107.25 feet by 52 feet ending in an apse; the flooring was in mosaics; the baptistery of Dar el-Djir; a monastery below Ain Hadjima; and especially the Basilica of St. Peter of Dar el-Kous, of which the narthex is at present used as a church: it measures 139.75 feet by 54.75, the naves are roofless, but the apse is intact SMITH, Dict. of Greek and Roman Geog. s. v.; MULLER, Notes a Ptolemy, ed. Didot, I, 646; TOULOTTE, Geog. de l'Afrique chretienne. Proconsulaire (Rennes, 1892), 241-6; DIEHL, L'Afrique byzantine (Paris, 1896), passim. S. PÉTRIDÈS Sichem Sichem (A.V. Shechem). An Israelite city in the tribe of Ephraim, the first capital of the Kingdom of Israel. Its position is clearly indicated in the Bible: it lay north of Bethal and Silo, on the high road going from Jerusalem to the northern districts (Judges xxi, 19), at a short distance from Machmethath (Jos., xvii, 7) and of Dothain (Gen., xxxvii, 12-17); it was in the hill-country of Ephraim (Jos., xx, 7; xxi, 21; III Kings, xii, 25; I Par., vi, 67; vii, 28), immediately below Mount Garizim (Judges, ix, 6-7). These indications are completed by Josephus, who says that the city lay between Mt. Ebal and Mt. Garizim, and by the Medaba map, which places Sychem, also called Sikima between the Tour Gobel (Ebal) and the Tour Garizin (Garizim). We may therefore admit unhesitatingly that Sichem stood on (St. Jerome, St. Epiphanius), or very close to (Eusebius, "Onomast.", Euchem; Medaba map), the site occupied by the town of Nablus, the Neapolis, or Flavia Neapolis of early Christian ages. That the city of Sichem, the name of which (Heb. shékém — shoulder, saddle) appears to have been suggested by the configuration of the place, existed in the time of Abraham is doubted by a few who think it is referred to in Gen., xii, 6, by anticipation; but there can be no question touching its existence in Jacob's time (Gen., xxxiii, 18, 19); it is certainly mentioned in the El-Amarna letters (letter 289), and is probably the Sakama of the old Egyptian traveler Mohar (fourteenth century B.C.; Muller, "Asien u. Europ.", p. 394, Leipzig, 1893). Owing to its central position, no less than to the presence in the neighborhood of places hallowed by the memory of Abraham (Gen., xii, 6, 7; xxxiv, 5), Jacob (Gen., xxxiii, 18-19; xxxiv, 2, etc.), and Joseph (Jos., xxiv, 32), the city was destined to play an important part in the history of Israel. There it was that, after Gedeon's death, Abimelech, his son by a Sichemite concubine, was made king (Judges, ix, 1-6) but the city having, three years later, risen in rebellion, Abimelech took it, utterly destroyed it, and burnt the temple of Baal-berith where the people had fled for safety. When and by whom the city was rebuilt is not known; at any rate, Sichem was the place appointed, after Solomon's death, for the meeting of the people of Israel and the investiture of Roboam; the meeting ended in the secession of the ten northern tribes, and Sichem, fortified by Jeroboam, became for a while the capital of the new kingdom (III Kings, xii, 1; xiv, 17; II Par., x, 1). When the kings of Israel moved first to Thersa, and later on to Samaria, Sichem lost its importance, and we do not hear of it until after the fall of Jerusalem (587 B.C.; Jer., xii, 5). The events connected with the restoration were to bring it again into prominence. When, on his second visit to Jerusalem, Nehemias expelled the grandson of the high priest Eliashib (probably the Manasse of Josephus, "Antiq., XI, vii, viii), who refused to separate from his alien wife, Sanaballat's daughter, and with him the many Jews, priests and laymen, who sided with the rebel, these betook themselves to Sichem; a schismatic temple was then erected on Mount Garizim and thus Sichem became the "holy city" of the Samaritans. The latter, who were left unmolested while the orthodox Jews were chafing under the heavy hand of Antiochus IV (Antiq., XII, v, 5) and welcomed with open arms every renegade who came to them from Jerusalem (Antiq., XI, viii, 7), fell about 128 B.C. before John Hyrcanus, and their temple was destroyed ("Antiq.", XIII, ix, 1). From that time on, Sichem shared in the fate of the other cities of Samaria: with these it was annexed, at the time of the deposition of Archelaus, in A.D. 6, to the Roman Province of Syria. Some, no doubt, of its inhabitants (whether Sichar of John, iv, 5, is the same as Sichem or a place near the latter we shall leave here undecided) were of the number of the "Samaritans" who believed in Jesus when He tarried two days in the neighborhood (John, iv), and the city must have been visited by the Apostles on their way from Samaria to Jerusalem (Acts, viii, 25). Of the Samaritans of Sichem not a few rose up in arms on Mt. Garizim at the time of the Galilean rebellion (A.D. 67); the city was very likely destroyed on that occasion by Cerealis ("Bell. Jud.", III, vii, 32), and a few years after a new city, Flavia Neapolis, was built by Vespasian a short distance to the west of the old one; some fifty years later Hadrian restored the temple on Mt. Garizim, and dedicated it to Jupiter (Dion Cass., xv, 12). Neapolis, like Sichem, had very early a Christian community and had the honor to give to the Church her first apologist, St. Justin Martyr; we hear even of bishops of Neapolis (Labbe, "Conc.", I, 1475, 1488; II, 325). On several occasions the Christians suffered greatly from the Samaritans, and in 474 the emperor, to avenge an unjust attack of the sect, deprived the latter of Mt. Garizim and gave it to the Christians who built on it a church dedicated to the Blessed Virgin (Procop., "De edif", v, 7). Since the Mohammedan conquest (636) Christianity, except during the twelfth century, has practically disappeared from Nablús, which, however, remains the headquarters of the Samaritan sect (about 150 members) and of their high priest. BAEDEKER-SOCIN, Handbook for Palestine and Syria (4th English ed., Leipzig, l906); CONDER, Tent-work in Palestine (London, 1885), ii, 14-42; IDEM, Survey of Western Pal. Memoirs, II (London, 1882), 160 8; 203-10; IDEM, Palestine (London, 1889), 63-7; TRISTRAM, The Land of Israel (London, 1865), vii, 159-62; GUERIN, Description de la Palestine, Samarie, I (Paris, 1875), 370-423; DE SAULCY, Voyage autour de la Mer Morte, II (Paris, 1883), 411-26; IDEM, Voyage en Terre Sainte, II (Paris, 1865), 244-53; HOELSCHER, Remarks on Palestinian Topography: Sichem and its environs in Zeit. des Deutsch. Palaest. Vereins, XXXIII (1910), nn. 1-3. CHARLES L. SOUVAY Sicily Sicily The largest island in the Mediterranean. It is triangular in shape and was on that account called Trinacria by the ancients; it is separated from the mainland by the Strait of Messina, rather less than two miles wide. Its area, including the adjacent islands, is 9935 square miles. The northern chain of mountains, running from Cape Peloro (Messina) to Lilibeo (Marsala), is only a continuation of the Calabrian Appenines. The most elevated peaks are the Pizzo dell' Antenna (6478 feet), near the middle of the range, and Monte S. Salvatore (6265 feet); the remainder of the island is an undulating inclined plain sloping to the Ionian and Mediterranean Seas. Near the middle of the eastern side rises the majestic volcano Etna, still active, 10,865 feet high, formed by successive eruptions and having a circumference of 87 miles at its base; it is covered with perpetual snow; on its slopes there are rich pastures, vineyards, gardens, arable lands, and forests; and vegetation flourishes up to an altitude of about 8200 feet. The chief Sicilian rivers are the Giarretta falling into the sea near Catania; the Anopo, flowing for a short distance underground and emptying into the sea near Syracuse; the Salso; the Platani. The two principal lakes are those of Lentini and Pergusa; on the southern coast there are very many lagoons and unhealthy marshes. Among the adjacent islands are the Lipari group (Aeolian Islands) and Ustica in the Tyrrhenian sea; the Egadi (Favignana, Marittimo, Levanzo) and the Formiche (Ants) near the western extremity; Pantelleria (the ancient Corcyra) between Malta and Tunisia. The northern and eastern coasts are generally steep, and the adjacent waters deep; the southern is shallow and has many sandbanks (Pesci, Porcelli, State, Madrepore). Considering the size of the island, it has many good harbours: Messina is the most important for commerce; Empedocle, the sulphur-exporting centre; Palermo, for oranges and lemons; Trapani, wines. Besides these there are Syracuse, Augusta, Catania, Milazzo, Licata, and Lipari. The climate is temperate, the mean summer maximum being 93.2 Fahrenheit; but Sicily suffers considerably from the sirocco. The wealth of the country is chiefly dependent on agriculture, maritime trade, and mining, especially sulphur. Though in antiquity Sicily was the granary of Rome, the production of grain (22,275,000 bushels) is not sufficient for the home consumption, a fact to be explained either by the increase of population, or by the system of large estates, or by the primitive methods employed. The vintage amounts to about 6,325,000 bushels. There is a large export of fruits, including oranges and lemons, and of carob beans. Sicily produces three-quarters of the world's sulphur: in 1905 it amounted to 3,049,864 tons, of which 1,629,344 came from Caltanisetta, and 1,039,005 from Girgenti. Among the other mineral products are: antimony and lignite from Messina (61 and 70 tons); asphalt from Syracuse (105,217 tons); rock-salt (12,730 tons). Fishing, especially tunny-fishing, is very profitable; but the sponge trade is decreasing (1980 tons in 1899, but only 172 in 1909). At the census of 1901 the population was 3,568,124, or 350 persons to the square mile; allowing for a mean increase of 1.3 per cent; the island probably contains 4,200,000 inhabitants at present (1911). The percentages of illiterates are 70.9, under 21 years of age, and 73.2, over 21 years, so that Sicily is more backward than Sardinia, Abruzzo, and the Apulias. However, this is not due to a great lack of schools, as there are 4156 elementary public, 563 private, and 310 evening schools; 4 training colleges for teachers; 44 royal gymnasia (2 pareggiati, 27 non pareggiati); 14 royal lyceums (2 pareggiati, 8 non pareggiati); 34 technical schools besides 6 non pareggiati; 7 technical institutes; 3 universities (Palermo, Messina, Catania); and 1 conservatory of music (Palermo). Sicily is divided civilly into 7 provinces, with 24 circondarii, 179 mandamienti, and 357 communes. It has 5 archbishoprics and 12 bishoprics: Catania, without any suffragans; Monreale, with Caltamisetta and Girgenti; Palermo, with Cefalù, Mazzara, and Trapani; Syracuse, with Caltagirone, Notto, Piazza Armerina. The Bishop of Acireale and the Prelate of S. Lucia del Mela are immediately subject to the Holy See. The parishes in Sicily are few in number and consequently very large. While in the Marches and Umbria the average number of persons in a parish is 600, in the Sicilian dioceses it is 7000 (9000 in Syracuse and 8000 in Palermo). HISTORY According to the ancient writers, the first inhabitants of Sicily were the Sicani; later there came from the Italian peninsula the Siculi, who, however, do not seem to have been of the same race or to have had any national unity. The island was greatly frequented by Phoenician merchants, as it lay in their way towards Africa and Spain, and was besides a centre of their trade. The presence of these traders is attested by Phoenician inscriptions and coins as well as by articles of Phoenician trade. The names, too, of the chief towns on the coast are of Phoenician origin. With their trade they introduced the worship of Melkart (Heracles) and Astarte, especially at Mount Eryx (Monte S. Giuliano). While the Phoenicians who came to the main island continued as foreigners, the smaller adjacent islands — Lipari, Egadi, Malta, Cosura — became thoroughly Phoenician in population. The Greeks had established themselves at some of the ports as early as the time of the Trojan War. Greek colonization really began in 735 B.C., when the Athenian Theocles was driven thither by a tempest. He induced the Chalcidians of Eubea to settle at Naxos and the Dorians to found a new Megara. Next year the Corinthians expelled the Siculi from the island of Ortygia, thus establishing the cradle of the city of Syracuse. In five years the colonies of Leontini, Catana, Thapsos, Megara, and Hyblona all sprang up on the east coast of the island, and then the immigration into Sicily seems to have ceased for forty years. In 690 B.C., the Rhodians and Cretans founded Gela, on the river of that name (now the Terranuova), and from Gela Acragas (Girgenti) was founded in 582, both on the south-west coast. At the point nearest to the peninsula the Cumani pirates had founded Zancle in the eighth century, and that settlement had received the name of Messana in 729 from Anaxilas, the tyrant of Reggio. Himera, on the north coast, was a colony of Zancle (648). The Syracusans founded Acrae (664), Casmenae (644), Camarina (599). Selinus arose in 629, Lipara in 580. This active Greek colonization drove the Phoenicians more and more towards the west of the island; Motye Solveis (Salunto) and Panormus (Palermo) remained the principal centres of their commerce. The Carthaginians then felt the necessity of obtaining political power over the island, if the Phoenician and Punic trade was not to be destroyed by the Greeks. They rejoiced at the disunion among the Greeks, who — particularly the Dorians and Ionians — had brought to the island their mutual hatreds and jealousies. Moreover, in the principal cities — such as Girgenti, Messina, Catania, and Syracuse, the democratic and aristocratic governments had given way to the rule of tyrants, which resulted in frequent conspiracies, revolutions, and temporary alliances. During the sixth century B.C. it was chiefly Acragas, under the government of Phalaris (570-555), that upheld the prestige of Greece against Carthage. In 480 B.C., Hamilcar, invited by Terillos, tyrant of Himera, who had been overthrown by Theron, came with an immense army to restore Terillos, and later to subjugate the whole island. But Gelon, tyrant of Syracuse, having been called on for aid, inflicted a great defeat on Hamilcar. That victory — which was not the first gained by Gelon over the Carthaginians — assured to Syracuse the hegemony of the Greek cities of the island. Gelon's brother Hiero being master of Gela and married to the daughter of Theon, tyrant of Acragas, Hiero succeeded him and defeated the Etruscans, enemies of the Cumani (474). The inhabitants of Catania and Naxos had to migrate to Leontini, and a Doric colony was established at Catania. But soon after Hiero's death (471) his brother Thrasybulus was expelled; democracy triumphed at Syracuse and the other Greek cities, and Greek unity was at an end. Ducetius, one of the chiefs of the Siculi, who were still masters of the interior, then conceived the hope of uniting his race and expelling all the foreigners from Sicily. He succeeded in taking Catania (451) and defeated the Syracusans who had come to the aid of Montyon; but in 452 he met with a reverse at Normae, and his army disbanded. The Siculi made no further efforts. The old rivalries broke out among the Greeks, and Athens intervened at the request of Leontini (427). For a moment the Sicilian Greeks recognized the danger of such intervention. At the Congress of Gela (424) a confederation of the Sicilian cities was formed for defence against all foreign powers. This alliance did not last long. The dispute between Selinus and Egesta (416), and the aid given by Syracuse to the former, led to the war between Athens and Syracuse, in which the latter appealed to Sparta for help. The Syracusans were victorious on sea, and the Spartans on land (413). Egesta then called upon the Carthaginians, and Hannibal, the nephew of Hamilear, destroyed Selinus and, a little later, Himera (409). Encouraged by these successes and stirred up by the threats of the Syracusans, the Carthaginians again sought to subdue the whole island. In 406 came the turn of Acragas the richest city in the island; the year following Gela and Camarina fell into the hands of the Carthaginians. In that year, however, Dionysius, having become master of Syracuse, made peace with the Carthaginians, and so stopped their victorious march. To prepare for renewed war with them, he strengthened and extended his power by taking Catania, Enna, Naxos, and Leontini. In 397 he expelled the Carthaginians from Motye. Himilco, the Carthaginian general, then attacked Syracuse, which seemed to prefer the gentle sway of the Carthaginians to that of its tyrant. But the stubbornness of the Spartan Pharacidas and a pestilence gained Dionysius a victory (396) and supremacy over the Greek portion of the island. An attack on Messina by the Carthaginian Mago was repulsed (393). A peace having been concluded, which assured each side its own territory, Dionysius thought of conquering Italy. Two other wars (383, defeat of Cronium; 368, capture of Selinunte and Entella) gave the advantage to neither party. When Timoleon defeated Dionysius II (343), the petty tyrants of the various cities again appealed for help to the Carthaginians, who were again defeated at Egesta (342). When Agathocles, the new tyrant of Syracuse, aspired to the supremacy of the island he had to fight the Carthaginians (312-306). Finally, however, the latter succeeded, by the treaty of peace, in securing their own possessions and the independence of the other Greek cities in the island, — preventing the union of the Greeks, among whom new tyrants arose, all fighting with one another. This led to the intervention of the Carthaginians, on the one hand, and on the other of Pyrrhus, King of Epirus, then at war with Rome (281-75). Pyrrhus caused the siege of Syracuse to be raised, stormed Eryx and Panormus, and cleared the enemy out of the whole island, with the exception of Lilybaeum. But when he began to appoint governors in Sicily, the Sicilians had recourse again to the Carthaginians and Pyrrhus returned to Italy (279). Meanwhile a military republic of Campanian mercenaries had been formed in Messina, and conquered almost the entire northern coast. Hiero II of Syracuse attacked these (269). Then some of the Mamertines, an Italic people, appealed for aid to Rome, while others called upon Carthage. Both answered the appeal, but wished to act alone. In 264 Appius Claudius landed an army and defeated the Carthaginian and Syracusan forces which had united to oppose him. Some sixty-seven cities yielded to the Romans; and even Hiero became their tributary (263). In 262 Girgenti, then the centre of the Carthaginian military power in the island, was captured. The victories of Mylae (260) and Panormus (254), and the capture of the Egadi (241), secured to Rome the possession of the island, but the cities which voluntarily surrendered remained federated. In the Second Punic War, Syracuse was allied with Hannibal, but was retaken by Marcellus (212). Sicily became a Roman province and acquired very great importance as the granary of Rome. It was divided into two quaestorships, Syracuse and Lilybaeum. The latinizing of the island continued, though the Greek element never entirely disappeared, so that in the Byzantine epoch the hellenization of Sicily progressed easily. In proportion as the political greatness of the Greek cities in the island increased, their artistic and literary fame diminished. The greed and cupidity of the praetors and other Roman officials (Verres, for instance) impoverished private individuals as well as the temples. The land fell into the hands of a few great landholders, who cultivated the rich soil by the labour of immense bands of slaves. These slaves rebelled in 135, proclaiming Eunus, one of their number, king. Eunus defeated the Roman army several times, but in 133 he was vanquished by Rufilius near Messina; the war ended with the capture of Tauro- menium and Enna (132), and about 20,000 of the unfortunate slaves were crucified. A second furious revolt occurred between 103 and 100 under "King Trypho" and the leadership of Athenio. During the last triumvirate Sicily was the scene of a war between the triumvirs and Sextus Pompey, who, victorious at first, was finally defeated by Agrippa in the naval fight at Mylae (36 B.C.) Another rebellion of the slaves took place under Valerian, and in A.D. 278 the island was devastated by a Frankish horde. From 440 on the Vandals repeatedly devastated the island, but they never obtained complete control of it. In 476 they abandoned it to Odoacer in return for an annual tribute, retaining, however, the region about Lilybaeum (Marsala). Theodoric recaptured Lilybaeum and ceased paying tribute. At the beginning of the Gothic War (535) Sicily was seized by Belisarius for the Byzantines; Totila regained it (550), but not for long. Meanwhile Christianity had been established in the island. A few cities boasted of having been evangelized by St. Peter and St. Paul or by the immediate disciples of the Apostles (Catania, Messina, Palermo, Girgenti, Taormina). St. Paul stayed three days at Syracuse, without St. Luke's making any mention of his visiting the brethren, as he does at Puteoli. That St. Paul preached in Sicily, is recorded by St. Chrysostom. The "Praedestinatus" mentions bishops of Palermo and Lilybaeum in the first quarter of the second century; it is certain that in the latter part of that century Christianity was flourishing in the island. Pantaeneus, the teacher of St. Clement of Alexandria and director of the famous Alexandrian school was a Sicilian; Clement himself, in the voyages he made to increase his knowledge of Christianity, visited Sicily. From the letters of St. Cyprian we learn that the Church in Sicily was in frequent relations with the Church in Rome and in Carthage, and that the questions discussed at those centres were followed with interest in the island. Through the efforts of Heracleon, the Gnostics made some progress there. Some Christians were martyred at Catania (St. Agatha, St. Euplus) and Syracuse (St. Lucy, St. Marcianus). Christian cemeteries have been discovered at Catania, Girgenti (2), Lentini, Marsala, Mazzara, Messina, Palermo (5), Rugusa, Selinunte, Syracuse, and its environs (Valley of the Molinello, Canicatti, the Valleys of Priolo, Pantalica, S. Alfano, etc). Christian inscriptions, excepting those at Syracuse, are generally in Latin. As in all Italy south of the Po, the bishops of Sicily were immediately subject to the Bishop of Rome, by whom ordination was conferred, and to whom a visit was to be made every five years at least. For the election of bishops, at least in the sixth century, the pope was accustomed to appoint a visitor, who was charged with the administration during the vacancy, and presided at the election, which was afterwards confirmed by the pope, when the bishop-elect presented himself for ordination. At the commencement of the Saracen invasion there were the following sees: Syracuse, Palermo, Cefalù, Lilybaeum, Drepanum (?), Messina, Lipari, Girgenti, Taormina, Catani, Leontini, Thermae (Sciacca?), Alesa, Cronion, Camarina, Tindari (Patti), Malta. Till after the time of St. Gregory, and probably down to the eighth century, the Roman Rite was observed in the island, and the liturgical language was Latin. In the dogmatic controversies, the Sicilian bishops were always among the defenders of orthodoxy, except that in the fifth century Pelagianism (through the personal efforts of Pelagius and Celestius) and Arianism (one Maximinus their chief was aided by the Vandals) obtained a foothold. Ecclesiastical affairs were thrown into disorder by the Vandal incursions, as is shown by the measures which Pope Gelasius was obliged to take. St. Leo the Great introduced into Sicily the obligation of celibacy even for subdeacons. Sicily was of great importance from the point of view of the Roman Church on account of the great amount of ecclesiastical property there, which was divided into two patrimonia (Palermitanum and Syracusarum). Each patrimonium had a rector, with inferior officers, defensores, notarii, actionarii, etc. The rector was generally a subdeacon of the Church of Rome, and was empowered to intervene in the ecclesiastical questions of the various dioceses. The Churches of Milan and of Melitene in Armenia also had property in the island. Monasticism was first introduced into Sicily by St. Hilarion. It was greatly increased by the large number of bishops or monks who were expelled from Africa or forced to emigrate to escape the Vandal persecution. St. Benedict sent a colony of his monks to Messina, under St. Placidus; the monastery was destroyed later by pagan (perhaps Slavic) pirates. St. Gregory the Great personally founded six monasteries, among them that of St. Hermes at Palermo. The number of monks was increased by the bands that flocked from Palestine, Syria, and Egypt, when Islamism began its triumphant march, and the Monothelites and Iconoclasts drove them from the Orient. Thus a strong hellenizing element, which was certainly encouraged by the Byzantine Government, settled in the island; Greek replaced Latin in the liturgy in many of the Churches. Leo the Isaurian (718-41) afterwards detached Sicily and Southern Italy from the metropolitan jurisdiction of Rome, but it is to be noted that, 100 years later, Nicholas I protested against this abuse. In the ninth century Syracuse was raised by the Patriarch of Constantinople to the rank of metropolis of Sicily and the adjacent islands. Concerning the state of the Sicilian Church during the Saracen domination we have no information: not the name of a single bishop is known. In the eleventh century the hierarchy seems to have been extinct, so that Cardinal Humbertus (later of Silva Candida) was appointed by Leo IX as Bishop of Sicily, though he could not enter the island. The Saracen attempt to invade Sicily was in 669, after the assassination of the Emperor Constans II at Syracuse. The Arabs subsequently made several descents and raids on the island, but occupied it only when the Sicilians were weary of the Byzantine misgovernment. About 820 the patricus Elpidius, governor of Sicily, rebelled against the Empress Irene; but he was defeated before the arrival of the Arabs whose aid he had asked, and who in 820 captured Palermo, whence they were afterwards expelled by pirates. In 827 again, the general Euphemius, invited Ziadeth Allah, Prince of Kairowan, to come; the latter captured Girgenti the same year and then proceeded to make a conquest on his own account. The Byzantines made a gallant effort to repel an enemy so much superior to themselves. Messina was taken in 831, Palermo in 832, Syracuse was reduced by famine only in 878, Taormina fell in 902, and it was not until 941, after a struggle of one hundred and fourteen years, that the Arabs completed the conquest of the island. The Arab domination was a benefit to Sicily from the point of view of material prosperity. To a certain extent liberty was enjoyed by the Christian population. Only those found in arms were reduced to slavery. This tolerance was, moreover, indeed, good policy on the part of the new masters, who, after the conquest, became independent of the great caliph. Agriculture flourished, new plants were introduced from Africa — the quince and the sugar-cane. Architecture was encouraged by the munificence of the princes (Palermo for instance had three hundred mosques); Arabic and Greek poets sang the beauties and the happiness of the island; not a few Arab writers were born there. The Aglabiti, and the family of Ziadeth were succeeded, in 909, as rulers by the Fatimidi, who were in their turn replaced, in 948, by the Kebbidi. The island was divided into three departments (valli); Val Demone in the north-east; Val Mazzara in the north-west; Val di Noto in the south; a division that was maintained later by the Normans. In a census taken at this time there were in the island 1,590,665 Mussulmans, 1,217,033 Christians, making a total of 2,807,698 inhabitants. The Byzantines were naturally desirous of reconquering the island, but the emperors of the West coveted it. Otho II had been negotiating with Venice about seizing it; Henry II, in the Treaty of Bamberg (1020), promised it to the popes. But it was the Normans who obtained it. Discord broke out in the Kebbidi family, and anarchy resulted: every alcalde and petty captain aspired to independence. Encouraged by these conditions, the Emperor Michael IV sent the catapan Leo Opus (1037) with a fleet, which, after varying fortunes, was forced to retire. In the following year he sent George Maniakis with an army which contained some Normans who had chanced to be at Calabria. Messina and Syracuse were taken, and the Arabs badly defeated near Troina. But Maniakis offended the Normans; they returned to the peninsula, and then began their conquests there. The victories of Maniakis continued until 1040, but their fruits were lost when he was recalled. Meanwhile the Normans had formed a state on the peninsula. Roger, brother of Robert Guiscard, crossed the Strait in 1060. In the following year, Becumen, a Saracen noble, asked him for assistance. With this aid, the whole Val Demone was conquered within the year. If progress was not more rapid, it was because Roger had been recalled to Italy. We may mention the siege of Troina (1062), the battle of Cerami (1063), of Misilmeri (1068), the capture of Palermo (1072), which had been attempted previously by the Pisans (1063), the defeat of the Saracens at Mazzara, the capture of Syracuse (1086), Girgenti (1087), and Noto (1091). In thirty years the Normans had conquered the whole island. To ensure their conquest they had to grant religious liberty to the Mohammedans, whose emigration in a body would have been a great blow to the country. Sicily became subject to Roger, who assumed the title of "Great Count"; Robert Guiscard who had aided him in the conquest, reserved certain rights to himself. Palermo continued to be the capital. The prosperity that followed the coming of the Arabs continued under the Normans, and later under the Swabians. Roger was succeeded by his son, Roger II, who in 1127 on the death of William II, became master of all the Norman territory and obtained from the anitpope Anacletus II (1130) the title of King of Sicily, which title was confirmed by Innocent II. The government of the island was almost always different from that of the other parts of the kingdom. As Robert Guiscard had recognized the suzerainty of the Holy See over Calabria and Aquileia, paying an annual tribute, so Roger II recognized it over Sicily and paid an annual tribute of 600 schifati. Costanza and Innocent III fixed the tribute for the whole kingdom at 1000 aurei. The official title was "the Kingdom of the Two Sicilies", thus marking the distinction between Sicily on the hither side and the Sicily beyond the Faro (the Straits of Messina). The custom of calling the south of Italy Sicily went back to the time of the Byzantine governors, who, while the island was under Arab domination continued to be called governors of Sicily. The Normans therefore considered that there were two Sicilies, one held by the Byzantines, and one held by the Arabs. For the Holy See the high sovereignty over that kingdom was necessarily a source of constant trouble and war. (For the history of the kingdom down to the Sicilian Vespers, see Naples). The admission of the burghers to the Sicilian Parliament by Frederick II, in 1241, deserves mention here. Immediately after the first conquest of the island the Normans re-established the dioceses, and in all of them the Latin-Gallican Rite was adopted. The Norman kings, moreover, considered ecclesiastical affairs as part of the business of the State, and this caused incessant difficulties with the Holy See, which was forced to make many concessions. Thus, Urban II granted to Roger I the right of putting into execution the orders of the pontifical legates. On the other hand, we must consider as apocryphal the document known as the "Monarchia Sicula", containing all the ecclesiastical rights and privileges presumed and exercised by the King of Sicily, among which, in particular, is the legatio sicula, making the king the legatus natus of the pope in that kingdom, whence it followed that the pope could not have any other legates in Sicily. The privilege granted by Urban II (1098) to Roger, confirmed and interpreted by Paschal II (1117), declares that Roger and his heirs held the vicem legati (the position of acting in place of a legate), in the sense that what the pope would have done or ordered through a legate (quoe per legatum acturi sumus) was to be carried into effect (exhiberi volumus) by the king's diligence (per vestram industriam). The pope certainly contemplated the possibility of sending legates into Sicily. This was the interpretation put by Paschal II on the privilege. The kings, especially the Aragonese, claimed for themselves full ecclesiastical authority in the Kingdom of the Two Sicilies, excluding the right of the Holy See to intervene. On the other hand, it is an error to deny the authenticity of the privilege itself as granted by Urban II and Paschal II (Baronius, Orsi, and others). Philip II (1578) sought to have the "Monarchia Sicula" confirmed, but did not succeed, notwithstanding which, in 1579, he established the office of the "judex monarchiae siculae", who in the king's name, exercised all the rights derived from the privilege of the Legation, and prohibited appeals to Rome from the decisions of that tribunal. The disputes with the Holy See became exceedingly grave when Sicily was given to Amadeus of Savoy (1713). The judex monarchiae claimed the right of absolving from censures reserved to the pope. Clement XI (1715) declared the "Monarchia" at an end. But Benedict XIII (1728) thought it advisable to come to an agreement, and granted the king the right of nominating the judge of the Monarchy (always an ecclesiastic), who in that way became a delegate of the Holy See with supreme jurisdiction in ecclesiastical affairs. But the causes of dissension were not removed. Pius IX, in 1864, abolished the tribunal of the Monarchy. The Italian Government protested, but, in the Law of the Guarantees (art. 15), it expressly renounced all claim to the privilege. The Sicilian Vespers resulted in once more separating the island from the kingdom, which was then held by the House of Anjou. Peter of Aragon, who claimed the right, as heir of the House of Swabia, was summoned by the Sicilians, and defended the island against the Angevin fleet, in spite of the excommunication of Martin IV. His son James, in 1291, ceded the island to the pope, who wished to restore it to the Angevins, but the Sicilians, in the Parliament of 1296, proclaimed James's brother Frederick king. This caused a fresh war, which was ended by the Peace of Caltabellotta (1302), by which Frederick retained the title of King of Trinacria, but only for his life, and paid in return an annual tribute of 3000 ounces of gold to the Holy See. Contrary to the provisions of the peace, Frederick's son Pietro succeeded (1337) and, after him (1342), his five-year old son Louis, and to him again (1355) his brother Frederick III, then thirteen years of age. Frederick II (Emperor Frederick II and Frederick I of Sicily) had restricted his own authority in favour of the Parliament. The barons profited by this to form four great divisions, over which they placed four great families, the Alagona, Chiaramonti, Palici, and Ventimiglia, whose bloody wars desolated Sicily. Roberto and Giovanna of Naples tried to take advantage of this state of anarchy to recover the island, but without success. In 1377 Frederick III was succeeded by his only daughter Maria, who married (1392) Martin, son of Martin of Momblanco, son of Peter IV of Aragon; in 1409 the kingdom passed by inheritance to the elder Martin, and thus the island was united to the Kingdom of Aragon and ruled by a viceroy. The attempt of Martin II to break the power of the barons gave rise to the idea of having a national king, and so one Peralta was proclaimed at Palermo. But Catania and Syracuse would have no Palermitan king; Messina submitted spontaneously to John XXIII, who declared the Aragonese line deposed. The latter, however, took advantage of the prevailing discord: in 1412 Ferdinand, son of Martin II, was acknowledged, and succeeded in curbing the powers of the Parliament. His son Alfonso I (1416-58) united the Kingdom of Naples (1442) with Sicily. On his death, Sicily was given to John of Aragon, whose son Ferdinand (1479-1516) became King of Aragon and Castile (and of Naples, 1503). Sicily thus became a distant province of Spain. There were occasional Sicilian uprisings and conspiracies against Spanish rule: at Palermo, in 1511, there was a second Sicilian Vespers; and in 1517 the whole island was thrown into confusion by the conspiracy of Gian Lesca. Then followed the civil war between the Luna and the Perollo (1529), the attempt of the brothers Imperatori and Marcantonio Colonna to conquer the island, and incursions of the Turks. More serious were the revolts at Messina, Palermo, and other cities, in 1647, caused by famine. At Palermo Francesco Ventimiglia, a nobleman, was proclaimed king, and one Giuseppe Alessi captain of the people. Alessi met with the same fate as Masaniello at Naples, being slain by the populace whose idol he had been. As Messina, alone of all the cities, had preserved its municipal liberty; the attempt to destroy this provoked a rising (1674), and annexation to France was proclaimed. Louis XIV agreed to this arrangement, but in 1676 withdrew his troops and warships from Messina. In 1713, by the Peace of Utrecht, Victor Amadeus II was made King of Sicily, and the Sicilians were contented with independence. But in 1718 war broke out again; Victor Amadeus had to abandon Sicily and Sardinia, and the former was given to Austria. In 1736 it was again united to Naples. The reign of the Bourbons was certainly advantageous to the island. During the Parthenopean Republic (1798), and the reign of Joseph Bonaparte and Murat (1806-15), Sicily was the asylum of the royal family, and was protected by the British fleet. At that time (1812) the island had a Constitution like the English Constitution. But, on being restored to the Throne of Naples, Ferdinand IV revoked the Constitution, which indeed had not been very acceptable to the people; he also put an end to the Parliament and all the laws and privileges of the Sicilians, and the island was thus put on the same footing as all the other provinces of the kingdom (Organic Laws of 1817). This caused great discontent in Sicily. When the Revolution of 1820 broke out at Naples, the Sicilians expected to obtain their independence; they received an evasive answer which diminished their hopes. General Florestano Pepe, sent into Sicily by the Neapolitan Parliament, was at first excluded from Palermo, but later welcomed, when he had given promises regarding their independence. These promises were not confirmed by the Parliament, which, to punish Palermo, declared Messina the capital of the island; widespread disorders followed, which made it easy for 12,000 Austrians to re-establish the authority of Ferdinand I in the island. The disturbances did not cease until they were put down by General Del Carretto. In 1847 a new agitation to obtain complete autonomy for Sicily, with its own Constitution, sprang up; but no one thought of Italian unity. On 10 July, 1848, Ferdinando Maria, Duke of Genoa, was proclaimed King of Sicily, but he refused to accept the throne. Peace having been restored on the Continent, the island was recovered in a few weeks (March and April, 1849). Some disturbances (as at Bentivenga, 1856) were crushed. Meanwhile, the idea of Italian unity had spread among the Liberals, while the populace continued to look forward to Sicilian independence. In 1862 Garibaldi's "Thousand" landed in Sicily and soon won the island for Victor Emmanuel II. The bright hopes of independence and prosperity, however, were not fulfilled; there were risings against the Italian Government (1867), though these were of little importance. Among ecclesiastical events it should be noted that, in the general re-organization (1818) of the Church in the kingdom, the Dioceses of Caltagirone, Nicosia, and Piazza Armerina were established; in 1844 those of Noto, Trapani, and Caltanisetta were added, and Syracuse was restored to metropolitan rank. CHIESI, Sicilia illustrata (Milan, 1892); BATTAGLIA, L'evoluzione sociale della Sicilia (Palermo, 1895); SLADEN, In Sicily (London, 1901); PIRRO, Sicilia Sacra (Palermo, 1733); LANCIA DI BROLO, Storia della Chiesa in Sicilia nei primi dieci secoli del cristianesimo (Palermo, 2 vols., 1884); SCADUTO, Stato e Chiesa, nelle due Sicilie (Palermo, 1887); STRAZZULLA, La Sicilia Sacra (Palermo, 1900); ANON., Documenti per servire alla storia di Sicilia (Palermo, 1873—); GARUFI, I documenti inediti dell' epoca normanna in Sicilia (Palermo, 1899); AMARI, I musulmani in Sicilia (Florence, 1854-72); Archivio storico siciliano (Palermo, 1873—); Arch. stor. per la Sic. Orientale (Catania, 1904—); MIRA, Bibliografia siciliana (Palermo, 1875, 1881). — For the Legatio Sicula, see FORNO, Storia dell' Apost. Legazione annessa alla corona di Sicilia (Palermo, 1868); SENTIS, Die Monarchia Sicula (Freiburg, 1869); GIANNONE, Il tribunale della Monar. di Sicilia (Rome, 1892); FREEMAN, History of Sicily from the Earliest Times (London, 1891—). U. BENIGNI Sidon Sidon The seat of a Melchite and a Maronite see in Syria. Sidon is the oldest city of the Phoenicians, and the metropolis of the great colonial empire established by this people (Strabo, XVI, i, 22). It is mentioned in the ethnological table of Genesis (x, 19); the territory of the tribe of Zabulon reached even to the gates of this city (Gen., xlix, 13), but the Hebrews never were its masters (Jos., xi, 8; xiii, 3, 6; xix, 28; Judges, i, 31; iii, 3; x, 12; xviii, 7). The supremacy of the Sidonians continued until about 1252 B.C., when the Philistines, after partly destroying Sidon, built on the old foundations the city of Dor, above Jaffa. The Sidonians fled to Tyre, one of their colonies, which then became the leading city. Sidon, called the mother of the Phoenician cities, for Tyre, Carthage, Hippo were settled by emigrants from there, was noted for its bronze, its commerce, navigation, knowledge of mathematics and astronomy; it is mentioned with great praise by Homer (Iliad, XXIII, 743; Odyssey, XV, 425; XIII, 285). After its downfall it is often mentioned in the Bible, but nearly always in terms of censure and as a subject of reproach (Joel, iii, 4, 5; Jer., xxv, 22; Ezech., xxxii, 30). Queen Jezabel, wife of Achab, was the daughter of a king of Sidon (III Kings, xvi, 31), for the city for a long time had its own rulers, although we find the inhabitants rendering service to David for the building of the temple (I Par., xxii, 4). Sidon was taken several times by the Assyrian kings, to whom its rulers paid tribute; finally in 676, when its name was changed to Ir-Asaraddon, and its inhabitants were killed, or carried captive into Assyria. When Babylon succeeded Nineveh in the sovereignty of Asia (606 B.C.), Sidon allied itself with Tyre to throw off this yoke and that of Egypt (Ezech., xxvii, 8); the conqueror, Nabuchodonosor, turned his wrath on Tyre, and Sidon took advantage of this to recover some of its former glory. It was a willing subject of the Medes and Persians from 538 to 351 B.C., but, having revolted in the latter year against Artaxerxes Ochus, it was burned by its inhabitants, 40,000 of whom perished in the flames (Diod. Sic., XVI, xli-xlvi). Finally it passed under the rule of the Greeks, sometimes of the Seleucides, sometimes of the Lagides, thus becoming gradually hellenized; at this time it had a school of philosophy. Under the Romans Sidon assumed the name of Nauarchis, later that of Colonia Augusta, or Metropolis, and had its own coinage. This period begins about 110 B.C. Jesus visited the countries of Tyre and Sidon (Matt., xv, 21; Mark, vii, 31), passing through Sidon after healing the Syro-Phoenician woman. St. Paul, returning to Rome from Caesarea, stopped with his friends at Sidon, where there were some Christian families (Acts, xxvii, 3). At an early date Sidon became a bishopric, subject to the Metropolitan of Tyre and included in the Patriarchate of Antioch. Theodore (present at the Council of Nicaea, 325) is the first bishop of whom there is any record; the two most celebrated are Paul ar-Râheb, an Arabic writer of the thirteenth century, and Euthymius, founder of the Basilian Order of St. Saviour, and one of the first organizers of the Melchite Catholic Church, about the latter part of the seventeenth century. For others see Le Quien, "Oriens christ.", II, 811-14. Mention is also made of two native saints: the martyr Zenobius, in the reign of Diocletian (Eusebius, "Hist. eccl.", VIII, xiii,) and Serapion (feast 21 March), a legendary personage. A great synod on the subject of Monophysitism was held at Sidon in 512. The city was unsuccessfully attacked by the Frankish king, Baldwin I, in 1108, and was captured by the Crusaders in 1111 after a long siege by land and water. From that time it was a dependency of the Latin Kingdom of Jerusalem. In 1187 Sidon surrendered to Saladin, who destroyed the ramparts, but it was retaken by the Franks in 1197, and held by them, notwithstanding temporary occupations by the Arabs and Mongols, until 1291, when Sultan El-Ashraft threw down the walls. In 1253 Saint Louis resided there for several months, and the Templars held possession the greater part of the time. During the Frankish occupancy it was called in Latin Sagitta, and in French Sagette, from its native name, Saida. The Latin bishopric, suffragan of Tyre, was administered by the Patriarch of Jerusalem, and not by that of Antioch, as formerly; it was already in existence in 1131, having probably been founded some years previously. Dating from 1291 it was only a titular bishopric. For the Latin bishops, see Du Cange, "Les Familles d'Outre-Mer", 805; Le Quien, "Oriens christ.", III, 1319-24; Eubel, "Hierarchia catholica medii aevi", I, 473;.II, 260, III, 318. After the departure of the Franks, Sidon was a city of little importance, acting as a port for Damascus; under the Druse Ameer Fakhr-ed-Dín (1595-1634) many Europeans, especially French, being attracted thereto, it became very prosperous. Its downfall began, however, when Djezzar Pasha expelled (1791) all Europeans from the pashalic, and settled at Saint Jean d'Acre; its ruin was completed by the commercial development of Beirut. In 1837 it suffered from an earthquake, and in 1840 from a bombardment by European fleets; in 1860 nearly 1800 Christians were massacred in its district. In the necropolis were found the painted sarcophagi, said to be of Alexander and the Weepers, now at the museum of Constantinople, and considered the most beautiful in the world. Saida numbers 12,000 inhabitants, of whom 1200 are Melchite Catholics, 1000 Maronites, 250 Latins, 200 Protestants, and 800 Jews; the remainder are Moslems. The city, located in the midst of gardens and thus retaining its surname of "Flowery ", forms a caza of the vilayet of Beirut. Although the harbor is partly blocked by sand, its commerce is of importance. The Maronite diocese numbers 40,000 faithful, 200 priests, and 100 churches. The Melchite diocese numbers 18,550 faithful, 42 churches, 50 priests, and 36 schools. The religious of the Basilian order of St-Saviour have their mother-house at Deir-el-Moukhalles; they possess 4 convents in this diocese and number 28 priests, 65 scholastics and novices, and 9 1ay brothers. The Basilian Sisters number 30, in one convent. Protestants have made considerable headway in this diocese, which the native Catholic clergy have not as yet been able to counteract. The Franciscans, established there in 1827, conduct the Latin parish and school for boys; the Jesuits have had a house there since 1855; the Sisters of St. Joseph direct the dispensary and school for girls. RENAN, Mission de Phenicie (Paris, 1864), 361-526; SMITH, Dict. of Greek and Roman Geogr., s. v.; GUERIN, Description de la Palestine, Galilee, II, 488-506; CUINET, Syrie, Liban, et Palestine (Paris, 1896), 70 -81; JULLIEN, La nouvelle mission de la C. de J. en Syrie, I, 257-65; Missiones catholicae (Rome, 1907), 782, 819; Annuaire pontif. cathol. (Paris, 1911). S. VAILHÉ Sidon Sidon Titular metropolis of Pamphylia Prima. Sidon, situated on the coast of Pamphylia, was a colony of Cumae in Æolia. Dating from the tenth century B.C., its coinage bore the head of Athena (Minerva), the patroness of the city, with a Pamphylian legend. Its people, a piratical horde, quickly forgot their own language to adopt that of the aborigines. For rendering tribute to Alexander they were accorded a Macedonian garrison. A commercial and warlike city, with a powerful navy, it was in continual rivalry with Aspendus. In its waters the fleet of Antiochus the Great, commanded by Hannibal with Sidonian vessels upon the right wing, was beaten by the Rhodians. From that time Sidon was a rendezvous of pirates, above all, a notorious slave market. After the destruction of piracy elsewhere Sidon continued to derive considerable wealth and profit from both these sources. It was the capital of Pamphylia, later of Pamphylia Prima. In the tenth century Constantine Porphyrogenitus called it still a nest of pirates. Its downfall was complete in the fourteenth century, its people having abandoned it by degrees, owing to the Turkish invasions, and lack of water. At present the deserted ruins are called Eski Adalia, Old Attalia, in the sanjak of Adalia and the vilayet of Koniah. They consist of a temple, basilica, gymnasium, aqueduct, public bath, theatre, ramparts, etc. and some inscriptions. Sidon is mentioned in I Machabees, xv, 23, among the cities and countries to which the Roman letter proclaiming their alliance with the Jews was sent. Christianity was early introduced into Sidon. St. Nestor, martyr in 251, was Bishop of Pergi, not of Sidon as Le Quien (Oriens Christ., I, 995) believed The first known bishop was Epidaurus, presiding at the Council of Ancyra, 314. Others are John, fourth century; Eustathius, 381; Amphilochius, 426-458, who played an important part in the history of the time; Conon, 536; Peter, 553; John, 680-692; Mark, 879; Theodore, 1027-1028; Anthimus, present at the Council of Constantinople where Michael Cerularius completed the schism with Rome, 1054; John, then counsellor to the Emperor Michael VII Ducas, presided at a council on the worship of images, 1082; Theodosius and his successor Nicetas, twelfth century. John, present at a Council of Constantinople 1156. The "Notitiae Episcopatuum" continued to mention Sidon as a metropolis of Pamphylia until the thirteenth century. It does not appear in the "Notitia" of Andronicus III. From other documents we learn that in 1315 and for some time previous to that, Sidon had bishops of its own — the Bishop of Sinope was called to the position, but was unable to leave his own diocese; this call was repeated in 1338 and 1345. In 1397 the diocese was united with that of Attalia; in 1400 the Metropolitan of Perge and Attalia was at the same time the administrator of Sidon. Since then, the city has disappeared from history. Sidon was the home of Eustachius of Antioch (see EUSTATHIUS), of the philosopher Troilus, the master of Socrates, himself a teacher; of the celebrated fifth-century ecclesiastical writer Philip; of the famous lawyer Tribonianus (sixth century). SMITH, Diction. of Greek and Roman Geog. (London, 1870), s.v.; TOMASCHEK, Zur historischen Topographie von Kleinasien im Mittelalter (Vienna, 1891), 59; ALISHAN, Sisseuan (Venice, 1899), 364; TEXIER, Asie Mineure (Paris, 1862), 721 sqq.; LANCKORONSKI, Les villes de la Pamphylie et de la Pisidie (Paris, 1890), 131 seq.; BEAUFORT, Karamania, 147 sqq.; FELLOWS, Asia Minor, 201; LEAKE, Asia Minor, 195 sqq.; RAMSAY, Asia Minor, 420 and passim; WACHTER, Der Verfall des Grieehenturns in Kleinasien im XIV Jahrhundert (Leipzig, 1903), 29 sqq. S. PÉTRIDÈS Sidonius Sidonius Apollinaris (CAIUS SOLLIUS MODESTUS APOLLINARIS SIDONIUS). Christian author and Bishop of Clermont, b. at Lyons, 5 November, about 430; d. at Clermont, about August, 480. He was of noble descent, his father and grandfather being Christians and prefects of the pretorium of the Gauls. About 452 he married Papianilla, daughter of Avitus, who was proclaimed emperor at the end of 455, and who set up in the Forum of Trajan a statue of his son-in-law. Sidonius wrote a panegyric in honor of his father who had become consul on 1 Jan., 456. A year had elapsed before Avitus was overthrown by Ricimer and Majorian. Sidonius at first resisted, then yielded and wrote a second panegyric on the occasion of Majorian's journey to Lyons (458). After the fall of Majorian, Sidonius supported Theodoric II, King of the Visigoths, and after Theodoric's assassination hoped to see the empire arise anew during the consulate of Anthemius. He went to Rome, where he eulogized the second consulate of Anthemius (1 Jan., 468) in a panegyric, and became prefect of the city. About 470 he returned to Gaul, where contrary to his wishes he was elected Bishop of the Arveni (Clermont in Auvergne). He had been chosen as the only one capable of maintaining the Roman power against the attacks of Euric, Theodoric's successor. With the general Ecdicius, he resisted the barbarian army up to the time when Clermont fell, abandoned by Rome (474). He was for some time a prisoner of Euric, and was later exposed to the attacks of two priests of his diocese. He finally returned to Clermont, where he died (Epist., IX, xii). His works form two groups, the "Carmina" and the "Epistulae". The poems are the three panegyrics with their appendixes; two epithalamia; an acknowledgment to Faustus of Reji (now Riez), a eulogy of Narbonne, or rather, of two citizens of Narbonne; a description of the castle (burgas) of Leontius, etc. The letters have been divided into nine books, the approximate dates of which are: I, 469; II, 472; V-VII, 474-475; IX, 479. Although written in prose, these letters contain several metrical pieces. After his conversion to Christianity, Sidonius ceased to write profane poetry. The poems of Sidonius are written in a fairly pure latinity. The prosody is correct, but the frequent alliterations and the use of short verses in lengthy compositions betray the poet of a decadent period. The excessive use of mythological and allegorical terms and the elaboration of details make the reading of these works tiresome. The sources of his inspiration are usually Statius and Claudian. His defects are atoned for by powerful descriptions (sketches of barbarian races, landscapes, details of court intrigues) noticeable particularly in his letters, in the composition of which he took as models Symmachus and Pliny the Younger. Most of them are genuine letters, only somewhat retouched before their insertion in the collection. They abound more in mannerisms than the poems and contain also many archaic words and expressions borrowed from every period of the Latin language; he is very diffuse and runs to antithesis and plays upon words. He foreshadows the artificial diction of the "Hisperica Tamina", only the artistic skill of the painter and the story-teller makes up for these defects. These letters exhibit a highly colored and unique picture of the times. Sidonius wished to unite the service of Christ and that of the Empire. He is the last representative of the ancient culture in Gaul. By his works as well as by his career, he strove to perpetuate it under the aegis of Rome; eventually he had to be content with saving its last vestiges under a barbarian prince. The writings of Sidonius were edited by SIRMOND (Paris, 1652); for new editions see LUETJOHANN in Mon. Ger. Hist.: Auct. antiq., VIII (Berlin, 1887); MOHR in Bibliotheca Teubneriana (Leipsig). For an exhaustive bibliography see CHEVALIER, Repertoire; IDEM, Bio-bibl., s. v.; ROGER, L'enseignement des lettres classiques d'Ansone a Alcuin (Paris, 1905), 60-88. PAUL LEJAY Sidyma Sidyma A titular see in Lycia, suffragan of Myra; mentioned by Ptolemy, V, 3, 5; Pliny, V, 28; Hierocles, 684, 15; Stephanus Byzantinus, s. v., Cedrenus (ed. Bonn) 344. Near the sea and to the west of Patara it was built on the southern slope of Cragus, to the north-west of the estuary of the Kanthus. Its history is unknown; its ruins, which prove it to have been an unimportant place, are near the village of Doodoorgar, in the vilayet of Koniah, and consist of a theatre, agora, temples, tombs, and some inscriptions. Le Quien, "Oriens christianus", I, 973, mentions three of its bishops: Hypatius, who signed the letter of the bishops of Lycia to the Emperor Leo, 458; Zemarchus, at the councils of Constantinople in 680 and 692; Nicodemus, at Nicaea, 787; Eustathius, present at the Council of Seleucia, 359, was bishop both of Pinara and of Sidyma (see Le Quien, ibid., 975). The see is mentioned by the Greek "Notitiae episcopatuum" until the thirteenth century. FELLOWS, Lycia, 151 seq.; SMITH, Dict. of Greek and Roman Geog., s.v., RAMSEY, Asia Minor, 425; TEXIER, Asie mineure, 675. S. PÉTRIDÈS Siena Siena (SENENSIS) Archdiocese in Tuscany (Central Italy). The city is situated on three gently swelling hills. The Public Library was donated by Archdeacon Bandini (1663). The Academy of Fine Arts, the Museum of the Cathedral, and the different churches of the city, illustrate almost completely the history of art in Siena; in no other city had art, especially painting, a more local character, and nowhere else did it remain so conservative. Gothic architecture produced here its most excellent monuments, both ecclesiastical and in civic buildings; and the Sienese architects laboured beyond the confines of their state (e.g. the cathedral of Orvieto). Sculpture received its first impulse from Nicolo and Giovanni Pisani, whose Sienese disciples carved the decorations of the facade of Orvieto cathedral. The most renowned sculptors of the fifteenth century were Jacopo della Quercia (1374-1438), one of the pioneers of the Renaissance; Lorenzo di Pietro; Antonio Federighi; Francesco di Giorgio (also an architect); Giacomo Cozzarelli; and Lorenzo Mariano. Sculpture in wood is represented by the brothers Antonio and Giovanni Barili, Bartolomeo Neroni, and others. In painting Siena possessed in Duccio an artist who greatly surpassed his contemporary Cimabue of Florence, both for grace and in accuracy of design. Nevertheless, art developed and was perfected in Florence more rapidly than in Siena. Simone Martini (1285-1344), immortalized by Petrarca, and a citizen of Siena, bears comparison with Giotto. Lippo Memmi (also a miniaturist), Pietro and Ambrogio Lorenzetti, imitated with facility the grandiose composition of the school of Giotto. But Bertolo di Fredi (1330-1410); Taddeo de Bartolo (1360-1422); and the fifteenth century painters, Domenico di Bartolo, Sano di Pietro, Vecchietta, Matteo, and Benvenuto di Giovanni, compared with the Florentines, seem almost medieval. Siena therefore turned anew to Florentine, Lombard, or Venetian painters, under whom the ancient fame of the city revived, especially in the works of Bernardino Fungai, Girolamo della Pacchia, and others. The most renowned representatives of the Renaissance in Siena are Baldassare Peruzzi, better known as the architect of the Basilica of San Pietro, Giovanni Antonio Bazzi, and Il Sodoma (1477-1549), a rival of Raphael. With Domenico Beccafumi (1486-1551) begins the decadence. In the nineteenth century Paolo Franchi founded a school of painters closely related to the "Nazarenes" (a group of German painters of the early nineteenth century, who imitated the Italians of the fifteenth and early sixteenth centuries); the chapel of the Istituto di Santa Teresa gives a good idea of their art. The cathedral of Siena is said to occupy the site of a temple of Minerva. The present building was begun in the early thirteenth century; the cupola was finished in 1464. But in 1339 it was decided to so enlarge the cathedral that the area then occupied by the nave should form the transepts of the new building. In fact the construction of the longitudinal nave, now in part incorporated in the Opera del Duomo, was actually commenced. Though the pestilence of 1348 compelled the citizens to desist from this plan, they determined to complete in a worthy manner the original design. As it stands the building is about 292 ft. long and 80 ft. wide — 168 ft. in the transepts. The facade is decorated with bands of red, white, and black marble, tricuspidal, and richly adorned with sculptures (restored in 1869) and with mosaics (renewed in 1878). In the interior the pavement is of admirable marble mosaic — the work of masters of the fifteenth century, which has been for the most part renewed. The pulpit, entirely in relief, is the work of Nicolo Pisano and his pupils; the high altar is by Petruzzi, the bronze tabernacle by Vecchietta, and the carvings of the choir by the brothers Barili. The chapel of San Giovanni contains a statue of the saint by Donatello, besides statues by other sculptors, and frescoes by Pinturicchio. Scattered through the interior of the cathedral are statues of Sienese popes and the tombs of the bishops of Siena. The library of the cathedral possesses ancient choir-books and other manuscripts, and is adorned throughout with frescoes by Pinturicchio representing scenes from the life of Pius II — the gift of Pius III. In the centre of the library is the celebrated group of the Three Graces, presented by Pius II. In the Opera dei Duomo are preserved the remains of the exterior sculptures and of the pavement of the cathedral, as well as paintings and sacred tapestries. In the Hospital of Sta Maria della Scala (thirteenth century) the church and the pellegrinaro (a large sick room) with frescoes by Domenico di Bartolo are noteworthy; San Agostino possesses pictures and frescoes by Perugino, Sodoma, Matteo di Giovanni, and others. Beneath the choir of the cathedral is the ancient baptistery, now the parish Church of San Giovanni, with its remarkable font, ornamented with sculptures by Quercia, Donatello, and Ghiberti. In Santa Maria del Carmine the cloisters and the Chapel of the Sacrament are particularly interesting. The Oratory of San Bernardino contains works of the principal Sienese artists, especially of Sodoma and Beccafumi. The house of St. Catherine of Siena (Benineasa) has been transformed into a number of chapels, which centuries have vied in adorning. San Domenico (1293) possesses pictures by Sodoma, Fungai, Vanni, and others, and a tabernacle by Benedetto da Maiano. The little church of Fonteguista has frescoes by Fungai, Petruzzi, and Lorenzo di Mariano. Scattered throughout the other churches are works of the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries. Outside of the city is the Convento dell' Osservanza, with majolicas by Andrea della Robbia and paintings by Sodoma, Sano di Pietro, Taddeo Bartolo, and others; here also are shown the cell of St Bernardino of Siena, and the tomb of Pandolfo Petrucci. More distant from Siena are the Certosa di Pontignano, the Abbey of Sant' Eugenio (730), and the monastery of San Galgano (1201). Of the civic buildings we mention the Palazzo Pubblico (1289), with the Torre del Mangia (102 metres), at the foot of which in the form of a graceful loggia is the Capella di Piazza (1376-1460), adorned with frescoes and sculptures. In the interior of the Palazzo Pubblico, the halls of the ground and first stories (Sala della Pace, del Mappamondo, di Balia) are decorated with frescoes by painters named above and by others; the frescoes of the Sala Vittorio Emanuele are modern (Maccari and others). In front of the Palazzo Pubblico extends the great Piazza del Campo, where on the second of July and the fifteenth of August of each year are held the celebrated races — Corse del Palio — which by reason of the gay medley of the riders and their historic costumes attract a great number of strangers each year. (Heywood, "Our Lady of August and the Palio", Siena, 1889). The Fonte Gaia (Joyful Fountain) in the public square is the work of Jacopo della Quercia. Among the private palaces the following are of note: Spannochi, Casino de' Nobili, Tolomei, Buonsignori, Piccolomini (the last named contains the public archives). The Monte dei Paschi is perhaps the oldest of all non-charitable houses of credit. It was founded in 1500, and was reorganized in 1654, when the pastures (paschi) of the Maremma, from which it derives its name, were assigned it in guise of securities. In ancient times Saena, an Etruscan city, was of no great importance, hence remains of the Etruscan and Roman epochs are rare. It became a Roman colony under Augustus. Under the Lombards it was the seat of two gastaldi (magistrates), one a judge, the other a minister of finance. Under the Carlovingians it was made a country, which in 868 became hereditary in the family of Vinigiso Ranieri, which soon in its various branches divided the territory. The power of the bishop increased in consequence, so that in the eleventh and twelfth centuries he was the sole ruler of the city and the surrounding territory, though he recognized the over-lordship of the margraves of Tuscany. At the death of Matilda (the last Countess of Tuscany, 1115) a municipal government already existed, and in 1125 consuls are first mentioned. Thenceforth the form of government changed continuously. In the beginning there were three consuls, later there were twelve, the office being restricted to members of noble families. At other times a dictator was named. Through donations, purchases, and conquests, particularly from various petty lords of the Maremma ever plotting against Siena, the territory of the republic increased. In its expansion Siena naturally conflicted with Florence. Thus in the struggle for Poggibonzi (1141) the Sienese won, but were conquered by the Florentines in 1445. The rivalry with Florence consequently determined the politics of Siena, which adhered to the imperial (Ghibelline) party. Nevertheless in 1194 the Sienese repulsed the army of Henry VI, who failed to recognize the privileges accorded the city by his father. This victory increased the prestige of the republic, which now enlarged the circuit of its walls. In 1197 it joined the League of San Genesio. In 1199 the common people, wishing to participate in the government, secured the nomination of a podestà (chief magistrate) for justice and war, although the administration remained in the hands of the consuls of the guilds. A new change occurred in 1212, in which the administration passed to the Provveditori (purveyors) della Biccherna, while the consuls were reduced in rank to simple councillors. In consequence the heads of government changed in rapid succession: the Twenty-seven, Twenty-four, Seventy, Thirty-seven. Meanwhile at the battle of Montaperto (1260) Siena, at the head of the Ghibellines of Tuscany, had humiliated the hated Florence. But in Siena itself the Guelphs, aided by Charles of Anjou, acquired the sovereignty in 1277. The offices were all bestowed upon Guelphs, who for the most part were required to be merchants. Meanwhile the petty Ghibelline lords of the Maremma laid waste the territory of the republic, despite the mediation of Pope Nicholas III. The Guelph Government of the "Fifteen", instituted in 1282, lasted for seventy years. During this period occurred the war against the Bishop of Arezzo, head of the Ghibellines, who was conquered at Pieve al Toppo. Internal discords among the principal families, the recurrence in Siena of the conflicts between the Bianchi (whites) and Neri (blacks), for which the city was excommunicated by Clement V, the seditions of the butchers, doctors, and notaries, fomented by the nobles excluded from the government, failed to displace the Guelph merchants. It required the Great Pestilence of 1348, with its 30,000 victims in the city, and the advent of Emperor Charles IV to effect a change in the government. In 1355 the nobles and the common people rose in revolt, and instituted a mixed government of twelve plebeians and twelve nobles with four hundred councillors. But this lasted only a short time; in 1368 three changes were effected, and the whole year of 1369 was saddened by revolts and slaughter. The arbitration of Florence was of little avail. To these tumults and constitutional conspiracies within the city was added (1387) the rebellion of Montepulciano, fomented by Florence. A war with Florence arose in consequence, in which the Sienese had as an ally Gian Galeazzo Visconti, proclaimed in 1399 lord of Siena. But in 1404 they deserted Visconti, made peace with Florence, to whom Montepulciano was abandoned, and constituted a new government. From 1407-13 Siena was repeatedly assaulted by King Ladislaus of Naples, on account of its adhesion to the "Conciliabulum" of Pisa. In 1480, on the accession of new tumults over the right to participate in the government, Pandolfo Petrucci acquired the upper hand, and in 1487 instituted a new and absolute government. Caesar Borgia secured the expulsion of Petrucci from Siena; but in 1503 the latter returned, assumed the title of Magnifico (Maecenas of the Arts), and was more powerful than ever. His son Borghese Petrucci, who succeeded him in the signoria, was in 1516 expelled by order of Leo X, who intended to subject Siena to the Medici, hence the enmity that Cardinal Alfonso Petrucci bore him. Clement VII was on the point of proclaiming the Medici as rullers when the victory of Pavia (1525) and succeeding events destroyed his hopes. The Spanish protectorate proved even more severe. Charles V wished to compel the Sienese (1550) to construct a fortress for the Spanish garrison, whereupon they sought the aid of France, which sent a garrison of its own, so that the Spanish and Florentine troops abandoned the city. But Cosimo de' Medici was unwilling to relinquish his prey. Indignant because the command of the garrison had been given to Pietro Strozzi, a Florentine rebel, he invaded the territory of the Republic in 1554, and after several successful encounters, laid siege to the city, which surrendered, 17 April, 1555. Montacino, Chiusi, and Grosseto maintained themselves for a few years longer, but in 1559, under the terms of the Peace of Cambrai, the French troops departed. Thus the Medici acquired finally the large territory now divided between the Provinces of Siena and Grosseto. Orbetello alone was given to Spain. The Sienese soon accommodated themselves to the new regime, which left them much autonomy. Among the renowned natives of Siena were Alexander III, Pius II, Pius III, Alexander VII; the hermits St. Galgano (1181) and St. Giacomo (eleventh century); St. Catarina Benincasa, St. Bernardino Albizzeschi, and St. Ambrogio Sansedoni. The heretics Socinus and Ochino were born at Siena. As first apostle of the Christian faith, Siena venerates St. Ansanus who suffered martyrdom under Diocletian. Bishop "Florianus a Sinna", present at the Council of Rome (313) is claimed by Siena as its first bishop, also by other cities of Italy. The first bishop of certain date was Eusebius (465). The Lombard invasion interrupted the episcopal succession in Siena; it was restored in 635 with Bishop Maurus, when Rotharis rebuilt the city. In 713 commenced the controversy concerning jurisdiction over certain lands between the bishops of Siena and Arezzo, which lasted for three centuries (712-1029). The bishops of Siena (Adeodatus in 713, Ausifredus (752), Cantius (853), Lupis (881), Leo (1029) claimed ecclesiastical authority over all territory within political limits of the republic. The struggle was decided in favour of Arezzo. Other Sienese bishops were Giovanni (1058), founder of the monastery of Monte Cellese, St. Rodolfo (1068), Gualfredus (1083), author and poet; Buonfiglio (1215) who opposed the heretical Patarini and reformed the clergy; Bernardo (1273) brother of B. Andrea Gallerani, founder of the hospital and brotherhood of the Misericordia (d. 1251); Ruggero di Casale, O.P. (1307), a learned theologian active against the Fraticelli, who in 1314 excommunicated the entire convent of Franciscans at Siena; Azzolino Malavolti (1357), who obtained from Charles IV privileges for the University. In 1384 the canons exercised for the last time their right to elect the bishop, the election not being confirmed. In 1407 Gregory XII residing at Rome named as bishop his nephew Gabriele Condulmer, aftewards Eugene IV. Pius II, a former Bishop of Siena (1449), made the see an archbishopric in 1459. The first archbishop was cardinal Francesco Nanni Todeschini Piccolomini (afterwards Pius III), succeeded in 1503 by his nephew Cardinal Giovanni Todeschini. Francesco Brandini held the see from 1529 to 1588; Francesco M. Targui (1597), reformer and friend of St. Philip Neri, was bishop in 1597; Metello Bichi founded the seminary in 1613. Alessandro Petrucci (1615), emulating St. Charles Borromeo, was active in reforming the convents of women. Leonardo Marsili (1684) was much opposed by the comune and by the Grand Duke of Tuscany. Cardinal Felice Zondadari (1795-1823) suffered exile in France in 1809; Enrico Bindi (1871) was a man of letters. The suffragans of Siena are Chiusi and Pienza, Grosseto, Massa Marittima, Sovana, and Pitigliano. The archdiocese has one hundred and fourteen parishes, two hundred and twenty secular and seventy regular clergy, with 85,000 souls; 9 monasteries for men; 8 convents for women; 4 houses of education for boys and 5 for girls. There are four Catholic periodicals. COUNCIL OF SIENA (1423) It was decreed in the Council of Constance that five years later another council should be called. In fact Martin V summoned it for Pavia, where it was inaugurated on 23 April, 1423. The general session had not yet begun when the pestilence broke out at Pavia, for which reason the transfer of the Council to Siena was decreed. The procedure of the Council was almost identical with that at Constance. Certain formalities of safe conduct issued by the city for the members of the Council were the cause of friction with the pope. On the eighth of November four decrees were published: against the Hussites and the Wyclifites; against those who continued the schism of Benedict XIII; on the postponement of the negotiation with the Greek schismatics, and on greater vigilance against heresy. Gallican proposals of reform were productive of discord with the French. On 19 February, 1424, Basle was selected as the place of the next Council. On 20 February the dissolution of the Council was decreed, but the Decree was not published until 7 March. The French would have preferred to continue the Council until the "reform" of the church "in capite et in membris" (in its head and its members) had been accomplished, but whether to avoid a new schism, or on account of fear of the pope (since Siena was too near the Papal States), they departed. The magistrates of Siena took care not to let anyone depart until he had paid his debts. CAPPELLETTI, Le chiese d'Italia; PECCI, Storia del vescovado della citta di Siena (Lucca, 1748); LUSINI, Il capitolo della metropolitana di Siena (Siena, 1893); IDEM, I confini storici del vescovado di Siena (Siena, 1895); MALAVOLTI, Historia di fatti e guerre de' sanesi dall' origine al 1555 (Venice, 1599); TOMASIUS in MURATORI, Rerum italicarum, XX; RICCI, Siena in Italia artistica (Bergamo, 1905); RICHTER, Siena: Beruhmte Kunststatten (Leipzig, 1901); MILANESI, Documenti per la storia dell arte senese, III (Siena, 1854-56); Bulletino della Societa di Storia Patria di Siena. U. BENIGNI University of Siena University of Siena The earliest notices of an advanced school (of grammar and medicine) at Siena go back to 1241. In 1246 the Emperor Frederick II compelled the Sienese students at Bologna to abandon that city, which was hostile to him, and this fact must have contributed to enlarge the school of Siena, which then had celebrated professors of law (Pepo), of grammar (Magister Tebaldus, Hoannes Mordentis), of medicine (Petrus Yspanus). In 1252 the institution received from Pope Innocent IV the usual privileges for its professors and students. He granted the "University of Masters and Doctors regent at Siena and of their scholars studying in the same" together with their bedels an exemption from certain city taxes, and appointed the bishop as their conservator. In 1275 and 1285 the Commune of Siena, by its own authority, without regard either to the pope or to the emperor, decided to enlarge the studium into a studium generale. Nevertheless, it remained incomplete; but through the emigration from Bologna of professors and students in 1321 it received an unexpected increase, and then had twenty-two professors — seven of Roman law, five of canon law, two of medicine, two of philosophy, one of notarial science, the others of grammar, i.e., of literature and the interpretation of the classics. But after three years a great number of the professors and the scholars departed, either because peace had been established at Bologna, or because Siena could not obtain from the Holy See the necessary privileges for a real studium generale. In 1397, however, Siena obtained a Bull from Charles IV, which, after declaring that the studium had once been flourishing but had now sunk into obscurity, proceeds to confer upon it de novo the privileges of a studium generale. As early as 1386 we find a chair for the interpretation of Dante. In 1404 Bishop Marmille instituted the Collegio della Sapienza for poor students. In 1408 Gregory XII confirmed the privilege granted by Charles IV, and established a faculty of theology. Among the professors of the fourteenth century mention should be made of the jurists, Dino del Garbo, Neri Pagliaresi, Federico Petrucci, Pietro Ancharano, Ubaldo degli Ubaldi, Tommaso Corsini; the physicians, Ugo Benzi and Riccardo da Parma (oculist); the grammarians, Nofrio and Pietro d'Ovile. Instruction was also given in mathematics and in astrology, in which latter study Guido Bonatti and Cecco d'Ascoli were famous. In the fifteenth century the following professors obtained celebrity: Nicolo de Tudeschi (il Panormitano), Francesco Accolti, and Mariano Soccini in law; Jacopo da Forli and Alessandro Sermoneta in medicine; Francesco Filelfo, the theologian Francesco della Rovere (afterwards Pope Sixtus IV), and Agostino Dati in literature. It should also be noted that Siena was conservative in letters as well as in art, for which reason Humanism was not able to obtain a foothold. Among the professors of the early sixteenth century were the jurist Claudio Tolomei, and the humanists Eurialo Ascolano and Jacopo Griffoli. After Siena had come under the Medici, these princes used every effort to promote its prosperity. Among its famous jurists were Silvio Spannocchi and Francesco Accarigi; but the seventeenth century brought also at Siena a general decline of studies. Medicine and the natural sciences claim renowned devotees at Siena, such as the Camaldolese Francesco Pifferi, the mathematician Teofilo Gallaccini, the botanist Pirro Maria Gabrielli, founder of the Academic Fisiocritica, and particularly should be mentioned Michelangelo Mori and Ottavio Nerucci, the mathematicians Pistoi and Bartaloni, and the botanist Bartalini. Among theologians Sixtus Senensis was renowned; the first professor of church history was Domenico Valentini (1743). The special chairs of moral theology and Holy Scripture were founded in 1775 and 1777. Leopold I gave to the university a new organization, and increased the number of chairs. The French occupation caused the closing of the university, which was, however, re-established in 1814. But in 1840 political reasons brought about the suppression of the faculties of literature, philosophy, mathematics, and natural science. And thus it remained, even after Tuscany was annexed to Piedmont in 1859, in which year the theological faculty was also disbanded. Among the more recent professors mention should be made of the jurist Francesco Antonio Mori, the political economist Alberto Rimieri de' Rocchi, the physician Giacomo Barzellotti, and the theologian Luigo de Angelis. At present the university of Siena belongs to the so-called free universities; it has only the two faculties of law and medicine, with a school of pharmacy. In jurisprudence there are 19 chairs, classified as 15 ordinary professors and 5 docents; in medicine 24 chairs, with 22 professors and 31 docents. The number of students enrolled in 1910 was 255. CARPELLINI, Sulla origine nazionale e popolare deile Universita di Studi in Italia e particolarmente dell' Universita di Siena (Siena, 1861); ZDEKAUER, Lo Studio di Siena nel Rinascimento (Milan, 1894); DENIFLE, Die Universitaten des Mittelalters, I (Berlin, 1885), 429; MARIANI, Notizie nell' Universita di Siena (Siena, 1873); RASHDALL, The Universities of Europe in the Middle Ages, II (Oxford, 1895). U. BENIGNI Cyril Sieni Cyril Sieni (Better known as CYRIL OF BARCELONA). Missionary bishop, b. in Catalonia, date of birth unknown; d. after 1799, place and exact date equally uncertain. He was a member of the Capuchin Order, and in 1772 was sent to New Orleans as vicar-general by the Bishop of Santiago, Jose de Echeverria, within whose jurisdiction Louisiana then was. Ecclesiastical and religious conditions were at that time very unsatisfactory. The mission was in charge of some Capuchins who were not always models of ecclesiastical virtue; their superior, Dagobert, reputed to be ignorant and corrupt, had aroused against Cyril the opposition both of Unzaga, the civil governor, and the people. In the hope that a responsible episcopal authority would remove these obstacles, Father Cyril was made titular Bishop of Tricali, and auxiliary of Santiago. His delegated ecclesiastical authority extended over the seventeen parishes and twenty-one priests found in the territory now included in the States of Louisiana, Alabama, Florida, and those bordering on the western bank of the Mississippi as far as the Missouri. In 1772 he sent to St. Louis, then a hamlet of about two hundred inhabitants, its second pastor, Father Valentine. He also sent resident pastors (1781) to Pensacola and St. Augustine in Florida. During his administration, several Irish clergymen were sent to Bishop Sieni by Charles III of Spain, to minister to the religious needs of the English-speaking Catholics; to each of them the king assigned an annual salary of 350 dollars, besides paying their passage. In 1786 Sieni issued a pastoral letter concerning the proper observance of Sunday as a day of rest and prayer. In 1788 New Orleans was swept by a great conflagration, on which occasion the brick church of the city perished (it was rebuilt in 1794). In spite of his zeal, religion made little progress: on the one hand he failed to restore ecclesiastical discipline, and on the other displeased both Charles III and Bishop Trespalacios of Havana, to whose care the mission was committed since 1787. Finally a royal order (1793) banished him to his native province. In 1799 he was still in Havana on his way to Spain. Irreligious writers of his own day, followed by some modern historians, depict him in harsh colours. He probably committed more than one administrative error, but he was esteemed a holy and simple-minded ecclesiastic. BACHILLER Y MORALES, A puntes (Havana, 1859); GAYARRE, A History of Louisiana (New Orleans, 1890); SHEA, Life and Times of the Most Rev. John Carroll (New York, 1888); FORTIER, A History of Louisiana (New Orleans, s.d.). A. FRANÇON Sierra Leone Sierra Leone (SIERRAE LEONIS, SIERRA-LEONENSIS). Comprises the English colony of that name and the surrounding territory from French Guinea on the north and east to Liberia on the south. The capital, Freetown (population, 90,000) is in lat. 8°30' N. and long. 13°14' W. of Greenwich. Its area is 30,000 square miles; population, 3,000,000. Its climate is most deadly and has merited for the colony the name "White man's grave". Yellow fever is endemic. Malaria and hemoglobinuria are prevalent. After the American Revolution the English Government purchased from native chiefs a tract of land some twenty miles square, and established a colony for negroes discharged from the army and navy, and for liberated or runaway slaves who had sought refuge in England. In 1787 about 400 negroes settled there and founded Freetown. In 1808 it became a crown colony, and is so still. It has a completely-developed system of government. Protestantism had exclusive control in the colony until Catholicism appeared in 1864. Amongst many sects Wesleyans predominate, though Anglicans are numerous. All are strongly organized. In the surrounding territory the aborigines are pagans. Mohammedanism is spreading and becoming a dangerous enemy to Catholicism. The history of West-African Catholic missions begins in 1843 with the foundation of the Vicariate Apostolic of the Two Guineas by Bishop Barron of Philadelphia with the Holy Ghost Fathers. This vicariate, which after Bishop Barron's departure in 1845 was completely entrusted to these fathers, was divided in 1858, and a special vicariate comprising Sierra Leone, Liberia, and French Guinea was confided to Bishop Bresillac, founder of the African Fathers of Lyons. He with his companions died two months after reaching Freetown, and the vicariate was given back to the Holy Ghost Fathers. At the earnest request of the Propaganda Fathers Blanchet and Koeberle, C.S.Sp., began work in 1864. The French Guinea mission was begun in 1876 from Freetown, and fostered until its erection into a prefecture m 1897. The Liberian mission was undertaken by Fathers Lorber and Bourzeix, C.S.Sp., in 1884, but because of opposition they withdrew in 1888 and confined their efforts to Sierra Leone. Liberia was erected into a prefecture in 1903 and given to the Fathers of Mary. The present Vicariate of Sierra Leone was administered by the Holy Ghost Congregation since 1864, Fathers Blanchet and Brown having the title of pro-vicar Apostolic. After Father Brown's death in 1903, Rt. Rev. John A. O'Gorman of the American province of the congregation was named vicar Apostolic, and consecrated at Philadelphia. Despite the difficulty of climate and religious opposition the vicariate has prospered. At Father Brown's death there were five missions; since Bishop O'Gorman's consecration six new ones have been added, making eleven in all. There are twenty-eight missionaries, six from the American province. Connected with each mission is a school, and with it a workshop, farm, or plantation. Thus with religious and secular instruction the boys receive a practical training. A high school for boys was built at Freetown in 1911. There are four schools, one high school, and one orphanage for girls, in care of the Sisters of St. Joseph of Cluny. The Venerable Mother Javouhey, their foundress, labored here herself in 1822. Since 1866 her daughters have been in continuous charge. With religious and secular education they teach cooking, sewing, and laundering. MOCKLER FERRYMAN, British West Africa, its Rise and Progress (London, 1900); STANLEY AND OTHERS, Africa, Its Partition and Its Future (New York, 1898); BLANCHET, Histoire de la mission de Sierra Leone, 1864-1892 (op. inedit.); Bulletin officiel of the Congregation of the Holy Ghost (Paris, 1863-1911); CROOKS, A Short History of Sierra Leone (Dublin 1900). JOSEPH BYRNE Sigebert of Gembloux Sigebert of Gembloux Benedictine historian, b. near Gembloux which is now in the Province of Namur, Belgium, about 1035; d. at the same place, 5 November, 1112. He was apparently not a German, but seems to have been of Latin descent. He received his education at the Abbey of Gembloux and at an early age became a monk in this abbey; after this he taught for a long time at the Abbey of St. Vincent at Metz. About 1070 he returned to Gembloux, where he was universally admired and venerated, and had charge there of the abbey school until his death. While at Metz he wrote the biographies of Bishop Theodoric I of Metz (964-85), of King Sigebert III, founder of the monastery of St. Martin at Metz, and also a long poem on the martyrdom of St. Lucia, whose relics were venerated at the Abbey of St. Vincent. After his return to Gembloux he also wrote similar works for this abbey, namely: a long poem on the martyrdom of the Theban Legion, as Gembloux had relics of its reputed leader Exuperius; a biography of the founder of the abbey, Wicbert (d. 962); a history of the abbots of Gembloux, and revisions of the biographies of St. Maclovius and the two early bishops of Liege, Theodard and Lambert. Later he became a violent imperial partisan in the great struggle between the empire and the papacy. Of the three treatises which he contributed to the contest, one is lost; this was an answer to the letter of Gregory VII, written in 1081 to Bishop Hermann of Metz, in which Gregory asserted that the popes have the right to excommunicate kings and to release subjects from the oath of loyalty. In the second treatise Sigebert defended the masses of married priests, the hearing of which had been forbidden by the pope in 1074. When Paschal II in 1103 ordered the Count of Flanders to punish the citizens of Liege for their adherence to the emperor and to take up arms against him, Sigebert attacked the proceeding of the pope as unchristian and contrary to the Scriptures. His most celebrated work, "Chronicon sive Chronographia", is a chronicle of the world; it must be confessed that in this work he has not written history; he desired probably merely to give a chronological survey, consequently there is only a bare list of events even for the era in which he lived, though the last years, including 1105-11, are treated more in detail. The chronicle gained a very high reputation, was circulated in numberless copies, and was the basis of many later works of history. Notwithstanding various oversights and mistakes the industry and wide reading of Sigebert deserve honorable mention. He also made a catalogue of one hundred and seventy-one ecclesiastical writers and their works from Gennadius to his own time, "De scriptoribus ecclesiasticis". In this list he mentions his own work. P.L., CLX; HIRSCH, De vita et scriptis Sigeberti monachi Gemblacensis (Berlin, 1841). KLEMENS LOFFLER Siger of Brabant Siger of Brabant Indisputably the leader of Latin Averroism during the sixth and seventh decades of the thirteenth century. Many influential masters of art espoused his principles, and Pierre du Bois praised his oral teachings; finally Dante immortalized his name in these flattering verses of the "Divina Commedia: Paradiso", X, 136: Essa e la luce eterna di Sigieri Che, leggendo nel vico degli strami, Sillogizzo invidiosi veri. His illustrious colleague, St. Thomas Aquinas, expressly refuted his teachings. There are few authentic details of the life of Siger of Brabant. He was a master of arts at Paris, and for ten years the guiding spirit of the agitations that troubled the university. From 1266 he was with the legate, Simon de Brie, in disciplinary affairs. From 1272 to 1275 he held in check the rector of the university, Alberic of Reims, placing himself at the head of the opposition, which he recruited from the Garlande Quarter (scholares golardie). Though condemned in 1270 Siger still continued the propagation of his ideas, and his opposition to his Scholastic masters. A second condemnation, in 1277, put an end to his teaching. He was brought before the tribunal of the Grand Inquisitor of France, was condemned, and took an appeal to the Roman Court. He died at Orvieto, between 1281 and 1284, having been assassinated by his secretary. Of the works of Siger there are still extant: "De anima intellectiva", "De aeternitate mundi", "Quaestiones naturales", "Quaestiones logicales", "Quaestio utrum haec sit vera: Homo est animal, nullo homine existente", and a collection of six "Impossibilia". Another unpublished "Quaestio" has just been discovered by Pelzer of Rome. Siger was the adversary of Albertus Magnus and of St. Thomas Aquinas, "contra praecipuos viros Albertum et Thomam". His principal work (De anima intellectiva) called forth St. Thomas's treatise on the unity of the intellect (De unitate intellectus contra Averroistas). Siger in fact supported all the beliefs of the Averroist philosophy — the monism of the human intellect; one intellectual spirit for all men, separate from the body, is temporarily united with each human organism to accomplish the process of thought. Man is mortal, but the race is immortal. Hence the question of a future life is without meaning; immortality cannot be personal. The world is produced by a series of intermediary agencies; hence there is no providence in the government of men and of earthly things. All these productions are necessary, coeternal with God. All is ruled by cosmic and psychical determinism. Celestial phenomena and the conjunction of the planets control the succession of events on our globe, and the destinies of the human race. Man is not a free agent. There is an eternal reversibility of civilizations and religions, the Christian religion included, which is governed by the reversibility of the stellar cycles. Siger wished to remain a professing Catholic, and to safeguard his faith he had recourse to the celebrated theory of the two truths: what is true in philosophy may be false in religion, and vice versa. It is hard to tell whether such a mental attitude indicates buffoonery or sincerity. One is lost in conjecture as to the motive which impelled Dante, the admirer of Thomism, to place in the mouth of St. Thomas Aquinas the eulogy of Siger of Brabant, the apostle of Averroism. MANDONNET, Siger de Brabant et l'averroisme latin in Philosophes belges, VI, VII part i: Etude critique (Louvain, 1910), part ii, Textes (Louvain, 1909), contains all the works of Siger; BAUMKER, Die Impossibilia d. Siger von Brabant, eine philosoph Streitschr. aus. d. XIII Jahrh. in Beitr. z. Gesch. d. Philos. Mitt. II (1888), 6; IDEM, Zur Beurteilung Sigers von Brabant in Philosophisches Jahrbuch (1911); MANDONNET, Autour de Siger de Brabant in Rev. thomiste, XIX, 1911. For the relations between Siger and Dante, see the studies published by LANGLOIS, GASTON PARIS, and CIPOLLA. M. DE WULF Sigismund Sigismund King of Germany and Emperor of the Holy Roman Empire, b. 15 February, 1361, at Nuremberg; d. at Znaim, Bohemia, 9 December, 1437. He was the second son of the Emperor Charles IV, who betrothed him to Maria, the oldest daughter of King Louis of Hungary and Poland, and thus prepared the way for a great extension of the power of the House of Luxemburg. During the reign of his elder brother, King Wenceslaus, Sigismund was able, upon the death of the King of Hungary, to maintain his claims to Hungary though only after a hard struggle, and on 31 March, 1387, he was crowned King of Hungary. In 1389 he was obliged to defend the boundaries of his new kingdom against the Turks. In this year Sultan Amurath I had overthrown the Servian kingdom in the battle on the Plain of Kossovo (Plain of the Blackbirds). Amurath's son, Bajazet, defeated a Christian army under Sigismund at Nicopolis, and the lands along the Danube were only saved by the renewed advance of the Osmanli. In 1389 the clergy and nobility of Bohemia rebelled against the administration of the Government by the favorites of King Wenceslaus; they were supported both by Jost of Moravia and Sigismund. After this the intrigues in the royal family of Luxemburg were incessant. When, therefore, King Wenceslaus was deposed as emperor in 1400 at Oberlahnstein by the electors, and Rupert was elected emperor in his stead, Wenceslaus appointed his brother imperial vicar for Germany and governor and administrator of Bohemia. However, the accord between the brothers was not of long duration, because Wenceslaus was not willing to confer the succession in Bohemia upon Sigismund. For a time Sigismund was held prisoner by rebellious Hungarian subjects. The Emperor Rupert died on 18 May, 1410, at a time of intense excitement when the ecclesiastical confusion of the Great Schism had reached its height. There was a double election of a king of the Romans. On 20 September, 1410, Sigismund was chosen, and on 1 October of the same year his cousin, Jost of Bohemia, was also chosen. The empire, like the Church, had now three rulers. The death of Jost of Moravia made it easier for Sigismund to gain recognition, for the electors who had chosen Jost agreed to the election of Sigismund on 21 July, 1411. The new emperor was King of Hungary and Margrave of Brandenburg, and thus had a dynastic power which might have restored real power to the German Empire. He had large ambitions, his aim was to lead a united Christendom against the power of Islam, but he lacked steadiness and perseverance. Although highly talented he was too easily carried away by Utopian schemes. He also neglected to protect the base of his power, his hereditary possessions, which were disorganized by bad administration and civil disorder. The first matter of importance during his reign was the Great Schism. To Sigismund, undoubtedly, belongs the credit of bringing about the great reform Councils of Constance and Basle. In 1414 he went to Italy on an expedition against Venice; while there he forced Pope John XXIII, who was hard-pressed by King Ladislaus of Naples, to call a council which met at Constance on 1 November, 1414. For a time Sigismund was the soul of the council, and this no doubt served once more to emphasize the importance of Germany. However, the interest of the emperor in the council diminished in proportion as its proceedings failed to meet his views. The sole result of the council so far as Sigismund was concerned was that he brought upon himself the hatred of his Bohemian subjects by his sacrifice of John Hus. During the course of the council Sigismund turned his efforts at reform to internal policies, especially to the establishment of a general peace in the empire. He failed, however, in these efforts. Important consequences resulted from his granting to Frederick Hohenzollern, Burgrave of Nuremberg, the Mark of Brandenburg in fief, to which he added on 30 April, 1415, the electoral dignity and the office of lord high chancellor. In this way Sigismund gained support for himself against the independent policy of the electors. On the death of Wenceslaus (16 August, 1419), Sigismund became King of Bohemia; where, directly after the close of the Council of Constance, Hussite disorders had begun. The king sought to re-establish order by severe measures, but, as this method failed, Martin V at Sigismund's request proclaimed a crusade. Religious and national fanaticism brought a bloody victory to Ziska's hordes on 1 November, 1420, at Wyschehrad, and also on 8 January, 1422, at Deutschbrod. The position of Sigismund, who was now also threatened by the Turks, was an exceedingly precarious one. The only effective aid offered him was that of Duke Albert V of Austria to whom Sigismund had married his only daughter Elizabeth and whom he had made the presumptive heir of the Hungarian and Bohemian crowns. The Hussite armies now threatened the neighboring German territories. Forthwith it became apparent how wretched was the military organization of the empire and how desperate were the divisions among the German princes. Attempts at reform began, but the emperor lacked the vigor to carry out these attempts. Sigismund's failure to effect the needed imperial reforms was not wholly due to weakness of character; the selfish policy of the estates opposed insuperable obstacles to his good intentions. In 1424 the electors attempted to take the defense of the empire in their own hands. Though the coalition soon broke up, it had proclaimed the political programme of the following decades: reform of the empire with the controlling assistance of the estates As Sigismund was unable to enforce these reforms he could bring about the reconciliation of Bohemia by way of negotiations only; these were entrusted to the Council of Basle. Probably to emphasize before the councils his European position, Sigismund had himself crowned King of Lombardy on 25 November 1431, and German emperor at Rome, 31 May, 1433. Quarrels between the moderate Calixtines and the radical Taborites helped along the negotiations. By the so-called Compact of Prague the councul brought back the Hussite movement, at least so far as essentials were concerned, to lines compatible with the authority of the Church. The only concession was the granting of the cup to the laity. At the Diet of Iglau in 1436 after Sigismund had recognized the Compact of Prague he was acknowledged as regent of Bohemia. After this Sigismund took no further interest in large undertakings and retired to Bohemia. When, however, his reactionary measures led to a fresh outbreak, in which his wife, Barbara of Citti, joined, he retired to Znaim where he died. Regesta imperii, ed. ALTMANN, XI (Innsbruck, 1896-1900); WINDECKER, Denkwurdigkeiten zur Geschichte des Zeitalters Kaiser Sigmunds, ed. ALTMANN (Berlin, 1893); Deutsche Reichstagsakten unter Konig Sigmund, ed. KERLER, HESSE, and BECKMANN, II-XII (Gotha, 1878-86); ASCHBACH, Geschichte Kaiser Sigmunds (Hamburg, 1838-45); BECKMANN, Der Kampf Kaiser Sigmunds gegen die werdende Weltmacht der Osmanen, 1902); BERGER, Johannes Hus u. Konig Sigmund (Augsburg, 1871); VON KRAUS, Deutsche Geschichte im Ausgang des Mittelalters (1888). FRANZ KAMPERS Sign of the Cross Sign of the Cross A term applied to various manual acts, liturgical or devotional in character, which have this at least in common: that by the gesture of tracing two lines intersecting at right angles they indicate symbolically the figure of Christ's cross. Most commonly and properly the words "sign of the cross" are used of the large cross traced from forehead to breast and from shoulder to shoulder, such as Catholics are taught to make upon themselves when they begin their prayers, and such also as the priest makes at the foot of the altar when he commences Mass with the words: "In nomine Patris et Filii et Spiritus Sancti". (At the beginning of Mass the celebrant makes the sign of the cross by placing his left hand extended under his breast; then raising his right to his forehead, which he touches with the extremities of his fingers, he says: In nomine Patris; then, touching his breast with the same hand, he says: et Filii; touching his left and right shoulders, he says; et Spiritus Sancti; and as he joins his hands again adds: Amen.) The same sign recurs frequently during Mass, e.g. at the words "Adjutorium nostrum in nomine Domini", at the "Indulgentiam" after the Confiteor, etc., as also in the Divine Office, for example at the invocation "Deus in adjutorium nostrum intende", at the beginning of the "Magnificat", the "Benedictus", the "Nunc Dimittis", and on many other occasions. Another kind of sign of the cross is that made in the air by bishops, priests, and others in blessing persons or material objects. This cross recurs also many times in the liturgy of the Mass and in nearly all the ritual offices connected with the sacraments and sacramentals. A third variety is represented by the little cross, generally made with the thumb, which the priest or deacon traces for example upon the book of the Gospels and then upon his own forehead, lips, and breast at Mass, as also that made upon the lips in the "Domine labia mea aperies" of the Office, or again upon the forehead of the infant in Baptism, and upon the various organs of sense in Extreme Unction, etc. Still another variant of the same holy sign may be recognized in the direction of the "Lay Folks Mass Book" (thirteenth century) that the people at the end of the Gospel should trace a cross upon the bench or wall or a book and then kiss it. It was prescribed in some early uses that the priest ascending to the altar before the Introit should first mark a cross upon the altar-cloth and them should kiss the cross so traced. Moreover it would seem that the custom, prevalent in Spain and some other countries, according to which a man, after making the sign of the cross in the ordinary way, apparently kisses his thumb, has a similar origin. The thumb laid across the forefinger forms an image of the cross to which the lips are devoutly pressed. Of all the above methods of venerating this life-giving symbol and adopting it as an emblem, the marking of a little cross seems to be the most ancient. We have positive evidence in the early Fathers that such a practice was familiar to Christians in the second century. "In all our travels and movements", says Tertullian (De cor. Mil., iii), "in all our coming in and going out, in putting of our shoes, at the bath, at the table, in lighting our candles, in lying down, in sitting down, whatever employment occupieth us, we mark our foreheads with the sign of the cross". On the other hand this must soon have passed into a gesture of benediction, as many quotations from the Fathers in the fourth century would show. Thus St. Cyril of Jerusalem in his "Catecheses" (xiii, 36) remarks: "let us then not be ashamed to confess the Crucified. Be the cross our seal, made with boldness by our fingers on our brow and in every thing; over the bread we eat and the cups we drink, in our comings and in goings; before our sleep, when we lie down and when we awake; when we are travelling, and when we are at rest". The course of development seems to have been the following. The cross was originally traced by Christians with the thumb or finger on their own foreheads. This practice is attested by numberless allusions in Patristic literature, and it was clearly associated in idea with certain references in Scripture, notably Ezech., ix, 4 (of the mark of the letter Tau); Ex., xvii, 9-14; and especially Apoc., vii 3; ix, 4; xiv, 1. Hardly less early in date is the custom of marking a cross on objects -- already Tertullian speaks of the Christian woman "signing" her bed (cum lectulum tuum signas, "Ad uxor.", ii, 5) before retiring to rest-and we soon hear also of the sign of the cross being traced on the lips (Jerome, "Epitaph. Paulæ") and on the heart (Prudentius, "Cathem.", vi, 129). Not unnaturally if the object were more remote, the cross which was directed towards it had to be made in the air. Thus Epiphanius tells us (Adv. Hær., xxx, 12) of a certain holy man Josephus, who imparted to a vessel of water the power of overthrowing magical incantations by "making over the vessel with his finger the seal of the cross" pronouncing the while a form of prayer. Again half a century later Sozomen, the church historian (VII, xxvi), describes how Bishop Donatus when attacked by a dragon "made the sign of the cross with his finger in the air and spat upon the monster". All this obviously leads up to the suggestion of a larger cross made over the whole body, and perhaps the earliest example which can be quoted comes to us from a Georgian source, possibly of the fourth or fifth century. In the life of St. Nino, a woman saint, honoured as the Apostle of Georgia, we are told in these terms of a miracle worked by her: "St. Nino began to pray and entreat God for a long time. Then she took her (wooden) cross and with it touched the Queen's head, her feet and her shoulders, making the sign of the cross and straightway she was cured" (Studia Biblica, V, 32). It appears on the whole probable that the general introduction of our present larger cross (from brow to breast and from shoulder to shoulder) was an indirect result of the Monophysite controversy. The use of the thumb alone or the single forefinger, which so long as only a small cross was traced upon the forehead was almost inevitable, seems to have given way for symbolic reasons to the use of two fingers (the forefinger and middle finger, or thumb and forefinger) as typifying the two natures and two wills in Jesus Christ. But if two fingers were to be employed, the large cross, in which forehead, breast, etc. were merely touched, suggested itself as the only natural gesture. Indeed some large movement of the sort was required to make it perceptible that a man was using two fingers rather than one. At a somewhat later date, throughout the greater part of the East, three fingers, or rather the thumb and two fingers were displayed, while the ring and little finger were folded back upon the palm. These two were held to symbolize the two natures or wills in Christ, while the extended three denoted the three Persons of the Blessed Trinity. At the same time these fingers were so held as to indicate the common abbreviation I X C (Iesous Christos Soter), the forefinger representing the I, the middle finger crossed with the thumb standing for the X and the bent middle finger serving to suggest the C. In Armenia, however, the sign of the cross made with two fingers is still retained to the present day. Much of this symbolism passed to the West, though at a later date. On the whole it seems probable that the ultimate prevalence of the larger cross is due to an instruction of Leo IV in the middle of the ninth century. "Sign the chalice and the host", he wrote, "with a right cross and not with circles or with a varying of the fingers, but with two fingers stretched out and the thumb hidden within them, by which the Trinity is symbolized. Take heed to make this sign rightly, for otherwise you can bless nothing" (see Georgi, "Liturg. Rom. Pont.", III, 37). Although this, of course, primarily applies to the position of the hand in blessing with the sign of the cross; it seems to have been adapted popularly to the making of the sign of the cross upon oneself. Aelfric (about 1000) probably had it in mind when he tells his hearers in one of his sermons: "A man may wave about wonderfully with his hands without creating any blessing unless he make the sign of the cross. But if he do the fiend will soon be frightened on account of the victorious token. With three fingers one must bless himself for the Holy Trinity" (Thorpe, "The Homilies of the Anglo-Saxon Church" I, 462). Fifty years earlier than this Anglo-Saxon Christians were exhorted to "bless all their bodies seven times with Christ's rood token" (Blicking Hom., 47), which seems to assume this large cross. Bede in his letter to Bishop Egbert advises him to remind his flock "with what frequent diligence to employ upon themselves the sign of our Lord's cross", though here we can draw no inferences as to the kind of cross made. On the other hand when we meet in the so-called "Prayer Book of King Henry" (eleventh century) a direction in the morning prayers to mark with the holy Cross "the four sides of the body", there is a good reason to suppose that the large sign with which we are now familiar is meant. At this period the manner of making it in the West seems to have been identical with that followed at present in the East, i.e. only three fingers were used, and the hand traveled from the right shoulder to the left. The point, it must be confessed, is not entirely clear and Thalhofer (Liturgik, I, 633) inclines to the opinion that in the passages of Belethus (xxxix), Sicardus (III, iv), Innocent III (De myst. Alt., II, xlvi), and Durandus (V, ii, 13), which are usually appealed to in proof of this, these authors have in mind the small cross made upon the forehead or external objects, in which the hand moves naturally from right to left, and not the big cross made from shoulder to shoulder. Still, a rubric in a manuscript copy of the York Missal clearly requires the priest when signing himself with the paten to touch the left shoulder after the right. Moreover it is at least clear from many pictures and sculptures that in the twelfth and thirteenth centuries the Greek practice of extending only three fingers was adhered to by many Latin Christians. Thus the compiler of the Ancren Riwle (about 1200) directs his nuns at "Deus in adjutorium" to make a little cross from above the forehead down to the breast with three fingers". However there can be little doubt that long before the close of the Middle Ages the large sign of the cross was more commonly made in the West with the open hand and that the bar of the cross was traced from left to right. In the "Myroure of our Ladye" (p. 80) the Bridgettine Nuns of Sion have a mystical reason given to them for the practice: "And then ye bless you with the sygne of the holy crosse, to chase away the fiend with all his deceytes. For, as Chrysostome sayth, wherever the fiends see the signe of the crosse, they flye away, dreading it as a staffe that they are beaten withall. And in thys blessinge ye beginne with youre hande at the hedde downwarde, and then to the lefte side and byleve that our Lord Jesu Christe came down from the head, that is from the Father into erthe by his holy Incarnation, and from the erthe into the left syde, that is hell, by his bitter Passion, and from thence into his Father's righte syde by his glorious Ascension". The manual act of tracing the cross with the hand or the thumb has at all periods been quite commonly, though not indispensably, accompanied by a form of words. The formula, however, has varied greatly. In the earlier ages we have evidence for such invocation as "The sign of Christ", "The seal of the living God", "In the name of Jesus"; etc. Later we meet "In the name of Jesus of Nazareth", "In the name of the Holy Trinity", "In the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost", "Our help is in the name of the Lord", "O God come to my assistance". Members of the Orthodox Greek Church when blessing themselves with three fingers, as above explained, commonly use the invocation: "Holy God, Holy strong One, Holy Immortal One, Have mercy on us", which words, as is well known, have been retained in their Greek form by the Western Church in the Office for Good Friday. It is unnecessary to insist upon the effects of grace and power attributed by the Church at all times to the use of the holy sign of the cross. From the earliest period it has been employed in all exorcisms and conjurations as a weapon against the spirits of darkness, and it takes its place not less consistently in the ritual of the sacraments and in every form of blessing and consecration. A famous difficulty is that suggested by the making of the sign of the cross repeatedly over the Host and Chalice after the words of institution have been spoken in the Mass. The true explanation is probably to be found in the fact that at the time these crosses were introduced (they vary too much in the early copies of the Canon to be of primitive institution), the clergy and faithful did not clearly ask themselves at what precise moment the transubstantiation of the elements was effected. They were satisfied to believe that it was the result of the whole of the consecratory prayer which we call the Canon, without determining the exact words which were operative; just as we are now content to know that the Precious Blood is consecrated by the whole word spoken over the chalice, without pausing to reflect whether all the words are necessary. Hence the signs of the cross continue till the end of the Canon and they may be regarded as mentally referred back to a consecration which is still conceived of as incomplete. The process is the reverse of that by which in the Greek Church at the "Great Entrance" the highest marks of honour are paid to the simple elements of bread and wine in anticipation of the consecration which they are to receive shortly afterwards. Thalhofer, Liturgik, I (Freiburg, 1883), 629-43; Warren in Dict. Christ. Antiq. s.v.; Church Quart. Rev., XXXV (1893), 315-41; Beresford-Cooke, The Sign of the Cross in the Western Liturgies (London, 1907); Gretser, De Cruce Christi (Ingolstadt, 1598); Stevens, The Cross in the Life and Literature of the Anglo-Saxons (New York, 1904). HERBERT THURSTON Luca Signorelli Luca Signorelli Italian painter, b. at Cortona about 1441; d. there in 1523. He was a son of Egidio Signorelli, and his mother was a sister of the great-grandfather of Vasari, from whom we obtain almost all the important facts of his career. A pupil of Piero oella Francesea, he was largely influenced in his early days by Pollaiuolo, by whom it seems possible that he may have been instructed. His early youth was probably spent in Florence, and his style of painting is essentially Florentine. In 1479 we hear of him in residence at Cortona, taking high office in the government of the town, and held in great consideration. In 1488, he was elected a burgher of Citta di-Castello, and three years later he was one of the judges of the designs for the facade of the cathedral at Florence. In 1497, he commenced his first great work at Monte Oliveto near Siena, where he painted eight frescoes; from thence he went to Orvieto, where he remained for five years, devoting himself to painting his magnificent frescoes of the Last Judgment, which are perhaps his most characteristic works. There he also painted his own portrait, with a few bold, clever strokes revealing a great deal of character. In 1508 he went as delegate from Cortona to Florence, and the same year passed on to Rome, where he executed work for Julius II in the Vatican, now unfortunately no longer in existence, having been swept away to make room for the paintings of Raphael and his scholars. Again in 1512 he left Cortona as a representative, bearing an address of congratulation, and went again to Rome, but obtained no new commissions, as other men had taken his place. He returned to Cortona, and there lived to the age of eighty-two, working almost up to the day of his death; he received the honor of a public funeral. Few men left a greater mark upon the art of the period than Signorelli. He is spoken of by Berenson as the "grandest illustrator of modern times", although "by no means the pleasantest". In another place the same critic speaks of his mastery over the nude and action, the depth of refinement of his emotions, and the splendor of his conception remarking on the extreme power that Signorelli possessed of creating emotion and triumphing when representing movement. Art critics regard his "Pan" at Berlin as being one of the most wonderful works of the Renaissance and one of the most fascinating works of art that has come down to us in modern times; while his frescoes at Orvieto can only be described as magnificent, austere and strange no doubt, but marked by almost perfect genius, with full knowledge of the sense of form, and an awe inspiring majesty. Signorelli stands out as a master of anatomy and almost the only person who could render complicated movement and crowded action and in this special department he has rarely been equaled and never excelled. He cannot be properly appreciated without a journey to Cortona, and a visit to Orvieto. His works are scattered through all the little townships of Umbria, and can especially be studied in Loretto, Arezzo, Volterra, Foiano, Arcevia, Monte Oliveto, and Borgo San Sepolcro, while other pictures by him are in the galleries of Florence, London, Liverpool, Berlin, Milan, Paris, Perugia, and Rome. VASARI, Vite dei Pittori (Florence, 1878). GEORGE CHARLES WILLIAMSON Siguenza Sigüenza (SEGUNTINA, SEGONTIAE). Diocese in Spain, suffragan of Toledo; bounded on the north by Soria, on the east by Saragossa and Teruel, on the south by Cuenca, and on the west by Guadalajara and Segovia. It lies in the civil provinces of Guadalajara, Segovia, Soria, and Saragossa. Its episcopal city has a population of 5000. The site of the ancient Segoncia, now called Villavieja, is at half a league distant from the present Sigüenza; Livy speaks of the town in treating of the wars of Cato with the Celtiberians. The diocese is very ancient: the fictitious chronicles pretended that St. Sacerdos of Limoges had been its bishop; but, apart from these fables, we fimd Protogenes as Bishop of Sigüenza at the Third Council of Toledo, and again the same Protogenes at Gundemar's council in 610; Ilsidclus assisted at the fourth, fifth, and sixth councils; Wideric, at the seventh to the tenth; Egica, at the eleventh; Ela, at the twelfth, thirteenth, and fourteenth; Gunderic, at the fifteenth and sixteenth. The succession of bishops continued under the Arab domination: after St. Eulogius, in 851, we find there Sisemund, a man of great sagacity. But later on Sigüenza was so completely depopulated that it does not appear among the cities conquered by Alfonso VI when he subdued all this region. The first bishop of Sigüenza, after it had been repeopled, was Bernardo, a native of Agen, who had been "capisol" (caput schola — schoolmaster) of Toledo; he rebuilt the church and consecrated it on the Feast of St. Stephen, 1123, and placed in it a chapter of canons regular. He died Bishop-elect of Santiago. On 14 March, 1140, Alfonso VII granted the bishop the lordship of Sigüenza, which his successors retained until the fourteenth century. After the long episcopate of Bernardo, Pedro succeeded, and was succeeded by Cerebruno, who began the building of the new cathedral. Jocelin, an Englishman, was present with the king at the conquest of Cuenca; he was succeeded by Arderico, who was transferred to Palencia; Martin de Hinojosa, the holy Abbot of Huerta, abdicated the see in 1192, and was succeeded by Rodrigo. Sigüenza took a large part in the civil wars of the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries. The fortress palace of the bishops was captured in 1297 by the partisans of the Infantes de la Cerda, and in 1355 it was the prison of the unhappy Blanche of Bourbon, consort of Pedro the Cruel. In 1465 Diego López of Madrid, having usurped the mitre, fortified himself there. Pedro Gonzalez de Mendoza, the Cardinal of Spain, held this diocese together with that of Toledo, and enriched his relations by providing establishments for them at Sigüenza. His successor, Cardinal Bernardino de Carvajal, was dispossessed, as a schismatic by Julius II, for his share in the Conciliabulum of Pisa. After that Garcia de Loaisa, Fernando Valdés, Pedro Paeheco, and others held this wealthy see. The castle-palace, modified in various ways, suffered much from the storms of civil war, and was restored by Joaquin Fernandez Cortina, who was bishop from 1848, and the restoration was continued by Bishop Gomez Salazar (1876-79). The cathedral is a very massive Gothic edifice of ashlar stone. Its façade has three doors, with a railed court in front. At the sides rise two square towers, 164 feet high, with merlons topped with large balls; these towers are connected by a balustrade which crowns the facade, the work of Bishop Herrera in the eighteenth century. The interior is divided into three Gothic naves. The main choir begins in the transept with a Renaissance altar built by order of Bishop Mateo de Burgos. In the transept is the Chapel of St. Librada, patroness of the city, with a splendid reredos and the relies of the saint, all constructed at the expense of Bishop Fadrique de Portugal, who is buried there. What is now the Chapel of St. Catherine was dedicated to St. Thomas of Canterbury by the English Bishop Jocelin, who came with Queen Leonora. Cardinal Mendoza is interred in the main choir. Beyond the choir proper, which is situated in the centre, there is the sumptuous altar of Nuestra Señora la Mayor. Connected with the church is a beautiful Florid Gothic cloister, the work of Bernardino de Carvajal. The rich tabernacle, with its golden monstrance, was given by Cardinal Mendoza. The chapter house contains many excellent paintings. It is not known with any certainty at what period this church was begun, though it appears to date from the end of the twelfth century. The image of Nuestra Señora la Mayor, to whom the church is dedicated, dates from the end of the twelfth century; it was taken to the retro-choir in the fifteenth century, the Assumption being substituted for it on the high altar. The Conciliar Seminary of San Bartolomé is due to Bishop Bartolomé Santos de Risoba (1651). There is a smaller seminary, that of the Immaculate Conception, and a college. The College of San Antonio el Grande is a beautiful building. It was formerly a university, founded in 1476 by the wealthy; Juan López de Medina, archdeacon of Almázán, but its prosperity was hindered by the foundation of the University of Alcalá; in 1770 it was reduced to a few chairs of philosophy and theology, and was suppressed in 1837. Worthy of mention are the ancient hermitage of Nuestra Señora, which, according to tradition, had been originally the pro-cathedral; the Humilladero, a small Gothic hermitage; the Churrigueresque convent of the Franciscans; the modern convent the Ursulines, which was formerly the home of the choir boys; the hospital of the military barracks; and the Hieronymite college. UNIVERSITY OF SIGUENZA The building of the College of San Antonio Portaceli of Sigüenza, Spain, which was later transformed into a university, was begun in 1476. Its founder was Don Juan López de Medina, archdeacon of Almázán, canon of Toledo, and vicar-general of Sigüenza. The Bull ratifying the foundation, approving the benefices, etc., was granted by Sixtus IV in 1483, and courses were opened in theology, canon law, and arts. By a Bull of Innocent VIII in 1489, the university was created, with powers to confer the degrees of bachelor, licentiate, and doctor; the college was thus transformed into a university. A Bull issued by Paul III extended the course in theology, and, during the rectorate of Maestro Velosillo, the chairs of physics were created, while a Bull of Julius II established the faculties of law and of medicine. Among the professors were Pedro Ciruelo, who enhanced the prestige of the university as a centre of learning; Don Franeiseo Delgado, Bishop of Lugo, who was rector, and under whom the university reached its period of greatest splendour; Don Fernando Velosillo, rector and professor, was sent by Philip II to the Council of Trent. There were also present at that council, as theologians, Don Antonio Torres, first Bishop of the Canary Islands, and Senor Torro, both professors of this university; Don Pedro Guerrero, Archbishop of Granada; the famous Cuesta; Tricio and Francisco Alvarez, Bishop of Sigüenza. It is thus evident that the influence of the University of Sigüenza in Church and State was considerable in the last years of the fifteenth century and the first years of the sixteenth; thereafter it fell into decay. It was suppressed in 1837. DIOCESE: FLOREZ, Espana Sagrada, VIII (3rd ed., Madrid); CUADRADO, Castilla la Nueva in Espana, sus monumentos y artes, II (Barcelona, 1886), DE LA FUENTE, Hist, de las universidades de Espana, II (Madrid, 1885): O'REILLY, Heroic Spain (New York,1910); RUDY, The Cathedrals of Northern Spain (Boston, 1906. UNIVERSITY: Archivo del Instituto de Guadalajara; Legajos 1 y 2. etc., de los papeles pertenecientes a la Universidad de Sigüenza; JOSE JULIE DE LA FUENTE, Resena historica de la Universidad de Sigüenza; VICENTE DE LA FUENTE, Historia de las universidades espanolas (Madrid, 1887); SANCHEZ DE LA CAMPA, Historia filosofica de la instruccion publica en Espana (1872); RASHDALL, Universities of Europe in the Middle Ages, II (Oxford, 1895), 97. RAMÓN RUIZ AMADO TEODORO RODRIGUEZ Sikhism Sikhism The religion of a warlike sect of India, having its origin in the Punjab and its centre in the holy City of Amritsar, where their sacred books are preserved and worshipped. The name Sikh signifies "disciple", and in later times the strict observants or elect were called the Khalsa. The founder of the sect, Nanak (now called Sri Guru Nanak Deva), a Hundu belonging to the Kshastrya caste, was born near Lahore in 1469 and died in 1539. Being from childhood of a religious turn of mind, he began to wander through various parts of India, and perhaps beyond it, and gradually matured a religious system which, revolting from the prevailing polytheism, ceremonialism, and caste-exclusiveness, took for its chief doctrines the oneness of God, salvation by faith and good works, and the equality and brotherhood of man. The new religion spread rapidly and, under the leadership of nine successive gurus or teachers, soon became an active rival not only to the older Hinduism, but also the newer Mohammedanism of the reigning dynasties. The "disciples" were therefore somewhat ill-treated by the governing powers. This persecution only gave fresh determination to the sect, which gradually assumed a military character and took the name of Sings or "champion warriors"; under Govind Sing, their tenth and last guru (b. 1660; d. 1708), who had been provoked by some severe ill-treatment of his family by the Moslem rulers, they began to wage active war on the Emperor of Delhi. But the struggle was unequal. The Sikhs were defeated and gradually driven back into the hills. The profession of their faith became a capital offence, and it was only the decline of the Mogul power, after the death of Aurungzeb in 1797, which enabled them to survive. Then seizing their opportunity they emerged from their hiding places, organized their forces, and established a warlike supremacy over a portion of the Punjab round about Lahore. A reversal took place in 1762, when Ahmed Shah badly defeated them and defiled their sacred temple at Amritsar. In spite of this reverse they manged still to extend their dominion along the banks of the Sutlej and the Jumna Rivers, northwards as far as Peshawar and Rawalpindi, and southwards over the borders of Rajputana. In 1788 the Mahrattas overran the Punjab and brought the Sikhs under tribute. Upon the Mahrattas supervened the British, who received the allegiance of a portion of the Sikhs in 1803, and later on, in 1809, undertook a treaty of protection against their enemy Runjeet Singh, who although himself a prominent Sikh leader, had proved overbearing and intolerable to other portions of the sect. Various other treaties between the British and the Sikhs, with a view of opening the Indus and the Sutlej Rivers to trade and navigation, were entered into; but as these agreements were not kept, the British declared war on the Sikhs in 1845. By 1848, partly through actual defeat, partly through internal disorganization and want of leaders, the Sikh power was broken; they gradually settled down among the rest of the population, preserving only their religious distinctiveness intact. According to the census of 1881 the number of Sikhs was reckoned at 1,853,426, which in the census of 1901 rose to 2,195,339. At the time of writing the census of 1911 is not yet published. Their sacred books, called the "Granth" (the original of which is preserved and venerated in the great temple of Amritsar) consists of two parts: "Adi Granth", the first book or book of Nanak, with later additions compiled by the fifth guru, "Arjoon, and with subsequent additions from later gurus down to the ninth, and contributions by various disciples and devotees; secondly, "The Book of the Tenth King", written by Guru Govind Sing, the tenth and last guru, chiefly with a view of instilling the warlike spirit into the sect. The theology contained in these books is distinctly monotheistic. Great and holy men, even if divinely inspired, are not to be worshipped-not even the Sikh gurus themselves. The use of images is tabooed; ceremonial worship, asceticism, and caste-restrictions are explicitly rejected. Their dead leaders are to be saluted simply by the watchword "Hail guru" and the only material object to be outwardly reverenced is the "Granth", or sacred book. In practice, however, this reverence seems to have degenerated into a superstitious worship of the "Granth"; and even a certain vague divinity is attributed to the ten gurus, each of whom is supposed to be reincarnation of the first of the line, their original founder -- for the Hindu doctrine of transmigration of souls was retained even by Nanak himself, and a certain amount of pantheistic language occurs in parts of the sacred hymns. Salvation is to be obtained only by knowledge of the One True God through the Sat Guru (or true spiritual guide), reverential fear, faith and purity of mind and morals -- the main principles of which are strictly inculcated as marks of the true Sikh; while such prevailing crimes as infanticide and suttee are forbidden. They place some restriction on the killing of animals without necessity, but short of an absolute prohibition. Peculiar to the sect is the abstention from tobacco, and in part from other drugs such as opium -- a restriction introduced by Guru Govind Sing under the persuasion that smoking was conducive to idleness and injurious to the militant spirit. At the present time an active religious revival is manifesting itself among the Sikhs, having for its object to purge away certain superstitions and social restrictions which have gradually filtered in from the surrounding Hinduism. CUNNINGHAM, "A History of the Sikhs" (Calcutta, 1904; MACGREGOR, "History of the Sikhs" (2 vols., London, 1846); COURT, "History of the Sikhs"' GOUGH, "The Sikhs and the Sikh Wars" (London, 1897); SAYED MOHAMED LATIF, "History of the Punjab" (Calcutta, 1891); SEWARAM SINGH THAPAR, "Sri Guru Nanak Deva" (Rawalpindi, 1904); BHAGAT LAKSHMAN SINGH, "A short Sketch of the life and Work of Guru Govind Singh" (Lahore, 1909); MACAULIFFE, "The Sikh Religion" (6 vols., Oxford, 1909); TRUMPP, "The Adi Granth, the Holy Scriptures of the Sikhs" (London, 1877), stigmatised by Macauliffe as an unreliable translation. ERNEST R. HULL Silandus Silandus A titular see in Lydia, suffragan of Sardis. It is not mentioned by any ancient geographer or historian. We possess some of its coins representing the Hermus. It is the present village of Selendi, chief town of a nahia in the caza of Koula in the vilayet of Smyrna, situated on the banks of the Selendi Tchai or Ainé Tchai, an affluent of the Hernus (now Ghediz Tchai). Some inscriptions but no ruins are found there. The list of bishops of Silandus given by Le Quien, "Oriens christianus", I, 881, needs correction: Markus, present at the Council of Nicaea, 325 (less probably bishop of Blaundus, as suggested by Ramsay, "Asia Minor", 134), Alcimedes at Chalcedon, 451 (Anatolius, who signed the letter of the bishops of the province to Emperor Leo, 458, belongs rather to Sala, Ramsay, ibid., 122); Andreas, at the Council of Constantinople 680; Stephanus, at Constantinople, 787; Eustathius, at Constantinople, 879 (perhaps Bishop of Blaundus). The bishop mentioned as having taken part in the Council of Constantinople, 1351, belongs to the See of Synaus (Wächter, "Der Verfall des Griechentums in Kleinasien im XIV Jahrhundert", Leipzig, 1903, 63, n. 1). The See of Silandus is mentioned in the Greek "Notitiae episcopatuum" until the thirteenth century. RAMSAY, Asia Minor (London, 1890), 122; TEXIER, Asie mineure (Paris, 1862), 276. S. PÉTRIDÈS Silence Silence All writers on the spiritual life uniformly recommend, nay, command under penalty of total failure, the practice of silence. And yet, despite this there is perhaps no rule for spiritual advancement more inveighed against, by those who have not even mastered its rudiments, than that of silence. Even under the old Dispensation its value was known, taught, and practised. Holy Scripture warns us of the perils of the tongue, as "Death and life are in the power of the tongue" (Proverbs 18:21). Nor is this advice less insisted on in the New Testament; witness: "If any man offend not in word, the same is a perfect man" (St. James 3:2 sq.). The same doctrine is inculcated in innumerable other places of the inspired writings. The pagans themselves understood the dangers arising from unguarded speech. Pythagoras imposed a strict rule of silence on his disciples; the vestal virgins also were bound to severe silence for long years. Many similar examples could be quoted. Silence may be viewed from a threefold standpoint: + As an aid to the practice of good, for we keep silence with man, in order the better to speak with God, because an unguarded tongue dissipates the soul, rendering the mind almost, if not quite, incapable of prayer. The mere abstaining from speech, without this purpose, would be that "idle silence" which St. Ambrose so strongly condemns. + As a preventative of evil. Senica, quoted by Thomas à Kempis complains that "As often as I have been amongst men, I have returned less a man" (Imitation, Book I, c. 20). + The practice of silence involves much self-denial and restraint, and is therefore a wholesome penance, and as such is needed by all. From the foregoing it will be readily understood why all founders of religious orders and congregations, even those devoted to the service of the poor, the infirm, the ignorant, and other external works, have insisted on this, more or less severely according to the nature of their occupations, as one of the essential rules of their institutes. It was St. Benedict who first laid down the clearest and most strict laws regarding the observance of silence. In all monasteries, of every order, there are special places, called the "Regular Places" (church, refectory, dormitory etc.) and particular times, especially the night hours, termed the "Great Silence", wherein speaking is more strictly prohibited. Outside these places and times there are usually accorded "recreations" during which conversation is permitted, governed by rules of charity and moderation, though useless and idle words are universally forbidden in all times and places. Of course in active orders the members speak according to the needs of their various duties. It was perhaps the Cistercian Order alone that admitted no relaxation from the strict rule of silence, which severity is still maintained amongst the Reformed Cistercians (Trappists) though all other contemplative Orders (Carthusians, Carmelites, Camaldolese etc.) are much more strict on this point than those engaged in active works. In order to avoid the necessity of speaking, many orders (Cistercians, Dominicans, Discalced Carmelites etc.) have a certain number of signs, by means of which the religious may have a limited communication with each other for the necessities that are unavoidable. Holy Bible, especially Psalms, Proverbs, Ecclesiasticus, and Catholic Epistle of St. James; Thomas à Kempis, Imitation of Christ; Holsteinius, Codex Regularum quas S. Patres Monachis et Virginibus prascripere (Paris, 1663), St. Benedict, Holy Rule, in particular chaps. vi and vii; Schott, Fundamentder Grundrisse der Vollokommenheit (Constance, 1680); Rodriguez, Christian Perfection (London, 1861). EDMOND M. OBRECHT Silesia Silesia I. PRUSSIAN SILESIA Prussian Silesia, the largest province of Prussia, has an area of 15,557 square miles, and is traversed in its entire length by the River Oder. In 1905 the province had 4,942,612 inhabitants, of whom 2,765,394 were Catholics, 2,120,361 Lutherans, and 46,845 Jews; 72.3 per cent were Germans and nearly 25 per cent Poles. Agriculture is in a flourishing condition, 66 per cent of the area being under cultivation; the mining of iron, lead, and coal is largely carried on, and the manufacturing industry is considerable; among the articles manufactured are hardware, glass, china, linen, cotton and woollen goods. In the earliest period Silesia was inhabited by Germans, the tribes being the Lygii and the Silingii. When during the migrations these peoples emigrated about the year 400 towards the West, the territory was lost to the Germanic races, and for about eight hundred years the region was Slavonic. The sole memorial of the Silingii is the retention of the name Silesia; the Slavs called Mount Zobten near Breslau "Slenz" (Silingis), and the Gau surrounding Mount Zobten they called Pagus Silensi or Slenzane, Slenza, Silesia. The region belonged politically at times to Poland and at times to Bohemia. Christianity came to it from Bohemia and Moravia. The apostles of these two countries, Cyril and Methodius (from 863), are indirectly also the apostles of Silesia. Until nearly the year 1000 Silesia had no bishop of its own. The right bank of the Oder belonged to the Diocese of Posen which was established in 968 and was suffragan of Magdeburg; the left bank belonged to the Diocese of Prague, that was established in 973 and was suffragan of Mainz. The Emperor Otto III transferred the part on the left bank of the Oder to the Diocese of Meissen in 995. In 999 Silesia was conquered by the Poles. Duke Boleslaw Chrobry (the Brave) of Poland now founded the Diocese of Breslau; in the year 1000 this diocese was made suffragan of the new Archdiocese of Gnesen that was established by Otto III. In 1163, at the command of the German Emperor Frederick Barbarossa, Silesia was given dukes of its own who belonged to the family of the Piasts. With these rulers began the connection with Germany and German civilization. Lower Silesia was governed by Boleslaw the Long, the companion-in-arms of the emperor. His successor was Henry the Bearded (1201-38), the husband of St. Hedwig. From about 1210 Henry began to bring German colonists into his territory and to permit them to found German villages and cities. Bishop Laurence of Breslau followed his example in the district under the control of his see, the castellany of Ottmachau. The monasteries did much to aid the colonization and the Germanic tendencies, especially the Cistercians of the monastery of Leubus. These established no less than sixty-five new German villages and materially promoted agriculture and gardening, mechanical arts, mining, and navigation of the Oder. In the reign of Henry II (1238-41), the son of St. Hedwig Silesia and its western civilization were threatened by the Tatars. Henry met them in battle at Wahlstatt near Liegnitz and there died the death of a hero; his courageous resistance forced the barbarians to withdraw. Consequently 9 April, 1241, is one of the great days of Silesian history. The German colonization was vigorously carried on and towards the end of the thirteenth century Lower Silesia was mainly German, while in Upper Silesia the Slavs were in the majority. Among the contemporaries of St. Hedwig (d. 1243) were the Blessed Ceslaus and St. Hyacinth, both natives of Upper Silesia. They entered the Dominican Order in Italy and then became missionaries. Ceslaus labored in Breslau, where his order in 1226 obtained the Church of St. Adalbert; he died in 1242. Hyacinth, who among other labors also preached in Upper Silesia, died in 1257 at Cracow. A third native saint of Silesia was a relative of Hyacinth, Bronislawa, who became a Premonstratensian in 1217 and passed forty years in the practice of severe penances. Besides the monastery of Leubus the Cistercians had monasteries also at Kamenz (1248) Heinrichau (1228), Rauden (1252), Himmelwitz (1280), and Grussau (1292). The wealthiest convent was the Abbey of Trebnitz for Cistercian nuns founded by St. Hedwig who was buried there. Celebrated monasteries of the Augustinians were the one on the Sande at Breslau, which was founded at Gorkau about 1146 and was transferred to Breslau about 1148, and that at Sagan, established in 1217 at Naumburg on the Bober and transferred to Sagan in 1284. There were also a large number of houses belonging to the Premonstratensians, Franciscans, and orders of knights, as the Knights of St. John of Jerusalem, Knights of the Cross, Knights Templar. Up to the middle of the fourteenth century forty-five monasteries for men and fourteen for women had been established. The ruling family, the Piasts, repeatedly divided their inheritance so that in the fourteenth century Silesia contained no less than eighteen principalities. This made it all the easier for the Bishop of Breslau as Prince of Neisse and Duke of Grottkau to become the most important of the ruling princes. Silesia came under the suzerainty of the kings of Bohemia in 1327-29. As Bohemia was controlled by Germany the change was more favorable for colonization than if it had fallen to Poland. Silesia suffered terribly during the Hussite Wars (1420-37). The Hussites repeatedly undertook marauding expeditions, and hardly any city except Breslau escaped the havoc they wrought. About forty cities were laid in ashes. The clergy were burnt or put to death in other ways; the nobility grew poor; the peasants became serfs; the fields lay uncultivated; the "golden" Diocese of Breslau became a diocese of "filth". In 1469 Silesia came under the suzerainty of Hungary. However, as in 1526 Hungary, with Silesia, and Bohemia became at the same time possessions of the Habsburgs, from this time the province was once more regarded as a dependency of Bohemia. The Reformation made rapid progress in Silesia. For the causes of this see The Prince- Bishopric of Breslau. In the same article also the course of the Reformation and that of the counter-Reformation are fully treated. A large share of the credit for the restoration and firm establishment of Catholicism is due to the Jesuits, who during the years 1622-98 established in Silesia nine large colleges, each with a gymnasium, four residences, and two missions, and brought under their control all the higher schools of the country. This control endured, as Frederick the Great continued his protection of the Jesuits, even after the suppression of the order, up to 1800. In the seventeenth century Silesia obtained great renown through the two Silesian schools of poetry, the chief of these poets being Martin Opitz, Friedrich von Logau, and Andreas Gryphius. In 1702 the Jesuit college at Breslau was changed into the Leopoldine University (see BRESLAU, UNIVERSITY OF). At the close of the three Silesian wars (1740-2, 1744-5, 1756-63) the greater part of Silesia belonged to Prussia. By this change Catholicism lost the privileged position which it had regained in the counter-Reformation, even though Frederick the Great did not impair the possessions of the Church, as happened later (1810-40). In 1815 the Congress of Vienna enlarged Silesia by the addition of about half of Lausitz (Lusatia). During the decade of the forties the sect of "German Catholics" developed from Silesia as the starting-point; this sect was founded at Laurahutte in Upper Silesia by the ex-chaplain, John Ronge. Finally a brief mention should here be made of the enormous economic development of the province in the last fifty years, especially in the mining of coal, the mining and working of metals, and the manufacture of chemicals and machines. In Upper Silesia especially manufactures have advanced with American rapidity. Ecclesiastically the entire province belongs to the Prince Bishopric of Breslau with the following exceptions: the commissariat of Katscher, which consists of the Archipresbyterates of Katscher, Hultschin, and Leobschutz with 44 parishes and 130,944 Catholics, and belongs to the Archdiocese of Olmutz; the county of Glatz, which has 51 parishes and 146,673 Catholics, and belongs to the Archdiocese of Prague II. AUSTRIAN SILESIA Austrian Silesia is that part of Silesia which remained an Austrian possession after 1763. It is a crownland with an area of 1987 square miles and a population of 727,000 persons. Of its population 84.73 per cent are Catholics; 14 per cent are Protestants; 44.69 per cent are Germans; 33.31 per cent Poles; 22.05 per cent Czechs. As in Prussian Silesia, agriculture, mining, and manufactures are in a very flourishing condition. The districts of Teschen and Neisse belong to the Prince Bishopric of Breslau, those of Troppau and Jagerndorf to the Archdiocese of Olmutz. Scriptores rerum Silesiacarum, I-XVI (Breslau 1835-97); Codex diplomaticus Silesiae, I-XXV (Bres1au, 1857-1909); GRUNHAGEN, Gesch. Schlesiens, I-II (Gotha, 1884-86); MORGENBESSER, Geschichte von Schlesien (4th ed.)., Breslau, 1908); CHRZASZCZ, Kirchengesch. Schlesiens (Breslau, 1908); PETER, Das Herzogtum Schlesien (Vienna, 1884); SLAMA, Oesterreichisch-Schlesien (Prague, 1887). KLEMENS LÖFFLER Siletz Indians Siletz Indians The collective designation for the rapidly dwindling remnant of some thirty small tribes, representing five linguistic stocks -- Salishan, Yakonan, Kusan, Takelman, and Athapascan -- formerly holding the whole coast country of Oregon from within a few miles of the Columbia southward to the California border, extending inland to the main divide of the coast range, together with all the waters of Rogue River. Several of the tribes originally within the range of this territory are now entirely extinct. The others, all on the verge of extinction, are now gathered upon the Siletz Reservation, Lincoln County, Northwest Oregon, with the exception of perhaps seventy on the adjoining Grande Ronde reservation to the east. The principal tribes from north to south were the Tillamook (Sal.), Alsea, Siuslaw (Yak.), Coos, Coquille (Kus.), Takelma or Upper Rogue River (Tak.), Six, Joshua, Tututini, Mackanotni, Shastacosta, Cheteo (Ath.). The Athapascan and Takelman tribes were commonly designated collectively as Rogue River Indians. Before the beginning of the era of disturbance the Indians of the territory in question may have numbered 15,000 souls. In 1782-83 a great smallpox epidemic, which swept the whole Columbian region, reduced the population by more than one-third. The advent of trading vessels in the Columbia, dating from 1788, introduced disease and dissipation which poisoned the blood of all the tribes, leading to their rapid and hopeless decline. A visitation of fever and measles about 1823-25 wiped out whole tribes, and by 1850 probably not 6000 survived. In that year gold was discovered in the Rogue River country, resulting in an invasion of miners and the consequent "Rogue River Wars", lasting almost continuously for six years, 1850-56. In these wars the southern tribes of the Oregon coast probably lost over 1000 killed outright and more than that number through wounds, exposure, and starvation due to the destruction of their villages and food stores. On their final subjugation they were removed by military force to the "Coast Reservation", which had been established under various treaties within the same period, and to which several tribes had already peaceably removed. The Coast Reservation originally extended some ninety miles along the coast, but by the throwing open of the central portion in 1865 was divided into two, the present Siletz agency in the north, and the Alsea subagency in the south. In 1876 the latter was abandoned, the Indians beinc concentrated on Siletz Reservation, to which about the same time were gathhered also several vagrant remnant bands farther up the coast. On 1 Sept., 1857, the Coast Tribe Indians were officially reported to number: Siletz Reservation, 2049; Alsea, 690; refugee hostiles in mountains, about 250; remnant bands north of Siletz, 251; total, about 3240. Degraded, impoverished, and diseased, their condition could not easily be lower, and their superintendent states his conviction that any expectation of their ultimate civilization or Christianization was hopeless. "They have acquired all the vices of the white man without any of his virtues; and while the last fifteen years have witnessed the most frightful diminution in their numbers, their deterioration, morally, physically, and intellectually has been equally rapid. Starvation, disease, and bad whiskey combined is rapidly decimating their numbers, and will soon relieve the government of their charge." Up to 1875 governmental provisions for moral or educational betterment was either lacking or entirely inadequate, and the only light in the darkness was afforded by the visits at long intervals of the devoted pioneer missionary, Father A. J. Croquette, of the neighboring Grande Ronde Reservation, who continued his ministry to both reservations for a period of nearly forty years. Protestant work was begun under Methodist auspices about 1872, but no building was erected until about twenty years later. Each is now represented by a regular mission, the Catholic denomination being in charge of the Jesuits. The majority of the Indians are accounted as Christians, having abandoned the old Indian dress and custom, besides almost universally using the English language. There is also a flourisishing government school. Notwithstanding that the Indians are reported as "above the average" in civilization and comfortable condition, there is a steady and rapid decrease, due to the old blood taint which manifests itself chiefly in tuberculosis, and points to their speedy extinction. The approximate 3240 assigned to the reservation in 1857 had dwindled to approximately 1015 in 1880; 480 in 1900; and 430 in 1910, including mixed bloods. The work of assigning them to individual land allotments, begun in 1887, was finally concluded in 1902. The various tribes differed but little in habit of life. Their houses were of cedar boards, rectangular and semi-subterranean for greater warmth. Rush mats upon the earth floor served for beds. Fish formed their chief subsistence, supplemented by acorns, camas root, berries, wild game, and grass-hoppers; tobacco was the only plant cultivated. They had dug-out canoes, and were expert basket makers. Their chief weapon was the bow, and protective body armor of raw hide was sometimes worn. The ordinary dress of the man was of deer skin, and the woman, a short skirt of cedar bark fibre. Hats were worn by both sexes. Head flattening was not practiced, but tattooing was frequent. The dentalium shell was their most prized ornament and standard of value. Polygamy was common. The dead were generally buried in the ground, and the property distributed among the relatives. The government was simple and democratic, but captives and their children were held as slaves. There were no clans, and descent was paternal. Each linguistic group had its own myths and culture hero, or transformer, who prepared the world for human habitation. Among the Alsea these sacred myths could be told during only one month of the year. Among the principal ceremonies were the acorn festival and the girls puberty dance. BANCROFT, Hist. Oregon (2 vols., San Francisoo, 1856-58); BOAS, Traditions of the Tillamook Indians in Jour. Am. Folklore, XI (Boston, 1898); Bur. Cath. Ind. Missions, annual reports of director (Washington); COMMISSIONER OF INDIAN AFFAIRS, annual reports (Washington), DORSEY, Indians of Siletz Reservation in American Anthropologist, II (Washington, 1888); IDEM, Gentile System of the Siletz Tribes in Jour. Am. Folklore, III (Boston, 1890); FARRAND, Notes on the Alsea Indians in Am. Anthropologist, new series, III (New York, 1901); HALE, Ethnology and Philology, forming vol. VI of Wilkes Rept. U. S. Exploring Expedition (Philadelphia, 1846); Lewis and Clark Exrpedition, original journals, ed. THWAITES (8 vols., New York, 1904-05); SAPlR, Notes on the Takelma Indians in Am. Anth., IX (Lancaster, 1907); IDEM, Religious Ideas of the Takelma Indians in Jour. Am. Folklore (Boston, 1907); IDEM, Takelma Texts, Univ. of Penn. Mus. Anthrop, Pubs. (Philadelphia, 1909); IDEM, The Takelma Language in BOAS, Handbook Am. Ind. Langs., Bull. 40, part 2 (Bur. Am. Ethnology, Washington, 1912). JAMES MOONEY Siloe Siloe (SILOAH, SILOAM). A pool in the Tyropoean Valley, just outside the south wall of Jerusalem, where Jesus Christ gave sight to the man born blind (John, ix, 1-7). Thanks to the excavations of Mr. Bliss and others, the identification of the present pool with the Siloe of Isaias (viii, 6) and John (ix, 7) is beyond all doubt. Near the traditional pool (birket Silwan), Mr. Bliss found in 1896 the ruins of an ancient basin, 75 ft. north and south by 78 ft. east and west and 18 ft. deep, on the north side of which was a church with a nave. The pool connects with "the upper source of the waters of Gihon" II Par., xxxii, 30) by a subterranean conduit (IV Kings, xviii, 17), called "the king's aqueduct" (Esd., ii, 14), 600 yards long, the fall of which is so slight that the water runs very gently; hence Isaias (viii, 6) compares the House of David to "the waters of Siloe, that go with silence". In 1880 the excavations of the German Palestinian Society uncovered in the Siloe pool near the outflow of the canal an inscription, which is, excepting the Mesa stone, the oldest specimen of Hebrew writing, probably of the seventh century B.C. The tower "in Siloe", (Luke, xiii, 4) Was probably a part of the near-by city wall, as Mr. Bliss's excavations show that the pool had given its name to the whole vicinity; hence "the gate of the fountain" (II Esd., ii, 14). Bliss, Excavations of Jerusalem, 1894-7 (London, 1898), 132-210; Zeitschr. des deutschen Palastina-vereins (Leipzig), XXII, 61 sqq.; IV, 102 sqq., 250 sqq.; V, 725; Pal. Explor. Fund, Quarterly Statement (London, 1882), 122 sq., 16 sq., 178 sq.; (ibid., 1883), 210 sqq.; Revue biblique (Paris, 1897), 299-306; HEIDET IN VIGOUROUX, Dict. de la Bible, s. v. Siloe; MOMMERT, Siloah, etc. (Leipzig, 1908); WARREN AND CONDER, Survey of Western Palestine, II (London, 1884), 343-71. NICHOLAS REAGAN Silveira Ven. Goncalo da Silveira Pioneer missionary of South Africa, b. 23 Feb, 1526, at Almeirim, about forty miles from Lisbon; martyred 6 March, 1561. He was the tenth child of Dom Luis da Silveira, first count of Sortelha, and Dona Beatrice Coutinho, daughter of Dom Fernando Coutinho, Marshal of the Kingdom of Portugal. Losing his parents in infancy, he was brought up by his sister Philippa de Vilhena and her husband the Marquis of Tavora. He was educated by the Franciscans of the monastery of Santa Margarida until 1542 when he went to finish his studies in the University of Coimbra, but he had been there little more than a year when he was received into the Society of Jesus by Fr. Miron, rector of the Jesuit college at Coimbra. At the dawn of the Christian Renaissance, when St. Ignatius, St. Philip, and St. Teresa were founding their institutes, even then Goncalo was recognized as a youth of more than ordinary promise. Fr. Goncalo was appointed provincial of India in 1555. The appointment was approved by St. Ignatius a few months before his death. Fr. Goncalo's term of government in India lasted three years. He proved a worthy successor of St. Francis Xavier, who bad left India in 1549, and his apostolic labors and those of the hundred Jesuits under him, were crowned with much success, yet he was not considered the perfect model of a superior. He used to say that God had given him the great grace of unsuitability for government — apparently a certain want of tact in dealing with human weakness. The new provincial Fr. Antonio de Quadros sent him to the unexplored mission field of south-east Africa. Landing at Sofala on 11 March, 1560, Fr. Goncalo proceeded to Otongwe near Cape Corrientes. There, during his stay of seven weeks, he instructed and baptized the Makaranga chief, Gamba and about 450 natives of his kraal. Towards the end of the year he started up the Zambesi on his expedition to the capital of the Monomotapa (q.v.) which appears to have been the N'Pande kraal, close by the M'Zingesi river, a southern tributary of the Zambesi. He arrived there on 26 December, 1560, and remained until his death. During this interval he baptized the chief and a large number of his subjects. Meanwhile some Arabs from Mozambique, instigated by one of their priests, began to spread calumnies against the missionaries, and Fr. Silveira was strangled in his hut by order of the chief. The expedition sent to avenge his death never reached its destination, while his apostolate came to an abrupt end from a want of missionaries to carry on his work. CHADWICK, Life of the Ven. Goncalo Da Silveira (Roehampton, 1910); THEAI, Records of S. E. Africa, printed for the Government of Cape Colony, VII (1901); WILMOT, Monomotapa (London, 1896). JAMES KENDAL Pope St. Silverius Pope St. Silverius (Reigned 536-37). Dates of birth and death unknown. He was the son of Pope Hormisdas who had been married before becoming one of the higher clergy. Silverius entered the service of the Church and was subdeacon at Rome when Pope Agapetus died at Constantinople, 22 April, 536. The Empress Theodora, who favoured the Monophysites sought to bring about the election as pope of the Roman deacon Vigilius who was then at Constantinople and had given her the desired guarantees as to the Monophysites. However, Theodatus, King of the Ostrogoths, who wished to prevent the election of a pope connected with Constantinople, forestalled her, and by his influence the subdeacon Silverius was chosen. The election of a subdeacon as Bishop of Rome was unusual. Consequently, it is easy to understand that, as the author of the first part of the life of Silverius in the "Liber pontificalis" (ed. Duchesne, I, 210) relates, a strong opposition to it appeared among the clergy. This, however, was suppressed by Theodatus so that, finally, after Silverius had been consecrated bishop (probably on 8 June, 536) all the Roman presbyters gave their consent in writing to his elevation. The assertion made by the author just mentioned that Silverius secured the intervention of Theodatus by payment of money is unwarranted, and is to be explained by the writer's hostile opinion of the pope and the Goths. The author of the second part of the life in the "Liber pontificalis" is favourably inclined to Silverius. The pontificate of this pope belongs to an unsettled, disorderly period and he himself fell a victim to the intrigues of the Byzantine Court. After Silverius had become pope the Empress Theodora sought to win him for the Monophysites. She desired especially to have him enter into communion with the Monophysite Patriarch of Constantinople, Anthimus, who had been excommunicated and deposed by Agapetus, and with Severus of Antioch. However, the pope committed himself to nothing and Theodora now resolved to overthrow him and to gain the papal see for Vigilius. Troublous times befell Rome during the struggle that broke out in Italy between the Ostrogoths and the Byzantines after the death of Amalasuntha, daughter of Theodoric the Great. The Ostrogothic king, Vitiges, who ascended the throne in August, 536, besieged the city. The churches over the catacombs outside of the city were devastated, the graves of the martyrs in the catacombs themselves were broken open and desecrated. In December, 536, the Byzantine general Belisarius garrisoned Rome and was received by the pope in a friendly and courteous manner. Theodora sought to use Belisarius for the carrying out of her plan to depose Silverius and to put in his place the Roman deacon Vigilius (q.v.), formerly apocrisary at Constantinople, who had now gone to Italy. Antonina, wife of Belisarius, influenced her husband to act as Theodora desired. By means of a forged letter the pope was accused of a treasonable agreement with the Gothic king who was besieging Rome. It was asserted that Silverius had offered the king to leave one of the city gates secretly open so as to permit the Goths to enter. Silverius was consequently arrested in March, 537, roughly stripped of his episcopal dress, given the clothing of a monk and carried off to exile in the East. Vigilius was consecrated Bishop of Rome in his stead. Silverius was taken to Lycia where he was went to reside at Patara. The Bishop of Patara very soon discovered that the exiled pope was innocent. He journeyed to Constantinople and was able to lay before the Emperor Justinian such proofs of the innocence of the exile that the emperor wrote to Belisarius commanding a new investigation of the matter. Should it turn out that the letter concerning the alleged plot in favour of the Goths was forged, Silverius should be placed once more in possession of the papal see. At the same time the emperor allowed Silverius to return to Italy, and the latter soon entered the country, apparently at Naples. However, Vigilius arranged to take charge of his unlawfully deposed predecessor. He evidently acted in agreement with the Empress Theodora and was aided by Antonina, the wife of Belisarius. Silverius was taken to the Island of Palmaria in the Tyrrhenian Sea and kept their in close confinement. Here he died in consequence of the privations and harsh treatment he endured. The year of his death is unknown, but he probably did not live long after reaching Palmaria. He was buried on the island, according to the testimony of the "Liber pontificalis" on 20 June; his remains were never taken from Palmaria. According to the same witness he was invoked after death by the believers who visited his grave. In later times he was venerated as a saint. The earliest proof of this is given by a list of saints of the eleventh century (Mélanges d'archéologie et d'histoire, 1893, 169). The "Martyrologium" of Peter de Natalibus of the fourteenth century also contains his feast, which is recorded in the present Roman Martyrology on 20 June. [ Editor's note: According to the Liber Pontificalis, Pope St. Silverius was exiled not to Palmaria, but rather to the Island of Palmarola, a much smaller and more desolate island near Ponza, Italy, in the Bay of Naples.] Liber pontificalis, ed. DUCHESNE, I, 290-95; LIBERATUS, Breviarium causoe Nestorianorum et Eutychianorum, XXII, in P.L., LXVIII, 1039 sq.; PROCOPIUS, De bello gothico, I, xxv; Acta SS., June, IV, 13- 18; JAFFÉ, Regesta pont. rom., I, 2nd ed., 115 sq.; LANGEN, Gesch. der römischen Kirche, II, 341 sqq.; GRISAR, Gesch. Roms u. der Päpste, I, 502-04, and passim; HEFELE, Konziliengesch.,II, 2nd ed., 571. J.P. KIRSCH Francis Silvester Francis Silvester ( Ferrariensis). Theologian, b. at Ferrara about 1474; d. at Rennes, 19 Sept., 1526. At the age of fourteen he joined the Dominican Order. In 1516 he was made a master in theology. He was prior first in his native city and then at Bologna, and in the provincial chapter held at Milan in 1519 he was chosen Vicar General of the Lombard congregation of his order. Having discharged this office for the allotted term of two years, he became regent of the college at Bologna where he remained for a considerable time. Later he was appointed by Clement VII vicar-general of his entire order, and on 3 June, 1525, in the general chapter held at Rome, he was elected master general. As general of his order he visited nearly all the convents of Italy, France, and Belgium, restoring everywhere primitive fervor and discipline. He was planning to begin a visitation of the Spanish convents, when a fatal illness carried him away. Albert Leander, his traveling companion, tells us that he was a man of remarkable mental endowments, that nature seemed to have enriched him with all her gifts. Silvester wrote many splendid works, principal among which is his monumental "Commentary on the Summa contra Gentiles of St. Thomas Aquinas" (Paris, 1552). Worthy of special mention are also his explanations of various books of Aristotle. In his "Apologia de convenientia institutorum Romanae Ecclesiae cum evangelica libertate" (Rome, 1525), written in a style clear, forceful and elegant, he ably defended the primacy and the organization of the church against Luther. Some have erroneously attributed this work to Silvester Prierias. QUETIF-ECHARD, Script. Ord. Praed., II, 59 sq.; HURTER, Nomenclator. CHARLES J. CALLAN St. Silvia St. Silvia (Also spelled "Sylvia"). Mother of Pope St. Gregory the Great, born about 515 (525?); died about 592. There is unfortunately no life of Silvia and a few scanty notices are all that is extant concerning her. Her native place is sometimes given as Sicily, sometimes as Rome. Apparently she was of as distinguished family as her husband, the Roman regionarius, Gordianus. She had, besides Gregory, a second son. Silvia was noted for her great piety, and she gave her sons an excellent education. After the death of her husband she devoted herself entirely to religion in the "new cell by the gate of blessed Paul" (cella nova juxta portam beati Pauli). Gregory the Great had a mosaic portrait of his parents executed at the monastery of St. Andrew; it is minutely described by Johannes Diaconus (P.L., LXXV, 229-30). Silvia was portrayed sitting with the face, in which the wrinkles of age could not extinguish the beauty, in full view; the eyes were large and blue, and the expression was gracious and animated. The veneration of St. Silvia is of early date. In the ninth century an oratory was erected over her former dwelling, near the Basilica of San Saba. Pope Clement VIII (1592-1605) inserted her name under 3 November in the Roman Martyrology. She is invoked by pregnant women for a safe delivery. KLEMENS LÖFFLER Simeon Simeon The second son of Jacob by Lia and patronymic ancestor of the Jewish tribe bearing that name. The original signification of the name is unknown, but the writer of Gen., xxix, 33-35, according to his wont, offers an explanation, deriving the word from shama, "to hear". He quotes Lia as saying: "Because the Lord heard that I was despised, he hath given this also to me; and she called his name Simeon" (Gen., xxix, 33). Similar etymologies referring to Levi and Juda are found in the two following verses. In Gen., xxxiv, Simeon appears with his full brother Levi as the avenger of their sister Dina who had been humiliated by Hemor a prince of the Sichemites. By a strange subterfuge all the men of the latter tribe are rendered helpless and are slaughtered by the two irate brothers who then, together with the other sons of the patriarch, plunder the city. This act of violence was blamed by Jacob (Gen., xxxiv, 30) though for a rather selfish reason; his disapproval on more ethical grounds appears in the prophetical blessing of his twelve sons in Gen., xlix, 5 7. Regarding Simeon and Levi Jacob says: "Cursed be their fury because it was stubborn; and their wrath because it was cruel: I will divide them in Jacob, and will scatter them in Israel." There is a striking contrast between this earlier appreciation of the treacherous and bloody deed and that of the writers of post-Exilic Judaism, who have only words of praise for the action of the two brothers, and even consider them as incited to it by Divine inspiration (see Judith, ix, 2, 3). The same change of ethical sense may be gathered more fully from the un-canonical Book of the Jubilees (xxx) and from a poem in commemoration of the massacre of the Sichemites by Theodotus, a Jewish or Samaritan writer, who lived about 200 B.C. Simeon figures in only one other incident recorded in Genesis. It is in connection with the visit of the sons of Jacob to Egypt to buy corn. Here he is detained by Joseph as a hostage while the others return to Chanaan promising to bring back their younger brother Benjamin (Gen., xlii, 25). According to some commentators he was selected for this purpose because he had been a principal factor in the betrayal of Joseph into the hands of the Madianite merchants. The narrative, however, makes no mention of this, and it is but a conjectural inference from what is otherwise known of Simeon's violent and treacherous character. (See SIMEON, TRIBE OF.) VON HUMMELAUER, Comment. in Genesim (Commentary on chapters xxix, xxxlv, xlii and xlix); VIGOUROUX, Dict. de la Bible, s.v. JAMES F. DRISCOLL Holy Simeon Holy Simeon The "just and devout" man of Jerusalem who according to the narrative of St. Luke, greeted the infant Saviour on the occasion of His presentation in the Temple (Luke ii, 25-35). He was one of the pious Jews who were waiting for the "consolation of Israel" and, though advanced in years, he had received a premonition from the Holy Ghost, Who was in him, that he would not die before he had seen the expected Messias. This promise was fulfilled when through guidance of the Spirit he came to the Temple on the day of the Presentation, and taking the Child Jesus in his arms, he uttered the Canticle Nunc dimittis (Luke, ii, 29-32), and after blessing the Holy Family he prophesied concerning the Child, Who "is set for the fall, and for the resurrection of many in Israel", and regarding the mother whose "soul a sword shall pierce, that, out of many hearts, thoughts may be revealed". As in the case of other personages mentioned in the New Testament, the name of Simeon has been connected with untrustworthy legends, viz., that he was a rabbi, the son of Hillel and the father of Gamaliel mentioned in Acts, v, 34. These distinguished relationships are hardly compatible with the simple reference of St. Luke to Simeon as "a man in Jerusalem". With like reserve may we look upon the legend of the two sons of Simeon, Charinus, and Leucius, as set forth in the apocryphal gospel of Nicodemus. VIGOUROUX, Dictionnaire de la Bible, s.v. JAMES F. DRISCOLL Simeon of Durham Simeon of Durham (Symeon). Chronicler, d. 14 Oct., between 1130 and 1138. As a youth he had entered the Benedictine monastery at Jarrow which was removed to Durham in 1074, and he was professed in 1085 or 1086, subsequently attaining the office of precentor. His chief work is the "Historia ecclesiae Dunelmensis", written between 1104 and 1108, giving the history of the bishopric down to 1096. He also wrote "Historia regum Anglorum et Dacorum" (from 732 to 1129). The first part down to 957 is based on a northern annalist who made large use of Asser; the next part, to 1119, follows Florence of Worcester; the remainder is an original composition. Simeon's authorship of this work was vindicated by Rudd (in 1732) against Bale and Selden. He wrote some minor works including "Epistola ad Hugonem de archiepiscopis Eboraci," written about 1130, and some letters now lost. Symeonis Dunelmensis opera omnia, ed. ARNOLD with valuable introduction in Rolls Series (2 vols., London, 1882-5); Symeonis Dunelmensis opera et collectanea, containing everything ever ascribed to him except the Historia ecclesiae Dunelmensis, ed. with introduction by HINDE in Surtees Soc., LI (Durham, 1868); Historical Works of Simeon of Durham, tr. with preface and notes by STEVENSON (London, 1855); HARDY, Descriptive Catalogue of British History (London, 1862- 71); CHEVALIER, Repertoire des sources historiques du moyen age (Paris, 1905), with list of earlier references, s.v. Simon. EDWIN BURTON St. Simeon Stylites the Elder St. Simeon Stylites the Elder St. Simeon was the first and probably the most famous of the long succession of stylitoe, or "pillar-hermits", who during more than six centuries acquired by their strange form of asceticism a great reputation for holiness throughout eastern Christendom. If it were not that our information, in the case of the first St. Simeon and some of his imitators, is based upon very reliable first-hand evidence, we should be disposed to relegate much of what history records to the domain of fable; but no modern critic now ventures to dispute the reality of the feats of endurance attributed to these ascetics. Simeon the Elder, was born about 388 at Sisan, near the northern border of Syria. After beginning life as a shepherd boy, he entered a monastery before the age of sixteen, and from the first gave himself up to the practice of an austerity so extreme and to all appearance so extravagant, that his brethren judged him, perhaps not unwisely, to be unsuited to any form of community life. Being forced to quit them he shut himself up for three years in a hut at Tell-Neschin, where for the first time he passed the whole of Lent without eating or drinking. This afterwards became his regular practice, and he combined it with the mortification of standing continually upright so long as his limbs would sustain him. In his later days he was able to stand thus on his column without support for the whole period of the fast. After three years in his hut, Simeon sought a rocky eminence in the desert and compelled himself to remain a prisoner within a narrow space less than twenty yards in diameter. But crowds of pilgrims invaded the desert to seek him out, asking his counsel or his prayers, and leaving him insufficient time for his own devotions. This at last determined him to adopt a new way of life. Simeon had a pillar erected with a small platform at the top, and upon this he determined to take up his abode until death released him. At first the pillar was little more than nine feet high, but it was subsequently replaced by others, the last in the series being apparently over fifty feet from the ground. However extravagant this way of life may seem, it undoubtedly produced a deep impression on contemporaries, and the fame of the ascetic spread through Europe, Rome in particular being remarkable for the large number of pictures of the saint which were there to be seen, a fact which a modern writer, Holl, represents as a factor of great importance in the development of image worship (see the Philotesia in honour of P. Kleinert, p. 42-48). Even on the highest of his columns Simeon was not withdrawn from intercourse with his fellow men. By means of a ladder which could always be erected against the side, visitors were able to ascend; and we know that he wrote letters, the text of some of which we still possess, that he instructed disciples, and that he also delivered addresses to those assembled beneath. Around the tiny platform which surmounted the capital of the pillar there was probably something in the nature of a balustrade, but the whole was exposed to the open air, and Simeon seems never to have permitted himself any sort of cabin or shelter. During his earlier years upon the column there was on the summit a stake to which he bound himself in order to maintain the upright position throughout Lent, but this was an alleviation with which he afterwards dispensed. Great personages, such as the Emperor Theodosius and the Empress Eudocia manifested the utmost reverence for the saint and listened to his counsels, while the Emperor Leo paid respectful attention to a letter Simeon wrote to him in favour of the Council of Chalcedon. Once when he was ill Theodosius sent three bishops to beg him to descend and allow himself to be attended by physicians, but the sick man preferred to leave his cure in the hands of God, and before long he recovered. After spending thirty-six years on his pillar, Simeon died on Friday, 2 Sept., 459 (Lietzmann, p. 235). A contest arose between Antioch and Constantinople for the possession of his remains. The preference was given to Antioch, and the greater part of his relics were left there as a protection to the unwalled city. The ruins of the vast edifice erected in his honour and known as Qal `at Sim `ân (the mansion of Simeon) remain to the present day. It consists of four basilicas built out from an octagonal court towards the four points of the compass. In the centre of the court stands the base of St. Simeon's column. This edifice, says H.C. Butler, "unquestionably influenced contemporary and later church building to a marked degree" (Architecture and other Arts, p. 184). It seems to have been a supreme effort of a provincial school of architecture which had borrowed little from Constantinople. St. Simeon's life is principally known to us from an account by THEODORET, who was a contemporary; also from the biography of a disciple Antonius and from a more or less independent Syriac source. All these materials have been edited by LIETZMANN in HARNACK AND GEBHARDT, Texte und Untersuchungen, XXXII (Berlin, 1906), no. 4; Acta SS., Jan., I, 234-74. See also DELEHAYE in Revue des questions historiques, LVII (1895), 52-103; STOKES in Dict. Christ. Biog., s.v., Simeon (12) Stylites; HOLL in Philotesia P. Kleinert zum 70. Geburtstag (Leipzig, 1907). Upon the architecture of Qal `at Sim `ân see BUTLER, Architecture and other Arts of Syria (New York, 1904), 184-93; DE VOGöE, Syrie centrale, I (Paris, 1885), 141-54; JULLIEN, Sinai et Syrie (Lille, 1893), 246-61; LECLERCQ in CABROL, Dict. d'arch. chrét. I, 2380-88. HERBERT THURSTON St. Simeon Stylites the Younger St. Simeon Stylites the Younger Born at Antioch in 521, died at the same place 24 May, 597. His father was a native of Edessa, his mother, named Martha was afterwards revered as a saint and a life of her, which incorporates a letter to her son written from his pillar to Thomas, the guardian of the true cross at Jerusalem, has been printed. Like his namesake, the first Stylites, Simeon seems to have been drawn very young to a life of austerity. He attached himself to a community of ascetics living within the mandra or enclosure of another pillar-hermit, named John, who acted as their spiritual director. Simeon while still only a boy had a pillar erected for himself close to that of John. It is Simeon himself who in the above-mentioned letter to Thomas states that he was living upon a pillar when he lost his first teeth. He maintained this kind of life for 68 years. In the course of this period, however, he several times moved to a new pillar, and on the occasion of the first of these exchanges the Patriarch of Antioch and the Bishop of Seleucia ordained him deacon during the short space of time he spent upon the ground. For eight years until John died, Simeon remained near his master's column, so near that they could easily converse. During this period his austerities were kept in some sort of check by the older hermit. After John's death Simeon gave full rein to his ascetical practices and Evagrius declares that he lived only upon the branches of a shrub that grew near Theopolis. Simeon the younger was ordained priest and was thus able to offer the Holy Sacrifice in memory of his mother. On such occasions his disciples one after another climbed up the ladder to receive Communion at his hands. As in the case of most of the other pillar saints a large number of miracles were believed to have been worked by Simeon the Younger. In several instances the cure was effected by pictures representing him (Holl in "Philotesia", 56). Towards the close of his life the saint occupied a column upon a mountain-side near Antioch called from his miracles the "Hill of Wonders", and it was here that he died. Besides the letter mentioned, several writings are attributed to the younger Simeon. A number of these small spiritual tractates were printed by Cozza-Luzi ("Nova PP. Bib.", VIII, iii, Rome, 1871, pp. 4-156). There is also an "Apocalypse" and letters to the Emperors Justinian and Justin II (see fragments in P.G., LXXXVI, pt. II, 3216-20). More especially Simeon was the reputed author of a cerain number of liturgical hymns, "Troparis", etc. (see Pétridès in "Echos d'Orient", 1901 and 1902). Simeon Stylites III, another pillar hermit, who also bore the name Simeon, is honoured by both the Greeks and the Copts. He is hence believed to have lived in the fifth century before the breach which occurred between these Churches. But it must be confessed that very little certain is known of him. He is believed to have been struck by lightning upon his pillar, built near Hegca in Cicilia. There is a long and dreary life of St. Simeon the Younger by Nicephorus of Antioch, but we learn more from the Life of St. Martha, his mother, and from the Ecclesiastical History of Evagrius. All these have been printed by the Bollandists, Acta SS., May, V, 296-431; fragments of a Biography by Arcadius have been published by Papadopulos Kerameus in Vivantisky Vremennik (1894), 141-150 and 601-604. See also Allatius, De Simeonum scriptis (Paris, 1864), 17-22; Krumbacher, Gesch. der Byzant. Litt. (2nd ed., Munich, 1897), 144-145 and 671; Philotesia P. Kleinert zum 70 Geburtstag (Leipzig, 1907). HERBERT THURSTON Simla Simla Archdiocese in India, a new creation of Pius X by a Decree dated 13 September, 1910 formed by dividing off certain portions of the Archdiocese of Agra and of the Diocese of Lahore. By this arrangement the following places fall within the territory of the new archdiocese: Simla, the metropolitan city, where the Church of Sts. Michael and Joseph has been adopted as the pro-cathedral, Ambala, Higsar, Karmal, Patiala, Nabha, Sind, Loharu and Maler Kotla, taken from the Archdiocese of Agra, and Mandi, Suket, Kulu, Labul and Spiti, taken from the Diocese of Lahore. As yet the appointment of suffragans has been reserved to the future by the Holy See. As the two more ancient dioceses are confided respectively to the Italian and Belgian Franciscans of the Capuchin Reform, so the new archdiocese has been given to the care of the same Fathers of the English province. The first archbishop appointed is the Most Rev. Anselm E. J. Kenealy who, as Father Anselm, O.S.F.C., was well known in England as a lector in logic and metaphysics, guardian of Crawley monastery in Sussex, a member of the Oxford Union Society, and provincial of the English province, before being called to Rome as definitor general of the order. Consecrated on 1 Jan., 1911, at Rome by Cardinal Gotti, assisted by the Archbishop of Westminster and Archbishop Jacquet, after visiting England to select some Fathers of the English province to accompany him, he sailed for India on 18 April, and was welcomed with an imposing public reception on his arrival at Simla on 8 May. The stations with resident clergy are: Simla, Amballa, Dagshai, Casauli, and Subathu. The stations visited are: Jutogh, Solon, stations on the Kalka Simla railway and Kalka, Karnal, Patiala, Rajpura, Sirsa, and Gind. The principal educational establishments in the new archdiocese are at Simla and Amballa. At Simla the Nuns of Jesus and Mary (established in 1864) have some of the best schools in India for orphans, boarders, and the training of teachers. The Loreto Nuns at Tara Hall, Simla (established in 1895), have also first-class schools for boarders and day-scholars. There is a private school for boys under the care of the Capuchin Fathers at Simla. ERNEST R. HULL St. Simon the Apostle St. Simon the Apostle The name of Simon occurs in all the passages of the Gospel and Acts, in which a list of the Apostles is given. To distinguish him from St. Peter he is called (Matthew 10:4; Mark 3:18) Kananaios, or Kananites, and Zelotes (Luke 6:15; Acts 1:13). Both surnames have the same signification and are a translation of the Hebrew qana (the Zealous). The name does not signify that he belonged to the party of Zealots, but that he had zeal for the Jewish law, which he practised before his call. Jerome and others wrongly assumed that Kana was his native place; were this so, he should have been called Kanaios. The Greeks, Copts, and Ethiopians identify him with Nathanael of Cana; the first-mentioned also identify him with the bridegroom of the marriage of Cana, while in the "Chronicon paschale" and elsewhere he is identified with Simon Clopas. The Abyssinians accordingly relate that he suffered crucifixion as the Bishop of Jerusalem, after he had preached the Gospel in Samaria. Where he actually preached the Gospel is uncertain. Almost all the lands of the then known world, even as far as Britain, have been mentioned; according to the Greeks, he preached on the Black Sea, in Egypt, Northern Africa, and Britain, while, according to the Latin "Passio Simonis et Judae" -- the author of which was (Lipsius maintains) sufficiently familiar with the history of the Parthian Empire in the first century -- Simon laboured in Persia, and was there martyred at Suanir. However, Suanir is probably to be sought in Colchis. According to Moses of Chorene, Simon met his death in Weriosphora in Iberia; according to the Georgians, he preached in Colchis. His place of burial is unknown. Concerning his relics our information is as uncertain as concerning his preaching. From Babylon to Rome and Toulouse we find traces of them; at Rome they are venerated under the Altar of the Crucifixion in the Vatican. His usual attribute is the saw, since his body was said to have been sawed to pieces, and more rarely the lance. He is regarded as the patron of tanners. In the Western Church he is venerated together with Jude (Thaddaeus); in the East separately. The Western Church keeps his feast on 28 October; the Greeks and Copts on 10 May. KLEMENS LÖFFLER Simone Da Orsenigo Simone da Orsenigo A Lombard architect and builder of the fourteenth century whose memory is chiefly connected with the cathedral of Milan in the course of its erection. He was probably a native of the town of Orsenigo in the district of Como. His name is inscribed in 1387 on the list of masters of work at the Duomo, immediately after that of Marco da Campione, who heads his associates, and it appears subsequently alternately with that of Nicolas Bonaventure of Paris. Orsenigo is styled insegnerius. Another master of the same name, Paulino Orsenigo, was likewise employed upon the works of the cathedral in 1400 under the title of magister a lignanime, perhaps master of the scaffolding. NAGLER, Kunstler Lexicon (Munich, 1841); CICOGNARA, Storia della Scultura (Venice, 1853); PERKINS, Italian Sculptors (London, 1868). M.L. HANDLEY Simonians Simonians A Gnostic, Antinomian sect of the second century which regarded Simon Magus as its founder and which traced its doctrines back to him. The Simonians are mentioned by Hegesippus (in Eusebius, "Hist. eccl.", IV, xxii); their doctrines are quoted and opposed in connection with Simon Magus by Irenaeus ("Adv. haer.", I, xxiii), by the "Philosophumena" (VI, ix-xx; X, xii), and later by Epiphanius ("Haer.", xxii). In the "Philosophumena" Simon's doctrine is described according to his reputed work, "The Great Declaration"; it is evident that we have here the doctrinal opinions of the Simonians as they had developed in the second century. According to these there was a perfect, eternal ungenerated being (fire), that contained an invisible, hidden element and a visible, manifest element; the hidden is concealed in the manifest; the action of both is similar to that of the intelligible and the sensible in Plato. From that which remains concealed of the ungenerated being six roots (powers) emanated in pairs and these pairs correspond at the same time to heaven and earth, sun and moon, air and water. In their potentiality is contained the entire power. This unlimited power is the "Standing One" (estos), the seventh root (power) corresponding to the seventh day after the six days of creation. This seventh power existed before the world, it is the Spirit of God that moved upon the face of the waters (Gen., i, 2). When it does not remain in the six roots (in potentiality), but is actually developed in the world, it is then in substance, magnitude, and perfection the same as the unlimited power of the ungenerated being (pantheistic emanation). As the female side of the original being appears the "thought" or "conception" (ennoia), which is the mother of the aeons. The "Standing One" is regarded as containing both sexes. The first six "powers" are followed by other less important emanations: archangels, angels, the demiurge who fashions the world, who is also the God of the Jews. The jealousy of the inferior spirits seems to have forced the "Ennoia" to take female forms and to migrate from one body into another, until Simon Magus, the great power sent forth by the original being, discovered her in Helena and released her. The deliverance was wrought by his being recognized as the highest power of God, the "Standing One". Men are also saved by accepting Simon's doctrine, by recognizing him as the great power of God. The Old Testament and its law, by which mankind was only brought into bondage, was opposed (antinomianism) as the work of the inferior god of the Jews (the Demiurge). The Simonians used magic and theurgy, incantations, and love-potions; they declared idolatry a matter of indifference that was neither good nor bad, proclaimed fornication to be perfect love, and led very disorderly, immoral lives. In general, they regarded nothing in itself as good or bad by nature. It was not good works that made men blessed, in the next world, but the grace bestowed by Simon and Helena on those who united with them. The Simonians venerated and worshiped Simon under the image of Zeus, and Helena under that of Athene. The sect flourished in Syria, in various districts of Asia Minor and at Rome. In the third century remnants of it still existed (Origen, "Contra Cels.", I, 57; VI, 11), which survived until the fourth century. Eusebius ("Hist. eccl.", II, xiii) calls the Simonians the most immoral and depraved of mankind. Closely connected with them were the Dositheans and Menandrians, who should be regarded probably as branches of the Simonians. Their names came from Dositheus and Meander, of whom the first, a Samaritan, was originally the teacher and then the pupil of Simon Magus, while Menander was a pupil and, after Simon's death, his most important successor. Dositheus is said to have opposed antinomianism, that is, the rejection of Old Testament law. As late as the beginning of the seventh century Eulogius of Alexandria (in Photius, "Bibliotheca cod.", 230) opposed Dositheans who regarded Dositheus as the great prophet foretold by Moses. Dositheus died a tragic death from starvation ("Pseudo-Clemen. Recognitions," I, 57, 72; II, 11; Origen, "Contra Cels.", I, 57; VI, 11; "De principiis", IV, 17; "In Matth. Comm.", XXXII, P.L., XIII, 1643; "In Luc. Hom.", XXV, ibid., 1866; Epiphanius, "Haer.", XX). Like Simon, Menander also proclaimed himself to be the one sent of God, the Messias. In the same way he taught the creation of the world by angels who were sent by the Ennoia. He asserted that men received immortality and the resurrection by his baptism and practiced magical arts. The sect named after him, the Menandrians, continued to exist for a considerable length of time. See the bibliography to SIMON MAGUS. J.P. KIRSCH Simon Magus Simon Magus According to the testimony of St. Justin ("First Apolog.", xxvi), whose statement as to this should probably be believed, Simon came from Gitta (in the Pseudo-Clementine Homilies, II, xxii, called (Getthon) in the country of the Samaritans. At the outbreak of the persecution (c. 37 A.D.) of the early Christian community at Jerusalem that began with the martyrdom of St. Stephen, when Philip the Deacon went from Jerusalem to Samaria, Simon lived in the latter city. By his magic arts, because of which he was called "Magus", and by his teachings in which he announced himself as the "great power of God", he had made a name for himself and had won adherents. He listened to Philip's sermons, was impressed by them, and like many of his countrymen was baptized and united with the community of believers in Christ. But, as was evident later, his conversion was not the result of the inner conviction of faith in Christ as the Redeemer, but rather from selfish motives, for he hoped to gain greater magical power and thus to increase his influence. For when the Apostles Peter and John came to Samaria to bestow on the believers baptized by Philip the outpouring of the Spirit which was accompanied by miraculous manifestations, Simon offered them money, desiring them to grant him what he regarded as magical power, so that he also by the laying on of hands could bestow the Holy Ghost, and thereby produce such miraculous results. Full of indignation at such an offer Peter rebuked him sharply, exhorted him to penance and conversion and warned him of the wickedness of his conduct. Under the influence of Peter's rebuke Simon begged the Apostles to pray for him (Acts, viii, 9 29). However, according to the unanimous report of the authorities of the second century, he persisted in his false views. The ecclesiastical writers of the early Church universally represent him as the first heretic, the "Father of Heresies". Simon is not mentioned again in the writings of the New Testament. The account in the Acts of the Apostles is the sole authoritative report that we have about him. The statements of the writers of the second century concerning him are largely legendary, and it is difficult or rather impossible to extract from them any historical fact the details of which are established with certainty. St. Justin of Rome ("First Apolog.", xxvi, lvi; "Dialogus c. Tryphonem", cxx) describes Simon as a man who, at the instigation of demons, claimed to be a god. Justin says further that Simon came to Rome during the reign of the Emperor Claudius and by his magic arts won many followers so that these erected on the island in the Tiber a statue to him as a divinity with the inscription "Simon the Holy God". The statue, however, that Justin took for one dedicated to Simon was undoubtedly one of the old Sabine divinity Semo Sancus. Statues of this early god with similar inscriptions have been found on the island in the Tiber and elsewhere in Rome. It is plain that the interchange of e and i in the Roman characters led Justin or the Roman Christians before him, to look upon the statue of the early Sabine deity, of whom they knew nothing, as a statue of the magician. Whether Justin's opinion that Simon Magus came to Rome rests only on the fact that he believed Roman followers had erected this statue to him, or whether he had other information on this point, cannot now be positively determined. His testimony cannot, therefore, be verified and so remains doubtful. The later anti-heretical writers who report Simon's residence at Rome, take Justin and the apocryphal Acts of Peter as their authority, so that their testimony is of no value. Simon brought with him, so Justin and other authorities state, a paramour from Tyre called Helena. He claimed that she was the first conception (ennoia) whom he, as the "great power of God", had freed from bondage. Simon plays an important part in the "Pseudo-Clementines". He appears here as the chief antagonist of the apostle Peter, by whom he is everywhere followed and opposed. The alleged magical arts of the magician and Peter's efforts against him are described in a way that is absolutely imaginary. The entire account lacks all historical basis. In the "Philosophumena" of Hippolytus of Rome (vi, vii-xx), the doctrine of Simon and his followers is treated in detail. The work also relates circumstantially how Simon labored at Rome and won many by his magic arts, and how he attacked the Apostles Peter and Paul who opposed him. According to this account the reputation of the magician was greatly injured by the efforts of the two Apostles and the number of his followers became constantly smaller. He consequently left Rome and returned to his home at Gitta. In order to give his scholars there a proof of his higher nature and divine mission and thus regain his authority, he had a grave dug and permitted himself to be buried in it, after previously prophesying that after three days he would rise alive from it. But the promised resurrection did not take place; Simon died in the grave. The apocryphal Acts of St. Peter give an entirely different account of Simon's conduct at Rome and of his death (Lipsius, "Die apokryphen Apostelgeschichten und Apostellegenden", II, Pt. I (Brunswick, 1887). In this work also great stress is laid upon the struggle between Simon and the two Apostles Peter and Paul at Rome. By his magic arts Simon had also sought to win the Emperor Nero for himself, an attempt in which he had been thwarted by the Apostles. As proof of the truth of his doctrines Simon offered to ascend into the heavens before the eyes of Nero and the Roman populace; by magic he did rise in the air in the Roman Forum, but the prayers of the Apostles Peter and Paul caused him to fall, so that he was severely injured and shortly afterwards died miserably. Arnobius reports this alleged attempt to fly and the death of Simon with still other particulars ("Adv. nationes" ii, xii; cf. "Constit. Apost.", vi, ix). This legend led later to the erection of a church dedicated to the Apostles on the alleged spot of Simon's fall near the Via Sacra above the Forum. The stones of the pavement on which the Apostles knelt in prayer and which are said to contain the impression of their knees, are now in the wall of the Church of Santa Francesca Romana. All these narratives belong naturally to the domain of legend. It is evident from them, however, that, according to the tradition of the second century, Simon Magus appeared as an opponent of Christian doctrine and of the Apostles, and as a heretic or rather as a false Messias of the Apostolic age. This view rests on the sole authoritative historical account of him, that given us by the Acts of the Apostles. It cannot be determined how far one or another detail of his later life, as given in essentially legendary form in the authorities of the second century and the following era, may be traced to historical tradition. Baur ("Die christl. Gnosis", 310) and some of his ad- herents have denied the historical existence of Simon and his sect. This view, opposed to the account in the Book of Acts, and to the tradition of the second century, is now abandoned by all serious historians. Further this "legendary" Simon was made an essential link by the Tübingen School of Baur and his followers for historical evidence of the alleged "Petrine" and "Pauline" factions in the early Church, which had fought with one another and from whose union the Catholic Church arose. For the same reasons this school, especially Lipsius, assigns the labors of St. Peter at Rome, which it claims are first made known by these apocryphal writings, to the domain of legend. All these theories, however, are without basis and have been abandoned by serious historical scholars, even among non-Catholics (cf. Schmidt, "Petrus in Rom", Lucerne, 1892). A developed system of doctrines is attributed to Simon and his followers in the anti-heretical writings of the early Church, especially in Irenaeus ("Adv. haer., I, xxiii; IV; VI, xxxiii), in the "Philosophumena" (VI, VII sq.), and in Epiphanius ("Haer.", XXII). The work "The Great Declaration" (Apophasis megale) was also ascribed to Simon, and the "Pseudo-Clementines" also present his teaching in detail. How much of this system actually belonged to Simon cannot now be determined. Still his doctrine seems to have been a heathen Gnosticism, in which he proclaimed himself as the Standing One (estos), the principal emanation of the Deity and the Redeemer. Aecording to Irenaeus he claimed to have appeared in Samaria as the Father, in Judea as the Son, and among the heathen as the Holy Ghost, a manifestation of the Eternal. He asserted that Helena, who went about with him, was the first conception of the Deity, the mother of all, by whom the Deity had created the angels and the aeons. The cosmic forces had cast her into corporeal bonds, from which she was released by Simon as the great power. In morals Simon was probably Antinomian, an enemy of Old Testament law. His magical arts were continued by his disciples; these led unbridled, licentious lives, in accordance with the principles which they had learned from their master. At any rate they called themselves Simonians, giving Simon Magus as their founder. EUSEBIUS, Church Hist., II, 13; HILGENFELD, Ketzergeschichte des Urchristentums (Leipzig, 1884); HAGEMANN, Die romische Kirche (Freiburg, 1864), 655 sqq.; LANGEN, Die Clemensromane; ihre Entstehung u. ihre Tendenzen (Gotha, 1890); WAITZ, Die Pseudo-Klementinen (Leipzig, 1904); LUGANO, Le memorie leggendarie di Simone Mago e della sua volata in "Nuovo Bull. di arch. crist." (1900), 29-66; SAVIO, S. Giustino martire e l'apoteosi del Simone Mago in Roma in Civilta cattolica (1910), IV, 532 sq., 673 sq.. PRAFCKE, Leben u. Lehre Simons des Magiers nach den pseudo-klementinischen Homilien (Ratzeburg, 1895); REDLICH Die simonianische Schrift Apophasis megale in Arch. f. Gesch.der Philosophie (1910), 374 sq.; WEBER, Hist. of Simony in the Christian Church (Baltimore, 1909); SALMON in Dict. Christ. Biog., s.v. Simon (1) Magus. J.P. KIRSCH Bl. Simon of Cascia Bl. Simon of Cascia (SIMEONE FIDATI) Italian preacher and ascetical writer, b. at Cascia, Italy; d at Florence, 2 February, 1348. At an early age he entered the Order of Augustinian Hermits, where he became distinguished for learning and as a model of every monastic virtue. He displayed great ability as a preacher, and his sermons at Perugia, Bologna, Siena, and Florence bore much fruit. He was especially successful in his work among fallen women, making many conversions and founding for them a house of penance. He also established at Florence a convent of women. He was beatified by Gregory XVI in 1833. He wrote "De gestis Christis", a history of the Gospels in fifteen books wherein the mystical sense of the sacred narrative is simply but learnedly set forth. The work was published at Basle (1517), Cologne (1533, 1540), and Ratisbon (1733). He is likewise the author of an "Expositio super evangelia" (Venice, 1486; Florence, 1496), of a work in Italian on the evils existing among the clergy (Milan, 1521; Turin, 1779), and a treatise "De beata Virgine" (Basla, 1517). Unpublished works of his are "De doctrina christiana"; "De vita christiana"; "De cognitione peccati"; "Expositio symboli"' "De speculo crucis"; "De conflictu christiano". HURTER, Nomenclator. BLANCHE M. KELLY Simon of Cramaud Simon of Cramaud Cardinal, b. near Rochechouart in the Diocese of Limoges before 1360; d. at Portiers 14 Dec., 1422. He studied law at Orleans and later enjoyed an excellent reputation as a canonist. In 1382 he became Bishop of Agen, was transferred to Béaeziers in 1383, and to Poitiers in 1385. He never occupied the See of Sens to which he was named in 1390; but the following year he became titular Patriarch of Alexandria and Administrator of the Diocese of Avignon. His appointment to the archiepiscopal See of Reims (1409) was followed by his elevation to the cardinalate in 1413, and from that date until his death he was Administrator of the Diocese of Poitiers. A very prominent figure in the Great Schism, he resolutely championed the cause of Clement VII, but was a decided opponent of his successor, Benedict XIII. In diplomatic missions and at national synods he agitated in favour of the withdrawal from the latter's obedience. As a president of the Council of Pisa in 1409 he proclaimed the deposition of both Gregory XII and Benedict XIII, and secured the election of Alexander V. At this Council of Constance an extraordinary form of papal election, which granted a vote to certain national delegates among with the cardinals, was carried largely through his efforts. In his writings, still widely scattered and to a great extent unedited, he so exaggerates the authority of the civil power to the detriment of the spiritual rights of the Apostolic See that some of his views are really schismatical. He has been rightly called a precursor of both theological and political Gallicanism. SALEMBIER in Dict. Théol. Cath., III (Paris, 1908), s.v. Cramaud; IDEM, The Great Schism of the West (New York, 1907), 157, passim. N.A. WEBER Simon of Cremona Simon of Cremona A theological writer and celebrated preacher belonging to the Order of St. Augustine, date of birth unknown; d. at Padua, 1390. He flourished in the second half of the fourteenth century, and the field of his labours was Northern Italy, especially the Venetian territory. Excerpts from his sermons were published under the title "Postilla super Evangliis et Epistolis Omnium Dominicarum" (Reutlingen, 1484). He left several works in manuscript, among which may be mentioned "In Quatuor Libros Sententiarum", "Quæstiones de indulgentia Portiunculæe" and "Quæstiones de sanguine Christi". OSSINGER, Bibl. August. (Ingolstadt, 1768), 275 sqq. JAMES F. DRISCOLL Simon of Sudbury Simon of Sudbury Archbishop of Canterbury, b. at Sudbury, Suffolk, England, of middle-class parents, date of birth unknown; d. at London, 14 June, 1381. After taking a degree in law at Paris, he proceeded to Rome, became chaplain to Innocent VI, and was sent to England as nuncio to Edward III in 1356. In 1361 Sudbury was made Bishop of London, after being chancellor at Salisbury. He was busy with John of Gaunt over negotiations with France in 1372-73, and while complaints were made that his cathedral in London was neglected, the bishop enriched his native town by building and endowing a collegiate church on the site of his father's old house. Sudbury succeeded Langham as Archbishop of Canterbury in 1375, and his friendship with John of Gaunt and the Lancastrian party at once brought him into opposition with Courtenay, Bishop of London, and William of Wykeham, Bishop of Winchester. Sudbury was an amiable but not a strong man and John of Gaunt's support of Wyclif made the archbishop reluctant to proceed against the latter. Courtenay's pressure forced Wyclif to be summoned before the bishops in 1377, but Wyclif, who had not yet incurred a formal charge of heresy, had Lancaster and the influence of the court at his back, and escaped condemnation. Archbishop Sudbury became lord chancellor in 1380, on the resignation of Scrope, and this acceptance of office cost him his life a year later at the great uprising of the peasants. On 11 June, 1381, the archbishop was with Richard II and his ministers in the Tower of London, when the peasants marched on the capital. On 14 June, while Richard was holding conference with Wat Tyler at Mile End, and agreeing to the demands of the peasants, a crowd invaded the Tower crying "Where is the traitor to the kingdom? Where is the spoiler of the commons?" "Neither a traitor, nor despoiler am I, but thy archbishop", came the reply. In vain the archbishop warned the mob that heavy punishment would follow his death; the hatred of the people against all whom they judged responsible for the poll-tax left no room in their hearts for mercy. The archbishop was dragged from his chamber to Tower Hill, and there with many blows his head was struck off -- to be placed on London Bridge, according to the savage custom of the time. A few days later, when the rising was over, the head was taken down, and with the archbishop's body, removed to Canterbury for burial. It was said that Sudbury, when Bishop of London, had discouraged pilgrimages to the shrine of St. Thomas at Canterbury; he was known to be the friend of John of Lancaster, and he had imprisoned John Ball, the peasant leader, as his predecessors had done, at Maidstone. But the fact that he was chancellor was the real cause of Sudbury's violent death. Nevertheless, there were many who loved the mild and gentle archbishop, and who counted him a martyr. RYMER, Fædera; KNIGHTON, Chronicon Anglicæ, ed. THOMPSON; WALSINGHAM, Hist. Anglicana: HIGDEN, Polychronicon; all in Rolls Series. FROISSART, Stubbs' Constitutional History. JOSEPH CLAYTON Simon of Tournai Simon of Tournai Professor in the University of Paris at the beginning of the thirteenth century, dates of birth and death unknown. He was teaching before 1184, as he signed a document at the same time as Gerard de Pucelle, who died in that year Bishop of Coventry. The chroniclers of the period, however they differ on other points, are unanimous in proclaiming Simon's brilliancy in philosophy, which subject he taught for ten years. Later he lectured on theology with equal success. In his lectures he utilized the many works, including Aristotle's philosophical writings, which were being made known by the labors of the Arab translators. Simon's teachings aroused suspicion as early as the end of the twelfth century. His enemies were, probably, the opponents of the new philosophy; the accounts given by Thomas de Cantimpré, Matthew Paris, and Giraldus Cambrensis before them, though differing considerably as to details, agree at least in saying that Simon was struck dumb as a punishment for his blasphemy or his heretical assertions regarding the truths of the Christian faith. It would be difficult now to determine whether in private conversation he made statements that are not contained in his works; the latter, however, of which but few have been printed, are orthodox. They consist chiefly of a "Summa theologica" or "Sententiae", various "Quaestiones", "Sermons", and the "Expositio in symbolum s. Athanasii" printed in the "Bibliotheca Casinensis", IV (Rome, 1880), 322-46. The work entitled "De tribus impostoribus" was not written by Simon. A letter of Stephen of Tournai, earlier than 1192, speaks in very flattering terms of a Simon, who is probably to be identified with the subject of this article. Hist. Litter. de la France, XVI, 388-94; DENIFLE AND CHATELAIN, Chartularim Univers. Paris, I, 45, 71; HAUREAU, Histoire de 1a la philosophie scolastique (Paris, 1880), 58 62; Notices et extraits des manuscrits de la Bibl. Nat., XXXI, pt. II, 293-300; Notices et extraits de quelques manuscrits (Paris, 1891), III, 250-59; UEBERWEG-HEINZE, Grundriss der Geschichte der Philosophie (Berlin, 1905), II, 211, 277, etc.; DE WULF, Histoire de la philosophie scolastique . . . dans les Pays Bas (Brussels, 1895), 39, etc.; Histoire de la Philosophie en Belgique (Brussels, 1910), 56-57. J. DE GHELLINCK St. Simon Stock St. Simon Stock Born in the County of Kent, England, about 1165; died in the Carmelite monastery at Bordeaux, France, 16 May, 1265. On account of his English birth he is also called Simon Anglus. It is said that when twelve years old he began to live as a hermit in the hollow trunk of an oak, and later to have become an itinerant preacher until he entered the Carmelite Order which had just come to England. According to the same tradition he went as a Carmelite to Rome, and from there to Mt. Carmel, where he spent several years. All that is historically certain is that in 1247 he was elected the sixth general of the Carmelites, as successor to Alan, at the first chapter held at Aylesford, England. Notwithstanding his great age he showed remarkable energy as general and did much for the benefit of the order, so that he is justly regarded as the most celebrated of its generals. During his occupancy of the office the order became widely spread in southern and western Europe, especially in England; above all, he was able to found houses in the university cities of that era, as in 1248 at Cambridge, in 1253 at Oxford, in 1260 at Paris and Bologna. This action was of the greatest importance both for the growth of the institution and for the training of its younger members. Simon was also able to gain at least the temporary approbation of Innocent IV for the altered rule of the order which had been adapted to European conditions. Nevertheless the order was greatly oppressed, and it was still struggling everywhere to secure admission, either to obtain the consent of the secular clergy, or the toleration of other orders. In these difficulties, as Guilelmus de Sanvico (shortly after 1291) relates, the monks prayed to their patroness the Blessed Virgin. "And the Virgin Mary revealed to their prior that they were to apply fearlessly to Pope Innocent, for they would receive from him an effective remedy for these difficulties". The prior followed the counsel of the Virgin, and the order received a Bull or letter of protection from Innocent IV against these molestations. It is an historical fact that Innocent IV issued this papal letter for the Carmelites under date of 13 January, 1252, at Perugia. Later Carmelite writers give more details of such a vision and revelation. Johannes Grossi wrote his "Viridarium" about 1430, and he relates that the Mother of God appeared to Simon Stock with the scapular of the order in her hand. This scapular she gave him with the words: "Hoc erit tibi et cunctis Carmelitis privilegium, in hoc habitu moriens salvabitur" (This shall be the privilege for you and for all the Carmelites, that anyone dying in this habit shall be saved). On account of this great privilege many distinguished Englishmen, such as King Edward II, Henry, Duke of Lancaster, and many others of the nobility secretly work (clam portaverunt) the Carmelite scapular under their clothing and died with it on. In Grossi's narrative, however, the scapular of the order must be taken to mean the habit of the Carmelites and not as the small Carmelite scapular. As was the custom in medieval times among the other orders, the Carmelites gave their habit or at least their scapular to their benefactors and friends of high rank, that these might have a share in the privilege apparently connected with their habit or scapular by the Blessed Virgin. It is possible that the Carmelites themselves at that period wore their scapular at night in a smaller form just as they did at a later date and at the present time: namely, in about the form of the scapular for the present third order. If this is so they could give laymen their scapular in this form. At a later date, probably not until the sixteenth century, instead of the scapular of the order the small scapular was given as a token of the scapular brotherhood. Today the brotherhood regards this as its chief privilege, and one it owes to St. Simon Stock, that anyone who dies wearing the scapular is not eternally lost. In this way the chief privilege and entire history of the little Carmelite scapular is connected with the name of St. Simon Stock. There is no difficulty in granting that Grossi's narrative, related above, and the Carmelite tradition are worthy of belief, even though they have not the full value of historical proof (see SCAPULAR). That Simon himself was distinguished by special veneration of and love for the Virgin is shown by the antiphonies "Flos Carmeli" and "Ave Stella Matutina", which he wrote, and which have been adopted in the breviary of the Calced Carmelites. Besides these antiphonies other works have been incorrectly attributed to him. The first biographical accounts of Simon belong to the year 1430, but these are not entirely reliable. However, he was not at this time publicly venerated as a saint; it was not until 1435 that his feast was put in the choral books of the monastery at Bordeaux. It was introduced before 1458 into Ireland and, probably at the same time, into England; by a decree of the General Chapter of 1564 its celebration was commanded for the entire order. JOSEPH HILGERS _________________________________________________________________ This document is from the Christian Classics Ethereal Library at Calvin College, http://www.ccel.org, generated on demand from ThML source.